The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionTattoos, music, and 'legitimate questioning of theology'
Four day 'Wild Goose' festival wraps up
Jun. 27, 2011
Nadia Bolz-Weber (Photos by Veronica O'Neill)
SILK HOPE, N.C. -- The Wild Goose Festival experiment began with big dreams and big hopes. In the festival program organizers wrote: "we want to change the world, of course; but that will only happen when we change ourselves."
As the inaugural festival wrapped up Sunday, many of the more than 1,500 who made the trek to Shakori Hills Farm, not far from Chapel Hill, may not have noticed global changes, but most left with a sense of mission accomplished.
Wild Goose dreamer and founder Gareth Higgins, who has been part of the Britain’s Greenbelt Festival -- Wild Goose’s British mother goose so to speak -- satisfied a lingering question for skeptics: “Would U.S. Christians support a gathering as eclectic and diverse as Wild Goose?”
Organizers wondered, in the U.S. -- where less tolerant, less inclusive manifestations of Christianity are abundant -- would there still be room for a festival that championed religious diversity, pluralism, the inclusion of gays and lesbians, and many open mic events where people could simply tell their stories of love, pain, rejection, faith, joy and hope?
The answer was a resounding, “Yes,” said Wild Goose board member Karla Yaconelli, who dreamed of a U.S. version of Greenbelt ever since she first travelled to England from the U.S. to attend that festival 25 years ago. Yaconelli said the task of making Wild Goose a reality “almost seemed like an impossibility.”
Besides the logistics of putting on such a huge event, Wild Goose organizers had another difficult task -- getting renowned speakers and artists to come to North Carolina at their own expense, and for no compensation.
Yaconelli outlined initial reasons why she thought Wild Goose wouldn't fly in the U.S.
- “There are so many divisions in the church here in the U.S. that are so much greater or seem so much greater [than in Europe].”
- “Our culture is not ready for something like this.”
- “And then, of course, there is the Christian Industrial Complex that is so already established.”
“We began to wonder if it would ever be possible to have an event in the United States that could possibly be the beginning of the end of political and theological polarization and rigidity, dogma, where everyone had a seat at the table … with a willingness to have their own mind change in unexpected ways.”
Well, Wild Goose happened, and what emerged from the stories people told over four days was the gathering delivered a safe place for them to tell those stories, but it was also a place for people to rise up out of their tombs of pain, despair and loneliness for the purpose of reconnecting with a God of love.
Preview NCR's Family Life Issue
Watch this video from NCR Editor Dennis Coday for highlights from our annual Family Life special section.
You won't find these articles on our website. Subscribe now to receive all the content from each biweekly issue.
Many people who have suffered as a result of “bad religion” never return to the scenes of the crimes. Wild Goose was for those people, now hoping to find something better.
“I was raised in fundamentalism. Women couldn’t even pray out loud in front of men in the tradition I was raised in, but I left that form of Christianity 25 years ago,” said the Rev. Nadia Bolz-Weber, a Lutheran theologian and mother of two who officiated at Saturday’s Wild Goose liturgy, and spoke at several programs.
“I have scars; I just don’t have wounds anymore. And a lot of people have wounds, and I understand that, but I think it’s good for them to see someone who has scars instead of wounds,” said Bolz-Weber. “I’m profoundly fortunate that I’ve been given the support and encouragement that I have to do what I’m doing.”
When she decided to go into ministry, Bolz-Weber -- whose arms include multiple tattoos depicting the church year, Lazarus rolling out of a burial cloth, and Mary Magdalene -- said she received a blessing from her parents.
“I just don’t know that I’ll ever get that from my parents,” a young, aspiring minister told Bolz-Weber while tears streaked his face. Her advice was that he seek a blessing from another source.
“If your parents cannot give you the blessings, you need to find somebody who can,” said Bolz-Weber. “You need it. You need that kind of freedom instead of being in bondage. I think a lot of people here have been in bondage, and what they’re taking away from this is a blessing instead.”
Wild Goose also included a small contingent of Native American Christians who introduced their audiences to diverse worship styles that interwove various tribal traditions into the program.
Richard Twiss
Richard Twiss, a Lakota/Sioux, spoke on the “implications of post-colonial Christianity,” and sung Native songs.
