The Sermon on the Mount in Our World, Part 5: Blessed are the Merciful

"Blessed are the merciful, for they will receive mercy." -Matthew 5:7

The wing and hand of the angel with the cross symbolize the act of Mercy and represent those giving mercy as shown with the bandaged hand. The Caduceus represents the medical profession. The Chi Rho represents Christ and the bottomost symbol represents sickness and healing.

There were very few ways to die in the ancient world that were more painful, humiliating, or excruciatingly drawn out than crucifixion. It was generally a punishment by Rome for political enemies or military traitors. They were strung up on a beam and crossbar by hand and foot, and than left until they died from exposure or wild animals. While they waited for death, they had to endure the agony of intense muscle exertion and cramping, as well as hunger and thirst. The depictions of Jesus being hung with no support under his feet are wrong; that would anatomically impossible to do to a person, and would defeat the purpose anyways of a long, drawn out death.

They were often crucified in public places, such as roadsides, so serve as an example to other would-be revolutionaries. In the 2nd century BC, after the Spartacus uprising, the gladiators who followed Spartacus were crucified all along the road from Tuscany to Rome, one every 100 meters. The public aspect was intended to bring great shame on the prisoners. To not have one's body anointed and buried upon death was the ultimate humiliation, as the people of Rome believed  that you could not pass over to the afterlife with a proper burial.

And crucifixions were very, very ordinary. Hundreds of thousands, possibly even millions, of people were crucified during the extent of Roman Empire. People knew that the punishment for treason was generally crucifixion. It was a fairly convincing deterrent.

And, needless to say, it was very, very inhumane. That was kind of the point. It was to degrade their enemies, to shame them and bring them down to the lowest level of humiliation, that Rome did this. It was a particularly intense form of torture, and the death penalty, all rolled into one terrible act.

Jesus was crucified in this way. The man who had been declared King of the Jews, in direct contradiction to the Roman Emperor and King Herod, was strung up on a beam and left to die. He was shamed and humiliated and displayed publicly. It was a way for the Roman to deter future Messianic claimants, and by the Jewish leaders to mock the supposed prophet and Messiah. What Messiah suffers so long and so publicly? What Messiah allows himself to be exposed to nature and hunger and thirst and torture? What Messiah would allow his body, his personal Temple for the Lord to dwell in, to be degraded in such a way?

And yet, as He hung up there, Jesus asked for forgiveness for the one's who did this to him.

He didn't call out for vengeance. He didn't curse them. He didn't charge his followers with avenging his humiliating end.

He forgave. He asked for mercy for his tormentors.

Just as he did in His Sermon on the Mount. Jesus instructed, "Blessed are the merciful." He continuously commanded his followers to love their enemies, to forgive them, to show mercy to those who commit wrong or persecute them.

If Jesus commanded our mercy, then what does it say about us as a nation that has executed 1,364 people since 1976? A nation that, in some places, makes no regard for minors or the mentally handicapped when it comes to death penalty punishments. A nation that has exonerated 143 death row inmates since 1973. How many innocent men and women have we wrongfully executed?

Did we learn nothing from Jesus' example? Jesus really did, under Roman and Jewish law, commit a crime. He got the punishment prescribed by the authorities for his treason to the Roman emperor. Why would we, as a nation, take on the retaliatory role of the empire, rather than the merciful role of Christ?

Jesus demanded mercy from us. He was able to forgive those who persecuted him, people who hounded him and tortured him and humiliated him and ultimately killed him. Can we not find it in us to show mercy to those who commit crimes here, in our time? Not to release them and act as if it never happened. But what right to we have to play God, to determine when someone's time on this earth is done. But taking that person's life, we are taking away any and all opportunity they may have to find redemption. We take away the opportunity for them to show remorse and ask for forgiveness. We lose our chance to follows Christ's example.

Jesus said, "Forgive them, they know not what they do." He was speaking of those who could find no mercy in themselves. He was speaking of those who felt that the best answer to violence was more violence. He was talking about us.

For a really good discussion and meditation on crucifixion, check out Robin Meyer's excellent book, Saving Jesus from the Church. This blog post draws heavily from the ideas in Chapter 3.

Read Part 1: Blessed are the poor in spirit. 
Read Part 2: Blessed are those who mourn.
Read Part 3: Blessed are the meek 
Read Part 4: Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness

The Sermon on the Mount in Our World, Part 4: Blessed are Those Who Hunger and Thirst For Rigtheousness

"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled." -Matthew 5:6

The Rays of the Holy Trinity flow downward to the Bible and the Baptismal shell representing righteousness for which they hunger and thirst. The Staff and Cross represent the Lord as our Shepherd.

 Righteousness is one of those good old church words. You know the ones I'm talking about. One of those words you hear a thousand times on Sundays as a kid growing up, but have absolutely so idea what it means. And then as you grow up, you are expected to absorb the meaning somehow and understand when it is referenced.

Like through osmosis with the preacher or something.

But no one really ever explains it to us. So what is righteousness?

Websters Dictionary defines righteousness as the noun form of the adjective "righteous." And righteous is defined as "acting in accord with divine or moral law," and "morally right or justifiable."  A subheading says "arising from an outraged sense of justice or morality."

I like that. We are getting somewhere.

"An outraged sense of justice or morality" is what I think Jesus is getting at in Matthew 5:6. So far, through three verses, he has blessed groups of downtrodden people.

The poor in spirit.

Those who mourn.

The meek.

Now, he is blessing "those who hunger and thirst for righteousness." I don't think he is invoking another downtrodden group here. I think, in wrapping up the first half of the eight Beatitudes, he is putting the bow on top of the first three, so to speak.

If you peek ahead a little, the last Beatitude also invokes "Righteousness." Interesting, huh?

