From Welcoming to Winning to Welcoming

Recently I participated in a discussion with a group of theologians who participated in an event hosted by an organization that works for full inclusion of all people in all churches. One person made a comment, meant to be encouraging at the time, that with changes in society and stories in the press, we had won. The idea, and language, of “winning church” stuck with me for the rest of the day as it bulldozed its way through my thinking and most of my individual conversations the rest of the day.

Wouldn’t we all be very happy if everyone else’s theology came into perfect alignment with our own? I have never met anyone who did not like the idea of winning, and “winning church” probably ranks as the biggest.

Deep inside, I think we all desire an end to conflict between the faiths so that the most contentious argument in Church is whether to serve regular, whole-wheat, or gluten-free communion wafers. Sadly, within major religions such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam most of the divisions, denominations, or sects agree on the big concepts of the religion. The minutia and practice around those concepts, though create schisms large enough to dwarf the Grand Canyon. To cement the “rightness” of each point, they become so enshrined in ritual across generations that if the Torah/Bible/Koran did not say it, it should have.

Truthfully, though, I do not want another denomination or, for that matter, another individual to come into sync with my personal theology: it would diminish my personal, individual, relationship with God. I came to where I am in faith through my life experiences and my encounters with God. They are uniquely mine and have shaped nuances of faith no one else can have. The big ideas align to my faith tradition but have been buffed and polished by my experiences with God. The biggest idea in Christianity is having a personal relationship with God.

Similarly, congregational experience grows the same way through corporate worship and shared experiences. Each congregation develops its its history and tradition around those experiences. Some use the history as a guide for future work. Some get stuck in the history.

While it the idea of winning sounds nice, it does not support the value of welcoming all in the church. For someone to win, someone else loses - becoming disenfranchised and feeling unwelcome in the church. The welcoming and affirming movements within the different denominations have to recognize that we have not been successful until every child of God is welcome in every congregation. As more congregations and religious organizations adjust rules and statements of faith the more we will encounter individuals and groups who opposed those changes. They are as worthy or our love and gracious welcome as the previously excluded populations.

Welcoming is not a value extended only toward historically marginalized individuals and groups. Welcoming is a value extended to everyone. Christ left no ambiguity about who could be his follower. He traveled amongst the sinners and unclean while engaging the religious elite. He welcomed everyone.

Society may proclaim winners and losers on various issues, but we who seek justice for all cannot let ourselves adapt this kind of thinking. We have long worked to develop a kingdom view of people that welcomes everyone and affirms their value.

I admit that I am encouraged by the increase in congregations and organizations who are recognizing that Christ welcomed and affirmed all people and are seeking to become more Christlike by following his example. Meanwhile other congregations reinforce their theology that defines who can worship with them. As long as the dichotomy exists there are no winners. The best we can do is to practice grace and demonstrate the love of God.

The Mission of the Seventy Today

Each week as I do my personal devotional using the weekly lectionary texts as a guide, I find a theme and write a reflection. Sometimes one of the passages does not fit the theme and so I mention it only in passing or not at all. One passage from a few months ago completely stood apart from the other passages, and while it did not fit the theme I pulled from the rest of the passages, it is the passage that has stayed on my mind since then and I continue revisiting it as event after event reminds me how relevant the passage is today.

The first verses of Luke 10 marks the first time Jesus sends his followers out to do ministry work on their own. The seventy Jesus sent may actually be a symbolic rather than an actual number, but it clearly indicates the ministry extends beyond the twelve apostles. He gave them very specific directions as to their conduct and their mission. Those same directions are ones we Christians could well heed today as we continue the mission into the world.

The first direction Jesus gave the seventy as he prepared for them to go out in pairs was to take nothing but the clothes on their backs. They were wholly at the mercy of acceptance in the towns they approached. They only carried with them the Peace of the Lord (pre-cross message of Jesus). They went out with humility before those they encountered.

His second command was “to greet no one on the road,” meaning, go with urgency and do not get delayed by distractions. They had a purpose to their journey and Jesus did not want them getting sidetracked from that purpose.

