Nationalism

If you're not sure what exactly I'm talking about when I talk about compromised nationalistic messages . . . somehow I ran across this one today (I really wasn't looking for it!) . . . this is not the Gospel . . .

Why Wright Is Wrong from bellshoals on Vimeo.

Glenn Beck and Dealing in Politics

I have made it pretty clear through my posts here that I believe the American political system has compromised much of the Gospel in the American church. It has become difficult to discern the Gospel from the right wing political alignment of the Religious Right. There is certainly a wealth of disagreement when it comes to the nature of the Gospel and politics. Whenever I have some time, I'll be taking some time to study and work through some of the more critical matters involved here - I've recently just touched the surface. I foresee a discourse on Romans 13 coming soon.

For now, I want to take a moment and post a thought or two about Glenn Beck. I used to tune into his show occassionally just to stay abreast of what his very influential show is teaching. I would get so frustrated in watching it I came to the conclusion that it wasn't very beneficial for me to participate. However, I went to the gym last week and, his show on one of the televisions, I caught wind of his recent attacks on the "social justice" movement. As someone who has read a good bit in this area, I was intrigued as to what this great conspiracy was holding.

I actually dvr-ed the Glenn Beck show (never thought I would do that!) and, when I later watched what ensued, to say that I was outraged, disappointed, saddened, and appalled all at the same time wouldn't do justice to the range of negative emotions I felt. What Beck says doesn't bother me much - he is what he is; an entertainer, a personality, larger than life - all that. What I found so appalling was to see two prominent figures in the American church standing behind his shadow and mimic his agenda. All you conservative friends, keep in mind, I have no political allegiance - what appalled me wasn't so much the Republicanism (I'm used to that) it's their compromise and public debunking of fellow Christians . . . right next to Mr. Latter Day Saint, Glenn Beck. Beck's LDS is another topic for another day . . . what I find so amazing is that, by their actions, the president of the leading Reformed seminary (Westerminster) and wellknown evangelical (from Liberty University) more closely align their ideology and perspectives from someone from a false teaching - the LDS than from a liberal-voting evangelical Christian (though they didn't come right out and say it).

I have been looking for some perspective in addressing this sensitive matter. No doubt any posting in this regard will stir quite a flurry of comments and downright arguing. Is it possible to avoid that? Perhaps not. I found this blog posting over at Vanguard Church that I think has helped me focus this on the pertinent matter.

Glenn Beck is a false prophet. That's the title of his post . . . and I think Bob, the blog's author, is getting at the issue. I keep hearing people - Christians - crying out that we can't get involved in politics, that we must remain neutral. I know what they are saying. I'm not in complete disagreement. However, Glenn Beck's false teaching and compromise of the Gospel must be addressed. It is perhaps here more than anywhere else where the church's Constantinian compromise most vividly comes alive. I just read a book by Alan Hirsch entitled The Fogotten Ways. The point is about how the methodology of the church has been compromised by culture to the point that we can no longer envision another kind of church. At one point he makes the point, "the template of this highly institutional version of Christianity is so deeply embedded in our collective psyche that we have inadvertently put it beyond the pale of prophetic critique." (p. 51). The point of the book is more about the form and life blood of church but I make the same accusation of the church's involvement with politics. We have become so compromised by political power and might that we have lost our way - we can have put ourselves beyond the pale of prophetic critique.

I don't expect most people who read this to agree with me. I know my audience much too well. My hope is that you can take a moment and look inside yourself. What factors have led you to these political ties and perspectives that you hold so dearly? Why do you get so energized in the midst of these conversations? Could you be wrong?

I will share this on Facebook . . . not sure that's the best idea . . . but I hope you can engage in constructive dialogue . . . no matter what your perspective.

Helpful Fruit #4 - A Tradition of Pacifism

It was a trip to Columbus, OH that sealed my fate as a pacifist. I live in Columbus now, but at the time I was living, working, and going to school in Nashville, TN. I was working for a church in Nashville and had been invited to join a couple other former Buckeye residents to their yearly trek to the Ohio State - Michigan football game. I'll spare you the details (Buckeyes lost, John Cooper fired . . . really, really cold), but the connection to pacifism had to do with the car ride back to Nashville from Columbus. Two friends from church invited me, and one of the friend's brothers also came and provided our transportation.

Our foray into politics began while we were overnighting Friday at a friend's house and the topic of the recent election came up. Somehow, (I don't remember the details of the conversation, but if it was anything like most political conversations I've taken part in with Christians, the beginning presupposition of everyone present being a registered Republican probably played a role), the other men found out that I had voted for Al Gore. This (absurd, in their eyes) reality, opened us up to a weekend of political conversation and debate.

Even at that time, I had my suspicions about the benefit of a Christian being involved in the political process (even the less evil democratic political system), but had continued to meddle in the quasi-liberal-slanted perspective of my upbringing. Attending a private Christian school in the South immediately placed me in a smaller minority than the ethnic minorities at the not-long-ago-segregated campus of my alma mater.

