Religion holds no patent on goodness. Nor does a lack of religious beliefs ensure that someone is evil. The answer is not that simple. People are quite capable of “being good”, or “being bad” with or without “God”. Most people are a little bit of both.
In the hit Broadway musical, “Wicked”, the “good” witch, Glenda, asks: “Are people born wicked, or is wickedness thrust upon them?” The question is posed as all of Oz rejoices at the death of the “wicked” witch, Elphaba. Those who have seen the show or read the book are left with no clear answer to that question, though the show makes it clear that neither witch was entirely either. Both had good qualities and both were capable of wickedness… of evil.
The book of Genesis, starts with an explanation of the origins of life: “In the beginning, God created… and it was good.” Whatever else follows in subsequent verses, the Bible makes that much clear. What God creates is good.
If the question is in relation to “being”, then the answer is easy. Whether a person acknowledges God or not, as Creator, God has already impacted that person’s life for the good. As a person of faith, I believe that each person is born with goodness and worth simply because of the One who created and creates.
If the question is whether people can “be good”, in the sense of behaving themselves, living moral and responsible lives without the benefit of religion as a moral compass, the answer may not be quite as easy. One might assume that “having religion” makes it easier to “be good”, but the scriptures are filled with examples of terribly human people who seek to be faithful to the God of Israel, and who fail terribly, over and over again.
His faith in God, which was real and deep, did not keep King David from making terrible choices with terrible consequences. Was David evil? Surely not, though some of his actions certainly were far from “good”. Human beings have a capacity to be (or behave) both good and evil, depending on the situation and circumstances.
Susan L. Nelson, from the Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, in a book review of “Evil and Christian Ethics” by Gordon Graham writes: “The Christian narrative places human history within the larger context of a cosmic battle between good and evil, where we are assured that evil does not have the last word.”
“Having God” might not make it easier to “be good”. However, having God- as revealed in Jesus Christ- allows for grace and mercy when wickedness is thrust upon those who seek to be faithful. Most of all, having faith in Christ gives the ultimate hope that, in the cosmic battle between good and evil, good will prevail. According to Gordon Graham, that is the motivation we need to resist the evil, both within us, and outside of us.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Woe to the One Who Teaches a Child to Lie
What does it mean when a person craves attention to the point that he or she will involve a child in deception? According the teachings of Jesus, (Matthew 18:6-7), it would be better to be drowned in the sea with a millstone around your neck than to lead a child of faith astray. "Woe to the one by whom the stumbling block comes."
It was a hoax... a lie. And it was of the magnitude that it tricked the world.
Recently, the entire world watched, with an "eye to the sky", desperate to know what had happened to a young boy who was believed to have been inside his father's weather balloon when it broke loose from where it had been tethered at the family's home. When the balloon was finally grounded, the boy was no where to be found. Rescue workers and volunteers scoured the areas where the balloon's path may have travelled. Every news channel was focused on this little boy's fate.
It was a hoax... a lie.
There was relief when the boy was found in the attic of the family home. By the time I began watching the media frenzy, the possibility had already been raised that perhaps the boy was hiding, fearful of being punished. This was the hope that the world was clinging to. Parents wondered what they would do... feel... if this were their own child. Compassion and empathy surely poured into the prayers that were offered from MY living room.
According to CNN, when questioned on-air by his father about why he hid, the little boy responded, "You guys said we did it for the show." Two days later, the boy's mother admitted that the family had concocted the whole thing as a publicity stunt, to make themselves more marketable for "Reality TV".
CNN reported: "The couple hatched the plan about two weeks before the incident and "instructed their three children to lie to authorities as well as the media regarding this hoax," according to the documents."
It was a hoax... a lie... and the children were encouraged, even coached, to participate in the deception.
The response was interesting to watch. Some laughed it off, as if "boys will be boys" explained it all. (The term "boys" evidently included the father.) Some put the father on what seemed to be a "pedestal" of sorts, admiring the craftiness of the one who suckered the whole world into sitting on the edge of a universal "seat". Past hoaxes and hoaxers were given air time, and a "second chance at fame".
Some pointed fingers of blame towards the media in general, and towards Reality TV shows in particular.
Others almost demonized the parents. Angry, and rightly so, over the amount of money that was spent on rescue workers, the local law enforcement hinted that charges may be filed and fines assessed. Members of the media, doubly "honked off" that they had been fooled, were not very positive in their comments.
A few raised questions as to whether the involvement of the children should be seen as child endangerment. When all is said and done, this seems, to me, to be the only issue that really matters. Yes, the money should be repaid by the family. If laws were broken (and surely they were, though I have no personal knowledge of Colorado law), then charges should be filed against the adults.
Child Protective Services has a moral obligation to investigate the family's parenting skills, and to make recommendations based upon what they discover. The decisions made by these parents seems to go far beyond the mistakes that "every parent" makes. ALL parents make mistakes at one time or another. Despite good intentions, sometimes children are unwittingly placed in a potentially dangerous situation. But these parents chose to propagate a lie... a hoax... a deception that involved their children and the safety of all those who worked to try to "save" the child. Woe to the one who teaches a child to lie!
You might say that it was not just the child who needed to be saved. It is the entire family who needs to be saved from an addiction to fame and glory. My prayers are still offered up with compassion. Though I cannot empathize with whatever motivated them to act on this craving for attention, my faith tells me that there is hope and grace and healing for those who seek it.
That is no hoax. That is no lie. That is the Gospel... the good news of Christ.
