PEACE OR REVOLUTION?

In the USA, we have just come off a grueling presidential campaign. We have a president-elect who won the technical vote, but not the popular vote. The nation is deeply divided on the policies which might be instituted by the president-elect. Some ask, “How should the Church respond?” We first must acknowledge the Church is not monolithic in its assessment of the president-elect nor the policies which might be enacted.

There is a multitude of responses being voiced by both the committed and nominal members of the church. It is not as easy as saying this is what the evangelicals support and this is what the liberals resist. It is important to understand that those who self-identify as evangelicals and liberals both approach their support or resistance based on their theological approach to scripture. However, there are as many variations in each “camp” as there are people. Inconsistencies abound.

We know the early Christians lived in a hostile political environment. When the republic devolved into government by an emperor, considered to be a god, the conflict for Jews and Christians became more stressed. Jews and Christians held there is only one god, the god of Abraham, Issac and Jacob; the god revealed in Jesus the Christ. The policies and actions of the Empire often stood in sharp contrast with the theology and ethics of the Christian community. What advice do we find in the Gospel oriented Epistles in Scripture?

Three passages stand out: Romans 13:1-2 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which is from God. The authorities that exist have been appointed by God. Consequently, the one who resists authority is opposing what God has set in place, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.…  I Timothy 2:2 First of all, then, I urge that petitions, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgiving be offered on behalf of all men for kings and all those in authority, so that we may lead tranquil and quiet lives in all godliness and dignity.  I Peter 2:17 Treat everyone with high regard: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king.

Were the writers really urging tacit support of the Empire, or did they insert such verses to be able to say to the Empire, “See you have nothing to fear from us. We pray for you and our followers are to submit to those in authority.” In I Timothy, the motivation for praying for governmental leaders and those in authority is clearly stated, so that we may lead tranquil and quiet lives in all godliness and dignity. Russell Rathbun states, “It seems like Paul is trying to convince the powers that he is on their side. He says he was appointed a herald (a court-appointed crier) and an apostle. … He wants the Empire to know that he and his Christians have no argument with them.”  (http://thq.wearesparkhouse.org/yearc/ordinary25epistle/)

Eric Barreto writes, “But also here, we encounter a significant preaching challenge, especially in recent days characterized by protest and demands for change in pursuit of justice. Is the “quiet and peaceable life” always the ideal avenue for Christian faith? Haven’t we heard so often the call from preachers for protesters to be patient, for the oppressed to wait for justice? Too easily, we might preach a call to a quiescence that denies injustice, a peace that belies an underlying violence. Lest we become enablers of continued oppression, we ought to bring a critical eye to this text.” (http://www.workingpreacher.org/preaching.aspx?commentary_id=3035)

What then is the call to believers? Are we to pray for and submit to the governmental authorities so we may lead tranquil and quiet lives? Or, do we resist those policies which deny justice and the underlying violence that peace covers up?

I believe the answer is found in the Gospel of Matthew 25:31-46. The New King James Version titles this section The Son of Man Will Judge the Nations. (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A31-46&version=NKJV)  “Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ 4 Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” When the government policies and leaders care for “the least of these,” it/they deserve the support of believers, if they do not resistance and pressing for change is the course believers must take.

RECIPROCITY

If one spends any time around live stage actors, one is likely to hear them talking about their interaction with the audience. They will talk about how the energy or response of the audience feeds them as actors. The same can be heard from musicians and comics.

If the ones on stage “phone in” their performance (lacking energy or authenticity) the audience will be flat, and likely to thin out at the intermission. Any performance which is monotonous, delivered as if the audience were a blank wall, will leave the audience wondering why they bothered to show up.

On the other hand, if the audience is tired, troubled, distracted, or disinterested there will be little, if any, response no matter how hard the performers are working. The performers call it a “dead house.” When this is the case it can drag down the performance.

It used to be the advice to preachers, “do not put any emphasis into the reading of the Scriptures, nor into the sermon. Let the naked words speak for themselves.” The congregation sat blankly, sang a hymn of two and went home. Ironically, during this model of worship, attendance was at its highest in the last seventy-five years. But that was before television and the proliferation of action films.

It is hard work being a preacher. In general, people no longer will sit still of a thirty-minute expository sermon, no matter how eloquently it is delivered. It seems the preference is for short, pithy, humorous sermons which leave the congregation feeling good. Above all, the preacher must not overtly offend anyone. It is hard work crafting a sermon which will speak very subtly to the social issues of the day. Maybe, preachers need to telegraph their punch before the sermon by saying, “Let those with ears to hear, hear.” (Mark 4:9, Revelation 2:7)

I was once doing a presentation, after a trip to Rwanda following the genocide. I compared the radio spokespeople who, over time, stirred up the divisions between the Hutu and Tutsi populations to Rush Limbaugh stirring up divisions in our own populations. One couple immediately got up and walked out. Later, the husband angrily told me I was out of line, and that such political comments were inappropriate in church.

