Genuine Truth, Not False, Misleading Accusations

Danielle wonders if it is possible for society to support one candidate without constantly ridiculing the other. Must we revert to [being] 5 year olds.

When I saw this on my friend Danielle's Facebook status update, I commented, "Ditto." I have been thinking the exact same thing lately regarding this presidential campaign. I mean really, isn't name-calling a childish endeavor? I don't think this is what Jesus had in mind when he said, "And a little child shall lead them." Why do candidates even spend their time doing this? I'm sure there are many reasons. Maybe psychologcial issues, power and control issues, issues related to fear and prejudice as well as outright disrespect. Maybe the fact that it actually works on so many Americans who buy into all the rhetoric of their own candidate (whether there is any real, viable proof of accusations or not), is enough reason for candidates to pursue those votes. But this is disingenuous.

What's really troubling to me is that all of these candidates claim to be not only people of faith, but people of Christian faith - albeit a variety of expressions within the Christian faith. However, what they are doing to one another does not seem very "Christian" in any way. Well...wait a minute. I guess if you are the variety of Christian who thinks it's okay to demonize, ridicule, and misrepresent or even lie about the other in public (or private) it might very well seem Christian. But certainly this is not Christ-like. And the truth is, there is a big difference between what is accepted as Christian in many of our institutional churches and groups that has nothing to do with actually following Jesus. If it is always true that we are guilty by our associations, then the Pharisees were right about Jesus. They said he was a drunk, a glutton, a man who hung out with sinners, Zealots (of which one was a disciple of Jesus named Simon - Zealots were terrorist in their day, seeking to overthrow the Roman government), and he broke the Sabbath laws among other things. This is what the Pharisees tried to convince people of regarding Jesus. And you know what? He did associate with those people and he did break their Sabbath laws. So, do you feel Jesus is guilty by association? I know people who go out and get drunk on occasion, but they are my friends and I love them, but associating with them does not make me a person who does the same thing. I know people who claim to be Christian, but are so full of hate toward some racial groups or homosexuals, or people of an opposing political party, I wonder whether they are indeed following Jesus into discipleship. But, my associating with them does not mean I feel the same way or support their hatred or prejudice. And, on top of that, I have my own sinfulness and lack of perfection to worry about. Maybe I should be focusing on that instead of the perceived sinfulness of others.

Maybe candidates should not be allowed to make public accusations toward another candidate without at the same time producing public documents, witnesses, and specific proof beyond a reasonable doubt. And then, whatever State in which the candidate made that accusation without indictable, provable, unquestioned evidence, that State would automatically be put in the other candidate's win column. I don't want the candidates to tell me about the other one. I want them to justify their own stances and positions on policy without resorting to telling me anything about the other. It seems like the campaigns are in this childish tattle-telling mode that is immature and unbecoming at best. I keep hearing so many people saying they want clean campaigns, no negative advertising, no attacks, just tell us what "your" policies and positions are and why you support them. But strangely enough, when it gets closer to election day, the attacks become even more prominent, and unsupported, unproven accusations fly from every corner. And, we, the voters, eat it up. If negative ads did not work on us, these candidates would not spend millions of dollars putting them on the air.

Let's hope that in the end, we, the voters, are more intelligent than that. We need to see beyond the rhetoric of both campaigns. We need to hold these candidates, both Presidential and Vice-Presidential, accountable to the truth and not accept half-truths and inuendos as fact. I cannot say that I support all the policies and positions of any one of these candidates, but I feel I will need to make a choice because I think it important that I vote and participate in the political process. It is a good thing we have a political system where we have checks and balances. Oh, wait, is that slipping away too? Well, maybe that's a blog for another day.

Maybe these words should rule the conduct code of candidates for all offices in our country They are Jesus' words, not mine.