It was a hoax... a lie. And it was of the magnitude that it tricked the world.
Recently, the entire world watched, with an "eye to the sky", desperate to know what had happened to a young boy who was believed to have been inside his father's weather balloon when it broke loose from where it had been tethered at the family's home. When the balloon was finally grounded, the boy was no where to be found. Rescue workers and volunteers scoured the areas where the balloon's path may have travelled. Every news channel was focused on this little boy's fate.
It was a hoax... a lie.
There was relief when the boy was found in the attic of the family home. By the time I began watching the media frenzy, the possibility had already been raised that perhaps the boy was hiding, fearful of being punished. This was the hope that the world was clinging to. Parents wondered what they would do... feel... if this were their own child. Compassion and empathy surely poured into the prayers that were offered from MY living room.
According to CNN, when questioned on-air by his father about why he hid, the little boy responded, "You guys said we did it for the show." Two days later, the boy's mother admitted that the family had concocted the whole thing as a publicity stunt, to make themselves more marketable for "Reality TV".
CNN reported: "The couple hatched the plan about two weeks before the incident and "instructed their three children to lie to authorities as well as the media regarding this hoax," according to the documents."
It was a hoax... a lie... and the children were encouraged, even coached, to participate in the deception.
The response was interesting to watch. Some laughed it off, as if "boys will be boys" explained it all. (The term "boys" evidently included the father.) Some put the father on what seemed to be a "pedestal" of sorts, admiring the craftiness of the one who suckered the whole world into sitting on the edge of a universal "seat". Past hoaxes and hoaxers were given air time, and a "second chance at fame".
Some pointed fingers of blame towards the media in general, and towards Reality TV shows in particular.
Others almost demonized the parents. Angry, and rightly so, over the amount of money that was spent on rescue workers, the local law enforcement hinted that charges may be filed and fines assessed. Members of the media, doubly "honked off" that they had been fooled, were not very positive in their comments.
A few raised questions as to whether the involvement of the children should be seen as child endangerment. When all is said and done, this seems, to me, to be the only issue that really matters. Yes, the money should be repaid by the family. If laws were broken (and surely they were, though I have no personal knowledge of Colorado law), then charges should be filed against the adults.
Child Protective Services has a moral obligation to investigate the family's parenting skills, and to make recommendations based upon what they discover. The decisions made by these parents seems to go far beyond the mistakes that "every parent" makes. ALL parents make mistakes at one time or another. Despite good intentions, sometimes children are unwittingly placed in a potentially dangerous situation. But these parents chose to propagate a lie... a hoax... a deception that involved their children and the safety of all those who worked to try to "save" the child. Woe to the one who teaches a child to lie!
You might say that it was not just the child who needed to be saved. It is the entire family who needs to be saved from an addiction to fame and glory. My prayers are still offered up with compassion. Though I cannot empathize with whatever motivated them to act on this craving for attention, my faith tells me that there is hope and grace and healing for those who seek it.
That is no hoax. That is no lie. That is the Gospel... the good news of Christ.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Never a Bad Idea to Outlaw Hate
This week's "On Faith" question at the Washington Post asks: "Congress is expected to expand federal hate crimes laws to add "sexual orientation" to a list that already includes "race, color, religion or national origin." Is this necessary? Should there be special laws against crimes motivated by intolerance, bigotry and hatred? Isn't a crime a crime?
I fail to see how protecting a community from violence and hatred could ever be a bad idea.
How different things might have been for the first Christians if the ancient Roman Empire had such laws in place! When Peter and the apostles preached in the temple, the angry mobs were “enraged and wanted to kill them”. Only one voice of reason prevailed, and the crowd “simply” had them flogged.
Hate crimes based on religion is listed as the second highest cause on the statistical lists published by the FBI. Any one of us could be a target for anyone who hates. This legislation protects us all, as individuals and as community.
I wish it weren't necessary to add yet another label to the federal hates crimes that already exist. Knowing that it is against the law to perpetuate a crime involving “assault, murder, attempted murder, aggravated assault, attack with an explosive device, arson, etc.” towards anyone should be enough. There should be no need to expand the language of the laws that already in place, but evidence is compelling that there is a need.
According to FBI statistics dating back to the early 1990’s, when the term “hate crime” was first factored into reports, the number of such crimes reported by law officials hasn’t changed much. In 1995 and again in 2005, there were approximately 8,000 hate crimes reported. The numbers were only slightly higher in 2000 (approximately 8,400).
While more than half of those crimes were motivated by racial prejudice, crimes against religion and sexual orientation accounted for between 30-35% of the rest. Those numbers do not reflect the incidents that go unreported. About 40% of homosexual adults report being physically attacked because of their perceived sexual orientation.
The language of the current hate crimes legislation evidently is not specific enough. Additional labels are needed if the laws are going to protect those who most need protection.
There is a mis-perception that adding more specific language to the hate crimes bill will limit American’s freedom of speech. This is false. There is a mis-perception that hate crimes only hurt the victims, and this is also false. Hate crimes are perpetuated against communities, not just individuals. As HR 1913, a hate crimes bill passed by the federal House in 2009, states: "Such violence disrupts the tranquility and safety of communities and is deeply divisive."
As long as freedom of speech protects the rights of all Americans to speak their mind, there will be those who abuse others with hateful and hate-filled words. There will be talk-radio hosts who make outrageous claims such as the one I heard a few weeks ago on WLW who said something along the lines of: “The cause of obesity is that we aren’t allowed to bully the fat kids anymore. They don’t know they are fat, because we can’t tell them. So they get fatter.”
