How long, O Lord, this madness?!

/in /by

The recent event in Newton, Connecticut is simply horrific. These victims were innocent children! First, we are all stunned and sickened. To imagine it brings so much grief we feel it in our guts. It is hard to focus, and as much as it hurts to think about it, it is hard to think of anything else. No doubt this is a day to pray. Indeed, our hearts go out to those who have lost someone they loved. In Bishop Hagiya’s pastoral letter he says that we must think of these children as our own, because in the kin-dom of God they are our own. And if they are our children, if they are in God connected to us, shouldn’t we think differently about this?

If we are connected as children of God, if all things are connected shouldn’t we be looking for connections? But what I often see is dismissive. It is too easy to say that there are evil people out there, so what can we do? Does that mean that we are not connected to these “evil people?” To say this is no different than to say, “The Devil made him do it.” And that breeds paranoia when we need to think of transformation. Former Governor Mike Huckabee pointed at the lack of God in our schools. This just deflects us from the deeper cultural neurosis that lurks underneath these events. Worst of all is the comment, “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” The purpose of this nifty phrase is simply to kill any discussion. But isn’t discussion precisely what we need?

I believe we need to talk about it. Specifically, at least, we need to talk about mental illness and guns. Not as sad anomalies to our culture, but as a part of our culture and expressions of our values. Who likes to do this? But if we don’t, I don’t think we are living as if those children in Newton, Connecticut are our children too.

Mental illness is not an infectious disease that is caught and can be cured. Genetically people are born with relative potential to develop the disease, the other factor being one’s life circumstance. The life circumstance is our culture, I believe, is a petri dish for mental illness. Our values, including individualism, competition, privacy, personal responsibility, freedom (as an absolute value) and Darwinian economic policy leads people into disconnection and isolation. This is not to condemn these values outright; they are good values, but there is an underside to them. Isolation is a major factor in mental illness. It seems to me that this is something we ought to talk about. And a part of the discussion should also be how we are caring for people who are mentally ill. As we face a “fiscal cliff” I fear that programs that assist the mentally ill will be cut – this also is a kind of madness.

We also have to talk about guns. The Congress won’t, nor the President because it is too risky politically. This is more madness. Guns are not the sole reason for this violence (to think that there is a sole reason is wrongful thinking). but it is again dismissive to ignore that guns are a part of the problem. To shut down discussion is irresponsible to the victims of these tragedies.

To honor our connection to these children first we must pray. Second, we need to talk. Then we must understand our mission as bringing connection to the isolated. Evangelism is not simply converting people, it is first inviting people who feel lost and isolated into our community, which we strive to build around the love of God in Christ Jesus. It is to share with the world that all are God’s children, and we are connected to all of them. Pastor Jim

United Methodist Platform

/in /by

I hope we are getting to the place where we accept that religion and politics do mix. Jesus was political and if discipleship involes the whole of us it must include our political passions, opinions and interests. Of course we are quick to ammend that to say that we are not allowed to endorse a political party or candidate; we are not only allowed but encouraged to engage issues. In other words, while we can’t say whether we prefer the politcal platform of either party, we can have our own.

I would like to suggest that the Social Principles and the Book of Resolutions of the United Methodist Church be considered our political platform. The Social Principles beg social and political engagement. In the same way that we don’t have to agree with every stand taken by a party’s platform, the Principles are guidelines.

Here is the United Methodist Platform on issues receiving attention in this election season. Unless otherwise noted, everything below is taken from the Social Principles or the Book of Resolutions:

THE ENVIRONMENT: All Creation is the Lord’s, and we are responsible for the ways in which we use and abuse it. Water, air, soil, mineral, energy resources, plants, animal life and space are to be valued and conserved because they are God’s creation and not solely because they are useful to human beings. God has granted us stewardship of creation.