It takes approximately six hours to drive from Columbus to Nashville, and that Saturday, after the game was over, our six-hour commute was solely focused on politics. The conservation moved from light joking about the parties, to the serious concern they had over my vote . . . and as I came to find out, my soul. The most tense moment came when the driver challenged anyone to, "Name one good thing Bill Clinton did for this country!" As a college student, that was pretty easy to do because the former President had help sign into legislation a huge college education assistance program that I had benefited from. "He had gotten me a few extra thousand dollars to attend college." Sounded like something good to me. Turns out, my traveling companion did not see this as in any way "good." His response began sternly, and grew louder to the point of a yelling crescendo, "It's my money and I worked my ass off for it, and why should I be paying for your college tuition?" The car sat in silence for quite awhile. Finally, as the tension began to lift a bit, I tried to make the point that I really had no dog in the fight. I wasn't card-carrying for anyone. My point was simply to force my companions into considering the biblical texts that didn't easily jive with their political views. "What about Acts 2 and 4 where the Christians met together and sold all they had and shared all they had?" I asked. "And how does the Old Testament practice of jubilee connect with your Right wing political stances?" These were questions they had never been asked before - really, they had never been asked these questions!

I relay this story not to characterize everyone with one broad-sweeping stroke. Certainly, politics are complicated and generalizations are seldom helpful. This experience, however, opened my eyes to the negative side of politics and the divisive and explosive discussions that often result. These events occurred nearly a decade ago, and the United States has grown even more divided along political lines. What a breath of fresh air a church who focused more on kingdom politics than on the tirelessly fallen politics of the nation would be! Never has the world needed the prophetic voice of the church to live out a nonpartisan politic who concerns herself with matters of justice, mercy, and righteousness.

In recent years, pacifism has grown in attention paid by Christian theologians. Shane Claiborne and Chris Haw brought some more academic concepts from people like John Howard Yoder and Jacques Ellul to a more popular-level, lay Christian audience through their book: Jesus for President. Other scholars and pastors like Gregory Boyd, Lesslie Newbigin, and a host of others, are receiving wide readership and extensive exposure. As the West continues to broaden its perspective through the advances of technology and mass media, global concerns are becoming prevalent, and for many Christian traditions, their theological structure is incapable of productive dialogue in this setting.

In my years in seminary at Lipscomb University, it came as a huge surprise that this private Christian school with an overwhelming pro-Republican undertone, actually bears the name of one of America's most important Civil War-era Christian pacifists (and I don't think this is overstated): David Lipscomb. In fact, it turned out, Churches of Christ have a ripe tradition of pacifism. Lipscomb's 1913 work, Civil Government, represents what might be one of the most overlooked and under-appreciated documents produced in America on the topic of pacifism. [The full version of Lipscomb's work is available online here.]

Scholars in Churches of Christ continue to maintain this longstanding tradition - most notably through the work of Lee Camp (Lee has written the very popular Mere Discipleship, and hosts the Tokens program at Lipscomb) and Michael Casey ("the topic about which he was most passionate and which forms the largest corpus of his published materials was that of pacifism in Churches of Christ . . ." from preface of And the Word Became Flesh, essays written in his honor published this year.) Lipscomb University also has faculty member Richard Goode who teaches in the history department who has been especially formative in my experience, even in my limited interaction with him. In short, the pacifist tradition in Churches of Christ is alive in well . . . at least in the academy.

The challenge before us as ministers within the tradition is to bridge the gap between the isolated tower of academia and the every-day life of the church. In my early years of ministry I see no message as desperately needed in the face of mounting political divisions as this one. At the same time I have experienced the loudest and most acute backlash from conversations in this vein. Nationalism has become the most uniting characteristic of our churches: progressive and conservative churches are equally as likely to sing patriotic hymns in their service and display the American flag prominently in their building.

Certainly, pacifism stands as one of the more hopeful fruits of our tradition. It is also, however, one of the most challenging in teaching and discussing. It is widely said the two topics to avoid in public conversations are politics and religion. What this topic does is jump head first into them both. When it comes to our political allegiances, Churches of Christ are as guilty as any other Christian group of losing our way. It is important for us to rekindle the thoughts and ideas of our pacifist forefathers . . . and be reminded that these are not novel ideas - as the accusation sometimes is made. Not only is there a great history of pacifism within the broader Christian church, closer to home, Churches of Christ share in this rich tradition. We must learn to not be afraid of talking about politics, but we must reframe the conversation. We must overcome the unnecessary obstacles that we have placed in front of those who differ politically and open our minds to a new political reality, a politics of the kingdom of God.

This is not a call for being anti-political (a charge I have been accused of). Quite the contrary, this is a call for a renewed orientation, for allowing God to set our political agendas instead of our governments, and for realizing that our politic is our life, not our vote. We must allow our political agendas to be caught up in the vision of God, not the latest candidate to ascend to power. May Christ grant us some sanity when it comes to charged political matters. May he grant us the confidence and vision of the prophets to speak the Word of God. Those of us in Churches of Christ stand in a great tradition to be able to do so, may we be bold in taking up that calling.

On America as a Christian Nation

Here are some interesting thoughts regarding the way the United States is so often portrayed as a Christian nation.

I also had this article published for Wineskins on the related topic.

Necessitating an Egyptian/Roman Translation of the Bible

Earlier this year the Patriot's Bible hit the bookshelves of stores all across the country. There is an interesting video floating around from the editor explaining the rationale behind the compiling of this work, but in the end, I have to side with others who see this as perhaps the culmination of the patriotic idolatry of the American church. I feel this is an important teachable moment for people who may feel uncomfortable with this latest marketed Bible (which by the way, shouldn't we feel uncomfortable with all of these "specialized" and "marketed" Bibles?) thinking this may go too far. I don't want to dwell on critiquing this particular Bible here. The few folks that do come by here and read, have a pretty fair idea of the string of that argument. Instead, I'd like to propose another Bible that needs to be compiled.