There is little protection from name calling or verbal attacks, but there is protection from assault for those who are the most vulnerable. The question is, is it enough? My answer is, not yet.
I fail to see how protecting a community from violence and hatred could ever be a bad idea.
How different things might have been for the first Christians if the ancient Roman Empire had such laws in place! When Peter and the apostles preached in the temple, the angry mobs were “enraged and wanted to kill them”. Only one voice of reason prevailed, and the crowd “simply” had them flogged.
Hate crimes based on religion is listed as the second highest cause on the statistical lists published by the FBI. Any one of us could be a target for anyone who hates. This legislation protects us all, as individuals and as community.
I wish it weren't necessary to add yet another label to the federal hates crimes that already exist. Knowing that it is against the law to perpetuate a crime involving “assault, murder, attempted murder, aggravated assault, attack with an explosive device, arson, etc.” towards anyone should be enough. There should be no need to expand the language of the laws that already in place, but evidence is compelling that there is a need.
According to FBI statistics dating back to the early 1990’s, when the term “hate crime” was first factored into reports, the number of such crimes reported by law officials hasn’t changed much. In 1995 and again in 2005, there were approximately 8,000 hate crimes reported. The numbers were only slightly higher in 2000 (approximately 8,400).
While more than half of those crimes were motivated by racial prejudice, crimes against religion and sexual orientation accounted for between 30-35% of the rest. Those numbers do not reflect the incidents that go unreported. About 40% of homosexual adults report being physically attacked because of their perceived sexual orientation.
The language of the current hate crimes legislation evidently is not specific enough. Additional labels are needed if the laws are going to protect those who most need protection.
There is a mis-perception that adding more specific language to the hate crimes bill will limit American’s freedom of speech. This is false. There is a mis-perception that hate crimes only hurt the victims, and this is also false. Hate crimes are perpetuated against communities, not just individuals. As HR 1913, a hate crimes bill passed by the federal House in 2009, states: "Such violence disrupts the tranquility and safety of communities and is deeply divisive."
As long as freedom of speech protects the rights of all Americans to speak their mind, there will be those who abuse others with hateful and hate-filled words. There will be talk-radio hosts who make outrageous claims such as the one I heard a few weeks ago on WLW who said something along the lines of: “The cause of obesity is that we aren’t allowed to bully the fat kids anymore. They don’t know they are fat, because we can’t tell them. So they get fatter.”
There is little protection from name calling or verbal attacks, but there is protection from assault for those who are the most vulnerable. The question is, is it enough? My answer is, not yet.
Open the Eyes of Our Hearts
Blind Bartimaeus might be jumping for joy, had he read the news that the US Senate voted Thursday to pass Hate-Crime legislation that has extended its language to include protection for people who are targets for violent crimes due to their sex or sexual orientation. You see, Bartimaeus knew what it was like to be on the margins of society, crying out to Jesus. And he knew what it was like to have people (especially those who presumed to speak on the authority of Jesus) try to silence him.
This blind beggar refused to be defined by his "disability" or what others expected of him. He refused to be limited by what he "should or shouldn't" do. Bartimaeus refused to be silenced. He cried all the louder, And we are told, right there in the 10th chapter of mark that Jesus heard the cries of this man on the margins and asked him to "Come".
The Church (capital "c") is empowered with and burdened by an authority to "speak for Christ". Too often, there are still those who would silence the voices of those on the margins... those whose cries are easier to ignore.
Those might be the silent cries of abused children and women, who beg for no one to notice.... and pray for someone to notice. Or the shouts from the Sudan, where villages are exterminated in what can only be called what it is: genocide. Or the giggles and cries of children in worship... whose parents have felt shamed by annoyed glares and so finally choose to just stay home.
Those may be the cries of women who long to accept God's call to ministry in denominations that will not allow their voices to be heard.
Or the cries of so many broken-hearted people who simply long for a place to worship God where they will be welcomed without judgment because of who they are, where they are from or what path their lives have taken... immigrants... unwed mothers... gays, lesbians or transgendered persons...
Today, the voices of our congregations should join in giving praise that we are one step closer to "doing the right thing" in protecting those who have been marginalized, silenced and victimized due to some label that can never define them for who they really are: children of God. That is the only label that matters.
Open the eyes of our hearts, Lord, that we might hear and see the cries, and speak the only words you would give us authority to speak on your behalf: "Tell them to come."
This blind beggar refused to be defined by his "disability" or what others expected of him. He refused to be limited by what he "should or shouldn't" do. Bartimaeus refused to be silenced. He cried all the louder, And we are told, right there in the 10th chapter of mark that Jesus heard the cries of this man on the margins and asked him to "Come".
The Church (capital "c") is empowered with and burdened by an authority to "speak for Christ". Too often, there are still those who would silence the voices of those on the margins... those whose cries are easier to ignore.
Those might be the silent cries of abused children and women, who beg for no one to notice.... and pray for someone to notice. Or the shouts from the Sudan, where villages are exterminated in what can only be called what it is: genocide. Or the giggles and cries of children in worship... whose parents have felt shamed by annoyed glares and so finally choose to just stay home.
Those may be the cries of women who long to accept God's call to ministry in denominations that will not allow their voices to be heard.
Or the cries of so many broken-hearted people who simply long for a place to worship God where they will be welcomed without judgment because of who they are, where they are from or what path their lives have taken... immigrants... unwed mothers... gays, lesbians or transgendered persons...