HEALTHCARE: Healthcare is a condition of physical, mental, social and spiritual well-being, and we view it as a responsibility, public and private. Healthcare is a basic human right. It is unjust to construct or perpetuate barriers to physical or mental wholeness or full participation in the community. We also recognize the role of governments in ensuring that each indivitual has access to those elements necessary to good health. We affirm the right of men and women to have access to comprehensive reproductive health/family planning information and services which will serve as a means to prevent unplanned pregnancies, reduce abortions and prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS.

ABORTION: Our belief in the sanctity of unborn human life makes us reluctant to approve abortion. But we are equally bound to respect the sacredness of the life and well-being of the mother, for whom devastating damage may result from an unacceptable pregnancy. In continuity with past Christan teaching, we recognize tragic conflicts of life with life that may justify abortion, and in such cases we support the legal option of abortion under proper medical procedures.

SEXUALITY/MARRIAGE: We recognize sexuality is God’s good gift to all persons. We believe persons may be fully human only when that gift is acknowledged and affirmed by themselves, the church, and society. Although all persons are sexual beings whether or not they are married, sexual relations are only clearly affirmed in the marriage bond. Homosexual persons no less that heterosexual persons are individuals of sacred worth. The United Methodist Chruch does not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice incombatible with Christian teaching. We affirm that God’s grace is available to all, and we will seek to live together in Christian community. We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons.

Note: The Church’s stance on homosexuality is controversial. Our Annual Conference in the Pacifict Northwest has come out in support of Initiative 74 in support of same sex marriage. The Western Juisdiction of the UMC has declared itself to in open disobedience of the Church’s official stance.

ECONOMY: We claim all economic systems to be under the judgment of God. We believe private and public economic enterprises are responsible for the social costs of doing business, such as employment and environmental pollution, and that they should be held accountable for these costs. We support measures that would reduce the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few. We further support efforts to revise tax structures and to eliminate governmental support of programs that now benefit the wealthy at the expense of other persons.

Note: Since the economy is such an important part of the current campaign, below are some more specific statements about the economy.

Property: We believe private ownership of property is a trusteeship under God. Socially and culturally conditioned ownership of property is, therefore, to be considered a responsibility to God

Poverty: In spite of general affluence in the industrialized nations, the majority of persons in the world live in poverty. In order to provide basic needs such as food, clothing, shelter, education, healthcare, and other necessities, ways must be found to share more equitably the resources of the world. We do not hold poor people morally responsible for their economic state.

Corporate Responsibility: Corporations are responsible not only to their stockholders, but also to the stakeholders: their workers, suppliers, vendors, customers, the communities in which they do business, and for the earth which supports them.

Military Spending: Human values must outweigh military claims as governments determine thier priorities. The militarization of society must be challenged and stopped. The manurfacture, sale and deployemnt of armaments must be reduced and controlled.

Trade and Investment: We affirm the importance of international trade and investment in an interdependent world. Trade and investment should be based on rules that support the dignity of the human person, a clean environment and our common humanity. Trade agreements must include mechanisms to enforce labor rights and human rights as will as environmental standards.

Collective Bargaining: We support the right of public and private employees and employers to organize for collective bargaining into unions and other groups of their own choosing. Further, we support the right of both parties to protection in so doing and their responsibility to bargain in good faith within the framework of public interests.

EDUCATION: We believe that every person has the right to education. We also believe that the responsibility for education of the young rests with the family, faith communities, and the government. In society, this function can best be fufilled through public policies that ensure access for all persons to free public elementary and secondary schools and to post-secondary school of their choice.

NATIONAL POWER AND WAR: Some nations possess more military and economic power than do others. Upon the powerful rests responsibility of exercise their wealth and influence with restraint. We affirm the right and duty of people of all nations to determine their own destiny. We believe war is incompatible with the teachings and example of Christ. We therefore reject war as an instrument of national foreign policy, to be employed only as a last resort in the prevention of such evils as genocide, brutal suppression of human rights, and unprovoked international aggression.