Stephen Prothero has an interesting book entitled American Jesus: How the Son of God became a National Icon. While I haven't has a chance to read the book, the description on the back details an important element in American culture. "Our nation's changing images of Jesus, Stephen Prothero contends, are a kind of looking glass into the national character. Even as most Christians believers cleave to a traditional faith, other people give Jesus a leading role as folk hero, pitchman, or countercultural icon." (From Dan Cryer, Newsday). Prothero pursues something that consistently shows itself to be true: humans are most likely to worship a deity that looks most like us. Of course Jesus was white. Of course Jesus would be in favor of capitalism. Of course Jesus woudl be in favor of democratic governments. Of course Jesus would be an American patriot - he'd probably wear red, white, and blue to the fireworks. That's what we do . . . so it must be what he would do. Thus the Patriot's Bible.

Unfortunately, for us, the Bible was written from the perspective of the oppressed, not the oppressors; from the perspective of the poor, not the wealthy; from the perspective of the powerless, not the powerful. Yet in the halls of our churches and seminaries, the Bible has been slanted toward those perspectives. Jesus, like Bruce Barton's The Man Nobody Knew, becomes a mirror of successful Americana.

It seems to me we need to come up with a translation of the Bible that would have been read in Cairo and Rome. A Bible that would have stood to convict Pharaoh and Caeasar of their sins of oppression. I'm guessing we wouldn't particularly care for the language that it would contain, the acts of sacrifice it would require, or the life changes it would mandate. It would, once and for all, specifically address the problems of affluence and excess. Gluttony and abundance would be given more than the scant references contained in the Holy Scriptures.

Our leaders should be spending their time composing a work such as this instead of wasting our time wading through the references to Scripture in the founding documents of the United States as if that somehow makes their genocide of the Native Peoples less significant.

Readings off the Map

In researching for my upcoming paper, I'm reading through a lot of scholarly work on the periphery of theological scholarship. Most folks who check this blog out will probably be pretty unfamiliar with much of this work. I know some of you will have difficulty stomaching some of it, but I think there is great reward in exposure to things we have difficulty understanding and that offends. Stemming from a pacifist perspective, consider the following excerpt from Walter Wink's book, Unmasking the Powers. (By the way, this book is written with the Cold War as a backdrop, and it has been interesting for me to see the many parallels with today's works reflecting on the war on terror.)

“This is why the American abolitionist and founder of the Oneida Community, John Humphrey Noyes, could write to William Lloyd Garrison,
‘When I wish to form a conception of the government of the United States (using a personified representation), I picture to myself a bloated, swaggering libertine, trampling on the Bible – its own Constitution – its treaties to the Indians – the petitions of its citizens, with one hand whipping a negro tied to a liberty pole, and with the other dashing an emaciated Indian to the ground . . . The question urges itself upon me – “What Have I, as a Christian, to do with such a villain?”
‘My hope of the millennium begins where Dr. Beecher’s expires – namely, AT THE OVERTHROW OF THIS NATION.’
I have quoted such an extreme view because it helps place in relief the most radical challenge of Revelation 18: its celebration of the fall of the richest and most powerful empire of the time. Are we then to entertain the terrible possibility that the salvation of humanity depends somehow on the decline, destruction or transformation of the United States as a sign of God’s sovereignty over the nations? Rome, yes, but – America? Never! The very suggestion of such a thing will strike many Americans as subervsive. And that reaction itself is an index of our idolatry. A godly people would react ot the treat of God’s judgment with fear, awe, consternation. They would know that no person and no nation is righteous before God. They would say, with Jefferson, ‘I tremble for my country when I remember that God is just.’ But Americans do not, on the whole, think that way. To the degree that they are religious at all, they actually believe that God is pleased, beholden to, partial to, and identified with our land.
This is not to deny that, in many ways, our nation may be a more desirable place to live than some other countries. Nor do I wish to ignore the many positive contributions it has made to human society. My point is simply that these contributions in no way mitigate the objective state of idolatry that has been the price we have paid for nationhood.”

Many of us who speak against the perils of our country take great offense and quickly dismiss us as "haters" or the like. I think the merit in Wink's point here is that it must be possible for the Christian to live critically in the world she is a part embracing the good, but prophetically rebuking the evil.

Torture

I have several topics of interest I hope to post about in the next week or so - health care being at the top of the list and what I had intended to blog about today, but then I read the editorial that Cal Thomas had in today's paper about torture. I have to be honest, I have been way out of touch with things in the media lately (that must account for the peace that I have felt over the past few days), and have just heard a piece here and there in regards to the big debate about torture and all that has come with that. Just another partisan battle for the ages.

I guess it's because I am a glutton for punishment, but for the most part, I expose myself to more conservative media personalities and outlets than liberal ones. It seems to me that listening to folks you agree with all the time doesn't do much to help your critical assessment of the world, so I listen to people who drives me nuts. In that spirit, I spent a few minutes over lunch a bit ago watching videos from conservative discussions on the topic of torture mainly from Fox News. I suppose what surprises me (and disappoints me) most in these discussions is to see publicly confessed Christians (Cal Thomas is a Presbyterian from Washington D.C., and I also saw Glenn Beck following his same lines of argument - he's a Mormon) offer the party byline when it comes to overt matters of morality.

