Tag: American Christianity

Kavanaugh’s Distress, His Evangelical Support and the Problem of Angry Men

Yesterday’s  online edition of The New Yorker had a series of short articles on the testimony offered at the Brett Kavanaugh/Christian Ford hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.  The best of the  lot was a piece written by Alexandra Schwartz, “Brett Kavanaugh and the Adolescent Aggression of Conservative Masculinity.”

You can read the entire piece here.  Below is an excerpt (emphasis is mine).

“…Kavanaugh was setting a tone. Embedded in the histrionics were the unmistakable notes of fury and bullying. Kavanaugh shouted over Dianne Feinstein to complain about the “outrage” of not being allowed to testify earlier; when asked about his drinking, by Sheldon Whitehouse, he replied, “I like beer. You like beer? What do you like to drink, Senator?” with a note of aggressive petulance that is hard to square with his preferred self-image of judicious impartiality and pious Sunday churchgoing. Lindsey Graham eagerly took up the angry-man mantle, using his allotted five minutes of questioning to furiously shout at his Democratic colleagues.

“What we are seeing is a model of American conservative masculinity that has become popular in the past few years, one that is directly tied to the loutish, aggressive frat-boy persona that Kavanaugh is purportedly seeking to dissociate himself from. Gone are the days of a terse John Wayne-style stoicism. Now we

Republican U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally at the Treasure Island Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada June 18, 2016. REUTERS/David Becker/Files

have Trump, ranting and raving at his rallies; we have Alex Jones, whose habit of screaming and floridly weeping as he spouts his conspiracy theories is a key part of his appeal to his audience. When Kavanaugh is not crying or shouting, he uses a distinctly adolescent tone that might best be described as “talking back.” He does not respond to senators. He negs them. His response, when he is asked about his drinking, is to flip the question and ask the senators how they like their alcohol; his refusal to say whether he would coöperate with an F.B.I. investigation brings to mind a teenager stonewalling his parents. If Kavanaugh is trying to convince the public that he could never have been capable, as a teenager, of aggression or peer pressure, this is an odd way to go about it.”

Odd indeed.

The D.C. train-wreck otherwise known as the Senate Judiciary Committee exemplifies almost everything wrong with American politics today.  (More on that another day, perhaps.)

Sadly, but not surprisingly, yesterday’s exercise in public brow-beating and male chest-thumping gave US evangelicalism another chance to shame itself by revealing again how alienated it has become from our crucified Savior and his gospel. (I am sorry, but if your natural reaction yesterday was to imagine Kavanaugh as a Christ-figure, you have more in common with Judas Iscariot than Simon Peter.)

A Maris Poll conducted for NPR and PBS reports that among America’s white evangelical Christians:

72% approve of Trump’s performance in the Oval Office

56% have a favorable impression of Brett Kavanaugh

32% have an unfavorable impression of Christine Blasey Ford

48% believe Kavanaugh should be approved by the committee even if he is guilty of attempted rape

45% believe Kavanaugh is telling the truth, while only 14% believe Christine Ford’s story of sexual assault is true

64% support Kavanaugh’s appointment to the Supreme Court despite Ford’s allegations

The Holy Spirit has abandoned much of American evangelicalism just as he vacated the life of king Saul in that poor man’s spiritual collapse.

This DC horror show has NOT been about “innocent until proven guilty” or belief in the possibility of redemption and forgiveness.  (Kavanaugh needed to confess his guilt and ask for Dr. Ford’s forgiveness had that been the story-line).

No, what we have witnessed is an exercise in raw political power and shameless hypocrisy by politicians in both parties, more eager to do the bidding of their corporate contributors than in serving the people.  The main selling point in Kavanaugh’s judicial portfolio has been his consistent record of pro-corporate, pro-big business rulings that shaft the little guys.

By faithfully serving their money masters, the Senate committee has run roughshod over innocent lives without the slightest attempt to discover that near-extinct DC rarity called The Truth.  Democrats are as guilty as Republicans.

Anita Hill telling her story of sexual harassment by Clarence Thomas. Conservatives, including conservative Christians, didn’t believe her either.

I believe that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford has been telling the truth.  She will be remembered as this generation’s Anita Hill.  (Yes, I believed her too.)

The story of Dr. Ford’s unwanted exposure to public scrutiny is not a tale of Democratic conspiracies, as Kavanaugh alleges.  The trauma she describes is all too common, more common than most men could ever conceive.  Unbeknownst to us, we all know women and little girls who are victimizes of sexual assault and have never told anyone about it.

Most never will.

