Does believing in the mission that Christ gave us imply that one has liberal Utopian leanings or progressive delusions of grandeur? It's a question that I seem to encounter quite often these days. Generally the argument proceeds something like - all you emergent types are too tied to progressive liberal politics so therefore you think the government will save you and usher us into a perfect Utopian future (which is really a modern conception of progress anyway...). Or something similar along those lines. This is generally followed by some sermon on how we as Christians a should not corrupt ourselves (or the gospel) by getting involved in politics. Or at least about how we should only focus on trying to help those we have a personal relationship with - in our local community.

Don't get me wrong - I don't think the government can save us or bring about a perfect world. No one political party has all the answers or will automatically make this world a better place. But I don't think that is reason to just abandon politics or give up altogether. And (as I've mentioned before) I don't think working to bring God's Kingdom "on earth as it is in heaven" can just be written off as the modern myth of progress either.

To take to heart Jesus' command to "go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you" - would imply that one actually believes that it can be done. If we are following in the way of Christ, living out the Kingdom values, and teaching others about the things Jesus taught then part of the idea is that we are attempting to make this world a better place. If we follow in Jesus' footsteps to "preach good news to the poor, to proclaim freedom for the prisoners, and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor" then we should be actively working for those things believing that God has the power to make them happen. So in seeking to feed the hungry, to heal those with AIDS, to stop sexual exploitation of children, and to end slave like conditions in the factories we are not just buying into liberal ideas of progress through science, we are following Christ's commands.

But apparently to think that any of that will actually work is wishful Utopian thinking. And to think that the government or technology might assist in bringing those things about is to place our faith for salvation in such organizations. At least, so I have heard. But I'm not buying it.

The world is broken - God's kingdom is not on earth as it is in heaven. And often it has been the very people who claim to follow Christ that have caused the brokenness. If there is something that can be done to bring healing and reconciliation to the World, is it not a good thing to do it? And if a big organization or a government (many of whom caused the problems to begin with) are in a position to help heal the ills of the world, why the hell would I not support that? Even Jesus when the disciples reported that they had seen a man driving out demons in his name said, "Do not stop him, for whoever is not against you is for you."

I don't think the government will save us or that they have all the answers. I don't think that the world will just get better and better because of the wonders of technology. I am not deluded into thinking that Utopia will just appear if enough people vote a certain way and start recycling. But I do believe in Jesus and the mission he has called us to. I do believe that as Christians we are expected to care for others and to stop the injustices in this world. And I have no problem using the government or technology to help make that happen if that is what it takes. The mission is bigger than the fear of being consumed by an secular agenda of progress. And if working to make Kingdom values a reality gets dismissed as an Utopian delusion, I really don't care. I'll just keep on following Jesus.

Labels: Emerging Church, Politics, Social Justice

I've posted on the amazing photography of Chris Jordan before. Now he has a challenging piece up called "Building Blocks" which depicts nine million wooden ABC blocks, equal to the number of American children with no health insurance coverage in 2007. (HT - Justice and Compassion). It is a sobering thought and as always his visual representation drives home the enormity of the problem. As our President threatens to veto the bipartisan bill the House passed yesterday which would expand health care insurance for children, this number is even more frightening. As Bush said in a press conference recently, he believes that healthcare decisions are best made between a patient and their doctor, without government interference. As Jon Stewart so aptly pointed out on The Daily Show - these kids don't have doctors because they don't have health insurance. So Mr. President we await your giving the children of America the finger and pray you develop some semblance of a conscience instead.

Labels: Politics, Social Justice

This year marks the halfway mark for the Millennium Development Goals. The eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) – which range from halving extreme poverty to halting the spread of HIV/AIDS and providing universal primary education, all by the target date of 2015 – form a blueprint agreed to by all the world’s countries and all the world’s leading development institutions. They have galvanized unprecedented efforts to meet the needs of the world’s poorest.

Well it's 2007 and we are halfway to 2015. As aid groups are saying, "its halftime and this isn't a game we can afford to lose." But even though we are halfway there in regards to time, the goals are not halfway met. There has been progress, but not of the leaps and bounds kind. What is being found though is that we are seeing advances in Goal #3 - promoting gender equality and empowering women. That's not to say that rampant oppression of women doesn't still exist, but that in certain areas women are being empowered.

From reports I heard at the Jubilee Conference what is occurring is that in so-called developing nations women are becoming a more visible presence in politics. They are taking seats in Parliaments, being appointed to government positions, and occasionally even ruling countries. In fact the percentage of women in high level government positions is the same in sub-Saharan Africa as it is in the USA. Granted that percentage is still under 20%, but apparently that is huge progress. What is even more interesting is that it is being reported that the general population's acceptance of women in positions of authority is much higher in those countries than it is in the USA. Over here we are still quibbling over whether or not a woman or a black man can be president and these other countries are just doing it.

So here's to empowering women. May this goal be met and surpassed around the world and here in the States.