It would be my hope that something like the possible torture by the United States government would help expose the idolatrous relationship that so many Christians have with their state. Much of the time the patriotism that has invaded the faith of so many Christ-followers sits idly by as they pledge allegiance to their flag, sing the National Anthem before their sporting events, and sport their "God Bless the USA" bumper stickers on the back of their SUVs - seemingly harmless events. I'm the first to say that seeing one's faith through the cataract of post-Constantinian Christendom, the aforementioned actions are difficult to give much critical attention to. This realm of life espouses such incredible passion and fervor that seldom do these issues ever leave the level of passion to a place where critical self-examination can take place.

Perhaps you don't see the harm in pledging your allegiance to a flag. Maybe you believe the United States is the great hope of the world (an aside note: I just finished reading Captain America and the Crusade Against Evil which does a great job of illustrating how the "Captain America complex" has dominated the pages of American history where her politicians, leaders, and public-at-large has seen the America in the role as super hero: never guilty, but falsely accused; never the provoker, but always the provoked; never fully appreciated for what she means to the world; always working from the omniscient presence - "I'll save you even though you don't realize you need saved." They do a fantastic job of showing how this fautly logic has driven the country's foreign policy since its inception and how the current chlallenges faced in the "war on terrorism" are the same challenges that faced the U.S. in the Cold War, Vietnam, and on back through history) but surely the sight or thought of your nation's government toturing criminals delivers you a bit of an ethical quandry.

Charles Sheldon suggested we ask, "What would Jesus do?" That, apparently, only applies to personal matters of morality. We allow governments to operate under their own rules of engagement. It's different for them, right? Well, that's the thing: a lot of folks are having to ask that question now. Is that right? Jesus would never torture anyone. Jesus was tortured. How can we sit back and, even for one moment, for one criminal, allow an exception? When does the Bible ever teach that the end justifies the means - especially when we are at war?

I'm tired of conservatives telling me that I just don't understand. Sean Hannity told me I suffer from a pre-September 11 mentality. I'm the dumb one. I'm the naive one. It's one thing for liberals and conservatives to banter this stuff back and forth. It's entirely something else when I Christian can idly stand by and join the conversation without maintaining their sense of uniqueness - holiness.

My plea for conservative Christians is to acknowledge that fighting violence with violence will not work - it never works. Our government has promised us that greater force is needed to fight off the enemies so that peace will prevail . . . again . . . even though it hasn't worked before . . . even when we dropped two atomic bombs and killed thousands of innocent people in Japan. The terrorists killed 3,000 people in the United States, and we have killed more than ten-fold in civilians in two other nations. When will it end? We should expect this faith in the empire from those without hope, but from people with faith in Jesus? Those pulling triggers and dropping bombs will always be closer to the soldiers killing Christ than the innocent one on the cross.

More Sharing

Bush's War

One of my favorite television shows has become PBS's Frontline. It's basically the PBS version of Dateline or 20/20. They report on human interest stories, global features, but, since the beginning of the Iraq War, they have spent much of their time reporting on stories from Iraq, Afghanistan, and the War on Terror. I have caught several, and am excited about their recent work reviewing their five years' worth of data compiled in the new documentary feature, "Bush's War." It is a lengthy two-part feature that began here in Columbus last night for two and a half hours. I was only able to catch the last half, but thankfully you can catch all their past episodes online.

One of the most disturbing trends in the recent years of our country has been the alignment of churches to the partisan divide in the political landscape of this country. There are blue and red states, and now, unfortunately, there seem to be blue and red churches. This is a horrible trend that must turn back.

PBS's documentary on the war is eye-opening and disturbing at the same time. Conservatives will wage the old "liberal media" accusations, but this documentary is probably the most extensively done and inclusive project done on the war. The website has hundreds of interviews, statistics, and information that lays out the facts of the war. Leading up to the war, in the first part's coverage last night, it is not evident how much the American people were misled, how deceptive Bush's administration was, and how much of a mess we have gotten ourselves into as a result.

As a self-proclaimed pacifist, the war is especially troubling. To argue against the war immediately makes one a Democrat. To question the President or his cabinet makes one unpatriotic (I am that), and "Liberal" I'm not sure that I am that. The death toll of American soldiers is at 4,000. The death toll of civilian Iraqis is many times that. There is no upside to war. "But Saddam's dead!" comes the response. Is any man's death worth thousands of innocent lives? Cain committed the first murder and he was a marked man - marked with grace, that anyone who met him would NOT kill him.

I believe the preemptive military strategy that the United States has taken since 9/11 is one of the most biblically-contrary ideologies to enter the national political scene in decades. It has allowed for military strikes to be ordered to "prevent" future attacks. It is America flexing its muscles as the only remaining Super Power and is rooted in her imperialistic nature. It cannot be consistent with the character of God.

One of my fears is that our children will grow up with war as the norm. There will always be wars, but it is unfortunate that the lone Super Power is responsible for so many of them. Christians are called to be people of peace, but this is the furthest from their vocabulary when it comes to many of their international diplomacy support. Christians are often the loudest defenders of these unChristian American policies.

The Frontline documentary spends much time discussing the interrogation tactics that D. Rumsfield had such a hand in rewriting. This marks another aspect of the Bush administration that must be acknowledged as ungodly.

Shane Claiborne, in his new book, claims that the Church has fallen in love with the state and, as a result, has lost her political imagination. What a glorious proclamation to the current state of matters. Christians have lost their concept of love and grace and suffering servitude and exchanged that for one dominated by power and hungry for control. This opportunity was ever-before Christ, and on every occasion he turned the other way, why must we choose a different way to fight Christ's battle?