GUN CONTROL: As Christians who are deeply concerned about human life, we intend to do something about the unregulated access to guns in this country. We do not believe there is any constitutional personal right to bear arms. As the United States Supreme Court has ruled a number of times, the Second Amendment has to do with the militia, currently comparable to the National Guard. The United Methodist Church declares its support for the licensing of all gun owners, and the registration of all firearms. In addition, special controls should be applied to the handgun…with limited reasonable exemptions.

IMMIGRATION: We call the leaders of the USA to continue to strive to make the United States a model of social justice in its domestic immigration policies… to interpret broadly immigration laws of the United States by providing sanctuary for those fleeing because of well-founded fear of persecution due to their political affiliation, religious orientation and/or racial origin, and by adopting reasonable standards of proof of eligibility as refugees for those seeking asylum; to monitor all attempted reforms on immigration policy to ensure fair and adequate process in regards to judicial review, quota systems, and family reunification; to reject the use of an identification card to control immigrants

A Modest Proposal for Guns

/in /by

It’s happened again. This time in a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, not far from Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado. Our hearts are broken at the thought of innocent people gunned down; children! And as with any tragedy like this we ask why?

First of all, there is no single reason for a tragedy like this. The most blame must be placed on the person who perpetrated it, but that begs the question, what wan going on with that person? Mental illness is often involved, but that has its causes too, both inherited and contextual; we have to consider the contextual causes of mental illness, which certainly include an emphasis on peronal success while many of the structures that used to support people have deteriorated and people feel scared and lonely. I think this tragedy warrants a discussion about how we deal with mental illness it this country, or don’t deal with it. I think it is also fair in the wake of this tragedy to talk about guns again.

Guns are not what caused the tragedy, but they are a factor. “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” is an empy euphemism and a dodge. “Bombs don’t kill people, suicide bombers kill people,” while true doesn’t stop us from restricting the manufacture of bombs for personal use. This isn’t about blame, but about bringing discussion back to the issue of guns in America. Politicians don’t seem to have the courage to do it.

Neither do I feel inclined to listen to the arguments of the ‘slippery slope’ – the claim that any law restricting guns will gradually lead to guns becoming illegal. Neither is there a conspiracy going on – there is no “agenda” nor a well thought out subterranean plot out there bent on denying Americans guns. These comments are dismissive responses that stop discussion; they are simply not true.

We’ve got to bring the discussion back down to earth. During the primary campaign Newt Gingrich spoke as if the 2nd Amendment was wirtten by God; it is a part of our Christian heritage and those who want to take it away are acting against God’s grand plan for America. There is a missionary zeal to the pronouncements from the Gun Lobby. Gingrich also said that we should take gun rights to the rest of the world, to the United Nations, as we spread democracy we also spread gun rights to all, praise the Lord! (The truth is that the rest of the world thinks we are idiots regarding our love of guns.) One wonders if such rights would also be extended to those living on the moon in the near future? The talk is so irrational and vitriolic that there is no dicussion; we have abandoned critical thinking again.

So I have a reasonable and modest proposal to add to the discussion of guns in America. But first, guns will never be outlawed in America. Personally, I would be in favor of laws such as are in place in Canada, Britain and Japan, but I am practical and willing to dialogue and compromise. Second, I think we have to engage the issue from the standpoint of our faith. It is good to discuss the meaning of the 2nd Amendment, but also important to talk about guns in the Kin-dom of God. It is our responsibility as followers of Jesus Christ to protect the innocent. Anyone who calls him/herself a Christian has to be overwhelmed with sadness thinking of the lives lost in Aurora, Colorado, but then as Christians, what do we do about it? Third, freedom is not the absence of regulation.

My proposal is that all guns be registered, gun owners licensed, and that guns be taxed. Now before anyone gets all “up in arms” this is not unprecedented. Most things that are deemed dangerous have controls and regulations placed upon them and they are taxed. Cigarettes and alcohol are heavily taxed. Sudafed is strictly regulated to discourage the production of methamphetamines’, but the best precedent to follow is automobiles. Cars are dangerous, and because they are dangerous we place restrictions on them for the safety of all. One has to obtain a license, taking a test, and that license must be renewed every few years. Cars are registered with the government, they all have VIN numbers. In order to drive a car we have to have insurance too. I believe this is a good precedence for dealing with guns in America. It would create jobs, bring in tax revenue and most important, it would increase accountability and safety. One last thing: Assault rifles must be banned. They are simply insane!