So who are these people who "hunger and thirst for righteousness"?

As we have seen, the outcasts of ancient Palestine were forgotten groups of people. The ill. The widows. The gentle. Jesus has already upended things by giving his first Blessings to these outcasts. Now, Jesus is calling on his disciples and followers. By blessing those "Who hunger and thirst for righteousness," he is telling his listeners who they are called to be.

And what a way to describe them! Not just those who want to see righteousness. Those who "hunger and thirst" for it! Those who are starving for righteousness, who are parched for righteousness. One who hungers or thirsts is not one who is just mildly uncomfortable or annoyed. Think about a time you have been really, really hungry or thirsty. The feeling wraps you it up, it consumes you. All you can think about is eating or drinking something.

Jesus wants us to feel a need for righteousness in the same way.

Jesus doesn't just want his followers to see injustice in the world and have a casual reaction to it. He doesn't want them to simply respond with a small cash donation, or 30 minutes bagging meals for the hungry. He wants them to feel the need to rectify it as a deep, painful sensation!

In Palestine, as we have seen, injustice was a huge part of society. So many people lived in poverty, and in need. And with the rule of the Romans, the Jewish people were regarded as scarcely better than livestock. Rome's justice was not one that made sense to the people of Palestine. It did not play by the rules that their God had laid out two thousand years earlier to Moses. It was impersonal and distant and unjust.

But it was the just the way the world was. It was accepted as the way of the world. Rome's dominance was accepted as inevitable, as they swept across the Western world unstoppably over the past century. Unjust? Yes. Unexpected? Not at all.

Jesus wanted to shake the people of Palestine out of this acceptance of injustice! He wanted them to look at the inequality and poverty and bleakness of the world and be just as outrage as He was! He wanted them to feel a righteous anger over it so deep they could taste it. And he knew this "outraged sense of justice or morality" would propel them on to action.

And he made it very easy to realize if you were doing the right thing. One who "hungers and thirsts" doesn't just accept that and move on. They try to quench that hunger and thirst. They don't stop until they find food or drink to satisfy them. By blessing those who hunger and thirst, Jesus told us, "If you really, really care about righteousness, about the injustice in the world, you will not stop until you have quenched your hunger and thirst to see it made it right."

Injustice is still a huge part of the world. It's a huge part of the very nation we live in. So many people in America live in poverty, live with food insecurity, live with the constant threat of violence. Inequality in our country is more pronounced than ever, and much more pronounced than in much of the rest of the world.

And yet we just accept that that is the way it is.

We say it's their own fault. They are lazy and weak and don't want to work hard and only want a handout. We say they should pulls themselves up, nothing is standing in their way. We say the free market should not be interfered with, that it knows what is the right balance of equality in the world. We say that the rich obviously earned what they have. We say it's not our problem. It's unfortunate, but we can't do anything about it. We say there will always be poor and hungry people. We say it is structural, and the price of a free capitalist society.

If you hunger and thirst for righteousness, you don't say any of these things.

You don't just accept poverty and hunger and inequality as inevitable. You don't just accept the injustice in the world. You act. You quench that hunger and thirst you feel deep down inside, and you don't stop until it is done.

If you hunger and thirst for righteousness, you will be filled. But you have to make it happen.

Read Part 1: Blessed are the poor in spirit. 
Read Part 2: Blessed are those who mourn.
Read Part 3: Blessed are the meek

Indiana GOP Threaten Clergy With Jail Time For Performing LGBT Marriages

Here is some news that should make those who cherish religious freedom nervous:

In what appears to be a rather massive violation of the freedom of religion, the Republican party in Indiana appears to have amended the state criminal code to either make it a crime, or confirm that it remain a crime, for clergy to conduct weddings for gay couples.

While it is not widely known, numerous mainstream American religions permit gay nuptials. The faiths include reform Judaism, Evangelical Lutherans, Episcopalians, and the United Church of Christ, among others.

Yep, the Indiana GOP has decided that they will tell religious groups in their state what they can and cannot do in their own places of worship.

This is a massive violation of the 1st amendment, and the principle of freedom of religion. If a religious group wants to perform a religious act marrying two men or women, that should be no business for anyone but that place of worship. This is government meddling where it doesn't need to be. No matter what your opinion on gay marriage, it should make you nervous as a person of faith that the Indiana Republican legislature feels that they have the authority to do this kind of thing.

This is the distinction I feel a lot of conservatives fail to make on the issue of gay marriage: what a church does or doesn't do is their own business. Just because gay marriage may be legal in a state doesn't mean anyone will force your church to perform gay marriages. Nor should a church be prevented from performing gay marriages if they so choose.

Don't expect this to hold up in a court. And don't be surprised if we don't see more of this kind of thing as the push for gay rights becomes closer and closer to a done deal.

The Sermon on the Mount in Our World, Part 3: Blessed Are the Meek

"Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth." -Matthew 5:5

The lamb symbolizes the meek. The water represents the living water. The fish represents Christianity.

The third beatitude is one of the most beloved of Jesus' sayings, and also one of the most dismissed. It is also one of the most difficult to think about how to live.

This arises from the problems with the word "meek." To be meek is not something that is not very highly looked upon in the world. One who is meek is one who submits, who shuns conflict. In the hyper-masculine world of 1st century Palestine, and the equally hyper-masculine world today, these are not qualities that folks strive for.

In Palestine, as throughout most of history, men were the center of society. They were the only ones allowed to one property, conduct business, attend the synagogue, or travel. The men who were most esteemed were the strong, the smart, the assertive. The ones capable of defending their family and their property, both through their dealings with others and through violence, if necessary. This tough manliness was the view of the ideal man.

So it would be natural that after blessing those who mourn, with a focus on widows and women, that Jesus now blesses again those who don't conform to the accepted view of manhood in the world.