Labels: Gender Issues, Politics, Social Justice

I've been following the story the past couple of days of the kidnapping of Margaret Hill in Nigeria. A three year old girl was kidnapped on her way to school and is being held for ransom. Officials are decrying the act as evil and calling for the immediate return of the girl. And while I fully agree that this is an atrocious act, I wish the full history behind this kidnapping would be part of the typical news story. This isn't just about a random kidnapping for money. This was done by what is assumed to be a disposed tribal group demanding reparations for ruined land and stolen resources. The child is the daughter of a UK citizen who has profited from the oil business in Nigeria.

Brief history here. Very, very brief. The British Empire colonized what is now Nigeria and often used force to do so. They eventually formed Nigeria from pieces of four independent kingdoms. After Nigeria gained independence, the remains of those ancient tribes vied for power and survival. Series of dictators made themselves rich by selling land belonging to other tribes but with new found oil reserves to large multinational companies. These companies (Shall, Chevron) were known to support the military regimes of these dictators and are implicated in the deaths of activists who opposed the path being taken by their country. These oil companies devastated natural environments and often (with government help) imposed forced relocations of native peoples off of oil rich lands. In the 1990's protest groups formed to speak out against the rape of the land by the oil companies. The native tribes wanted to continue in their way of life, but their fishing economy was ruined by pollution or they were forced to move to land with poor soil. They also received no wealth from the oil taken from their native lands. Early protest was peaceful and focused on diplomacy and discussion. Much of it was led by women as well. It was generally met with violence. Then more militant groups formed that used violence to end the control of the land by the oil companies. Kidnappings of oil executives involved ransom demands - so that the people of Nigeria could share in the wealth taken from their lands. Then there were bombs to destroy pipelines and cripple the multinational companies. This is the story that this kidnapping is situated in. I don't condone the violence of that act just like I don't condone the violence perpetrated by the oil companies or the dictators or the British Empire - I just want the full story told. Everything is connected as the saying goes. This event must be understood as part of a long chain of events. Perhaps then the cycles of violence can end and a better world be formed.

We are discussing this issue in church today as we examine the Parable of the Tenants and the life of Samson. In those stories we see the ugly cycles of unbroken violence. One offense is met with violence which leads to more violence and so forth. Excuses are given and revenge is demanded. It is an ingrained concept in our culture. We cheer in movies like Braveheart or The Patriot when revenge is consummated. We care less about the defeat of evil than we do about extracting punishment on someone who has hurt or offended us. And we care even less about trying to resolve differences without resorting to violence. Our imaginations are so limited and our hatred so strong that to hurt others far too often is the first and only response. Cycles are hard to break. And often those who seek a better way are silenced with violence. Christ warned his followers that they could expect as much, but still urged them to pursue the way of peace. Perhaps if his followers had listened to his words a couple hundred years ago as colonization of Nigeria began or fifty years ago when oil was discovered there, a little three year old girl would not be in such dire circumstances right now.

Update - Margaret has been released

Labels: Culture, Environment, Politics, Social Justice

So its Empire Worship Day here in the USA. Now I really don't have an issue with the idea of a national holiday (Holy Day???) and I generally enjoy the bbqs, ice cream socials, and fireworks. But generally this day is a day of idolatry. Even in our churches pledges are said to a foreign god, hymn are sung to a temporal entity, and our citizenship to this country is promoted far above our citizenship to the Kingdom of God. (this article is a must read each year at this time). So this year it was refreshing for the first time in recent memory not to have to engage in idolatry just because I wanted to attend church around July 4. I will not be attending the local fireworks fest where last year the Rebel flag seemed as prominent as the US flag. I will not be twisting the truth and thanking the troops for my freedom to not have to wear a burka. I will continue to be offended by the "If you can read this in English thank a Vet" and the "Does my American Flag Offend You? Call 1-800- LEAVE THE USA" bumper stickers I've seen recently. I will try to avoid the worst displays of civil religion and propaganda. Sure I'll watch the fireworks (not like my neighbors haven't been setting some off every night for the last two weeks...), maybe even cook some slab of meat out on the grill but I won't check my mind, my beliefs, and my values at the door in patriotic fervor.

But I will take the historical perspective and reflect on the Declaration of Independence. It's interesting to read the full thing (not just the first part) where all the grievances against King George are listed. It's hard to tell which George they are being leveled against and not so hard to understand why our presence isn't welcome in Iraq (ht- Benjamin Ady). Included in the list as to why the USA engaged in violent revolution against this tyrant are -

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Happy Fourth of July.

Labels: Culture, History, Holidays, Politics

The headlines for today...

Bush Commutes Libby's Sentence

and

China Strikers Beaten by Thugs - A group of armed men attacked as many as 300 migrant construction workers who were striking over unpaid wages.

Is it just me or is there something seriously off balance in how justice works in this world? The powerful protect their friends from consequences and use violence against the poor and oppressed. Our systems are so broken...