“We should have had stricter immigration laws [for] that first boatload at Plymouth Rock,” Twiss said to laughter at Sunday’s closing ceremony. “That’s where it all began. We gave them an inch and they took 3,000 miles.”
Twiss said the Native people “have to forgive the white man every day.” Many whites have approached him asking for forgiveness “and yet still live on my land, and still derive great wealth and benefit from their privilege of being a Euro-American person, and in particular being a Christian. I have to forgive them.”
“I think Wild Goose has attracted a wide and remarkable community of questioners,” Twiss said in an interview. Throughout history, the most privileged Christians have always been the ones to define orthodoxy, Twiss said.
“And by comparison, others are unorthodox or they’re neo or they’re weird or they’re heretics. So Wild Goose attracts people who are engaged in some serious, legitimate questioning of those historic traditions and of contemporary theologies -- be they Calvinism or Weslyanism or all the other categories,” said Twiss.
“I don’t want to say I’m trying to blend my Native ways with Christian ways as if these are two different categories. I say I’m a common human person, I’m a pitiful human being. There’s only one creator. I just want to be a whole person.”
The Rev. Jim Bakker
The Rev. Jay Bakker, son of evangelists Jim and the late Tammy Faye Bakker, was a Wild Goose speaker. Jim and Tammy Faye, who passed away in 2007, hosted The PTL Club, a popular evangelical television series.
The Wild Goose program said Jay, founder of Revolution Church NYC, rose up out of drug and alcohol abuse to find “what God’s grace is all about.” He maintains an open and affirming ministry to the “LGBTQ community.”
Over the four days, Bakker mingled with festival-goers, and even met old friends from the PTL years. He said Wild Goose was a good start because it brought together “evangelicals and high church and Catholics and people coming here and just talking about stuff that sometimes seems so taboo, and we’ve all had conversations and just been able to be civil to one another, and that’s kind of a refreshing thing.
“I think they’ve done a good job, and I think next year you’ll probably see twice as many people and they’ll probably be a lot more outcasts.”
[Patrick O'Neill is a freelance religion journalist living in Garner, N.C.]
Editor's Note: Over the weekend, Patrick O'Neill reported on the Wild Goose festival from Shakori Hills, N.C. For more on the festival, see his previous stories and the slideshow of photos below:
"'have to forgive the white
"'have to forgive the white man every day.' Many whites have approached him asking for forgiveness 'and yet still live on my land, and still derive great wealth and benefit from their privilege of being a Euro-American person, and in particular being a Christian. I have to forgive them.'"
- How duplicitous.
So, he's Lakota? Really. If he expects 'Euro-Americans' to apologize to him, perhaps he should lead by example. After all, I'm guessing that what he refers to as 'his land' is not actually HIS TRIBE'S land, but actually the original land of the Cheyenne, whom, in 1776, the Lakota went to war against and took THEIR land from them, driving the remains west. Has he done this yet? I'm guessing no.
My point here is that no group on earth, NO ONE, is a lily white victim here. I'm getting very tired of people trying to assume that mantle for their favored group.
I don't think he's claiming
I don't think he's claiming to be an innocent. But, knowing anything at all about the history of colonists and then the US government and Native Americans, do you deny that they've been treated in ways that deserve apology in word and action and a seeking of forgiveness? Can you walk onto a reservation and really say native peoples still aren't affected by the wounds of our mutual history? The fact that violence existed before Europeans arrived only means they're human, it doesn't alter the fact of harsh oppression.
"I don't think he's claiming
"I don't think he's claiming to be an innocent."
- I very much think he is, actually. That is why I highlighted his use of the phrase "HIS LAND". If he really were honest, he would simply say it was not his land either, but, like I pointed out, the land of the Cheyenne. (who, if we had accurate records, probably invaded, killed, and drove someone ELSE off of it).
If they have some kind of right to declare that the modern land that they claim is theirs IS theirs, then 'Euro-Americans' have just as much right to say that this is actually OUR land now. Same principle that the Lakota use: right of conquest. What he seems to be pushing is the classic "one standard for you, a different one for me."
"do you deny that they've been treated in ways that deserve apology in word and action and a seeking of forgiveness?"
- Of course I will not deny it. Not even the most dishonest politicians of the time could spin the vileness of boxing up natives that had been driven off of land that they had agreed with the government to keep and shipped off to die in swamps, for example.