The only conspiracy surrounding Dr. Ford was plotted and executed by the Senate’s old boys club that refused to allow a pesky FBI investigation interfere with their well-laid plans for a vacant seat on the Supreme Court.  The Senate has ever so politely and cunningly traumatized her again.

Senator Lindsey Graham vents his hypocrisy while decrying the partisanship he helps to maintain

The fury unleashed by Brett Kavanaugh and Senator Graham was the graphic territorial display common to powerful men of privilege when their well-considered goals are frustrated by something, or someone, as inconvenient as a woman meddling in things that don’t concern her.

The Republican dismissal of Dr. Ford’s harrowing account had been  telegraphed by the committee long before yesterday’s testimony.  It was also entirely predictable, as predictable as the shocking “boys will be boys” defense ridiculously repeated by Kavanaugh’s most slimy supporters…many of whom are conservative, evangelical women.

Check Out the Work of Abby Martin

In my opinion, Abby Martin is one of the most significant independent journalists working today.

Abby Martin

I invite you to set aside some time and listen to this interview discussing media censorship, US imperialism, ongoing coup attempts in South America, and more.  Hopefully, this brief sampling will introduce a new perspective or two for those who take the time to listen.

I have become a regular follower of Ms. Martin’s work, especially the documentary program “The Empire Files” on Telesur English.  Previously, you could find her TV program “Breaking the Set” on RT.

Intelligent, educated people who want to remain life-long learners never stop reading and listening to new voices, especially voices with whom they think they disagree.  Sometime, those are the voices that become most illuminating to us.

Furthermore, I am absolutely convinced that Christian discipleship requires us to live as citizens of the world.  The international Body of Christ commands my first loyalty in this life, not my country, not my ethnicity, not my gender.  I believe this fact requires me to become reasonably well informed

Perhaps the most famous image from the Viet Nam war. A child flees her village after it was bombed with napalm.

about world  affairs.  More than that, as a citizen of the most powerful country in the world with a long history of treating other nations as its servants, I am required to speak out against American injustice and to defend those who suffer from US dominance.

The traditional conservative Christian social critique of “us against them” has never been a sound theology or a helpful way to engage the world.  For far too many, secular humanism and its adherents have been the “enemy,” opposing the things of God.  So these so-called secularists were to be shunned, criticized and displaced whenever, wherever possible.

Please don’t think that way.  And stop now if you have in the past.

The creation story in the book of Genesis makes two very important points about God’s world….and, yes, this is still God’s world, lock, stock and barrel.

First, the entire creation, including human beings, were declared to be “good.”  In fact, human beings are much more than good,  we are the best of the best,  the cherry on top of God’s creation.  God judged everything else to be “good,” but people are “very good.”

The entire universe is good, but people are fantastic in God’s eyes.

Extolling the virtues of intolerance. Her shirt says Intolerance is a Beautiful Thing. Sadly, for many, their intolerance extends beyond ideas or actions to include people.

Second, all human beings are created as “the image of God.”  We won’t go into the meaning of that designation here, but whatever the details, it means nothing less than the fact that if you want to find an approximation of God on earth, stare long and hard at the next person you see.  That’s the best God-approximation you’ll see this side of heaven.

The intrusion of sin into the creation did not change any of this.  That, too, is a discussion for another day.  But its true.

So, why in the world would anyone who loves God and His works ever imagine that it would be a fine idea to wall themselves off from the largest portion of His Very Best Creation, their thoughts, insights, artistry or alternative ways of thinking?

Oh my goodness, how incredibly knuckle-headed Christians can be.

I thank God for Abby Martin and her work.  I pray that she will come to know Jesus one day.  I have written to her on Twitter, letting her know that there  are thoughtful Christians in America.  In the meantime, she continues to teach me a tremendous amount about this broken world.

The image of God shines brightly in Ms. Martin. In certain respects, she reflects the ethics of Jesus and his kingdom more clearly than a good many Christians I know.

Michael Gerson, The Boiling Frog that Finally Jumped…Maybe

Perhaps you know the parable.  How do you boil a frog alive?

Don’t throw the frog into boiling water.  It will jump out.  Rather, turn a stove burner on to low heat.  Fill a kettle with water at room temperature.  Put your wiggling, green frog into the kettle.  Set the kettle onto the burner.  Wait…

Supposedly, as the water temperature slowly rises, the frog – being a cold-blooded creature – will enjoy the sauna without alarm.  Eventually, the cooperative frog allows itself to be cooked alive without ever objecting to the rising water temperature.

I have enough of a conscious that I’ve never tested the truth of this parable (have you?), but it serves as a popular warning against the dangerous allurements of compromising one’s conscience.  How many compromises does it take before principle and morality become waterlogged labels tossed by deceased idealists into the world’s pragmatic stew called “the ends justify the means?”