The third direction was that if they were welcomed into a house, then they were to stay there, not hop from place to place and they were to accept whatever was offered to them in the way of food and lodging. They were expected to be as good as guests as the hosts were generous in hosting. Moving from home to home projected the image that they were seeking something better than the current host offered which could shift the message from the blessings they could bestow to an implication of desiring comfort.

The fourth guideline dealt with acceptance and rejection. If the town accepted them, then they stayed, shared the message, and performed miracles as they had been given power by Jesus to do. For these towns, the message that the kingdom of God has come near was a blessing of salvation. Likewise, if a town rejected them, they went out, wiped the dust off their feet, and delivered the same message, but instead it was a notice of loss.

The directions Christ gave apply to us today - maybe even more than to those seventy disciples he sent to the towns ahead of him. We need to have that same humility in the world that the seventy took. Being Christian does not grant us any power or status to hold over those we encounter in the world. Instead, our service in the world becomes the beacon that draws people to Christ. Christianity is a religion to which one is drawn, not driven.

Jesus recognized that we need to have a sense of purpose in the work we are doing. Today, even more than in the time Jesus was on earth, we are surrounded by distractions. Work, media, family, social events - the list is lengthy. When Christ sends us on a mission, though, our entire focus is that mission.

Accepting people where they are and as they are remains one of the greatest challenges of the Christian church. The Gospel is clear that no one can become perfect to get into the kingdom of God, but after accepting Christ we have the best chance we are going to have. Unfortunately, I have heard too many messages in the media and from pulpits that affirm the message of “if you are not like us, you are not welcome.” Change your ways and then you can approach will lead to very few approaching. As the seventy sent by Christ illustrate, we should do the approaching, not waiting for those to come.

The final instruction, though, may be the hardest to follow. When the disciples were rejected, they went on their way and did not look back. There were no angry confrontations. There were no pleas to change the minds. They simply did as Jesus instructed and went on their way, wiping the dust off their feet. It is only natural that we want everyone to experience the joy, peace, and hope we have as Christians. Unfortunately, being confrontational shows none of that.

The same caution applies to any religion in the public sphere. Whether through broadcast religious-based talk and news shows or worship services, the humility, purpose, and acceptance are essential parts of the message. Sadly, as religious organizations have played a more prominent role in the political system over the last thirty years those tones have continually diminished as the leadership has been more vocal. Anyone who disagrees is in for a confrontation and stands to be attacked, especially if they have a different understanding of the scripture: believe my way or else.

Amazingly, it is exactly the same kind of legalistic, theocratic posturing Jesus fought within the Jewish establishment of his time. Most of his interactions with the Jewish leadership could be summarized with, “you have it memorized to the letter, but you are completely missing the point.” Legislating Biblical principles is exactly the opposite of what Jesus would have done.

Christianity is a religion to which people are drawn, not driven.

Legislating one sect’s beliefs guarantees a backlash against the faith as a whole. That is already being seen in the churches shuttering their doors and the empty pews of the ones hanging on. Even Christian groups that do not support the actions of the vocal minority are being harmed by the vociferous “spokesmen” for the faith. People hear a reference to faith and these are the voices they remember.

Jesus closed the experience with the seventy after their return to him by reminding them not to take any pride in the power they had in his name, but to rejoice that they were saved. He sent them out with humility and brought them back to humility. It is time the whole church revisited Jesus directions to the seventy and consider its next steps.

The Church is Becoming Christian Again

In the last few weeks several news articles about religious responses to social justice issues have caught my eye in a way, that, for the first time in a long time, led me to believe that there may be some hope for the Church. Pope Francis’s speeches on poverty and social justice issues that were the matched by his actions during the recent visit to Brazil also caught my attention. Suddenly, the voices preaching the message of the entire Bible have begun to rise above those that limit their message to the passages that provide a theological basis to match their views.

The Belief Blog on the CNN website recently gave voice to one who explained why many were leaving the church from anecdotal and survey data. While the article focused on millennials, the author recognized that it applied to people across generations.

Changes within the Church do not happen rapidly, but the theological foundation of the worldwide church has historically swung between extremes. When the the pendulum goes too far, the ideas are rejected and it goes back the other way. The political involvement of some of the most extreme religious leaders backing legislation that violate contemporary ideas of justice may have been the tipping point.