Captivity

I am coming to believe that Constantinian captivity may be one of the most important concepts for church leaders to grasp. I am finding it necessary more and more often to lay down some kind of concept of the Constantinian captivity of the church before I can get to place I am trying to get at. I believe that this is a real challenge. Constantine merged the Christian faith with the state nearly 1700 years. That's a long time to live with what Lee Camp refers to as the "Constantinian cataract." This idea, when considered, impacts everything. This cataract has been allowed to effect our entire vision.

I found it interesting in the most recent edition of wineskins, Fred Peatross interviews Tony Jones, the national coordinator for the Emergent Village. When asked what exactly he believed the Emergent church is attempting to do, Jones had a fairly direct answer, "I'd prefer to say that we're trying to recover the gospel from Constantinian and consumerist tendencies in modern, American Christianity." Those two tendencies I have come to grips with over the past two years: consumerism and Constantinianism. If you have no idea what I am talking about here, essentially it is the belief that the church has been mislead and baptized by the surrounding culture and has allowed the Western concepts of progress, success, economics, and power guide the Church's understanding of the same.

With concern to the commercial aspect, churches have become marketing firms. With concern to the Constantinial aspect, churches have become political lobbyists. Neither is biblical. [Both of these concepts have evolved into their current state, and I am simplifying here and jumping through oodles of history to where I can make a few comments about the current state of things as I see them].

In my ministry, I have seen both powers at work. The tradition of which I am a part (a cappella churches of Christ) I think has a leg up on the competition when it comes to the commercial aspects of our churches. After all, we don't use instruments in our corporate worship, I mean, c'mon, any marketing person would inform us that that is no way to grow a church. However, a recent progressive trend to revamp our worship (much needed to be sure) has swung the pendulum to a place where we suddenly are overly concerned with the commercial appeal of our services, and the "progressive" worship movement has led to an overemphasis on the two hours were together a week. This is a trend that many are noticing and are quickly moving to avoid. This is a bear of a topic to deal with . . . but I definitely feel that it is the easier one.

As for the political state of the church and her allegiance to her country . . . here may be the most challenging of all of my ideology. Sometimes I'll eve say something in this regard and think to myself, "Do they really know what I am saying?" This whole concept stems from a reevaluation of our understanding of power. I first was introduced to the powers in college but have read much more widely on the idea lately, and have been glad to see a resurgence in interest recently prompting more work be done there. This issue drives right between the two no-no's of cordial dialogue - politics and religion. It fuses the discussion together so that everyone will get angry.

I just finished reading Megan McKenna's book, On Your Mark: Reading Mark in the Shadow of the Cross. A fantastic book. I got it from a bag sale and wasn't sure how great it would be but I highly recommend it for a study of Mark. If you come from a moderate evangelical perspective, it will greatly challenge you. It was printed by Orbis Books. Definitely a link worth checking out. It was my first real reading from a liberation theology perspective (though I'm not sure you would classify her perspective as entirely that - kind of a mix between liberation theology and social gospel. I don't sense that she takes it unhealthily in those directions.)

McKenna takes a very earthy and hands-on approach to the Gospel of Mark - two ways I would have never considered reading a Gospel before. She fills the commentary with many great stories and illustrations (not all great!) highlighting action in the Gospel of Mark. There are too many to share, and through the first three-fourths of it that is where I found the value. However, in her discussion of the cross and the resurrection I was invigorated by her perspective. It was the first extensive treatment that I have read through the crucifixion and resurrection from the perspective of the powers. And where else can we better root a challenge to Constantinian perspectives of the church than the cross? This quote from Martin Luther King Jr. got me really fired up yesterday. This is from his sermon entitled "But if Not" preached on November 5, 1967:

"You may be 38 years old, as I happen to be. And one day, some great opportunity stands before you and calls you to stand up for some great principle, some great issue, some great cause. And you refuse to do it because you are afraid . . . You refuse to do it because you want to live longer . . . you're afraid that you will lose your job, or you are afraid that you will be criticized or that you will lose your popularity, or you're afraid that somebody will stab you, or shoot at you or bomb your house; so you refuse to take a stand. Well, you my go on and live until you are 90, but you're just as dead at 38 as you would be at 90. And the cessation of breathing in your life is but the belated announcement of an earlier death of the Spirit."

Yeah, you probably should go back and read that again. Don't bother with any of the gibber jabber below.

The cross challenges everything we know about church growth, about spiritual growth, about success, about power, about duty, about direction, about leading, about serving, about everything! The cross does to us what it did to the disciples. It flipped them upside down.

That's powerful stuff. That's the life Christ has called us to. One of sacrifice. One of cross-bearing. Not one of fear and apathy. There aren't enough churches out there challenging their people to act on their faith! They are concerned with being good, nice people. People can be good and nice without Christ (at least that's what I was taught, not all good people are going to heaven, you know). But it was because they didn't believe the right thing - that's what I was told. But, maybe, it will be cause we didn't do anything that will be the cause of our demise. Maybe we'll stand before our Maker and when he asks what we have to show for the many gifts, talents, and opportunities he gave us, we'll point to all the great "stuff" behind us and realize that . . . it didn't make the trip. Hmm . . . didn't Jesus say something about that?

I like the challenge that McKenna comes at us with in light of the crucifixion. Am I ready for this?