The Greek word used in the original scripture, praus, was an active verb. It conveyed the idea of one who is actively meek in the world, one who actively goes out of their way to be humble and gentle and friendly, as opposed to rough, hard, suspicious of others or violent. In fact, a more accurate translation of praus in the light of today's vocabulary would be gentle.

So why did Jesus call blessing upon the meek?

All through his ministry, Jesus led an example that can only be described as actively meek. Later in his Sermon on the Mount, Jesus teaches that we should turn the other cheek when someone strikes us, instead of retaliating.

In Matthew 18:4, he teaches that he who possesses true greatness is the one who "becomes humble like this child."

In Matthew 11:29, he refers to himself as gentle and humble.

In Matthew 26:52, he admonishes Peter to put away his sword, saying "For all who take the sword will perish by the sword."

Jesus' ministry was one of continual meekness. It was a ministry where he taught us that the way to change the world, to bring the Kingdom of God on Earth, was not through "manly" virtues like violence and force and hardness, but through love and kindness and serving others. It was a focus on being a friend to those in need, of being gentle to others and humble in our actions and thoughts.

I love this verse for this series because it has a direct parallel to today's world. We still revere the "ideal man" image. We tell our sons they need to be tough and hard, and not to trust anybody.

This bleeds over into leaders. We are told we should vote for the "tough" candidate, the one who will put criminals behind bars forever, who will play hardball with other world leaders, who won't coddle the weak in society. We like the loud and boisterous and confident-to-the-point-of-arrogant candidate.

But is this the kind of leader Jesus would have of choose? Is this the ideal He would want us to live?

Clearly not! We are instructed to be meek, to be gentle, to be humble. We are shown this example, and are supposed to follow it in all aspects of life. We should demand that our leaders show gentleness towards the needy, humility in their words and actions towards others, and yes, meekness in their attitude. We should demand that our leaders lead with these attributes, instead of raw force and power. We should demand they practice gentleness, and present our nation as a nation that is gentle and humble, instead of throwing our weight around and imposing our will on people who don't want it.

As the church, we are called upon first and foremost to live this life. We are to be the examples. The church should be humble. It should be gentle and welcoming. It should have open arms and an open attitude towards others. As the saying goes, we are to be the change we want to see in our world.

Because Jesus tells us that it is the meek who will inherit the world. It is the humble who will rule in His Kingdom. Being manly and tough and harsh may get us somewhere in this world, but we are called to embody the new world. It is not those virtues that will win in the end. If we want to see the Kingdom of God here on Earth, we need to be the leaders Jesus tells us will have that Kingdom.

Blessed are the meek, the gentle, the humble, says Jesus. Be like the little children. Put away your swords.

Is that us?

Read Part 1: Blessed are the poor in spirit. 
Read Part 2: Blessed are those who mourn.

The Sermon on the Mount in Our World, Part 2: Blessed Are Those Who Mourn

"Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted." -Matthew 5:4

The eagle flying into the sun symbolizes the Resurrection and the Life. The flames reprisent the Holy Spirit flowing down from the resurrection to comfort the kneeling figure in mourning. The hands with the shovel represent burial. The tearful eye also symbolizes mourning.

In our first look at the Sermon on the Mount on Wednesday, I talked about "Blessed are the poor in spirit," and tied it to those who are suffering from depression, addiction, and mental illness. Today's passage logically follows in Jesus' blessings.

In first-century Palestine, Jesus' listeners would have known who specifically he spoke about when he said "those who mourn." Those who mourned the most publicly and with the greatest feeling were widows. Because, to be a widow in Jewish culture was truly a terrible fate. A woman's fate in the Jewish culture was inextricably tied to her husband.She could own no land or property, she could not engage in business, she was not allowed to travel on her own. She was her father's property until marriage, and her husband's thereafter.

So for a woman to lose her husband was a veritable ostracizing event. The Old Testament laws tried to account for their situation by commanding the brothers of dead men to marry the widows. But if these men were married, or a man had no brothers, often times a woman was out of luck. The loss of her husband meant she no longer had a place in the world.

This is why you hear Jesus talk so much about praying and caring for widows. They were outcasts, forgotten and abandoned. So when Jesus says, "Blessed are those who mourn," he is calling blessing down upon women who have no hope. Women who feel no comfort, who have been forgotten by society and felt behind in the world.

So lets fast forward to today's world.

And shift gears.

I want to focus on two groups of people who probably feel they have almost nothing in common, but are more related than they think.

Abortion is the hottest of hot button issues in our current political climate. Since Roe v. Wade in 1972, it has become the major dividing line between our two political parties. It stirs passions on both sides of the aisle like nothing else, and rightfully so. It is an issue wrapped in our human identity and our morality.

As I see it, there are really three groups involved in the abortion debate: those who want to make it illegal, those who want to see it's legality preserved, and those who have ever had abortion (who fall into both other categories pretty evenly.)

And I think all groups involved are greatly misunderstood.

Anti-abortion activists view pro-choice activists as heartless relativists who have no regard for unborn children, and are in fact knowingly complicit in an act tantamount to murder.

Pro-choice activists view anti-abortion activists are misogynistic neanderthals driven by a dogmatic religious creed that has no regard for women's rights or bodily autonomy.

And those who have had an abortion are often pushed aside, forgotten after their ordeal, demonized by one group, and held up as a political victory by the other.

But they are the ones who mourn.

Those arguing this issue forget the tragic and unimaginably difficult decision making process these women go through. Often alone, and frightened, and ashamed, they don't see a better option for their lives. Many are poor. Many are single. Many have families who would condemn them, or even ostracize them, for being pregnant.