Today, the voices of our congregations should join in giving praise that we are one step closer to "doing the right thing" in protecting those who have been marginalized, silenced and victimized due to some label that can never define them for who they really are: children of God. That is the only label that matters.
Open the eyes of our hearts, Lord, that we might hear and see the cries, and speak the only words you would give us authority to speak on your behalf: "Tell them to come."
Monday, October 19, 2009
When Graven Images Bother Me
Last Friday, during our usual bargain hunting at a local Goodwill Store, my jaw must have dropped halfway to the floor. There on a shelf I saw what had to be the LAST thing I ever thought I would see! It was a ceramic figurine of Jesus with children, but unlike any I have ever seen (or want to see again).
This one depicted Jesus playing football with two little boys. They were in uniform, helmets and all. Except, not Jesus. He was in his "uniform"- a white flowing robe. No helmet or mouth guard.
One little boy had just grabbed him to tackle him. I know it was a tackle and not a hug because of the pained look on Jesus' face. Jesus was about to go down. That white robe was gonna get dirty.
I stood in shock- not sure if I wanted to laugh or wanted to cry. For some reason, this figurine bothered me... bothers me still. Why?
I have a figurine of Jesus welcoming the children of Matthew's Gospel. "Let the children come to me, and do not stop them; for it is to such as those that the kingdom of heaven belongs." (19:14) It doesn't bother me. The children are neatly dressed and sitting on Christ's lap or kneeling beside him. Their garb is reflective of Biblical times.
I have a picture of Jesus welcoming the children in more contemporary times, still based on the same passage from Matthew. It doesn't bother me either. In fact, I love it! There is a child in a wheelchair, a little girl holding a "Raggedy Ann" doll, an Asian girl, an African boy... Their garb reflects all times and all places.
I even love the idea that Jesus' love surrounds our children at all times, including playtime. Woven into each verse of Brian Wren's song "Bring Many Names" is an image of God as playful, warmly embracing each child, growing and constantly on the move. Why shouldn't Jesus play football with our children, too?
Perhaps what bothers me is this little subliminal message, flashing in my mind, that reminds me of all the families that seem to worship sports instead of Jesus, our Savior. Even in the "Heartland of America", Sunday mornings have been taken over with games and practices for travelling sports teams, and parents are choosing to commit to these activities rather than committing their lives and their children's lives to faith.
Perhaps I see a figurine that places Jesus on that playing field, about to be tackled, as irreverent, a graven image and just a bit "tacky".
My husband says that the only thing that bothered him was that you can't play football in a robe! Perhaps I need to just lighten up. Perhaps.
But, perhaps I need to also take seriously the commandments that warn me that God is a jealous God who will not tolerate coming in second to any other gods- not even the little brown sphere. They are pretty clear about graven images and the misuse of God's holy name.
That bargain item at Goodwill may not be much of a bargain after all!
This one depicted Jesus playing football with two little boys. They were in uniform, helmets and all. Except, not Jesus. He was in his "uniform"- a white flowing robe. No helmet or mouth guard.
One little boy had just grabbed him to tackle him. I know it was a tackle and not a hug because of the pained look on Jesus' face. Jesus was about to go down. That white robe was gonna get dirty.
I stood in shock- not sure if I wanted to laugh or wanted to cry. For some reason, this figurine bothered me... bothers me still. Why?
I have a figurine of Jesus welcoming the children of Matthew's Gospel. "Let the children come to me, and do not stop them; for it is to such as those that the kingdom of heaven belongs." (19:14) It doesn't bother me. The children are neatly dressed and sitting on Christ's lap or kneeling beside him. Their garb is reflective of Biblical times.
I have a picture of Jesus welcoming the children in more contemporary times, still based on the same passage from Matthew. It doesn't bother me either. In fact, I love it! There is a child in a wheelchair, a little girl holding a "Raggedy Ann" doll, an Asian girl, an African boy... Their garb reflects all times and all places.
I even love the idea that Jesus' love surrounds our children at all times, including playtime. Woven into each verse of Brian Wren's song "Bring Many Names" is an image of God as playful, warmly embracing each child, growing and constantly on the move. Why shouldn't Jesus play football with our children, too?
Perhaps what bothers me is this little subliminal message, flashing in my mind, that reminds me of all the families that seem to worship sports instead of Jesus, our Savior. Even in the "Heartland of America", Sunday mornings have been taken over with games and practices for travelling sports teams, and parents are choosing to commit to these activities rather than committing their lives and their children's lives to faith.
Perhaps I see a figurine that places Jesus on that playing field, about to be tackled, as irreverent, a graven image and just a bit "tacky".
My husband says that the only thing that bothered him was that you can't play football in a robe! Perhaps I need to just lighten up. Perhaps.
But, perhaps I need to also take seriously the commandments that warn me that God is a jealous God who will not tolerate coming in second to any other gods- not even the little brown sphere. They are pretty clear about graven images and the misuse of God's holy name.
That bargain item at Goodwill may not be much of a bargain after all!
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Fueled by Fear Not Faith
My husband's nephew has muscular dystrophy, affecting his heart. A simple cold could put him in the hospital. Pneumonia could be deadly. During cold and flu season, my sister-in-law insists that all visitors have had their flu shots. If we choose to visit then, we abide by that rule. Otherwise, we stay home. We choose to care for one another. It's what faith has taught us to do.