"So it is with the death of Jesus. God has clearly proclaimed to humankind that killing must stop, and any rituals that involve death, violence, humiliation, or the diminishment of human beings must be discarded forever. The followers of Jesus must faithfully refuse to kill, to be soldiers, to participate in the destruction of creation and the human race, to pay homage to any government or nation that extends its power by killing, by war, by bombs, or pre-emptive strikes. Disciples of Jesus must find the courage to refuse to bend or collude with any structure or group that discriminates, executes, destroys, or takes the life of others. They must speak out on behalf of victims and steadfastly stand with them, if only in silent witness. They must seek to share their pain and to be in communion with them. Otherwise, like the rest of Jesus' followers, including Peter, James, and John, we too betray our Lord; we flee in faithlessness and add to the pain and isolation to the suffering and crucified people of God still among us. Our prayer must be: Lord, have mercy on us, for we are sinners. Amen." p. 214 hmmm . . . i wonder how that would preach . . . wow . . .

Well, I got fired up on this one today. I guess I made up for not posting for a few weeks. Hopefully, I'll have a better time at it around the holidays (that sounds a little backwards, but we'll see if we can make it happen) Check out McKenna's book. It's worth the challenge to those right-wingers out there, especially.

A 9/11 Reflection

Five years and one day ago, Mary Beth and I were in Cleveland, OH to watch the season opening game against the Seattle Seahawks (one of their seven opening day losses in eight tries since their return, by the way). They lost 9 to 6 in a thriller (note the sarcasm). We flew back to Nashville after the game. Little did we know then, that if we had decided to stay one more night, we would have been stuck in Cleveland for a few extra days as the terrorist plots unfolded across the East coast. It became one of the very few events from our lifetime, when everyone remembers what they were doing, where they were, and what they saw. For a few days the entire country stood still. How could anyone get any "work" done those days? I was in the church office when I heard. Mary Beth was substitute teaching at a middle school. I will always remember that.

Five years have now passed. It seems impossible. Harder still it is to remember what life was like before then. As sweeping a statement as it is, I think it is true to say that life has not been the same since. The Trade Center attacks have become for my generation what Pearl Harbor was for the generation of my grandparents - an unmistakable, unmissable, wake-up call - a reminder of finitude and defenselessness.

Last night Mary Beth and I watched the 9/11 documentary that came out a few years ago done by a couple of French brothers who were doing a documentary on a new firefighters who was becoming a man . . . Little did they know what they were in for. I have to admit the images were moving and hard to comprehend, even this far removed.

Last summer my grandfather and brother and I took the subway to "Ground Zero." We had driven all day, and it was getting late, but all three of us felt the need to see what we had seen on TV for all these years. There wasn't much we could see through the tall metal fences, but it was a reflective moment all the same. My mind was flooded with all the dust-filled images I had seen just a few years earlier.

Such is the event in my mind . . . But what of the subsequent dominoes that have since fallen. "God bless America" became a theme for unity and signs of Congressional unity graced all parts of the country quickly settling back into partisan bickering and arguments over new issues.

George W. Bush is a President who will always be remembered. Irregardless of how he handled what happened five years ago today . . . He would be remembered. Where have the last five years taken us? Now . . . The "us" I am referring to here is not the "us" of America. To be honest, I seldom am concerned with that "us." I am concerned with the "us" of Christians living in this country. Where are "we"?

That is a powder-keg of a question if there ever were. The five years following the most extreme terrorist attacks this nation has seen so far have been years filled of war, fear, suspicion, turmoil, terrorist threats, national security, higher airline fees, reduced airline carry owns, and constant media attention. The average American has become familiar with new people and places: Iraq, Osama Bin Laden, Iran, Afghanistan, and numerous Islamic terrorists whose names we can never pronounce.

Debates rage on national security, legality, civil rights, and on and on. In my opinion President Bush's task in this war on terror is the most difficult plight facing a President since Abraham Lincoln was faced with the rift within his own nation (I know this is a lofty opining considering LBJ and Vietnam, both World Wars, the Cold War, etc., but I believe we are only at the cusp of something that may not relent in my life time).

Wherever you stand with the President (and probably more accurately wherever you stand with his political party) probably has a lot to do with how you think the past five years have gone. People on the extremes of both sides often receive a lot of media attention in these regards. My personal views have been extremely challenged by Mr. Bush. One of the biggest reasons I voted against him in the first election was my fear of his adeptness in America's foreign policy. When this happened, I was really concerned.

OK . . . I got off on the America stuff like I had hoped to avoid. Where are Christians? I know they tend to be very, very supportive of our military personnel. I, personally, have major reservations about Christians serving in the military. I would personally have to concientiously object if I was ever drafted. While I am very uncomfortable with Christians serving in the service, I also believe it is a personal choice that one must come to a decision on his or her own terms.

What makes me most uncomfortable is the relative ease that many Christians will use the Old Testament teachings toward Israel and then apply them to the United States as if both are God's chosen instruments for carrying out God's plans. From the outside looking in, that might appear to be very similar ideolgy as the Fundamentalist Islamic jihadists support. That is why I feel as though we have moved to a very difficult and, potentially, world altering time with 9/11. President Bush has made this a battle of ideologies - as he often refers to it. From his post 9/11 address rings the words "you're either with us, or your with the terrorists." While in the midst of a post 9/11 response, these words may have seemed appropriate, I think the subsequent years have shown things to be much more complicated than this. Does that mean that anyone who won't send troops to Iraq are supporting terrorists? Does that mean if you don't turn your confidential classified information in to the United States you are as guilty as the "regimes of evil"? I don't ask these questions mockingly, I just don't know.