Matthew 5:43-47 "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' [44] But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, [45] that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. [46] If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? [47] And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? (NIV)

Matthew 7:1-5 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. [2] For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. [3] "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? [4] How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? [5] You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." (NIV)

Pray for the process of the election this year. Don't pray negatively about how we should be saved from the awfulness of the "other" person. We need to pray more honestly than that. Let's examine ourselves first. Let's wonder what would come out about us if our lives were put under the microscope like these candidates. Putting the rhetoric, policies, and positions of any of these candidates above following the path of Jesus is idolatrous. We need real, genuine, truth, not false accusations, inuendo, and misleading statements that only serve to demonize and ridicule others just to get votes from those who are looking for an enemy to hate.

Review of The Shack by Wm. Paul Young

I just finished reading the novel, The Shack: Where Tragedy Confronts Eternity by Wm. Paul Young. A friend recommended I read it. He told me he had read part of it already and that it involved a conversation between this man and God (who was protrayed in the novel initially as a large African-American woman). That was about all he told me. And, being the person I am, I could not resist reading a novel that portayed God as an African-American woman - intriguing. I am always up for a challenge and for rethinking my assumptions and beliefs. As a matter of fact, a great quote from the book deals with just that - challenging our assumptions about God. Young has his God character say,

Just because you believe something firmly doesn't make it true. Be willing to re-examine what you believe. The more you live in the truth, the more your emotions will help you see clearly. But even then, you don't want to trust them more than me.

And this is exactly what happens. Assumptions are definitely challenged. The book is about a man named MacKenzie Allen Phillips who, while on vacation with his kids, leaves one child to go save another from drowning only to return to find his daughter, Missy, gone. He discovers she has been abucted and likely violently murdered in an old shack in the woods and her body is not found. As you begin reading the story, it seems to be the typical story of loss, personal pain, questioning God, and somehow, redemption (if one can experience redemption after such a horrible experience). As the story unfolds, however, it takes on a more mysterious nature in that Mac receives a note in his mail box, presumably from God inviting him back to the shack where his daughter was killed. He goes.

From there, Mac's world slams into the personification of God in the Trinity. They appear to him as God the Father (an African-American woman), God the Son (a middle-aged Jewish carpenter type) and God the Holy Spirit (a petite Asian woman). Mac's wife had always referred to God as "Papa," and because of Mac's bad experience with his own father, and his current questioning of God and all that he has assumed God to be, God the Father thinks it important to appear to him as something other than that which Mac grew up hating. From here, Mac is provided an experience beyond what he could have ever hoped and one for which he never would have asked. He enters into conversations with all three relational parts of the Trinity and has experiences that lead him ultimately to be reconciled to God, himself, his family, and especially his murdered daughter, Missy.

Mac struggles with the personifications of God he meets because he has many assumptions about how they interact and relate to one another in terms of being. The Holy Spirit, Sarayu by name in the book, explains to MacKenzie:

...we have no concept of final authority among us, only unity. We are a circle of relationship, not a chain of command or "great chain of being," as your ancestors termed it. What you are seeing here is relationship without any overlay of power. We don't need power over the other because we are always looking out for the best. Hierarchy would make no sense among us. Actually, this is your problem, not ours." (p. 122 paperback edition)

The Spirit makes it clear that everything that God does, all that God is, is wrapped up in each element of the trinitarian relationship. It's not like Jesus and the Spirit come up with an idea and pass it by God the Father and God the Father makes a decision as to whether to go with that or not. There are no power plays, no manipulation, no reward/punishment in the trinitarian relationship. There is only love. Young has his personification of God the Father, the African-American woman, say, My purposes are always and only an expression of love. (p. 190). And in this Mac struggles, because if God's "purposes are always and only an expression of love," then why did this tragedy happen to his daughter and his family. Even in the midst of Mac's anger and questioning, Young has "Papa" say what I think is one of my favorite lines in the whole book, My love is a lot bigger than your stupidity. Why is this my favorite line? Well, I think because we often think we have God all figured out. We have created our boxes of what we are willing to accept or reject about God and anyone who begins to open our box to let the real God out by asking challenging questions, having different assumptions, or sharing different experiences, we often lash out at them and try to almost demonize them for seeing God differently.