As a Christian pastor, I wondered what religious grounds there could be for placing other human beings in danger. Christianity places great value on human life. Surely, all citizens are called to be in community with one another, caring for their neighbors. Faith teaches us that.
Yet some parents, claiming religious freedom, whether they subscribe to any particular faith or not, are choosing to not vaccinate their children. I contend it is often not a religious decision at all, but one that is based on fear. It's a decision that affects more than just their own children.
In 2007, the director of the CDC's Immunization Services Division said that choices about vaccines have far-reaching consequences. "When you choose not to get a vaccine, you're not just making a choice for yourself, you're making a choice for the person sitting next to you".
If people don't want the vaccine, fine. Stay home. Don't spread the illness.
What right does anyone else have to make medical decisions that affect, not only themselves, but also the community they live in? What right do they have to put MY children at risk by refusing to vaccinate THEIR children?
In fact, I found few religious "groups" with religious edicts keeping them from having vaccinations. Despite dietary laws, both Judaism and Islam make exceptions for medical treatments derived from forbidden animals.
There are some who oppose vaccines that are developed using cell lines from aborted fetuses, but do not object to synthetic vaccines. (The four new H1N1 vaccines approved by the FDA do not use aborted fetal cell lines, but chicken eggs instead.)
The decision to not vaccinate seems to stem more from fear than faith. Some oppose only vaccinations that protect against sexually transmitted diseases, fearing they give the impression that the behaviors are somehow acceptable. Most are afraid of the small risk in taking the vaccination. This is no surprise! Fear is the fuel that seems to drive American fundamentalists. They are not alone.
A current report from the Center for Disease and Control says that, in an effort to stop vaccinations against polio, the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan have "issued fatwas opposing vaccination as an attempt to avert Allah's will, and as an American plot to sterilize Muslims. The Taliban have kidnapped, beaten, and assassinated vaccination officials."
It should be no surprise that this is one more thing the "terrorists of talk radio" share in common with the Taliban. Some cite the text of Matthew 18:6 as a Biblical command from Jesus to do no harm to their children. Jesus warns that to harm “one such as these” will have dire consequences.
Funny. When asked, Jesus said the greatest command was to love God and love your neighbor as yourself. I only hope my neighbors love me enough to be vaccinated... or at least enough to stay home if they are ill.
As a Christian pastor, I wondered what religious grounds there could be for placing other human beings in danger. Christianity places great value on human life. Surely, all citizens are called to be in community with one another, caring for their neighbors. Faith teaches us that.
Yet some parents, claiming religious freedom, whether they subscribe to any particular faith or not, are choosing to not vaccinate their children. I contend it is often not a religious decision at all, but one that is based on fear. It's a decision that affects more than just their own children.
In 2007, the director of the CDC's Immunization Services Division said that choices about vaccines have far-reaching consequences. "When you choose not to get a vaccine, you're not just making a choice for yourself, you're making a choice for the person sitting next to you".
If people don't want the vaccine, fine. Stay home. Don't spread the illness.
What right does anyone else have to make medical decisions that affect, not only themselves, but also the community they live in? What right do they have to put MY children at risk by refusing to vaccinate THEIR children?
In fact, I found few religious "groups" with religious edicts keeping them from having vaccinations. Despite dietary laws, both Judaism and Islam make exceptions for medical treatments derived from forbidden animals.
There are some who oppose vaccines that are developed using cell lines from aborted fetuses, but do not object to synthetic vaccines. (The four new H1N1 vaccines approved by the FDA do not use aborted fetal cell lines, but chicken eggs instead.)
The decision to not vaccinate seems to stem more from fear than faith. Some oppose only vaccinations that protect against sexually transmitted diseases, fearing they give the impression that the behaviors are somehow acceptable. Most are afraid of the small risk in taking the vaccination. This is no surprise! Fear is the fuel that seems to drive American fundamentalists. They are not alone.
A current report from the Center for Disease and Control says that, in an effort to stop vaccinations against polio, the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan have "issued fatwas opposing vaccination as an attempt to avert Allah's will, and as an American plot to sterilize Muslims. The Taliban have kidnapped, beaten, and assassinated vaccination officials."
It should be no surprise that this is one more thing the "terrorists of talk radio" share in common with the Taliban. Some cite the text of Matthew 18:6 as a Biblical command from Jesus to do no harm to their children. Jesus warns that to harm “one such as these” will have dire consequences.
Funny. When asked, Jesus said the greatest command was to love God and love your neighbor as yourself. I only hope my neighbors love me enough to be vaccinated... or at least enough to stay home if they are ill.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Witnessing Unity in Community
The things we can learn from nature... A few years ago, I watched a program on PBS about the red-tailed hawk who lives on the windowsill of a high-rise on 5th Avenue, just across the street frm Central Park in New York City. The locals, who named him "Pale Male" met him with both positive and negative reactions. Some recognized immediately that he was a natural predator who might help control the pidgeon population, as well as taking care of some rodents. Otherrs, who actually like the pidgeons, were not so thrilled.
The documentary followed the saga of this lone bird who somehow managed to call a mate to Central Park the first spring he was there. No one knows where she came from. They named her "First Love", and celebrated as the two red-tails mated and formed a nest together on the building across from Woody Allen's penthouse. For two years, people gathered and watched, hopeful that the nesting would produce chicks. Finally, in the third mating season, the pair produced three small chicks. New York was in love!