I don't think this issue is black and white. I think it is about ideology, but it is more fundamentally about faith. This is why Christians must be so reflective and prayerul in this time. What is to be our role? Do we support war? What about "pre-emptive war?" ( A war that has always been looked upon as not grounds for "just war theory") How is our faith to play out in a pluralistic society? What impact does foreign policy play in our support of government? Should we care? Should we be busier spreading the Gospel message than lobbying political parties?

Fundamentally, I think our role as Christians in a post-9/11 era is to be a refreshing breath of hope and optimism. Most are more fearful than they were five years ago. Why? Christians shouldn't be. Christians have suffered and died for their faith willingly and rejoicing because they had incredible faith in who they worshiped.

This morning in an interview with George Bush, Matt Lauer prodded into the issue of how terrorist prisoners were treated and how information was retrieved. His answer was constantly, "I'm not going to tell you what we do, because I don't want the enemy to know and prepare against it. All you need to know is that we are keeping your family safe and we are not breaking the law." Maybe for Americans that is enough. As Christians, is that enough? Are we that fearful that as long as we get pat answers we're fine just knowing we're safe? I don't know. Maybe this isn't the best example but it is one from today. All in all, I think 9/11 has given us a great opportunity to be a much needed voice and character of hope and love when there is great war and hate in the world.

On being a "chosen" nation

I know doubt blog too often regarding politics, especially knowing I opine from a minority perspective among conservative Christians, it is such a prominent issue here locally, I feel the need to once again "go there." I beg your forgiveness ahead of time, but hope for some reflective responses.

The hot issue in Columbus regarding politics and religion deals with the invitation of a political candidate (a Republican) to a gathering of pastors. I can't even remember when it happened - last year I think (the downfall of blogging is that we are amateurs and have no time to validate our facts!) Anyway . . . the specifics aren't important. This gathering of 400 plus clergy is the point of contention. The Republican speaker (Ken Blackwell for those of you locals) was the only invited speaker. Two leaders of this group of clergy (two pastors of Christian churches) have recently come under fire by a group of 31 other clergy members citing this group has violated its tax-exempt status by publicly endorsing a candidate.

OK . . . those of you who are local I am sure know this situation, and if you don't, hopefully this gives you an idea of what's going on.

Now that I've gotten it all mapped out, I don't know where to begin. Essentially, I want to make the point that there is a division slowly occurring in the undercurrents of many major denominations across the United States regarding political matters. I find this divide unnerving. Here are two recent observations that have made me uncomfortable (just by citing these things leaves me open for potshots, I know):
* Went to a seventh grade girls basketball game yesterday at a large Baptist church. Immediately inside the doors was a large "Support our Troops" booth.
* We get bulletins from another local Church of Christ congregation. Recently their elders' article on the front page noted the following issues that "are at the forefront" of ways America is becoming a secular nation (in the order they listed them): homosexual marriage, abortion, removal of "one nation under God" from pledge, cloning, and the use of aborted babies stem cells.

Now, the issues these elders mention are no doubt important, but I find it sad that these are the "top five" list that worries them. It has furthered my opinion that the Republican Party has nabbed religious conservatives, put them in their pockets, and I'm not sure will ever let them go. How dare Christians allow a political party to define their values for them? That is exactly what conservative Christians are doing.

In the sidebar I have my "currently reading" book as Many Voices, One God. It is a collection of essays regarding the issue of pluralism as it confronts American Christianity. One of the main factors in this discussion is the "chosen nation" status that many American Christians feel this nation has leading many to use Old Testament texts to apply to our nation today.

In his essay entitled "Being a Christian in a World of Fear" Will Coleman makes the following statements that I couldn't help but find convicting:

"Unfortunately, the rationale for such violent behavior [wars, inquisitins, slavery and genocice] has been exracted from passages that are contained within the sacred texts of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam that privilege a 'chosen people,' often at the expense of so-called heathens and infidels. This kind of scriptural eisegetical exegesis and appropriation has led to intolerance more often tha it has to toleration and mutual understanding. Too often, apocalyptic nihilism or fatalism (under the guise of 'destiny') has overridden the message of forgiveness, reconcilaiation, and hope that is also in these same texts . . . WIthin the specific context of the history of the United States, as heir to the social doctrine of election ('a chosen people'), violence has been accepted as an expedient, though somtimes regrettable, necessity. This hersy calls for confession and repentance."

Written in 1998, this essay obviously predates the "war on terror," but he hits the nail on the head when it comes to how this "war" has come about. Our current president has succeeded in convincing many conservative Christians of "us vs. them" thinking. His infamous, "If you're not on our side, you're on the side of the terrorists" makes complicated cultural, economic, and political issues much to simplistic.

There needs to be greater separation ideologically between most Christian denominations and sects and a particular political party. Many Christians, especially on the right wing, have fallen in love with political power and forgotten their first love. The bickering and the accusations must stop. Seldom can a person raise a question about the war in Iraq or Republican policies regarding taxes or budget concerns without being labeled a liberal or worse. This accusatory obsession is similar to the 1960's communisist obsession. Fear of liberals has now replaced fear of pinky communists. Looking back at our communist accusations sounds ridiculous . . . perhaps as ridiculous as our liberal accusations will sound in the future.