Labels: Politics, Social Justice

Sorry for the silence here the last couple of days, I was at the Jubilee USA Grassroots Conference over the weekend. It was an exhausting weekend and I feel overwhelmed with information. At the same time, it was revitalizing and inspirational to be surrounded by so many people who have truly committed their lives to make this world a better place for everyone.

Jubilee USA exists to promote economic justice for the world, mostly through Debt Relief. They of course realize that to improve conditions worldwide debt relief is just one element that needs to happens, so they promote and partner with organizations that work on all eight of the Millennium Development Goals. But Jubilee's main focus is to end so-called third world debt. Most Americans are unaware of the need for debt relief at all. They hear the term "debt" and think of their maxed out credit cards. But Debt Relief refers to countries that have incurred millions of dollars in debt fron loans from other countries, the IMF, and the World Bank. The problem is that many of these loans were irresponsibly given, acquired (and squandered) illegally by dictators, or are remains of colonialism and the Cold War. These are debts that the people of these countries didn't ask for or approve (like South Africans having to pay back the loans that the Apartheid government used to fight anti-apartheid efforts) and now these countries are having to use up to 80% of their national budget to repay these debts and their insane interest rates. To come up with that money the countries have cut public education, health services, and stopped hiring doctors, nurses, and teachers. Most aid the country receives from Western countries just goes straight back to West in debt repayment. To put numbers to it - Nigeria has borrowed $5 billion, to date it has paid $16 billion and still owes $32 billion. There are a number of stories and reasons why these debts are wrong, but the effect is that they are keeping the poorest countries in this world in cycles of extreme poverty.

The Jubilee movement calls for a cancellation of these debts. They invoke the Biblical principle of Jubilee to forgive debts and break the chains of injustice. Why? Because the people of these countries don't owe and they shouldn't pay. Besides the fact that the principles on these debts have been paid already, these weren't their debts in the first place. A good way to help understand this is to imagine that someone stole your credit card, charged $10 billion in weapons on it and did all that before you were born. But for some reason you have to pay it all back, resulting in your children not being able to attend school, you not having clean water, and there not being health services available to you. To put a selfish spin on why cancel debts, if these countries don't have debt canceled the environmental degradation and political instability (potential for terrorism) increases. But most of all it should be a moral choice for all people of faith or conscious who claim to care for the least of these to do whatever we can to give all people a fighting chance at life and the basic rights they deserve.

So I got to spend the weekend hearing stories about debt relief, economic justice, and human rights. I knew most of the general ideas before, but got to learn the facts and the stories this weekend. I heard of the extreme injustices being perpetrated (Vulture Funds), attempts to stand up to injustice, and stories of hope from countries whose debt has already been cancelled. I met activists from around the world - a political cartoonist from Kenya, lobbyists from DC, a human rights watch journalist in exile from Columbia. We even heard from the Ecuadorian Finance Minister who came to report in how her country is choosing to stop making payments on their onerous debt so they can spend money on basic human services. As a country they are standing up to the World Bank and the IMF (and their puppetmasters the G8). They face serious legal, economic, and political (hopefully not military) dangers in doing so, but they choose to no longer be oppressed by the rich west.

I could share any number of stories - of both horror and hope. At this point, I realize the need more than ever to get the word out about these issues. It is the government that can effect change by canceling the debts (or pressuring the IMF and World Bank to do so). But it will take people telling their elected representative (they do represent us you know) to support morality and debt relief. As I posted last week a bipartisan bill was just introduced to Congress called the Jubilee Act. It's up to us to tell our Congresspeople to support it. Simple, easy, but something that most people (especially Christians) have an allergic reaction to (treating the government like the empire it pretends to be instead of the representative democracy it is).

I'm sure that I will be mentioning other aspects of this event on this blog in the future. I just want to conclude by mentioning something I realized during the conference. Exactly five years ago I was at another conference at Moody Bible Institute just a few blocks from the Loyola building I was at this weekend. Both events were "Christian" events (although I don't think Jews, Muslims and Atheists would have been welcomed at the Moody one). But what sticks in my memory from the Moody event is the insane amount of time given to discussing exactly what type of clothing the women at the conference were allowed to wear - what sort of swimsuit, the exact width tank top straps had to be, and whether or not it was okay to wear jeans in church). When such an "adventures in missing the point" defines who we are as Christians instead of seeking justice and proclaiming good news to the poor I rejoice to no longer be immersed in that sort of christian experience. For although I spent this past weekend hearing depressing and horrific stories of oppression and injustice, I came away more full of hope in God and the potential of a better world than I do from "ministry" conferences where the focus remains on stuff we should have gotten over a long time ago (accepting women's rights for example). I got to be (for once) in an environment where gender equality was assumed and not debated and racial and ethnic diversity was the norm. It was encouraging to see that such things actually do exist (as opposed to just being endlessly discussed and debated). I am very thankful to have had this opportunity this weekend and look forward to continuing to meet with the Chicago Jubilee group to build on the grassroots campaign for justice, mercy, and love.