They may have felt like they had no choice with the man they were with. They may have been the victim of a rape, either from a stranger or a friend or even a spouse. Maybe their birth control failed. Above all, this isn't their fault. Our society has a disturbing tendency to make them feel that way. But it's not. As the saying goes, it takes two.

They probably realize they are in no financial place to raise a child. They are already in a non-optimal situation, and can't afford the doctor's appointments, the clothes and food and car seats and everything else it takes to raise a child. They don't want their child to live a life of poverty.

And so they feel as if they have no other choice. And then they feel dirty. They feel like they are the lowest of the low for even thinking of abortion. But they don't know where else to turn.

So they find a local clinic. But, in today's world, now they often have to go through state-mandated counseling. And a state-mandated ultrasound. And they may have the state mandate that they have to hear a verbal description of their baby. And then there may be a state-mandated waiting period.

As if this wasn't already hard enough.

And there may be protesters outside the clinic who yell things like "baby killer!" at them. And hold signs with pictures of aborted fetuses. Or maybe a pro-choice group wants them to speak about their exercising of their rights.

These are the one's who mourn. No one uses abortion as birth control, contrary to some rhetoric. This is a decision brought about by a lack of hope, by a feeling that they are alone and have no other choice. It's not one approached with anything other fear and sadness and mourning. And those emotions continue after. There is no sense of closure, no lifting of a weight.

Our leaders will continue to debate abortion as a campaign issue. They will do little to change the status quo, because it makes such an effective political cudgel to motivate the faithful.

Meanwhile, there will be thousands of women who mourn.

As followers of Christ, we need to embrace these women. We need put aside any judgment, any urge we may have to politicize their ordeal. We need to comfort them, welcome them, help them heal. We need to present an image to the world that helps women understand they have choices, that they aren't dirty, that they aren't at fault. We need to understand that abortion is a complicated issue, one with a lot of gray area. We need to realize that women consider it for legitimate reasons, go through with it for legitimate reasons. We need to realize that they need us, both before and after abortion.

Because these are the ones who mourn.

Read Part 1: Blessed are the poor in spirit.

The Sermon on the Mount in Our World, Part 1: Blessed are the Poor

This is the first of a semi-daily blog series about the Sermon on the Mount. I want to go through the Sermon from Matthew 5 teaching-by-teaching and talk about each teaching in the context of today's world. This being a blog about Christianity and politics, these modern-day applications will of course focus on public policy and governing. This will come from Matthew 5:3-7:27, and the translation is the NRSV, although I will reference others as well (noted in parentheses throughout.)

The stained glass series presented throughout the Beatitudes comes from Saint Vincent de Paul Catholic Church in Seward, Nebraska. The story behind these beautiful pieces of art can be found here. The captions under each come directly from the St. Vincent de Paul's website.

"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven." -Matthew 5:3

The Crown and Scepter symbolize the Kingdom of Heaven; the dove the Holy Spirit; the hand reaching from the flower symbolizes humility.

Jesus opens his Sermon with the Beatitudes, a set of blessings commonly found in Hebrew writings. Jesus, however, shakes things up from the start by pronouncing blessings on a very unlikely group of people. His first: the poor in spirit, or the hopeless (CEV).

In first century Palestine, this encompassed a very large part of the population. Most people in ancient Palestine lived in abject poverty. They lived hand to mouth, and had to constantly worry about the whims of the Roman proconsul or legionnaires. The tension, stress, and want they lived with engulfed them in a poverty of spirit, a lack of hope. Nothing had ever been good for them. Why would anyone ever think it would?

So Jesus making them the very first line of his great Sermon is huge. Immediately, he is reaching out to people listening, most of whom lived in despair and without hope. Immediately, he told them they are blessed before all others. What a way to get them listening!

Who are the poor in spirit in our world today? Notice Jesus doesn't just say "the poor" here. Now, I'll admit, when I first began embracing progressive Christianity, this bothered. I thought it must be a mistranslation. Wouldn't it make more sense for Jesus to just say "the poor?" I never quite understood it.

But by saying "the poor in spirit," Jesus casts a wider net in today's world. There are many people who live in poverty. There are many more who suffer not just from a lack of wealth, but from depression, or mental illness, or addiction, or loss. This is the poor in spirit in our world.

And yet, they are often the most forgotten. I wrote just today about how the mentally ill are becoming the first victims of states' refusal to accept federal dollars for Medicaid expansion, as safety net hospitals are forced to turn away patients. When it comes to living up to Jesus' first blessing, we are failing miserably.

Two-thirds of the homeless population in the United States are mentally ill. Over 90% of suicides involve a someone suffering from a mental illness. Since the beginning of the war in Afghanistan, over 100,000 veterans have been treated by the VA for mental illness. 57% of children with mental health issues come from families living under the poverty line.

And yet, our nations leaders continue with a push for brutal austerity that inevitably falls hardest on those who need help the most. When cuts happen to federal and state budgets, they don't fall on corporate subsidies and perks. They fall on Medicaid, on DHS, on CHIP, on addiction counseling. Every time we cut more and more in a effort to stop the "takers," we are leaving behind thousands of the mentally ill and needy. We are leaving behind the poor in spirit that Jesus spoke of with his first breath in the Sermon.

If the poor in spirit are so important that Jesus felt compelled to name them first, why do we make them the last in our society today?

How "Christian America" Deals With the Mentally Ill

It's often the most politically conservative states who like to pride themselves on being the most Christian states as well. They only elect God-fearing Christians, they say, and the only rules they live by are the rules of Christ.

Christian Example and Georgia Governor Nathan Deal

So how do the God-fearing men and women of Georgia explain this?

Every day he’s without his meds, Scott Patrick’s demons return: the urge to get high to forget that he’s dying of AIDS; the anxiety, paranoia, and phantom noises spurred on by his bipolar disorder and PTSD.