As a lifelong protestant from a conservative denomination, I have rarely paid attention to the Pope. The things he does did not affect me beyond the way his words and actions, as the most prominent face of Christianity to the world, shape the world’s view of the faith. When Pope Francis was elected earlier this year, the stories of his humility fascinated me, but the skeptic in me doubted it would continue into the papacy.

So far, the Pope’s actions - rejecting the elaborate attire worn by most pontiffs, rejecting the lavish papal apartment have lived up to the stories of his piety. The tone of his messages reflect a shift from social conservativism to social justice. The content may be largely the same, but the tone indicates he views scripture from a different side of the verse than his predecessors. Whether protestant or Catholic, the tone makes a difference.

Protestants deny the authority of the Pope, but the reality is that his voice carries authority to almost twice as many people as all the protestant denominations combined. When that many people begin to shift their thinking in the faith, it influences the thinking of others. Not only does it shape the thinking of others, it also gives weight to other religious groups who share a similar message.

Pope Francis has only been Pope a few months and broader media coverage focusing on Christian groups that promote social justice has only emerged more prominently in recent weeks. The restrictive voices of faith have not gone away but there has been enough shift that my hope for the Church has begun to flicker. I see signs that the Church is becoming Christian again, accepting the big message of the Bible, rather than focusing on small messages found in various passages.

We are not there yet, but I am looking forward to the day when I can again say, “I am a Christian” without feeling the need to add an explanation of my beliefs.

Shaped by an Era

(Since the original articles came out and I began writing my response to them, I have read much more about things that Deen said/did in recent times that crossed the line of acceptable behavior. She cannot use the excuse that it was “ok when I did it.” It extended into current times and to actions that are far beyond the use of language we now consider unacceptable. While she is now a less than perfect example for illustrating the point, the point that we need to use caution when judging historical behavior based on today’s standards stands.)

The recent scandal involving Paula Deen and her use of racist language has been challenging for me. The reports that she had used the “N” word came as a major “duh!” for me. She is a generation ahead of me from the south - of course she used the “N” word in her lifetime. It was a regular part of southern culture through the eighties (at least). It did not stop with the Civil Rights Act in the sixties: racist language did not cease because the laws changed. Unfortunately, it was a normal part of southern culture.

That it was a normal part of southern culture does not make racism ok; it simply recognizes that it was a real, regular part of life in that region at that time – and it was acceptable to the bulk of people living in that region at that time. We look back upon it with disdain, but history records its prevalence in that region at that time.

I do not excuse anything Deen said or did, but as a proponent of social justice, I believe we must be cautious about casting judgment, not just when someone is accused of racism, but of violating any contemporary social standard. I am a product of my generation and can guarantee that something I have said or done will be considered offensive by future generations. While I believe, somewhat, in psychic phenomenon, I do not profess to possess the ability to predict how society will change by the end of my lifetime or how things considered acceptable in my earlier life will be the object of scorn by the end of it. I do not expect past generations to possess any greater power. As a result, I feel an obligation to give due consideration to the generations that preceded me. Just as I do not want to be judged by the standards of future generations for living according to acceptable standards in my time, I must be cautious about judging previous generations for living according to the standard of their time by the standards of today.

The dynamic nature of society comes from our ever increasing understanding based on new knowledge. I have a hard time condemning any past group of people for operating based on their knowledge at the time. I have a problem, though, if we do not learn from their mistakes based on the knowledge we have now. Failure to recognize how changes have taken place over time stem directly from a lack of historical perspective (just ask a social studies teacher!). We live so much in the now, it is easy to jump on the bandwagon of outrage anytime we become aware of something that does not match contemporary sensibilities. We rarely contextualize the situation and nuance is often lost without the experience of proximity to the event.

In the age of Twitter, CNN, TMZ, and other round-the-clock media, would even Jesus have appeared perfect? By contemporary standards his encounter with the Syrophoenician woman (Matthew 15:21-28 & Mark 7:24-30), for example, would have required a good PR specialist. Even though he did what she requested, the racist and misogynistic language he used in the passage would have been the headline despite it being used as an opportunity to educate. The whole story is never as memorable as the sound-bite. Even when the complete story, miracle and all, has been told, the sound-bite has stuck.