There are a variety of blogs that review this book and take on Young's theology. Some respectfully, others not. I think Christians need to be thoughtful about their faith and how they interpret things, but I also think we need to see the book for what it is - a novel with some inspiring, interesting ideas about what we might hope God to be or need God to be in our lives. The critics will say, "but this is not biblical. It's heresy. It's universalists." And in other blogs and reviews about it, you will see those charges. Well, you just have to recognize that this book should not be viewed as a theological treatise, despite fears about it.

Whether anyone thinks Young is disguising The Shack as the next great theological treatise on the Trinity or not, it's a compelling story, with compelling thoughts and reflections going through his mind based on his personal life experience. And isn't that really the place from which we all share who we are, what our struggles are, what we hope to be, and what we hope we can come to terms with in our own lives. I don't see God cringing about this novel. I'm sure just like our little boxes in which we trap God with our own beliefs and misguided understandings, Young is in the same boat. We all theologize and interpret out what we understand the Bible to be and what it has to say to us. Even those who know the Greek, Hebrew, Armaic, and understand all there is to know about why this gospel writer wrote that and to whom and why they wrote it, and those who have all the knowledge they can possibly have about the Bible, to suggest any person has God (and of all things, the Trinity) all figured out, is only fooling themselves. I think it makes more sense to have an ongoing, forming, relationship with God, like what is happening in The Shack, as opposed to a contractual obligation where believing the stuff others say about God is the only way to have that connection. Signing contracts about the rules you'll follow is about institutions. Choosing to believe and pick up our cross daily is about relationship and trust. I think The Shack gets at this division well and tries to emphasize relationship vs. rules. I don't trust rules because they change like the wind as circumstances change, but I do trust God and know that he will love me and show me grace when I get it right and when I get wrong. In the end, we work through it all, in relationship.

I would recommend reading this book. As others have written about it, it is not the greatest novel ever and there is a great deal of theological dialogue to wade through. However, it has its inspirational and challenging moments for us to consider how we see tragedy, pain, love, and how God in the trinitarian relationship might speak to our questions and needs. It is ultimately about redemption, reconciliation, trust, and acceptance. Hopefully it will cause you to consider your own life and relationships, particulary your relationship with God.

Change

This Sunday, August 24, will be my last Sunday at my church. I will have the opportunity to preach and am still considering and praying over what to share that day. In September I will begin serving as an interim campus minister at Purdue University. I'm excited about the opportunity to work directly with college students and to work with them in preparing for worship each week, among other activities. However, I do feel sad about the process of saying goodbye to people who have been such a great support and encouragement to me over the last almost 14 years now.

This Sunday, I am leaning toward speaking on the sacredness and holiness of place. I'll share that on Sunday. As I leave here and get through the departing process, I hope to have even more time to spend on the blog to write and reflect. Life has been hectic with all the change taking place. And, although change can be good, it is not always easy to transition into the "new creation," I will become. We'll see what happens.

Rethinking Faith and Politics

It has always disturbed and confused me how we Christians have often been seen as very narrowly focused on the political and cultural landscape - only seeming to care about two very controversial issues; abortion and gay-marriage. One might add to that how so many people of faith confuse national allegiance with following Jesus. The close ties of the Republican Party with the Religious (Christian) Right has unfornunatley become a litmus test of authentic Christianity where many Republicans of faith, particularly ones in many of our churches, will actually make statements like, "You can't be a Christian and vote for a Democrat." I have heard this comment spoken (without jest) on many ocassions. It is disturbing and completely ignores the broader issues that Christians need to be concerned with culturally, spiritually, and politically.


However, it is also true that many progressive Christians have aligned themselves with the sole agenda of the Democrat party as well. Although I have never heard a Democrat of faith say that you can't be a Christian if you vote for a Republican (though, just because I haven't heard it, it doesn't mean it hasn't been said), it is clear that conservative, progressive, liberal, fundamentalist, the Christian or religious right, etc. all have allowed political party agendas and power to define our faith as opposed to Jesus' teachings being our guide. Wallis is equally critical of the left's dismissal of important family issues and sanctity of life issues that are important to Christian community as well. Too often we have allowed political power platforms from all parties to lead us into notions of misplaced nationalistic self-preservation and led us to justify obvious inequities and injustices around the globe, even in our own nation. It is into this landscape that Jim Wallis' new book, The Great Awakening: Reviving Faith and Politics in a Post-Religious Right America, enters and suggest a more faithful and just path to addressing so many critical national and global issues of today.