I don’t know.  Maybe Michael Gerson could tell us.

Gerson, now a columnist with the Washington Post, has become one of president Trump’s most vocal, conservative critics.  And I admire him for taking up the cause of repeating out loud that this president has no clothes.

Gerson prints what few other Republicans are willing to say out loud (except behind closed doors).  He appears to be working as a conservative conscience (in a kinda, sorta way) for an otherwise fetid Republican party that misplaced its public service conscience years ago – undoubtedly lost in the fancy parlor of some corporate contributor.

A graduate of Wheaton College, Gerson is noteworthy because he claims the mantle of “evangelical Christian” while openly condemning the boot-licking, brown-nosing antics of those religious-right leaders and their millions of followers who boast about their elevated status on Trump’s White House guest list.

In this regard, Gerson certainly has his head screwed on straight.  Perhaps he learned a lesson or two from his own time of service in the Bush White House.

GWB : 1630 : Speech Preparations – State of the Union. Oval Office

Gerson was chief speech writer for George W. Bush from 2001 to 2006.  From 2000 to 2006 he was also a White House Senior Policy Analyst and a member of Bush’s White House Iraq Group.

The primary purpose of the WHIG was to advance the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld plan “to sell” the American public on the imaginary threat of Saddam Hussein’s non-existent WMD program.  In other words, Gerson was on the president’s marketing team charged with candy-coating one of the most catastrophic, illegal, immoral wars in the history of American foreign policy.

Everyone on that team knew exactly what they were doing.

Here is Paul Waldman’s assessment (in a very cogent article published in

President George W. Bush speaks about Iraq and Afghanistan, January 4, 2006. Standing with Bush from left are National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque – RTR17RZC

This Week) of the work accomplished by Gerson and his associates in the WHIG:

“What the Bush administration launched in 2002 and 2003 may have been the most comprehensive, sophisticated, and misleading campaign of government propaganda in American history.”

That’s what Gerson helped to accomplish.

Gerson is widely regarded as the author of the “smoking gun/mushroom cloud” fear-mongering metaphor that became the most effective rhetorical trick used by Bush officials in promoting the Iraq War.  (Check out Gerson’ Wikipedia page for some interesting anecdotes told by his fellow speech-writers [with citations]).

I have always wondered what happened to Gerson’s Christian conscience during those crucial years in the Bush White House.

In 2012 Gerson gave a public lecture at Calvin College.  I was there.  As he often does, Gerson talked about the formative influences of Charles Colson and Senator Jack Kemp, two Christian leaders with whom he worked closely as a young man.  He credits them for positively shaping his Christian social and political conscience.  He also talked briefly about his years with George W. Bush, but had precious little to say about his work in the White House.

When it came time for the audience to ask questions, I took my place in the short line forming behind a public microphone.  I don’t recall my exact words, but this is essentially what I asked Mr. Gerson:

Torture at Abu Ghraib prison

“You have talked a lot about how your Christian conscience has directed you through your life in politics.  Yet, your political career includes working for an administration that legalized and carried out the torture of other human beings.  Your White House also violated our Constitution with its warrantless, mass surveillance of the American people.  When asked, the president you worked for knowingly lied to us about that fact.

The man packed in ice is Manadel al-Jamadi, an Iraqi prisoner who died while being tortured in Abu Ghraib prison

 “How did you, how do you, reconcile all of that with your ‘Christian conscience?’  How could you do that?  What do you have to say?”

Gerson’s answer was a disheartening example of double-speak and evasion.  He never answered my question, not really.  And I was surprised that he didn’t have a more polished response.  Certainly, he had been asked this question before?

I have no idea if Mr. Gerson has ever answered that question within himself.  If he felt ashamed or had experienced any regret over his years of deliberate, knowing collusion in clearing a path for one of the greatest American crimes of the 20th century, he gave no indication of it.

Though I strongly disagree with almost all of Gerson’s policy positions, I am pleased to see him take up the pen and use his position with the Washington Post to shed some sensible, moral – perhaps even somewhat Christian – daylight onto the sweaty, belching, obnoxious, moral turpitude that is the Trump administration.

Apparently, the water temperature in this current White House is too hot even for Michael Gerson.  But his previous ability to flourish at criminally high temperatures causes me to bite my tongue as others commend him for his Christian cajones.

My understanding of Christianity says that redemption first requires confession of and repentance from sin.  Public sins demand public confession.  We may have learned a little about Gerson’s tolerance of the current heat in Washington, D.C.

I am not convinced that his current opposition to Donald Trump tells us anything at all about Gerson’s Christian discipleship.

I am still waiting to hear a public confession of his past, political sins.