People gathered daily near the model boat pool to watch and learn about nature in ways that those of us who live in rural areas take for granted. One woman commented that her farmer friends couldn't imagine what all the fuss was about! Red-tailed hawks are not an endangered species, but there had never been a documented pair in New York City.
People watched, fascinated, as Pale Male relentlessly hunted to find food for his family, fought off predators, and tenderly coaxed his fledglings to learn to fly-- in a way that was not natural to hawks, since hawks usually learn to fly by hopping from brand to branch. This nest was on a window ledge, perched precariously over traffic.
People gathered from all walks of life. Homeless and jobless mingled with multi-millionaires. Scientists patiently and amilably chattered with toddlers who expressed delight in something new. People of great diversity came together and, for a time, found something to care about in the midst of the struggles of daily life.
As the chicks prepared for their first flights, people prepared for possible disaster. There were so many dangers-- windows they might fly into, traffic to fall into, other predatory birds to injure these young, inexperienced hawks. A woman with a terminal disease spoke of "feeling their fear"... of relating to what it is would be like to face the unknown with confidence... to just let go and soar.
How often do we cling to window ledges, afraid to just let go and soar?
When they finally left the nest, one by one, there was something almost spiritual about the whole thing for those who had faithfully gathered, hopeful and watchful, eager to share that experience with one another and these wonderful creatures. For just a moment, these diverse people were ONE.
God created us to be individuals... unique and diverse in our personalities and beliefs... with different abilities and strengths, gifts and talents. God brings us together to be ONE with each other and ONE with our Creator, reminding us every day through the world that He/She created to let go of our fears... and soar.
It has been eighteen years now since he arrived in New York City. At the time of the documentary, he had survived three mates and taken a fourth, and raised twenty-three chicks.
Think of all the lives that have been bettered by the coming together around that model boat pool in Central Park to witness the miracle of life. May we, too, see miracles in what others take for granted. may God show us, also, ways to come together- "That They May All Be One" (the motto of The United Church of Christ).
The documentary followed the saga of this lone bird who somehow managed to call a mate to Central Park the first spring he was there. No one knows where she came from. They named her "First Love", and celebrated as the two red-tails mated and formed a nest together on the building across from Woody Allen's penthouse. For two years, people gathered and watched, hopeful that the nesting would produce chicks. Finally, in the third mating season, the pair produced three small chicks. New York was in love!
People gathered daily near the model boat pool to watch and learn about nature in ways that those of us who live in rural areas take for granted. One woman commented that her farmer friends couldn't imagine what all the fuss was about! Red-tailed hawks are not an endangered species, but there had never been a documented pair in New York City.
People watched, fascinated, as Pale Male relentlessly hunted to find food for his family, fought off predators, and tenderly coaxed his fledglings to learn to fly-- in a way that was not natural to hawks, since hawks usually learn to fly by hopping from brand to branch. This nest was on a window ledge, perched precariously over traffic.
People gathered from all walks of life. Homeless and jobless mingled with multi-millionaires. Scientists patiently and amilably chattered with toddlers who expressed delight in something new. People of great diversity came together and, for a time, found something to care about in the midst of the struggles of daily life.
As the chicks prepared for their first flights, people prepared for possible disaster. There were so many dangers-- windows they might fly into, traffic to fall into, other predatory birds to injure these young, inexperienced hawks. A woman with a terminal disease spoke of "feeling their fear"... of relating to what it is would be like to face the unknown with confidence... to just let go and soar.
How often do we cling to window ledges, afraid to just let go and soar?
When they finally left the nest, one by one, there was something almost spiritual about the whole thing for those who had faithfully gathered, hopeful and watchful, eager to share that experience with one another and these wonderful creatures. For just a moment, these diverse people were ONE.
God created us to be individuals... unique and diverse in our personalities and beliefs... with different abilities and strengths, gifts and talents. God brings us together to be ONE with each other and ONE with our Creator, reminding us every day through the world that He/She created to let go of our fears... and soar.
It has been eighteen years now since he arrived in New York City. At the time of the documentary, he had survived three mates and taken a fourth, and raised twenty-three chicks.
Think of all the lives that have been bettered by the coming together around that model boat pool in Central Park to witness the miracle of life. May we, too, see miracles in what others take for granted. may God show us, also, ways to come together- "That They May All Be One" (the motto of The United Church of Christ).
Friday, October 9, 2009
The Gasp Heard Round the World
President Barack Obama has been awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. It is reported that this was unexpected, taking both the White House and the world "by surprise". Reporters indicate that a gasp could be heard in the room as his name was announced because he had not even been "on the radar" as a possible nominee.
Rush and Glen will have a lot to talk about today. According to a London correspondent on CNN's "American Morning" show, the Brits "choked on their tea" when they heard his name, and the International press is already weighing in on whether he deserves the award or not. Ed Rollins, CNN's Republican Consultant, on the same program, wondered if the Nobel Prize was the president's "consolation prize" for losing the bid for the 2016 Olympics. Gasp!
"But I don't mean any disrespect to the president", he repeatedly assured viewers.
The Taliban is reported to be outraged by this development because they say that the president has not done anything to promote peace in the Middle East. (I predict this will be something else that the "terrorists" of talk radio will have in common with the real terrorists in the world.) Gasp!
CNN's team of reporters indicated that now the pressure is on for President Obama to live up to the expectations of the award. Really? As though the pressure wasn't on him before this? This is news?