The current political climate has all sides responding in increasingly hostile ways to situations that historically would have merited little to no notice. The raw emotion created by the rapid change within society has put even people who should know better on edge and changed the norms under which most of our leadership learned to function. The rules and core beliefs of generations are being rejected. We know those rules and core beliefs were based on incorrect information, but that does not make the change any easier for the people involved. If anything, it makes it even harder for them to accept because the “facts” that shaped their world were not really facts. What then can they believe? When their entire mindset has to be altered, it is simply easier to reject the change outright.

We are all products of our generation. As much as we would like to believe we have worked it out and operate under enlightened rules, history tends to judge differently. As easy as it is to judge others for their shortcomings, let it be said about us that we extended some of the grace we hope to be shown when the foolishness of our ways is exposed.

Truck Guy in a Car World

Recently I took a new job that requires a fifty mile commute each direction. I have considered making the move, but financial considerations make it better for me to remain in my house and make a move in a few years; my current property is gaining value too rapidly to sell right now.

I have almost always had a truck of some kind. Most recently a full-sized Honda Ridgeline. I am a truck guy.

That truck lasted two days on the commute. Eighteen miles per gallon just would not cut it. I am a truck guy who hates filling up every two days.

So, I switched to a car. I have averaged 38.3 MPG in the trips since then. For the road trips I like to take, that put a huge smile on my face - especially since I was assured by the salesman that the real MPG was about 34. I pointed out to him that I know how to drive a standard and that I usually get above the rated mileage on vehicles. So far I am right! That is exciting too. I am a truck guy in a car world!

In all honesty, I used the truck as a truck one or two times a year.

Unless you count road-rage.

Having a full-sized truck while dealing with people in sub-compacts doing truly stupid things it traffic did give some intimidation factor.

Today, an idiot in a truck sped past a long line of us going the speed limit, slammed on her brakes, and swerved across two lanes of traffic going 70 mph. I sooooo wanted to be in a truck with a grill-guard and push her into the ditch. Now I am the one in the compact car: there will be no pushing trucks into the ditch.

The reality is that I do not need a truck, and living my ethic of social justice and conservation demands that I drive a suitable vehicle. The car is the right vehicle for me at this time and I am excited about being ok with it. The country boy in me will always want a truck (as will the Napoleon complex), but the intellectual liberal will like myself better for driving the vehicle that actually meets my needs. I am a truck guy in a car world and I am ok with that.

And Justice for All

         Each year at Veteran’s Day, we reflect on the sacrifices made by those who served in our armed forces to preserve the freedoms we value so highly as a nation. We remember those who died and honor those who returned. We celebrate that we live in a country whose ideals have survived wars, social change, political upheaval, expansionism and isolationism. No matter the prevailing winds, the commitment to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” and “liberty and justice for all” reign in each philosophy though we have many different ideas about how to get there and what those phrases exactly mean. Nevertheless, we celebrate them unquestioningly.

         In the last decade, and most vociferously in the latest election, debate raged over what these things mean in the scope of the government and the church. Labels like “socialist” and “bigot” flew from both sides toward anyone who believed differently than the insulter. Rather than examine the beliefs of the other, name calling became the easier tack. Anyone who understands what either of the terms means, knows that they were grossly misused, thus meaningless except for the sting of insult and serve to hurt the Christian image on both sides.

         It is no wonder the fastest growing religious group, is the group of people affiliated with no church whatsoever. The president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Albert Mohler, Jr., noted that their message had gotten out to the public, but that it was rejected. The polls finding that more people were turning away from the church are doing so because of the judgmental attitudes of those who proclaim Christian morals.

         This is exactly where the Church gets it wrong. From the books of the law through the prophets, Gospels, and epistles, acting with justice toward all overwhelms every other direction given to God’s people in the Bible. The Bible is equally explicit that God will be the judge, not us. As long as we spend our time fighting over who is or is not a Christian, both sides are being equally unchristian. We only regain Christian when we turn our faith into action by doing what Jesus commands.