Jim Wallis' proposal for a third way, politically, for Christians is very noble. Why can't anti-abortion lobbying co-exist with pro-welfare lobbying? Why does the fight for poverty have to take a back seat to the fight against abortion? Aren't both equally noble? Don't each reflect the characteristics of the Story? Why must we continue on from a reductionist notion of the role Christians have in politics?

I have to warn everyone that the book on deck for me is Yoder's Politics of Jesus, so when I get done reading that I may never make another "political" statement again! My rambling for today has ended.

A year in the books

So . . . yesterday marked my one year anniversary for starting the old God, Superman, and Buckeyes blog. Thanks to all of you who check here frequently and offer your two cents on occassion. It has proved to be a great format to share pictures with family, share ideas with friends, and even meet a few people along the way. All in all, it has been quite the blessing. I am absolutely amazed at the maze of blog rings one can get sucked into as you travel the blogs out there. I have seen just how many people there are out there writing about similar things that I do. It's a great way to see the way God is working. His diversity is evident as well (there are many more folks out there who think much differently than I.)

Mary Beth and I are in a small group that meets on Thursday nights. Tonight we have finally made it to Romans 13. That should be a fun chapter and spur plenty of thoughts and conversation (it's about submitting to the authorities and such). I, unfortunately, have some way some how come out a little differently than most when it comes to this issue (in other words, I'm not the most patriotic person in the world). I love my country, but the way so many Christians blindly worship the "empire," frankly scares me a bit. This sounds like a crazy, liberal idea, but it is actually quite rooted in my tradition. I was excited to see David Lipcomb's Civil Government online in it's entirety. If what I say in this post angers you at all, you should check out Lipscomb's book. It will challenge the way you view the society in which you serve.

Michael W. Smith (a Christian artist I love and respect immensely) really disappointed me by including a song about the American flag on his worship album. Following incredible worship songs about the blood of Jesus and the sovereignty of God there is a idol-ridden song about the red, white, and blue (I can feel the arrows already coming at me as I write this). Since September 11, 2001, churches in this country have become increasingly more imperialistic and blindly follow the "empire" guised in language of "right" and "justice."

I think all Christians would be well-served to read Lipscomb's book and consider the implactions moving from the context of Civil War in which he originally wrote to our age of "terrorism" and see how that might influence our relationship within the civil society. Frankly I am disturbed with the ease that Americana has found its way into the church. Examples: an elderly person at our church (whom I love and admire greatly) sports a lapel pin in the shape of the cross adorned with red, white, and blue stripes and stars. What does the cross have to do with the American flag? I'm afraid we are too quick to defend our country without critically considering the implications of our imperialistically minded theology that is, in my opinion, contrary to the Gospel.

OK . . . when I sat down to write this, I did not intend to write so much . . . I'll pick up on this subject later . . . and I'll be shocked if there aren't many who have opinions to share . . . and I welcome them. This is nothing I am hellbent on . . . but it is something that has for whatever reason become prominent in my thinking lately.

PS. Our first winterstorm is on its way so be prepared for some great pictures!

Chalk another one up for the Religious Right

If you haven't already heard . . . this game may be fun. Guess who said this:

"We have the ability to take (Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez) out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the same job and then get it over with. You know, I don't know about this doctrine of asssassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assisnate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it."

A.) A war-mongering U.S. President
B.) Donald Rumsfield
C.) Rambo
D.) Some crazed U.S. Navy Seal special forces member
E.) A beloved Christ-follower

Pat Robertson is an idiot. I can think of many other terms for him, but I none that I think are kind enough to type here. Jackass is about the meanest I'm willing to call out here.

Pat Roberton, host of 700 Club, instigator of Christian Coalition, and all-around misrepresenter of the Gospel to the United States made these comments on the 700 Club Monday. These comments are so ignorant and so un-Christian it grieves me to hear them made by someone so beloved for his "ministry."

I would love to retort with comments of my own, but I think the comments from Venezuela suffice to cover the problem with his words.

The Venezuelan vice-president said it would test the U.S. anti-terrorism policy. If an Islamic leader in the Middle East made these same comments about George Bush, we'd be up in arms and ready to bomb them. Jose Vicente Rangel (VP of Venezuela) said this:

"The ball is in the U.S. court, after this criminal statement by a citizen of that country. It's a huge hypocrisy to maintain this discourse against terrorism ans at the same time, in the heart of that country, there are entirely terrorist statements like those."

I guess the U.S. is getting a bit of taste of it's own medicine. I guess the comment I found most ironic in this whole situation is the fact that, Rangel sarcastically noted how "Christian" Robertson's comments were. It's amazing how all those "pagans" outside our country know the heart and mind of Christ, while those inside who stand in the midst of Christian glitz and glamour often show little awareness.

Maybe some day we'll move to the point where ignorant comments made by ignorant men won't be in the newspaper, but until that happens, we must come out and defend the true "love your enemy" faith calling Christ calls his disciples to. For whatever reason, Christian activists think that this doesn't apply on a world-level and in diplomatic relationships.

In a related vein, Stanley Haurwas has an interesting study regarding the non-violent resistance of Dietrich Bonhoeffer (a Lutheran Christian protesting WWII who eventually lost his life days before the Allies liberated his camp): Performing the Faith Bonhoeffer and the Practice of Nonviolence.

Even the Bush camp had to separate itself from these statements. It amazes me that there are actually people out there who believe that garbage. It's unbelieveable.