A Prayer Request and More Praise for My Book, I Pledge Allegiance

Like most authors, I always appreciate receiving feedback from my readers.  I am especially grateful whenever I hear a story about how my work has stirred positive transformation and been encouraging to someone, especially when that someone is trying to follow Jesus faithfully.

Below I have copied a very kind note I recently received from a minister who has read my newest book, I Pledge Allegiance: A Believer’s Guide to Kingdom Citizenship in 21st Century America (Eerdmans, 2018).

Thank you, pastor, for taking the time to be an encouragement to me:

“At the recommendation of [a] long-time friend and former parishioner… I just finished reading….for the second time…your book, “I Pledge Allegiance”. All I can say, David, is THANK YOU!!! You’ve helped me find some renewed sense of balance in what it means to live in this country at this time as a follower of Jesus. Having just recently retired from parish ministry… I’m aware of how often I waffled, especially in my preaching. There are times when I experience guilt and wish I could begin again to deal in a better way with the influences of congregants. And then there are those times when I’m grateful that I made it through without getting kicked out. The events of this past week put me into an even deeper depression. However, your insights and reminders have helped me immensely. Again, thank you!! And, please, keep writing. David”

In response to this man’s last sentence, let me say that I am trying to continue my writing.  But I am facing a few obstacles.  I mention this because, if you are a praying person, I could use your prayers about my next (possible) writing project.

I want to write a book about both(1)  the theological problems of Christian Zionism and (2) the human suffering entangled with American evangelicalism’s blind support for the nation of Israel.  The book will be half Biblical theology and half real-life stories.

The theology sections will explain the serious errors of “Christian Zionism” (i.e. those who believe that modern Israel is the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy in need of the church’s, and America’s, wholehearted support).

The real life stories will describe graphic instances of Palestinian suffering and abuse that I have witnessed first-hand during my visits to the West Bank area (captured by the Israeli army during the 1967 war and kept under military occupation ever since).

My proposal for this book has now passed over a number of publisher’s desks.  One publisher said (I am paraphrasing), “Dave, we think this would be a good book, but your previous books haven’t been great sellers for us.  We don’t think we’d make much money from this one, either.”

Four other well-known publishing houses have all said something similar, “David, we like and agree with your proposal.  We think this would me a good book, but we can’t figure out how we would sell it.  Sorry.  Good luck.”

Needless to say, I am a bit frustrated and disappointed.  So, I would very much appreciate your prayers as I try to figure out where next to send the proposal.  I firmly believe this book needs to be written.

Otherwise, perhaps I am at the end of my writing career.  I hope not, but who knows.

Why Erasing “In God We Trust” Would be a Good Thing for Everyone

Genuine Christians don’t trust in God.

Real Christians trust in the eternal, heavenly Father of the resurrected and ascended Lord, Jesus Christ.  There is a difference, a BIG difference between these two deities.

Trusting in God does not require anything of us, because God-trusters always make God in their own image.

The generic God of the God-trusters is a God of convenience.  And what is America today if not the wasteland of endless, ad nauseum convenience?

Idolatry’s promise of religious convenience is at the heart of why God-trusters embrace their ever-convenient God.  Like all idolatry, trusting in the God of American civil religion is easy-peasy religion, because that God is always on our side.  What’s not to like?

Who wouldn’t want to be on God’s side when you already think you know that God’s side is always your side?

The angel of American manifest destiny

He is always, predictably, the God of our nation, our history, our wars, our empire, our manifest destiny, our foreign policy, our political party, our consumerist lifestyle, our race, even our skin color, if and when appealing to such racial niceties becomes necessary.

How nice it is to believe in an agreeable God who wants for your nation what you do, who believes in the rightness of your cause just as you do, who excuses the world-wide bloodshed caused by your country for the same reasons you do.

How insufferably convenient to embrace a religion of such logical redundancy.  Clear-headedness is never expected of anyone.

This is always the way with idolatry.

This In-God-We-Trust God emerges from our own selfish desires, hopes and priorities.  For even when we fail to achieve our desires, this God of the God-trusters is flexible enough to adopt failed outcomes as the deepest desire of his heart.  So, America can do no wrong, even when she fails abysmally and wreaks havoc among those who suffer from her miscalculations.

On the other hand, if there is one thing the Bible tells us about the one, true God, Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the eternal Father of Jesus of Nazareth:  God is never convenient.

Following Jesus of Nazareth is not convenient, not at all convenient.  That’s why so few people really do it, consistently, day in and day out, for a lifetime.

When Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712 – 1778) devoted a chapter in his book, The Social Contract (1762), to the centrality of civil religion in the modern nation-state, he emphasized the civic dangers of Christianity.  In fact, he believed – rightly, in my opinion – that the gospel of Jesus Christ, when embraced by true believers, posed the single greatest threat to the long-term survival of any modern nation-state.  He even went so far as to insist that the Roman Catholic church (the only form of Christianity he knew) be outlawed if the nation-state hoped to survive.

Rousseau’s fears can be boiled down very simply:  The Christian God was not controllable.  The Christian God is neither predictable nor convenient – at least, not from a human point of view.

Jesus Christ can never be relied upon to cast his vote for “my side.”  And he always demands an allegiance transcending national, political and social loyalties.

The atheist Rousseau understood Christianity better than most American Christians.

If we understood the import of the gospel of Jesus Christ, Christians would be the first to ask that idolatrous phrases like “In God We Trust” be erased forever.

We would abandon the silly, meaningless conflicts over state-sanctioned “prayer” in public schools.

We would shun idolatrous ceremonies demanding that we “pledge allegiance” to a flag.

We would laugh hysterically whenever we hear the next televised nattering nabob boast about winning some war over saying “merry Christmas” in the public square.

We would speak up and declare, “No, I do not trust in your God of convenient nationalism.  I trust in the heavenly Father of Jesus Christ; Savior of ALL people everywhere; King of the universe; the Lord whose kingdom of righteousness makes public inconvenience a hallmark of the faithful.”

What Readers are Saying about My Book I Pledge Allegiance

Not long ago a good friend and former colleague sent me a message with encouraging words about my new book, I Pledge Allegiance: A Believer’s Guide to Kingdom Citizenship in 21st Century America (Eerdmans, 2018). 

She unexpectedly bumped into another friend while they both were marching in a local protest demonstrating against president Trump’s immigration policies.

She passed along these kind remarks:

“…(my friend) mentioned that the men’s book club had finished reading I Pledge Allegiance this morning, and found it really good and deeply challenging in all the right ways – and also that he had been in touch with you to say how superb he finds the book. I’m really glad that he took the initiative to contact you!! He and I have been talking a lot about it recently, and how we need to keep it close by to help us to navigate the insanity.”

I could not be more pleased.  She describes everything I hope would happen when disciples wrestle with God’s word while considering the arguments found in my book.

I am pleased as punch.

If you haven’t yet read I Pledge Allegiance, please join the crowd of those who have and ask the Holy Spirit what He wants you to be doing for the kingdom of God in this world right now.

The War Prayer, by Mark Twain

Besides being a brilliant author and humorist, Mark Twain was a man of deep conscience.  But that won’t surprise anyone who has read his books.

From 1899 to 1902, the United States was embroiled in another of its imperialist wars.  This time in the Philippines.  Twain was a staunch opponent of American empire and publicly protested against the Philippine-American war.

His short story, “The War Prayer,” was submitted to the magazine Harper’s Bazaar in March, 1905.  The editor’s rejected it.  Because Twain was under contract, he couldn’t submit it to anyone else.  He wrote to a friend lamenting,

“I don’t think the prayer will be published in my time. None but the dead are permitted to tell the truth.”

The Prayer was finally published in 1923, thirteen years after Twain’s death.  When I was teaching, I made it a regular practice to read Twain’s story to my students.  It is as relevant for us today as it was in 1905.

 

The War Prayer

by Mark Twain

It was a time of great and exalting excitement. The country was up in arms, the war was on, in every breast burned the holy fire of patriotism; the drums were beating, the bands playing, the toy pistols popping, the bunched firecrackers hissing and spluttering; on every hand and far down the receding and fading spread of roofs and balconies a fluttering wilderness of flags flashed in the sun; daily the young volunteers marched down the wide avenue gay and fine in their new uniforms, the proud fathers and mothers and sisters and sweethearts cheering them with voices choked with happy emotion as they swung by; nightly the packed mass meetings listened, panting, to patriot oratory with stirred the deepest deeps of their hearts, and which they interrupted at briefest intervals with cyclones of applause, the tears running down their cheeks the while; in the churches the pastors preached devotion to flag and country, and invoked the God of Battles beseeching His aid in our good cause in outpourings of fervid eloquence which moved every listener.

It was indeed a glad and gracious time, and the half dozen rash spirits that ventured to disapprove of the war and cast a doubt upon its righteousness straightway got such a stern and angry warning that for their personal safety’s sake they quickly shrank out of sight and offended no more in that way.

Sunday morning came — next day the battalions would leave for the front; the church was filled; the volunteers were there, their young faces alight with martial dreams — visions of the stern advance, the gathering momentum, the rushing charge, the flashing sabers, the flight of the foe, the tumult, the enveloping smoke, the fierce pursuit, the surrender!