Labels: Events, Gender Issues, mission, Personal, Politics, Social Justice

So the US Government just released its annual Trafficking in Human Person's Report. (read the report, it is a good general overview of the issue). In the report certain countries are listed as being top offenders and could face sanctions from the US if they fail to take steps to change the injustices in their countries. Well that is unless President Bush feels like waiving sanctions or Condi Rice decides to leave gross offenders (India) off the list "out of concern about alienating the Indian government." So the point is that if the country is worthless to us, we will punish them for trafficking women and children into forced prostitution and slavery. But if the country is big and potentially powerful, we will overlook such a trivial thing as injustice. (Not that sanctions are the answer to this sort of issue, but government is more of a blunt tool...). Anyway, read more about it here.

Labels: Politics, Social Justice

From Jubilee USA -

How do you eliminate poverty? Well, passage of the Jubilee Act is one way and "we" need your help.

This “we” is not just the Jubilee staff and members of Congress who believe that this legislation could help stop millions and millions of dollars in debt payments to the IMF and World Bank from leaving countries like Haiti, Liberia and Burundi. This “we” is the collective voice of the Global South.

For people in impoverished countries, passing debt into the next generation’s hands is as natural as passing down the legacy of a people.

For people in impoverished countries, the legacy of debt left by dictators and the reality of structural adjustment programs that privatize natural resources are all generational legacies — generational legacies that should be buried.

The Jubilee Act, which is the centerpiece of Jubilee's 2007 Sabbath Year campaign, ensures promises made by the G8 two years ago are kept by urging U.S. Treasury, the IMF and World Bank to keep their agreement.

Last Thursday, the Jubilee Act was re-introduced in Congress by the bipartisan team of Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) and Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL).

The Jubilee Act:

* Calls on the Bush Administration, the IMF and the World Bank to keep their promises on debt cancellation;
* Calls for expanded debt cancellation for impoverished countries that will use the freed resources well and require debt cancellation to meet the Millennium Development Goals;
* Calls for new standards for responsible lending and creditor transparency by calling for measures to address the problem of vulture funds as well as audits of odious and illegal debts from the past.

Use the easy online form to e-mail or fax your member of Congress about this legislation and urge them to co-sponsor The Jubilee Act.

Labels: Politics, Social Justice

A recent study being released states that military veterans are more than twice as likely to be in prison for sex crimes than are people without military experience. While veterans are less likely to be incarcerated in the first place, about a quarter of those sentences are for sex crimes against women are children. The article then claims that researchers are at a lose to understand why.

As soon as I read about these findings, I was reminded of the conversation of an Afgani woman I overhead where she discussed the American military's behavior in Afghanistan (read my blog post about it here). Another incident of cruel and senseless violence inflicted on a child.

And they really wonder why this is an issue?

When you take a group of people, mostly men, and teach them through intense indoctrination to objectify the Other of course stuff like this will happen. It takes seeing the Iraqis or Afganis as "the enemy" and not as real people in order to be able to kill them. If the soldiers didn't objectify others and instead saw that they were mothers, fathers, lovers, teachers, grandparents, and someone's child their ability to kill them would be compromised. They must be taught not to care, not to see the human face, and not to see life from the perspective of that other person. Alfie Kohn actually addresses this issue in his book Unconditional Parenting -

People who can - and do - think about how others experience the world are more likely to reach out and help those people - or, at a minimum, are less likely to harm them. Kafka once described war as a "monstrous failure of imagination". In order to kill, one must cease to see individual human beings and instead reduce them to abstractions such as "the enemy". One must fail to realize that each person underneath our bombs is the center of his universe just as you are the center of yours: He gets the flu, worries about his aged mother, likes sweets, falls in love - even though he lives half a world away and speaks a different language. To see things from his point of view is to recognize all the particulars that make him human, and ultimately it is to understand that his life is no less valuable than yours. Even in popular entertainments, we're not shown the bad guys at home with their children. One can cheer the death only of a caricature, not of a three-dimensional person.

Less dramatically, many of the social problems we encounter on a daily basis can be understood as a failure of perspective taking. People who litter, or block traffic by double-parking, or rip pages out of library books, seem to be locked into themselves, unable or unwilling to imagine how others will have to look at their garbage, or maneuver their cars around them, or fail to find a chapter they need.

And so while it pains me to read about it, I am not surprised that those who are taught to objectify others in order to kill them retain that mindset and apply it to other aspects of life. Combine the idea that women and children aren't "real people" with real feeling and lives but are instead seen as objects to be used with the military insistence of might makes right and one is left with conditions ripe for abuse. As this study shows that objectification of others and violent imposition of power over them is a sad reality.

What saddens me even more is that most people will assume that the solution to this problem is just to apply more of the same - have the bigger more powerful government impose harsher punishments on offenders. There will be no questioning of the military or their need to murder (that wouldn't be patriotic now would it?) I seriously doubt that lessons in perspective taking will ever catch on in our society, much less our military. So instead of being understood and appreciated as a person, those of us who have faced objectification must continue to live in fear.