My problem with what he said stems from what is QUITE obvious and very common when it comes to dealing with Native Americans: They themselves sometimes, but politically correct culture all the time, wishes to cast them as pacifistic, Garden of Eden dwellers who didn't know violence or evil until the 'White Man' showed up. This is unhistorical garbage and is believed by FAR too many people.
Natives in this country were quite familiar with war, violence and, as some very interesting finds in the midwest have shown in recent years, quite familiar with the concept of genocide as well.
Does this excuse what our early countrymen did? No way. But evil committed in the past does not automatically mean that our victims were lily white either. Our tendency to portray them as such needs to STOP. If we are going to be honest about our history, we should not allow others to creatively 'edit' theirs to be more palatable.
Not to burst anyone's bubble
Not to burst anyone's bubble or anything, b/c I know the organizers of this event were well intentioned... but, it's a bit of a misnomer to describe the gathering as inclusive. Yes, the event created space for people who feel harmed by "organized religion," and it also brought together folks from diverse ecclesial backgrounds; but, I guarantee you that it was exclusionary in its own way. You know how I know why: I went to divinity school with several of those who were in attendance. And, in that context (shaped by the same values that undergirded Wild Goose), if you even tried to have a theological discussion about women's ordination or to uphold the Catholic Church's moral theology, you were labeled a bigot and shunned. In other words, this crowd has their own theological shibboleth's which one must adhere to for inclusion in the group.
The fact of the matter is there is no religious group that is completely inclusive. The reason: anyone who is seeking to follow Jesus is seeking the truth, and truth is inherently exclusionary. To say something is true necessarily entails excluding those who do not agree. For instance, if someone says, "Those who follow Christ should be completely nonviolent," they will at some point experience a rupture in communion with those who think otherwise. Now, people of different beliefs can gather together for worship and fellowship to a certain degree. But, I just know from experience that this only goes so far. If you were to say to some of the speakers at Wild Goose that sacramental marriage is a lifelong union between a man and a woman, they would consider you a mean-spirited, narrow bigot. Exclusion.
So, on the one hand, I applaud the organizers of Wild Goose for their intentions. On the other hand, I still wanted to point out that it's a bit inaccurate to contrast the inclusion of Wild Good against the supposed exclusion of other manifestations of Christianity. The key difference is that the two simply have different interpretations of the truth. But, both crowds end up excluding opinions that they think are false. Jesus came not to bring peace, but the sword. Yes, the truth sets us free, but it also brings us into conflict with others (obviously, we should navigate such conflict with patience and charity). At the end of the day, I just think it's false to portray progressive Christians as wholly inclusive and Christians who maintain tradition as wholly exlcusionary. I say this as someone who's experienced concrete exclusion by progressive Christians.
I would agree. At some point
I would agree.
At some point you're going to reach deadlock. Good feelings and intentions will take you only so far.
Example:
I seem to remember that in the last post, there was something about a Muslim Imam, I think. You can dialog up to a point. There comes a point, however, when you as a Christian, have to stand behind the crux of the Faith, that Jesus is the Son of God, Divine, God of God, Light of Light. To a Muslim, that declaration is a horrible blasphemy. To act as though such differences don't matter is just as bad as denying your core principles. Are you going to ask the Muslim to treat Jesus as God, or ask the Christian to ignore His Divinity to prevent blockage?
My question would be: What are the non-negotiables?
I also agree with you on the exclusion. Had Fr. McBrien showed up, I'm sure he would have been given a warm welcome. Had, say, Bishop Williams (or is it Williamson?) from the SSPX showed up and wanted to talk, I'm willing to bet the organizers would have called security.
One of the smartest, most
One of the smartest, most insightful, caring comments I have heard in a long time.
Actually, one of the
Actually, one of the speakers, Tony Campolo, explicitly said that he thinks marriage is a lifelong union between one man and one woman. He did so in the context of a public conversation with his wife Peggy, who does not agree with him. It was a model of how people who don't agree with each other on important issues can do so respectfully and without excluding each other.
Brilliant observation, Ryan.
Brilliant observation, Ryan. Those who decry the sins of "patriarchy" and "exclusion" can be just as patriarchal and exclusionary as those they critique.
I was glad to see Lakota
I was glad to see Lakota member Twiss mentioned and quoted on a very difficult/interesting problem for Native American Christians, in a world in which world some kin deny there can be any such thing, as if being one precluded the other.