I am more than willing to discuss this with anyone, provided, as I said, that we do not talk about the ‘slippery ‘ or a conspiracy, and that we include in our discussion how we are it live as Christians. The Social Principles say nothing about guns, which is a troubling oversight. If we were to add something to our Social Principles about guns, what would we write? That’s where our discussion needs to be -and I challenge us all to think about it critically. Pastor Jim

The Power of Critical Thinking

/in /by

I recall once my father commenting on the disconnect between taking antibiotics and not believing in evolution. Without the “theory” of evolution we wouldn’t have antibiotics. Without quantum physics our phones would still be “dumb” too! But the one that really gets me is, why do Christians who rant about the evils of evolution at the same time support the most darwinian economic policies?

What happened to the power of critical thinking? It was the task of systematic theologians to create a belief structure in which ideas were consistent. If one believes that God is all powerful to every occasion then God must know everything too; if God knows everything God must know what will happen; if God knows what will happen God must know whether we are saved or not, and thus was born the “theory” of predestination. John Calvin was a systematic theologian so his theology matched up with his soteriology (big word for theory of salvation). Today people think willy nilly whatever they want and are as consistant as Mitt Romney is on healthcare.

It bothers me that people who defend their views on homosexuality use Leviticus 18 to support their views. Can you hear the cry, “God calls it an “abomination!” Well, read a little more of Leviticus and apparently God also thinks it is an abomination to eat shell fish – do we set up guard outside of Ivar’s? And there are some really interesting things in Leviticus about what women must do at that “time of the month.” I’d like to see how that goes across. In Romans too, the other big text that supposedly condemns homosexuality for all eternity, what about all the other sins in the rest of the chapter? (I could say much more about this but will save it for another time.) What about Jesus command for the rich man to go and sell all he owns? We can ignore that one but the Bible is clear about homosexuality? And why are the people who claim to be the most biblical seem to be the most cruel – missing the point of the Word of God which is that love is the bottom line? Why do Christians who claim the bible is inerrant and that evolution is a falsehood live not by love but by survival of the fittest? Just sayin’

Twitter Mind

/in /by

I have always been interested in how technology affects us – our thinking, our feelings, our habits, our selves. I have never lived without television, and I wonder if my thinking would have been differnt if I had been born earlier; before I had the option to slum it in front of the TV. The automobile has changed us considerably. We grow differently when we travel by train than by car. In the train we are surrounded by others, we feel thier presence and often overhear their conversations, learning a little about their lives; and we do not have control over where we go and when we will arrive. The automobile subliminally encourages independence and isolation. Every new technology affects us in some way, sometimes as it was intended, other times in ways we did not expect. The microwave was supposed to provide us with more time but actually as we came to depend upon it and scheduoled around it, we became more hurried. So, what about the Internet?

Some time ago I read an article in The Atlantic magazine by Nicholas Carr entitled, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” I was inspired to read more about how the Internet might be affecting our thinking. First, we must acknowledge the benefits of the Internet: It has provided easy access to information that used to take days of effort to track down. It has also opened up information more democratically; anyone can access what is on the Net and not just specialists in a field. We can get informatin much faster with the Internet, so it saves us a great deal of time. Finally, the Internet has provided for greater collaboration – that is, people from all over the globe can share and discuss topics from the comfort of thier homes. The gereral sharing of information and ideas is faster and more general, and all of this is good.

But not all is well with the Internet – and it is with the ‘not so good’ thiungs that we have to pay particular attention. Because information can be saved we don’t have to remember anymore. This is really an extension of the printing press – an acceleration. I don’t think I remember well but I sense that I remember better than my children. If they want to know something they go to the Net; I am still old enough to first scan my brain to see what is there. Essentially, our memory is being externalized and as a result we introspect less. The Internet is faster, so why waste time thinking about things.