Labels: Gender Issues, Politics, Social Justice, War

So apparently there has been a lot of controversy in California recently regarding spanking. A bill was proposed that would have made it illegal for anyone (including a parent) to strike a child under the age of four. Well that pissed off a lot of child hitters, so the bill was revised to just make it illegal to discipline a child with a closed fist, belt, electrical cord, shoe or other objects. The bill would also make it easier to prosecute anyone who throws, kicks, burns, chokes or cuts a child younger than 18. Also included would be striking a child younger than 3 in the head or face, and vigorously shaking a baby or toddler. And a lot of people are still pissed off. (read more here)

Of course this bill is being labeled as intolerant and anti-christian. Apparently hitting children is the only godly way to get them to do what you want. While the revised bill does allow open handed spanking, that's not good enough for some groups that insist that harder objects must be used to break the child's will.

Why is this a bad thing to some? One church whose advice pamphlet on spanking will be challenged by this new law, says that "guiltiness of sin can only be removed by God at salvation, but God has established a method by which children can have human justice satisfied and thus remove guilt. This method is spanking," because "The reality about Biblical spanking is that it works in a child's life to help bring him to the point of salvation." This church advises parents that "children should be disciplined starting shortly after birth with spanking beginning at the manifestation of the rebellious will," and that if after spanking "If the will has not been broken, spank again. Some of the ways the administrator of discipline can tell if the child is still being willful is if he turns around or puts his hands behind him during the spanking, or if he screams during or after the spanking." Oh and the Bible is clear that you can only use a rod to spank. They also tell parents that "when parents know to spank for a disobedience but withhold the rod, they are sinning."

I guess they're going to have to revise their theology or finally be punished for abusing children.

I know most spanking advocates aren't as extreme as this church, but I really have a hard time understanding it still. Just like I really can't fathom how anyone could hold the mindset that women are inferior to men, I can't understand how anyone can think it's okay to hit a child. I see it happen all the time, but I still don't get it. If it was a man hitting a woman or even a person hitting a dog - they would be prosecuted. But to hit a child is considered an inalienable right. I posted this quote before, but it is fitting today -

"When a child hits a child, we call it aggression.
When a child hits an adult, we call it hostility.
When an adult hits an adult, we call it assault.
When an adult hits a child, we call it discipline." - Haim Ginott"

Why? To show that they are bigger and stronger and have power over the child? To teach that might makes right? To break the child's will/personality? To control the child? To instill the fear of discipline (or God)?

I do not want my child to think that just because someone is bigger and more powerful than she is they can do whatever they want to her (no matter what our national war policy might imply). I do not want my child to be a good person because she fears physical harm if she isn't. I do not want my child to love/serve me or God out of fear.

There's something messed up about having to use laws to punishment parents who hurt children in order to punish them. One would hope common sense and love would dictate that, but other forms of rampant violence (spousal abuse, rape...) show that control and intimidation through physical violence is too often the norm. So if we need to add laws that protect babies and children to those that protect women, then so be it.

Tags: Spanking, Corporal Punishment

Labels: Culture, parenting, Politics

This post is part of my ongoing response to the questions I posted as part of this month's book discussion on Colossians Remixed by Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmaat over at the Emerging Women blog. (read my other responses - here).

Question #4 -

4. But wait a minute you cry! Aren't Christians supposed to subject ourselves to the governing authorities and all that? The authors respond - "Rather than read [Romans 13] as providing carte blanche legitimation for any regime, regardless of how idolatrous and oppressive it might be, we suggest that Paul is actually limiting the authority of the state. The state is a servant of God for our good. it has no legitimacy or authority in and of itself, apart from subjection to the rule of God. and when the state clearly abrogates its responsibility to do good, when it acts against the will of God, then the Christian community has a responsibility to call it back to its rightful duty and even to engage in civil disobedience (see Acts 12:6-23). The state has no authority to do evil". (p185)

I like the balance created here.

I have often heard the “subject yourself to the governing authorities” used as that sort of carte blanche. It is a line used to silence all opposition and dissent. Question the war, the Patriot Act, or No Child Left Behind and you are treated as if you are questioning the existence of God. And labeled a liberal (its hard to tell which is worse)

Then from another camp if I merely attempt to say that the government is in a good position to help make the world a better place and I’m told that I look to the government for my salvation. And that I’m a liberal.

So I like this response. That government thing – it’s there because of God. You know “for by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.” The government is just one more thing that can serve God for his glory. Can it be corrupted by power and swayed by greed? Of course and we have the empires to prove it.

But the responses that say “well even if it is doing God’s work we won’t let it or support it” and those that say “well even if it’s doing evil, we have to support it” just don’t make sense to me. To me the government can be used as a tool to advance God’s kingdom (and I so don’t mean this in a theocratic dictatorship sort of way) or it should be called out when it engages in practices contrary to kingdom values.

So to pledge one’s allegiance to the government (or to a party within that government) instead of God (or as it is subtly twisted – in the name of God) misses the point. Our purpose is to serve God and spread God’s love. If the government is on board with that great. If it is working against that mission, then it needs correction.