Christianity arrived as/with the conqueror, although some missionaries (particularly Jesuit) were better at recognizing what to their educated eyes could be regarded as indigenous faith beliefs in common with Christianity, while other missionaries (particularly Puritan) were unable to recognize any commonality. The Native occupants of what became Northern Tier states, including Northern New England, benefited from the 'welcoming' Jesuit approach, which in turn accounted for whose side they joined in the so-called French & Indian Wars.
Yox̣ kiwayl, kaa/taa ligen dabi.
Interesting and helpful
Interesting and helpful comment.. thanks.
From the story: "Organizers
From the story:
"Organizers wondered, in the U.S. -- where less tolerant, less inclusive manifestations of Christianity are abundant -- would there still be room for a festival that championed religious diversity, pluralism, the inclusion of gays and lesbians, and many open mic events where people could simply tell their stories of love, pain, rejection, faith, joy and hope?"
My eyes are almost rolling out of my head. Can you people be any more condescending and hypocritical? You want tolerance and inclusion? Start with yourselves!
My eyes are not rolling, but
My eyes are not rolling, but I also felt this paragraph crossed the line from reporting to editorializing. I'm sure there were many agendas present at the Wild Goose festival, and healing was no doubt among them. But I also have no doubt that a good deal of wholesale ranting at established religion was also on the docket.
Let's not be too quick to jump on the warm & fuzzy bandwagon for this event just because it was different. A little more objectivity from NCR would be proper.
Since when do you go off to a
Since when do you go off to a farm in search of inclusivism? This sounds like a lot of people who have decided to march to their own drummers, and wanted to hang out together. Inclusivism means including everyone, even those you disagree with. And you don't do it on a farm.
I applaud the organizers and
I applaud the organizers and participants of the Wild Goose Festival for daring to question the status quo. I applaud them too for the innovative structure, for deliberately and strategically knocking Nicolaitanism off its horse and putting all the speakers and leaders on even part with everyone else, and everyone else on par with the speakers and leaders.
I would encourage and challenge Wild Goose to be continue to stretch to be truly inclusive. For those that think gay marriage is wrong, for those that have issues with women's leadership, for those that believe Israel is the victim and Palestine the aggressor, etc etc etc.... be a safe place where the dialogue between left and right can occur.. We need the kind of dialogue that Goose has begun. We need this kind of structure and idealism. So please, keep it up, but allow the "right" the benefit of being part of your table too, without creating a sense that their opinions are simply bigotted and wrong. If we can manage to get all the righties and lefties talking at the same table, I think only then can the dream that the Goose is trying to achieve fully be realized.
What is truth?? It depends
What is truth?? It depends on who's truth are you addressing......but in truth there is only one truth.
And that is God's.
There is a little too much
There is a little too much drama in the article....
The U.S. has a population of 300,000,000. Was there really ever any doubt that a percentage of the U.S. population was going to support the Wild Goose Festival and that this percentage would be large enough to accomodate 1,400 participants?
"Twiss said the Native people “have to forgive the white man every day.”
No doubt. But why do many tribal names translate into English uhmmm....."modestly" as: "The First People", "People of the Dawn", "Real Human Beings", "People of the First Fire", "The People" etc.
Could it be that native americans as humans have the same faults as whites?
Lots of talk, but none of
Lots of talk, but none of Jesus...
where's the Love
where's the Love
A whole lot of criticism...
A whole lot of criticism... how many of you were actually there and testing those boundaries of what some of you seem to be claiming is a false inclusion? You make some points worthy of consideration, but I'm also hearing a lot of assumptions without the basis of experience (specifically experience at this gathering.)
Is it really surprising to hear that people who have been hurt by people representing the church react to that (whether rightly or wrongly, intentionally or unintentionally?) Isn't it good that they're still seeking a relationship with God? Shouldn't we be patient of their wounded-ness (because we all know what it is to be wounded,)? A hospital for sinners, no?
I just think, even if a majority of this gathering tend to be more on one side with regard to issues and theologies, etc, that they organized it in an attempt to be open beyond those things. That's a worthy intent and I do believe the church is bigger than its political lines... (which outs me as a big-tent Anglican, (though still pretty orthodox,) and might invalidate any of my opinions to some of you, but I'll live with that :)
I wasn't there either, but I'm very interested and curious. Let's go next year and find out what it's really like!
Post new comment