Then home from the war, bronzed heroes, welcomed, adored, submerged in golden seas of glory! With the volunteers sat their dear ones, proud, happy, and envied by the neighbors and friends who had no sons and brothers to send forth to the field of honor, there to win for the flag, or, failing, die the noblest of noble deaths. The service proceeded; a war chapter from the Old Testament was read; the first prayer was said; it was followed by an organ burst that shook the building, and with one impulse the house rose, with glowing eyes and beating hearts, and poured out that tremendous invocation:

God the all-terrible! Thou who ordainest,
Thunder thy clarion and lightning thy sword!

Then came the “long” prayer. None could remember the like of it for passionate pleading and moving and beautiful language. The burden of its supplication was, that an ever-merciful and benignant Father of us all would watch over our noble young soldiers, and aid, comfort, and encourage them in their patriotic work; bless them, shield them in the day of battle and the hour of peril, bear them in His mighty hand, make them strong and confident, invincible in the bloody onset; help them crush the foe, grant to them and to their flag and country imperishable honor and glory —

An aged stranger entered and moved with slow and noiseless step up the main aisle, his eyes fixed upon the minister, his long body clothed in a robe that reached to his feet, his head bare, his white hair descending in a frothy cataract to his shoulders, his seamy face unnaturally pale, pale even to ghastliness. With all eyes following him and wondering, he made his silent way; without pausing, he ascended to the preacher’s side and stood there waiting. With shut lids the preacher, unconscious of his presence, continued his moving prayer, and at last finished it with the words, uttered in fervent appeal, “Bless our arms, grant us the victory, O Lord and God, Father and Protector of our land and flag!”

The stranger touched his arm, motioned him to step aside — which the startled minister did — and took his place. During some moments he surveyed the spellbound audience with solemn eyes, in which burned an uncanny light; then in a deep voice he said:

“I come from the Throne — bearing a message from Almighty God!” The words smote the house with a shock; if the stranger perceived it he gave no attention. “He has heard the prayer of His servant your shepherd, and will grant it if such be your desire after I, His messenger, shall have explained to you its import — that is to say, its full import. For it is like unto many of the prayers of men, in that it asks for more than he who utters it is aware of — except he pause and think. “God’s servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he paused and taken thought? Is it one prayer? No, it is two — one uttered, and the other not. Both have reached the ear of Him who heareth all supplications, the spoken and the unspoken. Ponder this — keep it in mind. If you would beseech a blessing upon yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon your neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain on your crop which needs it, by that act you are possibly praying for a curse on some neighbor’s crop which may not need rain and can be injured by it.

“You have heard your servant’s prayer — the uttered part of it. I am commissioned by God to put into words the other part of it — that part which the pastor — and also you in your hearts — fervently prayed silently. And ignorantly and unthinkingly? God grant that it was so! You heard the words ‘Grant us the victory, O Lord our God!’ That is sufficient. The whole of the uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words. Elaborations were not necessary. When you have prayed for victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which follow victory — must follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God fell also the unspoken part of the prayer. He commandeth me to put it into words. Listen!

“Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth into battle — be Thou near them! With them — in spirit — we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with their little children to wander unfriended in the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames in summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it —

For our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimmage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet!

We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.

(After a pause.) “Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire it, speak! The messenger of the Most High waits.”

—

It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.

If Your Pastor is Packing Heat, You Need to Stop Listening to Him

Recently a good friend sent me a selection of articles from past issues of the Christian Century.   They all deal with Christianity and gun control.  More specifically, they contain stories about the ways various churches are dealing with concealed carry laws in their states and whether they allow guns in church. (You can read my previous posts about gun control and guns in church here, and here.)

I may revisit other articles in the future, but for now, I was especially struck by an article from pastor Kyle Childress entitled, “In Texas, Even the Pastors are Carrying Guns in the Pulpit” (3/7/16 in print, 3/16/16 online).

Several years ago I attended a public meeting sponsored by a cadre of local churches.  Several hundred people showed up at the local Hilton Hotel conference room.  At the end of his anti-Muslim rant, the visiting pastor/speaker boasted about the fact that he and all  his church elders carried their guns to every church activity, both inside and out of the church building, in order “to protect their flock.”

Contrast that man’s view of Christian faith with the following story excerpted from pastor Childress’s article:

“The rationale of gun-carrying church members is that they want to be ready to protect themselves and their families if an armed intruder enters the church.  But with the new [concealed carry] law in place, who will know if the person is an armed intruder or an armed visitor?…All visitors are now scrutinized, with every visitor being a potential threat.  At the same time, to demonstrate their enthusiasm for the new law, some churches are posting signs that say — as an act of outreach — ‘Guns Welcome Here.’