For another interesting take on this check out this post over at Theolog.

Labels: Book Reviews, Colossians Remixed, Politics, Theology

The world has changed...

The BBC has run a great article detailing how global warming has already started to change the world. Read it here.

The facts about how a climate change as small as 1-1.5 degrees will have major impacts on the world reminds me of that scene from Jesus Camp where that homeschooling mom was ridiculing and teaching her boys the utter falsehood of global warming because a couple of degrees is nothing. But as one could tell from the rest of the lesson, they really didn't care much for science or facts.

What I don't get is how people can be so sold to a political party that denies global warming for political reasons that they ignore the threat that people may die because they have no water.

Labels: Environment, Politics

So after posting that last depressing post, I wanted to post about those who work for good and not evil in this world. I've been loving the song "If Everyone Cared" by Nickleback and just saw the video. It's simple, but its powerful. We could make the world a better place if people cared enough to do anything.

If everyone cared and nobody cried
If everyone loved and nobody lied
If everyone shared and swallowed their pride
Then we'd see the day when nobody died

And I'm singing

Amen I, Amen I, I'm alive
Amen I, Amen I, Amen I, I'm alive

Labels: Politics, Social Justice

For those of you who recently expressed surprise that people in America advocate for "English only" laws, read this -

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich equated bilingual education Saturday with "the language of living in a ghetto" and mocked requirements that ballots be printed in multiple languages.

"The government should quit mandating that various documents be printed in any one of 700 languages depending on who randomly shows up" to vote, said Gingrich, who is considering seeking the Republican presidential nomination in 2008. He made the comments in a speech to the National Federation of Republican Women.

"The American people believe English should be the official language of the government. ... We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the common language of the country and they learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in a ghetto," Gingrich said to cheers from the crowd of more than 100.

"Citizenship requires passing a test on American history in English. If that's true, then we do not have to create ballots in any language except English," he said.

Peter Zamora, co-chair of the Washington-based Hispanic Education Coalition, which supports bilingual education, said, "The tone of his comments were very hateful. Spanish is spoken by many individuals who do not live in the ghetto."

He said research has shown "that bilingual education is the best method of teaching English to non-English speakers."

Spanish-speakers, Zamora said, know they need to learn English.

"There's no resistance to learning English, really, among immigrants, among native-born citizens," he said. "Everyone wants to learn English because it's what you need to thrive in this country."

In the past, Gingrich has supported making English the nation's official language. He's also said all American children should learn English and that other languages should be secondary in schools.

In 1995, for example, he said bilingualism poses "long-term dangers to the fabric of our nation" and that "allowing bilingualism to continue to grow is very dangerous."

Bilingual programs teach students reading, arithmetic and other basic skills in their native language so they do not fall behind while mastering English.

On voting, federal law requires districts with large populations of non-English speakers to print ballots in multiple languages.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

There's a part of me that groans at the thought that Gingrich is still around, much less considering a run for the Presidency (God help our country). But to see such racist and self centered talk coming from a person in a position of power is sad. America is full of itself, we are mostly monolingual in this global economy, and we think we can do whatever we want to the rest of the world. Besides helping us stop being complete jerks, how exactly is bilingualism dangerous? I desperately would like for my child to have a bilingual education. There are schools where she can be immersed in two or more languages - helping her learn language when she is most able to and broadening her knowledge of the world. I don't want her to be a self centered ugly American who thinks everyone else is beneath her. But if politicians like Newt force racism down our throats, she may not easily get that chance (or will be ridiculed for her tolerant global liberal ideas - but mommy gets enough of that and can teach her how to cope...).

Labels: Politics

Last night our church helped sponsor a Faith and the Environment forum. This was the second Faith and Politics forum we have been involved in. The first was about immigration and it's a chance to bring together area churches for a discussion on how our faith relates to these issues. This event was part of the Kendall Environmental Coalition's series of activities to help heighten environmental awareness in our area. Last night we met at the Yorkville congregational Church (which Emma decided was a castle). There were three "experts" that Mike asked a series of questions and who then accepted questions from the group. The presenters from around the Chicago area included Dr. Jeff Greenberg, a geology professor at Wheaton College; David Radcliff of the New Community Project; and Sarah Spoonheim from Faith in Place. They were a fantastic group to speak on the issues of faith and our environment. I want to find out more about their organizations as well.

They spent time discussing why environmentalism is a faith/moral issue. For many of them it went beyond God's command to be good stewards of our earth. They focused on Jesus' command to love and serve the least of these - to help the poor and oppressed. They explained how already the harm being done to our world hurts the poorest in the world the worst. Inuit women whose breastmilk is full of toxins because of the pollution of the rest of the world, the Africans who are starving because of how climate change has destroyed their ecosystem, the farmers who are exposed to toxins so they can grow our food for 8,000 a year, and the poor who live along the world's coasts that will take the brunt of the superstorms and rising oceans. If we are to follow Jesus' command to love others, we have to take care of the world as well.