Patrick, a former male prostitute and recovering drug addict, was released from a Georgia jail last month without any of his medications on hand. “I could die dirty or die clean,” he said. “I want to die clean.”

So like many struggling Atlantans with nowhere else to go, Patrick sought treatment at Grady Memorial, the state’s largest safety net hospital. He carried all his worldly possessions with him: a change of clothes, a Bible, and some vitamin C drops.

The partisan war over Obamacare is now threatening the mental health services that Patrick and countless others are seeking. The president’s health care law cuts federal subsidies to safety-net hospitals that were expected to have more paying patients under the law’s Medicaid expansion and insurance exchanges. But Republican-controlled states like Georgia have refused to go along with the expansion. That’s turned safety-net providers like Grady into unintended casualties—and mental health services for Georgia’s most troubled residents are first on the chopping block.

It was never meant to happen this way. States like Georgia, which has the nation’s sixth-highest uninsured rate, were supposed to be the biggest beneficiaries of the new Medicaid dollars. But in 2012, the Supreme Court unexpectedly ruled that the federal government couldn’t force states to accept the expansion.

Along with 22 other states with Republican governors or statehouses, Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal has refused to go along with the Medicaid expansion, saying the cost to the state would be untenable. Democrats counter that it’s a cruel political stunt, since the cost of new coverage is overwhelmingly paid for by the federal government.

So safety-net hospitals like Grady are now caught in the middle: they aren’t getting new Medicaid funding, yet they’ll see a cumulative $18 billion reduction in federal payments by 2020.

It's terrible that people have to live like this, with no hope and no security. And all for political games, all for the purpose of sticking it to President Obama. Rejection of live saving medical care for the most vulnerable doesn't seem very Christ-like to me. These political games and partisan cheap shots have real world consequences for real people. Perhaps Governor Deal and other Republican leaders should put down the latest Americans for Prosperity newsletter, and pick up a Bible.

The Complicated Legacy of Martin Luther King Jr.

Yesterday was Martin Luther King Jr Day. As the day approached, I had been pondering what to write about Dr. King. The Civil Rights movement, the Poor People's Campaign, Dr. King's various sermons and speeches: all fit in my niche here. What a plethora of subject matter.

But maybe another day.

The topic in my home during the lead-up to MLK Day has been the Reverend's downfalls and personal demons. Most specifically his penchant for extramarital affairs. We have struggled with how to assess Dr. King, knowing he did great things, but that he also violated the trust and integrity of his marriage. Should we continue to revere him, or reject him?

The fact of his affairs has been distorted by both sides assessing Dr. King's legacy. His detractors love to bring it up, to make it the defining characteristic of him, to cast him as the arch liberal hypocrite. They question how a man of God could engage in such acts and still maintain the moral high ground he holds in memory. His defenders refuse to even acknowledge the existence of such trysts, preferring to cast Dr. King as some hyper-moral superman. With those who wish to roll back the gains he won still active and committed, its natural for those of us who supported his goals to wish to close ranks and deny his sins.

 Both approaches are unfair to his legacy.

Martin Luther King Jr. was the driving force behind the defining political movement of the 20th century, and perhaps American history. He lead a great drive for freedom and equality, the two principles this nation is built on. He had great personal courage, being imprisoned and spit on and beat and cursed all through his life. He made some of the greatest statements in American history, statements that will live longer than almost any others for the sheer weight of good and right in them.

"I have a dream."

"The arc of the moral universe is long, and bends towards justice."

"I have seen the promised land."

Yet, there is no doubt that he was a flawed man. His affairs violated the sacred bond with his wife, and cast a shadow on the morality at play in his personal life. They reveal a man who could bend the rules. Some ask, if he couldn't keep to the straight and narrow in his personal life, how do we know he didn't bend the rules in public? How do we know he didn't potentially coordinate with more violent segments of the Civil Rights movement, or pay supporters to join the march, or purposefully curry violence to cast his movement in a victim's light?

His shortcomings do tarnish the man, as they should. But they come as a shock to many. Because we have done to Dr. King what we do to all great heroes. We try too often to make the great people in history out to be perfect. We put them on a pedestal. We begin to believe they were infallible, that they were gods among us.

It is unfair to them and unfair to us. No one is immortal. No one is without faults.

Lest we forget, the great men of the Bible were flawed.

Noah liked the get drunk. Moses was a murderer. King David was an adulterer. Peter was a coward and denier of Christ. St. Paul spent a good portion of his adult live pursuing, torturing and killing Christians.

Lest we forget, the vast majority of our Founding Fathers supported the enslavement of one race, and the extermination of another. Our Presidents all had great faults.

Washington and Jefferson owned slaves. Andrew Jackson ordered the Trail of Tears. Abraham Lincoln believed the intermixing of the races was impossible, and all freed slaves should be sent back to Africa upon their liberation. Woodrow Wilson, our only President to hold a PhD, was an unrepentant racist. Roosevelt had an ego that sometimes got in the way of effective governing. Truman (my favorite president) ordered the dropping of two atomic bombs on civilian populations. Kennedy had numerous affairs.

But these things do not define any of these men. Nor should they. Because they were human beings, complicated and fallible and weak, but at the same time, intelligent and driven and strong. They shaped the world and should be remembered for doing so. Their sins were damaging, but their achievements were great.

The focus by some on the downfalls of Dr. King are even more damaging than those of our white heroes. The scorn heaped upon MLK perpetuates the belief that for a black man to go down as a great American, he must have lived a spotless life. This is not fair to MLK, or to the legacy of African Americans. We do not hold white Americans to the same standards. We deify the Founders and whitewash their sins, but hold sins against King and Malcolm and the other great leaders of the Civil Rights era.