Let’s be absolutely clear. Christian social justice, be it church or state originated, is far removed from Socialism. Social justice, from the Christian perspective, means removing barriers to equality for all people and caring for those, who, in times of need, are incapable of caring for themselves. Removing barriers involves guaranteeing that the justice and financial systems do not lock people into a lifetime of need, but that even the poorest can work their way out. Caring for others includes making certain people have the food, shelter, and medical care needed to overcome whatever situation makes them incapable of caring for themselves. Social justice means elimination of barriers keeping people from equal access. No one should be trapped in a lifetime of poverty or need due to confinement of social systems.

Likewise, social justice does not mean a lifetime of support from church and state systems. When the barriers are eliminated and the basic needs met, one is expected to leave the situation behind, move forward, and then help others who are needy as they become able. Some, through illness (including mental illness) or injury may need a lifetime of support, but it is not the norm.

         The central Gospel in New Testament social justice comes in Matthew 25, though it is hardly the start or end of the social justice message. The other Gospels include teachings from Jesus regarding wealth and the poor. Acts and the Epistles offer examples of how the church cared for the needy, the orphans, and the widows. Jesus brought all the law and prophets down to two commandments in Matthew 22:37-40. Love God wholly and love your neighbor as yourself: the laws about treatment of the disenfranchised continue into the New Covenant.

         While there is no doubt and little disagreement about what the Bible tells the church and Christians to do regarding the needy, much debate rages about the state role in social justice. Here too, the Bible makes it clear, that nationally, we are responsible to those in need. The law for Israel demanded that the nation care for the poor, the widow, the orphan, the traveler: it was a national responsibility. Verses across the prophets describe the judgment of God on the nation coming because the nation refused to take care of all its residents. Nationally, we are responsible to make certain our social systems (legal, financial, medical) do not protract the length of time anyone spends in need.

         Unfortunately, the churches are spending too much time fighting over theology to meet those temporary needs for most, so nationally we are responsible to minimize the need within our boundaries if we are to call ourselves a Christian nation.  If every church lived their theology as much as they publicized it, there would be little need for the government to do social work beyond education. We, who call ourselves Christian, must do, not just believe. The doing is much harder than the believing, but it is what makes us Christian. If we believe it then we must do it. If we do not do it and shift the responsibility to the state, then we have no right to call anyone who advocates for state programs socialist or liberal.

         We, Christians, abdicated the responsibility and likewise relinquished any authority for name calling. The last election showed that the majority of the country do not buy fundamentalist social arguments, divisive rhetoric, or scare tactics over religious liberty and it is killing the (big C) Church. The only way left for the Church to regain credibility is for the Church to start being church and doing those things necessary to act on the mission of Christ.

         I am the first to admit that there are missions I have never been able to do. I have tried, but cannot bring myself to work with the homeless. As a trained counselor, I see too much mental illness among the homeless in the times I experiences I have had with homeless populations. I feel the need to “counsel” and help, but the opportunity to do meaningful counseling does not exist within any current structure. As an educator, though, I have ample opportunity to make a difference with that population and that is part of my ministry.

         My counselor training says not to use words like “must” and “should,” but as a Christian, the Bible directs us to the “musts” and “shoulds” any follower of Christ is to do. For me, God surpasses counseling philosophers. No matter where one looks in the Bible, social justice is the directing philosophy. The church will always lose the argument on social justice when its words, rather than its actions, dominate the headlines. We, people of the church, have been even farther behind at some points in history. We, people of the church, have overcome at some points in history to guide state policy.

         It was done with action, not words. Listen to the prophets. Live the Gospel. Love God wholly. Love your neighbor as yourself. That is social justice. That will change the world.

        

God Said What?