“I’ve been astonished at the level of fear associated with perceived threats that are just outside our doors ready to get us…I keep asking myself where the witness of Christ is in all of this. Many of the pastors who are carrying guns teach and preach a version of the gospel that’s different from what I know.  It is a gospel of everyone looking out for himself or herself, a gospel that says, ‘It’s a dangerous world, so get them before they get you…’

“One of my deacons, the dean of a nearby college, was in a faculty meeting listening to faculty members discuss how they were all getting guns.  The dean said she refused to carry a gun.  It got quiet in the room, then someone asked why.  She said she was not prepared to shoot and perhaps kill someone.  There

Jesus arrested on trumped up charges. Maybe if he had carried a gun…?

was a long pause and then ‘What would you do if someone threatening came into the classroom?’  The dean said, ‘I’d tell them about Jesus and try to show them the love of Jesus.’

“‘You could hear a pin drop,’ she told me later. ‘Everyone looked at the floor, and someone changed the subject.’

“During a sermon on baptism a few weeks ago, I explained why I would not be carrying a gun in the pulpit or anywhere else. ‘It has to do with baptism,’ I said.  ‘When I went down into the waters of baptism, I did not come out to strap on a gun.  I came out entering into the life of the crucified and resurrected Jesus Christ.’  I went on, ‘In baptism our lives are no longer our own.  We belong to Christ.’  I could see and hear some crying in the congregation…”

Our lives are no longer our own.

We belong wholly and completely belong to Jesus Christ to do with as He pleases.

If your pastor is packing heat, I am afraid that he doesn’t have wisdom enough to lead a conga line, much less the people of God.

How Do We Choose the Right Church?

This morning I came across an interesting online review in Christian Century discussing Jamie Smith’s book Awaiting the King.  (You can read my review of Jamie’s book here.)

I was particularly struck by the author’s observations  on the depth of political polarity within the American church.  His explanation of this destructive division is the simple sociological observation that people, including Christian people, naturally hang out with others like themselves.  If you are familiar with church-growth literature, you will recognize this as a simple application of the “homogeneous principle.”

Here is the most relevant paragraph:

“People select churches based on the convictions in which the culture has already formed them. Those formed primarily by the liturgy of the flag will choose a Southern Baptist church where they know their values will be mirrored, while those formed primarily by the liturgy of individualism will opt for a mainline church where they know inclusiveness will be a shared value. We choose churches the same way we choose political parties. This is why so many Christians know so few Christians who disagree with them. It’s why our ecclesial culture so neatly replicates the polarization in our wider culture. And it’s why so few mainline pastors thought it odd that, when the Festival of Homi­letics was held in D.C. this year, Elizabeth Warren and Cory Booker spoke but no Republican politicians did.”

Of course, the author is absolutely correct.  Sadly, he is also making an observation that reveals the immaturity of so many American Christians.  After all, the point of Christianity is not to remain who we are naturally.  Nor is the goal to be comfortable.

Even more sadly, this selection process not only works for individuals selecting a new church, but also for congregations selecting whom they choose to welcome and embrace.  Not only do insiders look for insider churches, but outsiders are regularly rejected by insider congregations.

When Terry and I retired and moved back to Montana we knew that we were immersing ourselves into a rural culture that, by and large, embraced values very different from our own.  I am not a bit surprised to see over-sized pick-up trucks rolling down the street sporting bumper stickers proclaiming “God, Guns and Guts Made America Great! Let’s Keep It That Way”  Montana voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump, the candidate who often encouraged his supporters to punch his nay-sayers in the face, then promising to pay their court fees.

If we were average church-goers we might have prioritized finding a church — probably a very tiny church meeting in someone’s basement after dark (I am joking) — filled with others like us, politically avant-guarde with a progressive social conscience, where we could be socially comfortable.

But this not what we did, not because finding a comfortable church may have been difficult, but because it would have been wrong.

No, we searched for a church that was living out what we believe the church is supposed to be. (For a fuller discussion of what I mean by this, read my book I Pledge Allegiance: A Believer’s Guide to Kingdom Citizenship in 21st Century America).  Here is a short list of the qualities we looked for:

  1. A preacher/teacher who taught from the Scriptures, both practically and authoritatively, as God’s Word for us today.
  2. A church where the leaders and the congregation were outwardly rather than inwardly focused, where the emphasis was on helping those who are hurting and reaching out to the lost with the good news of Jesus Christ.
  3. A church that was primarily growing because new people were coming into new relationships with Jesus, not because disgruntled church-goers were transferring from neighboring congregations.
  4. A place where we could be involved, use our gifts and make a contribution.
  5. A place where we could confidently bring our friends trusting that they would encounter the Holy Spirit.