The shortcomings and sins of our most hallowed figures should not define them. But they help us understand them. They show us that it is not immortals who do great deeds, but human beings, just like you and me. It is right of us to remember Dr. King as the great man he was, to appreciate the great deeds he achieved. It is also right of us to remember his weakness, his humanity, so that we may know that, despite our own faults, we can change the world as well.

It may be difficult to assess Dr. King this way. We may not be able to get past his shortcomings. It feeds the narrative of those who roll back the gains he achieved, who wish to obscure his fight not just for racial justice, but for economic and social justice. But we must remember that it is not personalities and individuals who define our drive for justice. It is the innate rightness of what we fight for. We are flawed, but our cause is not. Jesus told us, "He who is without sin, cast the first stone." All of us would do well to remember that.

The Methodist Inquistion Claims Another

The modern-day inquisition continues.

Just weeks after the defrocking of Rev. Frank Schaefer of Pennsylvania, the United Methodist Church in New York has begun proceeding against the Rev. Thomas Ogletree for presiding over the marriage of his gay son.

Ogletree is a retired elder, as well as former Yale Divinity School Dean. The wedding in question happened in 2012, in New York, where gay marriage is legal. Ogletree put out a statement, saying:

"It is a shame that the church is choosing to prosecute me for this act of love, which is entirely in keeping with my ordination vows to 'seek peace, justice, and freedom for all people' and with Methodism's historic commitment to inclusive ministry embodied in its slogan 'open hearts, open minds, open doors.'"

Rev. Ogletree's actions were brought to the New York conference's attention by a group of Methodist ministers, after they saw a wedding announcement in the New York Times celebrating the couple's new marriage.

It's terribly sad to see this kind of witch hunt happening in the UMC again. As I wrote last week, this does not present the church in the light of Christ's love and radical acceptance. It's comforting to know that the church is evolving fairly quickly on this issue, but sad that it is not happening fast enough to protect good ministers who have dedicated their lives to the church.

The Forgotten People of West Virginia

By now, we've all seen the picture and videos of the chemical spill in West Virginia this week. We've absorbed the angry, sickened and hurt reactions of the residents there, who put trust into Freedom Industries to safely operate a coal business in their backyards, as they realized Freedom Industries showed no respect for them.

Not to mention the attitude, not of surprise, but inevitability. The people of West Virginia are well versed in environmental clean-up and danger. They have dealt with it for 150 years, since coal started to be pulled from their ground in almost unimaginable quantities. And throughout that entire history, as lords of industry have employed every tool of technology and greed to grow rich off the natural resources on West Virginia, the population of the state has remained in poverty, undereducated and all but forgotten. Looked upon as nothing but a cog in the great Coal Machine.

The chemical spill is a tragedy not just for it's effects on nature, not just because it has contaminated the drinking of thousands. It's a tragedy because it is another hit against the poorest of the poor in America, the people of Appalachia. Inevitably, when something like this happens, it's the little people who suffer the consequences. Justice is not part of the equation in the plundering of natural resources. These people work harder than any other group of people, and see almost none of the returns. Others get rich off of their labor. We lament these tragedies, and then move on, and forget these people exist.

The median household income in West Virginia is $22,482. 18% of the population has a college degree, more than ten points off the national average. The poverty rate is nearly 18%. Wal Mart is the state's largst employer. We forget this kind of abject poverty exists in America. That this kind of poverty doesn't just strike black folks in St. Louis or Atlanta or Los Angeles.

This is what happens when greed takes precedence over people. This was not an accident. This was the direct result of greed, of lax regulatory oversight, of a non-existent inspection system. This is what happens when a group of poor, ill-represented people live on top of something that can make a very few, very rich. They become just as disposable as the dirt and water and mountaintops and old equipment.

These are the people Jesus spoke of in his Sermon on the Mount. These are the people Jesus spoke of as the "least of these."  These are the kinds of people Jesus spent his ministry serving, and called us to serve as well. When we let these kind of things happen, when we dismiss the environmental effects of coal and oil. And it's not just in West Virginia. Environmental tragedy and climate change affect the poor in the Caribbean, in Southeast Asia, in rural China, in the Amazon. They pay for our addiction to dirty energy.

I'll leave you with the words of a professor at West Virginia Wesleyan University, the words describing the rage he felt upon seeing the impacts of this completely preventable disaster on his family and friends and neighbors. I imagine it's the rage filling all the people affected, filling all of us who see this thing and know it didn't have to happen.