A student made my day today. He said he should have dropped out last year before he met me. He came to that conclusion after sparring with me two different times over his stated decision to drop out of high school. He was certain it did not matter to anyone else and that he was the only person affected by his decision. He continually insisted that it was his decision, but he would not stop arguing with me about the idea of dropping out. He could not accept my disapproval anymore than i could accept his decision. He wanted someone to talk him out it, someone to not give up. He made the mistake of saying that maybe God put me there to tell him to drop out of school. It did not take long before he realized that making that comment was even worse than saying he decided to drop out. I think he does have a better understanding of social justice now. I pointed out that since he had brought up God, all was fair game and he was in for a sermon. And I began to preach. I connected everything I had already said to him about staying in school to social justice. Lifetime health. Family stability. Living wages. Doing what is right. Every one of them come with social justice implications. And every one of them linked to education. He never saw the sermon coming. God was his trump card. He was not expecting a pair of Gods to match and raise. Our first conversation ended with him walking out of my office. The second conversation ended with us laughing together and agreeing to meet again in the next week. He still insists he is going to drop out. I still insist he is going to graduate - from somewhere. I look forward to more sparring with him when he returns to my office. One thing I am certain of is that he will not be using "God" and "dropout" in the same sentence.

Deer People

During the day today we received an email with information for directing the homeless to the emergency sheltering system that was going to be in place tonight since the forecast called for temperatures below freezing. Since we do not often get temperatures so low, they can be especially deadly for people unaccustomed to them since they likely have few clothes suitable for the cold. In the education system, homelessness has a broader definition than just people sleeping on the streets. While I work with a number of people experiencing homelessness, none of them live on the streets.

Driving home tonight, while stopped at the longest stoplight through which I pass, I glanced over and saw a group of people gathered at the edge of the scrub-brush that had overtaken an unused lot on one corner. They looked like a herd of wild deer, waiting for the sun to go down just a bit more before they ventured out into the clearing to forage. The reality was that they were huddled together, taking what shelter the brush provided. Farther back from the street is the camp where they live in cardboard and tarpaulin structures that provide protection from the sun, wind, and rain, but do little to protect from heat and cold.

The residences there are not new. The well-worn paths out to the street provide ample evidence of regular traffic. The presence of the people in the triangle clearing at the corner of the lot behind the bus stop remind all who pass that way that, while undeveloped, the lot is used. Throughout the day, the residents take turns on the concrete barrier separating the turn lanes from the oncoming traffic panhandling for change. They are hard to miss.

I could not separate the people clustered back at the edge of the grove from the daily Bible passages for this season’s Advent. Here are the poor, the needy, the oppressed, quite possibly the ill. One side of the social war says give me more and I will do more. The other side says take away more from the other side and we will do more. Nothing is being done. Where is the church? Where are the social services providers? Where is anyone who actually does more than use these people as a rallying cry?

Growing up in the country, I used to see just how close I could creep to the wild white-tail deer in our pasture. While they can be quite dangerous, I was not afraid because I knew at the first whiff of me, they would flash those famous white tails and high tail it to the other side of the meadow and beyond. The “deer people” at the corner are not those wild animals in the pasture of my childhood.  We cannot wave our hands or walk by with our cologned selves and have them flee deeper into the urban forest, out of sight.

As I caught up on the news of the day, with politicians on both sides blasting the other side of the culture war, I could not help but inject my mental picture of those people from the corner lot into the story and ask who is looking at them when they speak? No one is. Neither side is ready to get their hands dirty and actually get into the trenches with the neediest among us or consider the hypocrisy that we as a society proclaim to value all persons while we daily drive by deteriorating lives and wish they were on some other corner.

The government cannot do it all. The Church cannot do it all. So both sides quickly give up and shift their focus to something with quick results that bring a nice warm feeling to replace the emptiness of that which continues to go undone. Together, though, more can be done than either side could ever do by itself. Governmental entities at the local, state, and Federal levels all have a role in changing the circumstances of the neediest residents under their jurisdiction. I use Church but really mean bodies of faith (churches, synagogues, mosques, etc.) - all have commandments from God to serve the widows, orphans, and needy in their area.

There is room for the 100% to become involved. This is not a 99% problem or a 1% problem. It is not a problem for people of faith or the atheist. It is a people problem. The “deer people” are doing their part: they survive from day to day with remarkable resourcefulness. It is time for the rest of us to emerge from our own forest and do our part.