Wallis' book is a celebration of how social movements with spiritual foundations can address and actively change politics and the important moral and ethical issues around the world. It particularly addresses how the U.S. can be renewed and revived to honestly and humbly face its own disintegration into being world spectators as opposed to authentic activists who seek equity and justice for the whole world, not just for our own selfish desires for resources, power, and control.



In a world of divisions, even within the Christian church, it is refreshing to read and hear from a prophetic voice that challenges Christians to be more than "two-issue" people of faith. His assesment of the Religious Right's single-minded focus on the issues of abortion and gay-marriage is that they have ignored the broader realities of biblical justice and discipleship. Wallis, as a self-titled "progressive evangelical" goes to great lengths and depth to help us move beyond right and left, liberal and conservative, and get down to the business of faithful action that will move our churches, politicians, nation, and world, to genuinely collaborate to discover equitable, workable solutions to the critical global crises of the day. Wallis writes:


As I travel the country, I can see and feel new things happening - I find a revival of faith that is directly leading to new calls and commitments for social justice. That rebirth and renewal is being directly applied to the moral and biblical scandal of poverty around the globe and here at home, to the crises of environmental degradation and climate change that pose such a threat to God's creation, and to the mulitple assaults on human life and dignity that shame our world. (p. 3)



He goes on to add:



...Many of the great social issues we face feel like huge, unmovable mountains: disease pandemics that kill millions, massive inequality that imprisons half the world's people in miserable poverty, human sexual and economic trafficking, dangerous climate changes in the earth's temperature, genocide that no one seems able to stop, so many threats to the sanctity of human life, endless violations of human dignity, and the alarming unraveling of both family and community systems. (p. 3)



Although Wallis' entire book is important for Christians of all political and theological persuasions, I personally found Chapter five, entitled, "Inclusion and Opportunity: The Welcome Table," to be a foundational one that underlies addressing all the other issues. Here, Wallis takes the terminology of the welcome table from an African-American spiritual by that same name. He suggest that this idea, based on Jesus parable of the Kingdom of God about the banquet table found in Luke 14 is, "...an excellent image and metaphor for spiritual transformation and the political strategy needed to overcome poverty." Later in the chapter, Wallis quotes Bono of the Irish rock band U2, who spoke at the 2006 National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C., as saying:



...God is with the vulnerable and the poor. God is in the slums in the cardboard boxes where the poor play house. God is in the silence of a mother who has infected her child with a virus that will end both their lives. God is in the cries heard under the rubble of war. God is in the debris of wasted opportunity and lives, and God is with us if we are with them. (p. 110)



Bono goes on in that speech to suggest that we need to move away from seeing response to these needs as an act of charity. He says, It is not about charity, it's about justice. (p. 110)



Overcoming poverty has to be about relationships. I would suggest too that this is true of all the issues raised in The Great Awakening. We must welcome people to the table, the poor with the rich, the Christians with the Jews, Muslims, and other faith traditions with the scientist, the Republicans with the Democrats. As long as we continue to use our personal theologies and political agendas to keep us separate, we will never build the important relationships needed to genuinely address the crises in our world today. I believe young people today are getting this as does Jim Wallis. So many young people today just do not understand the uncritiqued loyalty to particular parties where real solutions to real serious problems get swallowed up in political rhetoric and power plays - all the while nothing gets done not only on the world stage, but in our local communites as well. Jim Wallis holds out a great deal of hope for the future recognizing that a younger generation just may be the ones who are emerging to lead us into a more hopeful future of collaboration, of sharing power, resources, and ideas to finally make a huge impact.



Read this book. Use it for a study group in your church, book club, or just among friends.