To hell with you.
To hell with every greedhead operator who flocked here throughout history because you wanted what we had, but wanted us to go underground and get it for you. To hell with you for offering above-average wages in a place filled with workers who'd never had a decent shot at employment or education, and then treating the people you found here like just another material resource -- suitable for exploiting and using up, and discarding when they'd outlived their usefulness. To hell with you for rigging the game so that those wages were paid in currency that was worthless everywhere but at the company store, so that all you did was let the workers hold it for a while, before they went into debt they couldn't get out of.
To hell with you all for continuing, as coal became chemical, to exploit the lax, poorly-enforced safety regulations here, so that you could do your business in the cheapest manner possible by shortcutting the health and quality of life not only of your workers, but of everybody who lives here. To hell with every operator who ever referred to West Virginians as "our neighbors."
To hell with every single screwjob elected official and politico under whose watch it all went on, who helped write those lax regulations and then turned away when even those weren't followed. To hell with you all, who were supposed to be stewards of the public interest, and who sold us out for money, for political power. To hell with every one of you who decided that making life convenient for business meant making life dangerous for us. To hell with you for making us the eggs you had to break in order to make breakfast.
To hell with everyone who ever asked me how I could stand to live in a place like this, so dirty and unhealthy and uneducated. To hell with everyone who ever asked me why people don't just leave, don't just quit (and go to one of the other thousand jobs I suppose you imagine are widely available here), like it never occurred to us, like if only we dumb hilljacks would listen as you explained the safety hazards, we'd all suddenly recognize something that hadn't been on our radar until now.
To hell with the superior attitude one so often encounters in these conversations, and usually from people who have no idea about the complexity and the long history at work in it. To hell with the person I met during my PhD work who, within ten seconds of finding out I was from West Virginia, congratulated me on being able to read. (Stranger, wherever you are today, please know this: Standing in that room full of people, three feet away from you while you smiled at your joke, I very nearly lost control over every civil checkpoint in my body. And though civility was plainly not your native tongue, I did what we have done for generations where I come from, when faced with rude stupidity: I tamped down my first response, and I managed to restrain myself from behaving in a way that would have required a deep cleaning and medical sterilization of the carpet. I did not do any of the things I wanted to. But stranger, please know how badly I wanted to do them.)
And, as long as I'm roundhouse damning everyone, and since my own relatives worked in the coal mines and I can therefore play the Family Card, the one that trumps everything around here: To hell with all of my fellow West Virginians who bought so deeply into the idea of avoidable personal risk and constant sacrifice as an honorable condition under which to live, that they turned that condition into a culture of perverted, twisted pride and self-righteousness, to be celebrated and defended against outsiders. To hell with that insular, xenophobic pathology. To hell with everyone whose only take-away from every story about every explosion, every leak, every mine collapse, is some vague and idiotic vanity in the continued endurance of West Virginians under adverse, sometimes killing circumstances. To hell with everyone everywhere who ever mistook suffering for honor, and who ever taught that to their kids. There's nothing honorable about suffering. Nothing.
To hell with you. This is the one moment in my adult life when I have wished I could still believe in Hell as an actual, physical reality, so that I could imagine you in it.

Amen to that.

What Our Gun Culture Reaps

A man was shot and killed in Florida.

Sounds pretty familiar, huh?

This time, it was in a movie theater. Chad Oulsen was texting his young daughter, who was at home, during the previews. Curtis Reeves, a retired police officer, was sitting behind him and asked him to stop texting. When Oulsen didn't comply, and theater employees didn't do anything, Oulsen and Reeves began a shouting match.

It ended with Reeves shooting and killing Oulsen.

Over a text message.

This is what the gun culture looks like.

This is what our nation looks like when we decide that the unchecked gun ownership and use is more important that public safety and human life. A small minority has decided that any restrictions of guns is tantamount to the ultimate sacrilege, and refuses to allow the majority impose sensible rules on such dangerous weapons.

Which is funny, considering many of those same people pride this country on being a "Christian nation." Apparently, they missed that little part about turning the other cheek.

Or "Blessed are the peacemakers," and "Blessed are the meek."

Or beating our swords into plowshares.

A nation predicated on guns and the violence they bring is not a Christian nation.

Nothing will come of this shooting. No public policy, no change in culture, probably not even a civil debate. 

Is this the kind of world we want to live in? One ruled by vigilante justice and angry outbursts of gunfire? Where disputes are settled by shootouts instead of dialogue?

Jesus called us to love one another, to be humble, to put away our pride and anger. A country with more guns than citizens, that has more regard for firearms than the poor, oppressed, and hungry, can never be a Christian nation.

LGBT Rights Get a Victory in Oklahoma!

Human rights took a huge step forward in Oklahoma today.

A federal judge struck down the state's ban on gay marriage, saying it violated the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment:

Kern called Oklahoma's ban "an arbitrary, irrational exclusion of just one class of Oklahoma citizens from a governmental benefit," declaring:
"Equal protection is at the very heart of our legal system and central to our consent to be governed. It is not a scarce commodity to be meted out begrudgingly or in short portions."

 The judge ordered a stay on gay marriage in Oklahoma until the Supreme Court rules on Utah's ban this year, but nevertheless, this is a big win for justice and love.

I lived in Oklahoma for four years, until this last summer, and I can tell you from experience, it is one of the most socially conservative places in the country. However, Oklahoma City is a cultured young city with a thriving LGBT community. The Pride Parade is one of the great events in the city every year. It is great to know that all those wonderful men and women can celebrate some real progress in their state.

After all, Oklahoma is the home of Sally Kern.

The country is moving forward, and Oklahoma is now part of that.

Morality vs. Theology: Some Thoughts on Rev. Frank Schaefer and Gay Marriage in the UMC

Question: how do you think the church should act in the world if the goal is to follow Jesus' command to love others as God loves us? What does this look like in action?

You know what it doesn't look like? This:

United Methodist church officials defrocked a pastor from central Pennsylvania on Thursday who violated religious doctrine by officiating his son's gay wedding, and he later said he was shocked by their decision, calling his involvement in the wedding an "act of love."

Rev. Frank Schafer, in 2007, traveled to Massachusetts from his home in Pennsylvania to marry his gay son and his partner. This was no problem until this year, when a congregant at his church found out and informed the East Pennsylvania Annual Conference. Who decided that Rev. Schaefer should no longer be a Methodist minister. Despite the fact that the Revered was out of state at a private ceremony, and was following the moral dictates of his own heart.

I posted an article the other day on Facebook about Phil Robertson. This point is made in that article that I absolutely think sums up Rev. Schaefer's case:

When faced with the choice between being theologically correct…as if this is even possible…and being morally responsible, I’ll go with morally responsible every time. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a German pastor and theologian during World War II. He firmly held the theological position of nonviolence. He believed that complete pacifism was theologically correct. And yet, in the midst of the war, he conspired to assassinate Adolf Hitler; to kill a fellow man. Why? Because in light of what he saw happening to the Jews around him by the Nazis, he felt that it would be morally irresponsible not to. Between the assassination of Hitler and nonviolence, he felt the greater sin would be nonviolence.