The award was given to honor his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." I, for one, have hope in my heart this day, that one day Isaiah's vision of "The Peaceable Kingdom" will find reality on earth... that the lion shall lie down with the lamb... If peace is to become reality, it begins one person at a time doing our part.
Mr. President, someone clearly believes in your efforts. There will be critics, naysayers, scorners and scoffers. Please do not let their malice divert your focus. There will be those who laud you with praise and honor. Please do not let the glory get in the way of your "extraordinary efforts" towards peace.
Just keep faithfully working to bring people together in conversation. Be encouraged and empowered to continue raising your voice to promote peace and understanding in the world. Be true to who you were created to be. Thank you for doing your part. I pray that the rest of us can and will do ours.
Rush and Glen will have a lot to talk about today. According to a London correspondent on CNN's "American Morning" show, the Brits "choked on their tea" when they heard his name, and the International press is already weighing in on whether he deserves the award or not. Ed Rollins, CNN's Republican Consultant, on the same program, wondered if the Nobel Prize was the president's "consolation prize" for losing the bid for the 2016 Olympics. Gasp!
"But I don't mean any disrespect to the president", he repeatedly assured viewers.
The Taliban is reported to be outraged by this development because they say that the president has not done anything to promote peace in the Middle East. (I predict this will be something else that the "terrorists" of talk radio will have in common with the real terrorists in the world.) Gasp!
CNN's team of reporters indicated that now the pressure is on for President Obama to live up to the expectations of the award. Really? As though the pressure wasn't on him before this? This is news?
The award was given to honor his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." I, for one, have hope in my heart this day, that one day Isaiah's vision of "The Peaceable Kingdom" will find reality on earth... that the lion shall lie down with the lamb... If peace is to become reality, it begins one person at a time doing our part.
Mr. President, someone clearly believes in your efforts. There will be critics, naysayers, scorners and scoffers. Please do not let their malice divert your focus. There will be those who laud you with praise and honor. Please do not let the glory get in the way of your "extraordinary efforts" towards peace.
Just keep faithfully working to bring people together in conversation. Be encouraged and empowered to continue raising your voice to promote peace and understanding in the world. Be true to who you were created to be. Thank you for doing your part. I pray that the rest of us can and will do ours.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Why Shouldn't I Pray for Glenn Beck?
In a recent blog on the Washington Post website, David Waters suggested that Glenn Beck might be the "most prayed for man in America at the moment." It seems that Glenn recently asked his followers to pray for him because of the "big money" that is trying to silence him. His request for prayers was countered by Jim Wallis over at Sojourners Magazine. Jim said, basically, that praying for Glenn might not be such a bad idea. He said, "...let's take Glenn at his word and pray for him to have wisdom as he speaks out on these issues. Tell Glenn you're praying for him - that he'll choose hope over fear."
After an assignment for my public theology class to "listen to Rush and Glenn" and respond, I would tend to agree with Mr. Wallis. He needs all the prayers he can get! I was not prepared to read, however, the onslaught of hate-filled responses to the suggestion.
The comments left for Mr. Waters were filled with hate and anger from every side. There are those who wrote to condemn Mr. Beck. Others scoffed at Mr. Wallis. Some spewed hate at organized religion in general and Christianity in particular. Very few seemed to agree that praying for Glenn Beck is a good idea at all.
Why shouldn't I pray for Glen Beck? Why wouldn't every "progressive" Christian do so? Why wouldn't all Christians pray for him... and for Mr. Wallis... and for President Obama... and for Osama bin Laden for that matter.
Jesus taught: "You have heard it said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may all be children of your Father in heaven..." (Matt. 5:43-45)
Whether we agree with Mr. Beck or not, my faith teaches me that he, too, is a child of God. I may hate what he says, but my Lord tells me to love him and pray for him as a child of God. Perhaps we need to ask for prayers ourselves, that we might be able to follow the teachings of the One by whose name we are called.
I'll pray for you, if you'll do the same for me!
After an assignment for my public theology class to "listen to Rush and Glenn" and respond, I would tend to agree with Mr. Wallis. He needs all the prayers he can get! I was not prepared to read, however, the onslaught of hate-filled responses to the suggestion.
The comments left for Mr. Waters were filled with hate and anger from every side. There are those who wrote to condemn Mr. Beck. Others scoffed at Mr. Wallis. Some spewed hate at organized religion in general and Christianity in particular. Very few seemed to agree that praying for Glenn Beck is a good idea at all.
Why shouldn't I pray for Glen Beck? Why wouldn't every "progressive" Christian do so? Why wouldn't all Christians pray for him... and for Mr. Wallis... and for President Obama... and for Osama bin Laden for that matter.
Jesus taught: "You have heard it said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may all be children of your Father in heaven..." (Matt. 5:43-45)
Whether we agree with Mr. Beck or not, my faith teaches me that he, too, is a child of God. I may hate what he says, but my Lord tells me to love him and pray for him as a child of God. Perhaps we need to ask for prayers ourselves, that we might be able to follow the teachings of the One by whose name we are called.
I'll pray for you, if you'll do the same for me!
Monday, October 5, 2009
Making Space for Praise
"This is the day that the Lord has made! Let us rejoice and be glad in it."
I am thinking about what that means this morning... to "be glad in" a day. Last night on that show that my husband and I watch, but hesitate to admit to (Desperate Housewives)... a mother told her son, "You know it takes more effort to be miserable than happy"... or words to that effect. That's so true!