In addition to the decrease in introspection, and related to it, the Internet promotes shallowness. It is a invitation to distraction. There are so many options for our attention and interruptions are constant. We get an email, or we obsessively check our email; the temptation to check out You Tube for a small break. Our thoughts are swifter but the brevity of messages increases; can we think beyond 140 characters? We feel more edgy, less able to concerntrate. Our minds and our lives become more fragmented, relationsheips less durable. There is so much information to distract us, most of it worthless, so we have to filter through a lot of junk to get to what we need to know – we are so busy filtering we have little time to concentrate and to think more deeply.

This filtering process is a sort of vetting that used to be done by someone else – a publisher or an expert, for instance. Somone who spends time determining that something is bogus, but now we have to do it. How do we know what is true and what is junk? Well, we depend on our ability to think which is dependent on being educated is already compromiesd by spending so much time on the Internet! And unfortunately, education understood as a thinking process is in decline. Anyone can put up anything on the Net, and anyone can believe it. Doonsbury recently cartooned people calling in to”Myfacts.com” where they could purchase the facts they needed to bolster their opinion, no matter how false and wacko it is. The Internet encourages this, and it runs on repetition. The first thing to come up on a Google search is not there because it is the most true but because it has received the most hits. In our world today, if one says something often enough it becomes true; the Internet has fashioned our minds to accept this.

The result of this is an increase in extremism. No one is filtering the facts from the filth, and one can say whatever one wants and repeat it, drilling it into already scattered minds. On top of that, since we all choose the sites we go to, we go to sites that present an idea we are already in agreement with. A newspaper has to reach a wider audience to get circulation, and therefore must be more balanced; on the Internet we can choose to listen only to those who support our views. Tea Partiers spend all day reading extremist conservative rhetoric and then take a break to watch FOX News! It is not only money that is corrupting our politics it is also the Twitter Mind. Nineteen debates in the Republican primaries and most of it has been sound bites.

I am particularly worried about “sound bite theology.” Meaning coming from bits rather than the body politic – from advertising slogans rather than the wealth of tradition. Facebook doesn’t care about the past – a long conversation cannot be sustained. We all post in the present tense and then forget about it. The Bible becomes a collection of sound bites rather than the multivalent, complex and profound story of the relationship of God and God’s people. My greater fear is that since people now find meaning in the bit they will go to “bit churches” with quick witted but shallow theology. Are these the churches that are growing? And if so, do we want to emulate them?

If you have read this far, congratulations. Studies say that this is too long for a blog post – if you skimmed to get here, shame on you! We are advised as preachers not to speak over 15 minutes becasue we will lose people. What is the gospel in 140 characters or less? I am aware of the irony of posting this via the Internet. Alas, the Internet is here to stay, for God’s sake and our own let us be aware of how it affects us, taking responsibility for whom we are, whose we are, and who we want to become. Pastor Jim

Gambling America

/in /by

Since John Wesley Methodists have advocated against gambling. I think we United Methodist clergy are even prohibited from gambling. There are obvious reasons for this position: Gambling can become an addiction; gambling can lead to conflict and suffering in families; gambling distracts from more important matters in life and faith. The UMC has been against lotteries as well because they are regressive and prey upon the poor. It has been difficult for the Church to weigh support for Native Americans who depend on casinos to support themselves against our historical opposition to gambling. In any case, it is clear that we condem gambling – so why do we invest in Wall Street? Aren’t investments in the stock market a form of gambling but for higher stakes? The poor play the lottery, the rich play the market – in either case aren’t they playing a similar game?

A large percentage of our best and brightest take jobs in the financial sector. We live in a meritocracy where those who work the hardest are successful, but when the goal is to make and produce money isn’t something skewed? This isn’t the work ethic my parents grew up with. As Americans we are supposed to believe in hard work and self sufficiency, but when the nucleus of our economic system plies the winds of speculation and guesswork are we not being duped? Many young people today are cynical, and they have a right to be. What I wish is that they would turn some of that cynicism into political advocacy. One of the hardest things to do in life is match our avowed values with our actual values. We avow the work ethic but reward the gambler.