There was also discussion as to why people (and most Christians) don't care about the environment. Reasons such as a twisted dispensational theology, a separatist theology that sees the "world" as including the physical planet, a conception that it distracts from more important things like getting people to say the Sinner's Prayer, a tendency to avoid associating with people who are different from them (like Al Gore!) and a belief that God will never let us really hurt the world were all reasons that were discussed. But most of the presenters agreed that Christians, like most Westerners, ignore the environment because of laziness, economics, and politics. We are too lazy to change, we are too cheap to change, we are too in the pockets of big business to change, and we care more for a political agenda than we do God's commands to change. These are the hurdles that need to be overcome before we can mobilize churches to follow Christ in this area.

One issue that hit home for me was that of food. The techniques of raising our meat and getting our food to us do a lot to hurt our environment. The mass cattle farms do more to harm the environment than our transportation does. So buying food that comes from places that care for the world and those animals helps reduce that impact. But the issue is held in tension with other harmful practices. If I have to drive an hour (use gas, create CO2) to get to the closest Whole Foods to get organic meat is the impact worth it? Or is creating the demand for healthy, environmentally friendly foods worth it? The idea is of course to buy as locally as possible. We buy a share in a local CSA farm during the growing season, but haven't done much meatwise. I did get the tip last night to check out Eat Wild for local organic meat - so does anyone want to go in ($2000) to buy a whole cow?

As a take away from the evening I realized that the issues were a lot bigger and more complex than I had thought. There is a lot more that I need to do to care for God's creation, but that my motivation shouldn't be guilt or fear, but hope for a better world.

Labels: Environment, Politics, Social Justice

So this seems like an interesting way to work for peace -

Global Orgasm for Peace

The mission of the Global Orgasm is to effect change in the energy field of the Earth through input of the largest possible surge of human energy. Now that there are two more US fleets heading for the Persian Gulf with anti- submarine equipment that can only be for use against Iran, the time to change Earth’s energy is NOW!

The intent is that the participants concentrate any thoughts during and after orgasm on peace. The combination of high- energy orgasmic energy combined with mindful intention may have a much greater effect than previous mass meditations and prayers.

The goal is to add so much concentrated and high-energy positive input into the energy field of the Earth that it will reduce the current dangerous levels of aggression and violence throughout the world.

Global Orgasm is an experiment open to everyone in the world.

WHO? All Men and Women, you and everyone you know.

WHERE? Everywhere in the world, but especially in countries with weapons of mass destruction.

WHEN? Winter Solstice Day - Friday, December 22nd, at the time of your choosing, in the place of your choosing and with as much privacy as you choose.

WHY? To effect positive change in the energy field of the Earth through input of the largest possible surge of human energy a Synchronized Global Orgasm. There are two more US fleets heading for the Persian Gulf with anti-submarine equipment that can only be for use against Iran, so the time to change Earth’s energy is NOW!


I guess the peacemakers really are blessed. ;)

Labels: Culture, Politics, Social Justice

Given recent discussions and posts, I think it apropos to have a post about the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women which falls on Nov. 25 each year. General polls across America show that the public believes that domestic abuse is a serious problem and that doesn’t even refer to the horrors the women who are sold into the sex trade have to face. Around the world, women not only face ideological sexism, but violence in all its forms. Physical, sexual, emotional, spiritual violence continue to plague women.

But where in the church do we hear much about this? Recently as I took Emma to the pediatricians I saw in the bathroom a sign about domestic abuse asking if one is afraid of someone they love. I realized that it had only been in medical situations (the pediatricians, my ob/gyn, the maternity ward) where I had ever encountered that question before. Unlike a majority of the women I regularly hang out with, I have never had to deal with abuse, but it shocked me that it has only been in “secular” medical settings that the topic has ever even come up. I can’t recall ever having heard violence against women addressed in church (besides us bringing up the sex trade with the youth group). Shouldn’t the church be leading the cause to stop oppression and violence? Shouldn’t caring for the unfortunate and showing love be a huge concern for all of us?

I have to wonder if the sexist assumptions that still haunt parts of the church (as has been demonstrated so clearly recently) has something to do with the church’s inaction in speaking out against violence against women. If women are inferior and are to submit to men, that can easily be translated into the idea that men can therefore do whatever they want to women. No matter what the theological assumptions of men being a loving, protective covering for women, it still places men in a position of power over women. Hierarchy often has the unfortunate side effect of allowing those in power to manipulate, harm, oppress, dominate, and humiliate those “below” them.

But fortunately there are some religious voices that are speaking out against the violence even if the circles I had run in haven’t always talked about it. On April 5, 2006 forty-two national religious leaders from around the country declared violence against women as intolerable and pledged their commitment to its eradication. The National Declaration by Religious Leaders to Address Violence Against Women will be distributed to every battered women's program in the U.S. Women will see this list and determine whether their faith community supports them in seeking safety for themselves and their children. When people of faith join with other community leaders to address domestic violence, we will see ancient roadblocks turn into resources that save lives and bring healing.