They say that you use many, many more muscles in your face to frown than to smile. To be joyful-- to PRAISE God, should be as simple as breathing in. It should be, as I prayed in the pastoral prayer yesterday, the only thing we CAN do... the only option of a response to the One who Created and Creates us.
When I taught voice lessons many moons ago, one exercise I did with students was to help them see how much air goes in when you simply open your mouth and make the space. No great gasp for air is needed to have sufficient breath to sing a song.
The same is true for praising God. We just need to make SPACE for it in our lives. We need to simply open up our hearts and let it be the natural response from a grateful heart to the One who is the Giver of the day.
This is the day that the Lord has made. I can choose to be happy and rejoice in it.
I am thinking about what that means this morning... to "be glad in" a day. Last night on that show that my husband and I watch, but hesitate to admit to (Desperate Housewives)... a mother told her son, "You know it takes more effort to be miserable than happy"... or words to that effect. That's so true!
They say that you use many, many more muscles in your face to frown than to smile. To be joyful-- to PRAISE God, should be as simple as breathing in. It should be, as I prayed in the pastoral prayer yesterday, the only thing we CAN do... the only option of a response to the One who Created and Creates us.
When I taught voice lessons many moons ago, one exercise I did with students was to help them see how much air goes in when you simply open your mouth and make the space. No great gasp for air is needed to have sufficient breath to sing a song.
The same is true for praising God. We just need to make SPACE for it in our lives. We need to simply open up our hearts and let it be the natural response from a grateful heart to the One who is the Giver of the day.
This is the day that the Lord has made. I can choose to be happy and rejoice in it.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones...
The Religious Right is not always wrong. That admission makes me squirm. In the coming week, I have been given an assignment in my Public Theology class to listen to some of those voices from the "other side" that, quite honestly, raise my "hackles", whatever that means. Perhaps I'll just say they raise my blood pressure and leave it at that. But nothing gets me madder than when I agree with them!
So, when I read articles by progressive Christians lobbing hardballs at the evangelical conservative Christians, I am sometimes uncomfortable when they begin using the same kind of name-calling and negative labeling as the conservative side. (Oh, the language may be slightly higher brow, but the intent to sling mud is just as real.)
Marilynn Robinson in Hallowed Be Your Name" seems to be indicating that the current evangelical movement is totally devoid of care for social justice and welfare issues. "For a self-declared Christian movement, it shows startlingly little sense of responsibility for the vulnerable in society." She goes on to lift up the Matthew 25 passages in which Jesus likens himself to the poor and vulnerable, as if to say that the evangelicals are not caring for the poor.
I would not be so quick to point fingers. I would propose that many evangelicals, as well as progressive Christians fall into the category of thinking that they ARE caring for the poor. They contribute to food banks, participate in CROP walks, donate to Church World Service or other faith-based charities. True, those progressives who would also wear the label of "social activist" would argue, quite correctly, that these are short-term solutions that do not address the long-term problems of poverty.
True, this method often keeps the giver in an elevated position "over" those who are "less-fortunate", and the giving probably makes the giver feel better about themselves, elevating that position even higher. But unless that person, church or organization is actively working against those who are actively working to reduce poverty, knowing that this is what they are doing, I think I would have a difficult time in calling them... what?
People who only claim to be Christians? Neofundamentalist frauds?
So, when I read articles by progressive Christians lobbing hardballs at the evangelical conservative Christians, I am sometimes uncomfortable when they begin using the same kind of name-calling and negative labeling as the conservative side. (Oh, the language may be slightly higher brow, but the intent to sling mud is just as real.)
Marilynn Robinson in Hallowed Be Your Name" seems to be indicating that the current evangelical movement is totally devoid of care for social justice and welfare issues. "For a self-declared Christian movement, it shows startlingly little sense of responsibility for the vulnerable in society." She goes on to lift up the Matthew 25 passages in which Jesus likens himself to the poor and vulnerable, as if to say that the evangelicals are not caring for the poor.
I would not be so quick to point fingers. I would propose that many evangelicals, as well as progressive Christians fall into the category of thinking that they ARE caring for the poor. They contribute to food banks, participate in CROP walks, donate to Church World Service or other faith-based charities. True, those progressives who would also wear the label of "social activist" would argue, quite correctly, that these are short-term solutions that do not address the long-term problems of poverty.
True, this method often keeps the giver in an elevated position "over" those who are "less-fortunate", and the giving probably makes the giver feel better about themselves, elevating that position even higher. But unless that person, church or organization is actively working against those who are actively working to reduce poverty, knowing that this is what they are doing, I think I would have a difficult time in calling them... what?
People who only claim to be Christians? Neofundamentalist frauds?
Not every conservative Christian is "demon spawn", nor are they always completely off base in their positions. Mis-guided, perhaps... probably... and sometimes downright wrong. But not always.
In coming blogs, I will write to some of these issues where there IS common ground, shaky as it may be. Phrases such as "pro-life" and "family values" have been claimed by the Religious Right, and I will argue that they do not have exclusive rights to them. On the other hand, the phrase "Open and Affirming" has been pidgeon-holed in the United Church of Christ to mean only one thing, when I believe it belongs to more than just the LGBT issues.
Maybe, just maybe, we can find a way to raise our voices in commonality and find our way to God's Truth as revealed in the life and person of Jesus, the Christ.
And maybe, just maybe we can find our way to recognizing the Christ in each other on both sides of each issue and everywhere in between.
And may, just maybe, we can stop calling each other names and begin calling each other brothers and sisters in Christ.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)