We set out in this search knowing full well that we would probably find ourselves surrounded  by folks who would not agree with our politics…and with whom we, too, would seriously disagree.  (Of course, there are necessary limits to such tolerance.  I would never attend a church where I judged the teaching to be an idolatrous Christian nationalism, or racist, or rabidly Zionist.)

In fact, that is exactly how it has worked out.  Thus far, I have disagreed with the politics of almost everyone who has shared their political positions

Members of the community join hands during a Black Lives Matter prayer vigil in front of the First Baptist Church, a predominantly African-American congregation, in Macon, Ga., on Monday, July 11, 2016. The pastors of both First Baptist Churches in Macon are trying to bridge the stubborn divide of race against a painful and tumultuous backdrop: the 2015 massacre at a historic black church in Charleston, South Carolina; the much-publicized deaths of blacks at the hands of law enforcement; the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, and the sniper killing of white Dallas police officers. (AP Photo/Branden Camp)

with me.  And, unfortunately, a few of them have made it clear that they aren’t especially interested in getting to know more about us after hearing my own thoughts on the issues of the day.  (I have only had one true confrontation when I had to challenge a new friend on his blatant anti-Semitism.)

Yes, I do believe that my fellow worshipers are wrong, and that I am right on these things.  But hanging out with fellow “X” (replace the X with whatever political party you like) is not why I go to church.  The purpose of the Body of Christ is not to provide a safe place (oh…how I have come to dislike those two words) where I will be coddled in my own preconceptions.

The purpose of Christian community, rather, is that we all become transformed into the image of Christ.  And there is one thing I know for certain about Christ’s image — no one on this earth looks exactly like Him yet, including me.

The all-to-common failure to recognize these important distinctions is further evidence of the spiritual immaturity endemic to American Christianity, including evangelicalism.

So, here is the challenge — take a step or two to change this situation in your sphere of influence today.

A Journalist’s Code for Christians

One of the bloggers I always enjoy reading (while not always agreeing with her) is the freelance journalist Caitlin Johnston.  Caitlin recently wrote a post reflecting on a tweet from Tim Black, host of the YouTube program, Tim Black at Night.

Here is an excerpt from Caitlin’s blog:

“Last night, one of my callers said we needed journalists and commentators willing to die for the truth,” Black tweeted. ‘I disagreed. We need journalists and commentators willing to give up their status, quit their jobs and make less money telling truth and sadly to most that’s the same as dying.’

“There’s so much truth in that I just want to unpack it a bit and riff on its implications from my own perspective. What would happen if a significant percentage of journalists got fed up with spoon feeding lies to a trusting populace and decided to place truth and authenticity before income and prestige? Or, perhaps more realistically, what if people who are interested in reporting and political analysis ceased pursuing positions in the plutocrat-owned mass media and pursued alternate paths to getting the word out instead?…

“…as Tim Black said, once you’ve set your sights on climbing to the top of the establishment media ladder, abandoning it can feel like death. And indeed, it is a kind of death: a death of the identity one builds up around the possession and pursuit of the power, prestige and wealth that comes with the realization of that goal. It’s a death of an egoic structure, one that a whole lot of energy has gone into upholding. Serving power has been both financially and socially rewarding for as long as there have been governments.”

Now, reread Caitlin’s post and replace the references to journalists, reporters and political analysts with words like pastors, Christians, and church leaders.  Notice what happens?  We end up with a perfect description of Jesus’ call to Christian discipleship – people who are willing to suffer and die for living a life of faithfulness to the Truth – and his warnings about the many temptations waiting to sidetrack his people – selling your conscience for the sake of ego, wealth, prestige, power and fame.

I am reminded of the message I heard this Sunday at my church.  The concluding text was Matthew 16:24-26.  Jesus says to journalists, reporters, Christian journalists, and Christian reporters of all stripes, as well as butchers, bakers and candlestick makers:

“If anyone would come after me, they must deny themselves, take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it. What good will it do for a person to gain the whole world, yet forfeits their soul?”

The church in this country is well and truly lost until it swells with genuine kingdom citizens who have so completely “died to themselves” that the prospects of physical suffering, professional loss, private shunning and even death for the kingdom teaching of Jesus Christ is not only considered inevitable, but is eagerly embraced because we know that then and only then have we fully experienced “the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him [Jesus] in his death” (Philippians 3:10).

Good journalists and faithful disciples are like kissin’ cousins.  They both devote their lives to honestly reporting the truth regardless of the cost.

This was the goal of Paul’s life.  It ought to be ours, too.