Should I , as a United Methodist clergyperson divest myself of stocks? Should the Church pull out of Wall Street? (Maybe we should occupy Wall Street?) Divestiture is impractical, but at least we can change the way we view our world – particularly politics. As much as we pat ourselves on the back as a nation of freedom, democracy and hard work the reality is different, and the rest of the world knows this better than we do. We are a nation of winners and losers, and the ponzi scheme is our Tower of Babel. I believe it is our job as United Methodist Christians to expose the truth; it is our calling to bring people out of a world of betting into a world of sacrifice and love. We need to challenge the myth that strangles us – be honest about what our economy is about, and invite people to seeking the Kin-dom of God. Let us reaffirm our stance against gambling, treating capital gains as gambing winnings and tax them accordingly. Pastor Jim

What’s so self evident?

/in /by

“We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men ae created equal…” These words in the Declaration of Independence are familiar to us, but what do they mean? Is this grounded in a belief that God looks upon all of us equally? Or does it mean to imply that we are all equal when we are born and so we all have an equal chance in life?

The latter is the more common understanding of the meaning of being created equal and it is expressed in the words, “equal opportunity.” Behind the Declaration of Independence, as well as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is the belief presented most notably by philosopher John Locke that we are all born as “clean slates.” When each of us in born there are no characteristics that influence or limit who we are able to become; we all have an equal start to write on that slate whatever we want, therefore we have equal opportunity. I am not certain that this is the best way to interpret the words of the Declaration of Independence; it certainly isn’t a Christian one.

The developing understanding of a person/self that we have from science and philosophy today does not concur with Locke’s vision of a clean slate at birth. Darwinism alone throws that out the window. It is not only genetically that we are born differently and not equally, but socially as well – being born in a ghetto is not equal to being born in the suburbs. This does not mean that we are determined; we have the freedom to create ourselves but we all have predispositions that we are born with that will influence who we become. My first son was born with a predisposition for asthma and allergies. As an infant we had to seclude him in order to avoid colds which often resulted in a trip to the ER. I can tell you I did not think that was fair! Nor equal, especially when in the company of parents holding a calm and peaceful child. Put simply, from a rational scientific point of view we are not created equal and therefore do not have equal opportunity.

More than that, this perspective is also at odds with what we hold to be self evident as Christians. “God is love” precludes anything we have to say. God loveing all equally is the basis for how we view this, and it means not only that God loves us equally when we are born but also wants us to be equal throughout our lives – to seek equality with intention.

A Christian understanding of freedom is irreconcilable with the common understanding of freedom which is, I believe, the power to do as I please. We mistake freedom as an end rather than a means. Martin Buber called freedom empty, a stepping stone rather than a dwelling place. Can you imgine a politician in American saying that freedom is empty?! Freedom is necessary for there to be transformation; by saying that freedom is empty does not devalue it. But by saying that freedom is necessary for transformation is to acknowledge that transformation is a more substantive value. Freedom is necessary as a means but dangerous as an end; as an end freedom leads to either totalitarianism or anarchy. For the Apostle Paul freedom was definetely a means and not an end. Specifically, freedom was a means for one to become a “slave of Christ.” Excuse me?! Freedom is a means for a greater good which is to choose to be a disciple of Jesus Christ so that the Kin-dom of God may come.

I would love to feel the freedom to pursue happiness – create my own life, write my slate, but I got married and that put an end to that. Then I was careless enough to have children. But even with these formitable constraints that are shared by many I also have this Jesus thing to deal with; and what is self evident to me is not that we are created equal but that God loves us equally.

Not only did I get married and have children, I became a pastor, and to make matters even worse I became a United Methodist pastor who is required to hand over my personal freedom to a bishop who has the power to tell me where to go…. I am a slave to the Church! Let it be so with me and likewise for many. Pastor Jim