I am convinced preachers must follow one of the ordination vows when preparing and delivering a sermon: Will you pray for and seek to serve the people with energy, intelligence, imagination, and love? (Book of Order W-4.4003 h) All four elements of this vow are critical to preaching, today. Energy is required if we are to move the congregation from where they are to where God is calling them. Intelligence is required if we are faithfully to interpret and proclaim the whole of Scripture. Imagination is required if we are to see beyond the thick veil of our context, and if we are to help the congregation to see beyond it also. Love is required because if we did not love God and the congregation we are called to serve there would be no reason to engage in the foolishness of preaching.

https://www.wayostccs.com/

Survival of the Fittest

https://www.facebook.com/AusTeaParty/

Per popular understandings, Darwin posited the theory of evolution in which was the proposition of the survival of the fittest. This would appear to be true in much of the animal world. The weak straggler in a herd is often prey for predators. Those which cannot keep up get left behind. This is illustrated by this joke, Two men were walking through the woods when a large bear walked out into the clearing no more than 50 feet in front of them. The first man dropped his backpack and dug out a pair of running shoes, then began to furiously attempt to lace them up as the bear slowly approached them. The second man looked at the first, confused, and said, "What are you doing? Running shoes aren't going to help, you can't outrun that bear." "I don't need to," said the first man, "I just need to outrun you." (Jokes2Go.Com)

I wander, even in the case of the two men in the joke above, if there were not another option. Must one be sacrificed so the other might survive? In the leading photo to this blog liberal philosophy/theology is pictured as weakening the strongest so the weaker members of the herd might keep up. That is so NOT THE CASE. My response to that photo on Facebook was, in true liberal style, the stronger would surround the weaker so all might safely make it to their destination. Yes, the stronger ones might have to travel a bit more slowly; might have to make sure the weaker ones get to water and food; might have to position themselves between potential threats the those less able.

One of my professors in seminary, Dr. Catherine Gunsalus Gonzalez, said, “One who truly takes Scripture seriously will be a social liberal.” How can a Christian read Matthew 25:31-46 and not care about the poor, disposed, and the weaker of our society? “…, Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’  “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.

Scripture says a lot about caring for the poor, weak and vulnerable, and nothing about making sure the rich, strong and lofty remain that way at all costs. However, in our current USA economy the rich get richer and the poor become poorer. The “law of the jungle,” survival of the fittest, seems at play. How do we adapt to provide the proper social safety nets so the hungry, thirsty, stranger (refugee), naked, sick or imprisoned are not left to predators?

Adaptability is the key. How do we adapt ourselves to the new economic realities so the weakest are not left behind? In the movie, Wall Street, it was proclaimed “greed is good!” How do we adapt from a greed based economy to one where the strongest surround and protect the vulnerable? If all are to survive, we must adapt. It was Darwin, himself, who promoted adaptability rather than survival of the fittest.

Hiatus

(www.entrepreneur.com/article/237687)

The first time I heard the word hiatus was when an actor used it on television to speak of an extended period she took between film projects. The word tickled my ears. I liked the sound of the word. I like the definition of the word. Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines hiatus as, an interruption in time or continuity: break; especially: a period when something (as a program or activity) is suspended or interrupted. (www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hiatus) A hiatus is a gap in activity.

History records when John Calvin returned to Geneva, after his exile to Strasbourg, he picked up reading Scripture and preaching at the point where he ended when sent away. It seems he interpreted his exile as a hiatus, an interruption to his early ministry and preaching. Sometimes a hiatus is freely chosen and at other times imposed by circumstances not of our choosing.

It has been several weeks since I last posted a blog. In large part, my hiatus was freely chosen. In part, I chose to take a hiatus from blogging because I knew it would be ease to be sucking into the heated rhetoric of the presidential election campaigns. There were sporadic lapses on Facebook and other social (anti-social) media. I am not proud of the times when I “flamed” another, or was guilty of passing on the untruths from “fake news” outlets.

Culturally, we still have a bifurcated view of the election result. Some are elated. Some are very fearful. Some want to overturn the Constitutionally prescribed process. Prior to the election some were proclaiming the system was rigged to reach a different outcome. I had/have my own very strong opinions about the two main candidates and the tenor of the campaigns. To keep pouring combustible words into the national discussion will not be helpful in seeking to heal the wounds suffered and wounds anticipated in the future.

The Prophet Jeremiah could have urged those in exile in Babylon to be active insurrectionists. He could have encouraged the exiles to use every opportunity to be subversive. Instead, Jeremiah encouraged the exiles saying, But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare. (Jeremiah 29:7 NRSV)

The election has established a president-elect who will officially take office on January 20, 2017. As a people, we remain divided on the outcome of the election and the projected changes we might face under the incoming administration. Whether each of us supported the eventual one who will become the President, we can still pray for the welfare of the place where God has placed us, knowing our own welfare is inextricably tied to the welfare of the nation and the world.

I am not encouraging that we roll-over and blindly support every proposed change. There are legitimate means of voicing our desires for the nation and the world. There are legitimate means of seeking redress of policies and programs which do not advance the general well-being for all. It is our responsibility as citizens of this nation and as citizens of the world to seek the welfare of all people, especially the disposed, the poor, the widow, the orphan, and the refugee. … (S)eek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare.

So, ends my hiatus.