I love that first line. "When faced with the choice between being theologically correct and being morally responsible, I'll go with morally responsible every time." If, as a Christian, we feel called to accept the LGBT community, and to affirm their life and their love, then we are morally obligated to do so. To do anything less would to be morally compromised and untrue to ourselves.

The other part of this story that really jumps out at me is this quote from Rev. Schaefer:

"So many of them came to me and they shook my hand and some hugged me, and so many of them had tears in their eyes," Schaefer said. "They said, 'We really don't want to do this, you know that, don't you?'"

Tony Campolo, in his book Red Letter Christians, tells the story of a young man from an Anabaptist Peace church during the Vietnam War who is brought before a court for refusing military service. He explains before the judge his moral opposition to warfare, and why, as a pacifist, he cannot perform military service. The judge listens sympathetically and tells the young man he understands his concerns and sympathizes, but he has no alternative to sentencing him. The young man looks at him and says, "You do have choice, Judge! You can resign!" Maybe the Board of Ordination should read this story. Maybe then they could help the church move towards the Kingdom, rather than away from it.

For more information on the gay rights movement within the UMC, I strongly suggest you check out Reconciling Ministries. It's a great resource, and on the forefront of the future of the Methodist church.

Question #2: For Progressives

What is it about 6 day creationism that bugs you so much? Why does this subject really seem to get under progressives' skin so badly?

Question #1: For Literalists

I'm going to start a regular feature, asking questions of you, my readers. Some may be addressed to a certain denomination or group, but anyone is free to answer below, in comments. These aren't rhetorical. They are questions I want answers to and discussion about. We all will grow in our faith through the responses, even if we disagree. I may even base future blog posts off the answers and discussion I get.

Again, please keep it respectful and on topic.

So, here is today's question:

Why is biblical literalism important?

Why We're Here

I haven't yet said what my purpose here is. I suppose I better.

I'm a political science major who has worked in politics in various ways since graduation 2+ years ago. I've written a politics blog in the past. But recently, I've felt a calling into ministry. After seminary, I will go for ordination in the United Methodist church.

I've always been interested in religion and how it intersects with politics and government and public policy. My wife is a youth minister and former religion student, and we've been very involved in social justice ministries, mostly in Oklahoma. It's the same emphasis I want to have in ministry. Personally, my faith feeds my political views. It's impossible for me to separate the two.

I want this blog to look at political and social issues from a progressive Christian viewpoint. I want to advocate for policies based upon how I feel led by faith. So expect propressive politics, progressive Christianity and lots of debate. I urge you to participate. Leave comments, and expect my response. This should be a place of discussion as much as me stating my opinion. And please, keep it PG, and no personal attacks against others. Keep it civil or you will be asked to leave.

Most of all, be honest and open and willing to think critically about politics and faith and how they work together.

Getting Lost in the (Created) Weeds

Sorry for the radio silence since Christmas. We moved from Kansas City to the Wichita area, and just got our Internet up and running this morning. Hopefully a regular posting schedule will take hold here!

I read an interesting article from a Old Testament/Hebrew Ph.D. about Genesis 1 literalism. I reposted it to Facebook and engaged in a debate with a Southern Baptist minister about who is right, 6 day creationists or Big Bang/evolution Christians. I was trying to make the point that spending time trying to convince people that God really did create the world in six days is a waste of time when I realized:

I was doing the same thing.

I was engaging in this fruitless and unwinnable debate to prove that my unprovable theory is better than someone else's unprovable theory. My opinion against theirs. All I get in the end is the ability to say I feel I won a rhetorical argument.

What an exercise in egoism.

Now, I'm not saying the debate isn't an important one. It is in a certain sense. I strongly believe in the Big Bang Theory and evolution, because I think God created a reasoned and orderly universe that follows laws of nature. I think Genesis 1 does not express an absolute, scientific truth, but instead has truth and meaning in the idea it's conveying. (More on that in a minute.)

Where this argument gets dangerous, in my view, is when we start teaching people that the creation story as interpreted by literalists is scientific fact. When you tell a person with anything beyond a grade school education that, their first question is,

"What about dinosaurs and fossils?"

Followed closely by,

"Where is the Garden of Eden?"

You start swimming in murky waters, and spinning far-fetched, non-science based theories and end up spending years building Creation Museums.

In the mean time, you've spent no time focusing on the real meaning behind Genesis 1.

And what is that meaning? What is the essential truth and meaning being conveyed here? Simply that God was present and active in our creation. This seems like a simple and obvious point to us modern Christians. Of course God was there. The Bible says so. No matter the details, it says "God created."

But to ancient peoples, this would be revolutionary! Think about the world the ancient Hebrews who read this were acclimated to, the creation stories they had heard from their conquerors.

Egyptians.
Assyrians.
Babylonians.

They all believed the creation of man to be an accident of the gods, an accident that became an annoyance or simple amusement. Or that man's purpose was a slave to the gods, meant only for their divine service and pleasure.

But the Hebrew tradition was radically different. Instead of a multitude of gods whose actions unintentionally lead to the emergence of man, here was one God creating man intentionally, in God's own image.

And God created man to be stewards, and gave them dominion over creation and everything in it. 
And God told them to name the animals. 
And God taught them.
And God came down and walked among them!

The point here isn't that this all did or didn't actually happen. It's the idea that we aren't some cosmic accident. God made us. God may have used the big bang. God may have let us evolve. But God directed it all. And God wants to be present among us and have a relationship with us.

Can you imagine hearing your whole life that your an accident, and then one day hearing that no, you have a purpose and a meaning?

This is what we lose when we try to turn creation into our favorite scientific theory. I'm not saying it's bad to have a strong belief. I certainly do. I'm saying don't lose the forest for the trees. Don't get lost in the weeds. Read what God is telling you. The rest will take care of itself.