The Declaration -

We proclaim with one voice as national spiritual and religious leaders that violence against women exists in all communities, including our own, and is morally, spiritually and universally intolerable.

We acknowledge that our sacred texts, traditions and values have too often been misused to perpetuate and condone abuse.

We commit ourselves to working toward the day when all women will be safe and abuse will be no more.

We draw upon our healing texts and practices to help make our families and societies whole.

Our religious and spiritual traditions compel us to work for justice and the eradication of violence against women.

We call upon people of all religious and spiritual traditions to join us.

To find out more or to sign the Declaration click here. Join your voice in prayer and action this Nov. 25 to help stop the violence against women.

Labels: Gender Issues, Politics, Social Justice

In response to the recent elections and subsequent regime change, the ever controversial Michael Moore has made the following response to Republicans. I obviously don't agree with all he writes, but I found it an interesting read. Your thoughts? (and thanks Wendy for the link)


November 17, 2006
Michael Moore's pledge
The liberal filmmaker extends an olive branch to
disheartened conservatives.

I WOULD LIKE TO extend an olive branch. Those of you
who consider yourselves conservative and usually vote
Republican have not had a very good couple of weeks.
Trust me, I know how this feels.

In fact, those of us on the other side of the fence
don't really know what it's like to win, so if we seem
a bit awkward right now (were we supposed to vote for
the majority leader the speaker said to vote for, or
stick to our promise to the other guy?), forgive us.

I know you are dismayed at the results of last week's
election. You've got to be freaking out about what
this bunch of tree-hugging, latte-sipping,
men-kissing-men advocates will do now that the country
is in our hands. I don't blame you. We'd never admit
it, but we secretly admire you because you know how to
chop down a tree, take your coffee black and enjoy
watching women kissing women. Good on you!

What I don't want is for you to drop into the deep
funk we liberals have been in for two-plus decades.
Yes, your Republican revolution is over, but hang in
there. And do not despair. I, and the millions who
voted for Democrats, have no interest in revenge for
the last 12 years. In fact, let me make 12 promises as
to how we will treat you, the minority, in the coming
years.

Thus, here is "A Liberal's Pledge to Disheartened
Conservatives":

1) We will always respect you. We will never, ever,
call you "unpatriotic" simply because you disagree
with us. In fact, we encourage you to dissent and
disagree with us.

2) We will let you marry whomever you want (even
though some among us consider your Republican behavior
to be "different" or "immoral"). Who you marry is none
of our business. Love, and be in love — it's a
wonderful gift.

3) We will not spend your grandchildren's money on our
personal whims or to enrich our friends. It's your
checkbook too, and we will balance it for you.

4) When we soon bring our sons and daughters home from
Iraq, we will bring your sons and daughters home too.
We promise never to send your kids off to war based on
some amateur Power Point presentation cooked up by men
who have never been to war.

5) When we make America the last Western democracy to
have universal health coverage, and all Americans are
able to get help when they fall ill, we promise that
you too will be able to see a doctor, regardless of
your ability to pay. And when stem cell research
delivers treatments and cures for diseases that
afflict you and your loved ones, we'll make sure those
advances are available to you and your family too.

6) When we clean up our air and water, you too will be
able to breathe the cleaner air and drink the purer
water. When we put an end to global warming, you will
no longer have to think about buying oceanfront
property in Yuma.

7) Should a mass murderer ever kill 3,000 people on
our soil, we will devote every single resource to
tracking him down and bringing him to justice.
Immediately. We will protect you.

8) We will never stick our nose in your bedroom or
your womb. What you do there as consenting adults is
your business. We will continue to count your age from
the moment you were born, not the moment you were
conceived.

9) We will not take away your hunting guns. If you
need an automatic weapon or a handgun to kill a bird
or a deer, then you really aren't much of a hunter and
you should, perhaps, take up another sport. In the
meantime, we will arm the deer to make it a fairer
fight.

10) When we raise the minimum wage, we will raise it
for your employees too. They will use that money to
buy more things, which means you will get the money
back! And when women are finally paid what men make,
we will pay conservative women that wage too.

11) We will respect your religious beliefs, even when
you don't practice those beliefs. In fact, we will
actively seek to promote your most radical religious
beliefs ("Blessed are the peacemakers," "Love your
enemies," "It is easier for a camel to go through the
eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the
kingdom of God" and "Whatever you did for one of the
least of these brothers of mine, you did for me"). We
will let people in other countries know that God
doesn't just bless America, he blesses everyone. We
will discourage religious intolerance and fanaticism —
starting here at home.

12) We will not tolerate politicians who are corrupt
and break the law. And we promise you we will go after
the corrupt politicians on our side first. If we fail
to do this, we need you to call us on it. Simply
because we are in power does not give us the right to
turn our heads the other way when our party goes
astray. Please perform this important duty as the
loyal opposition.

I promise all of the above to you because this is your
country too. You are every bit as American as we are.
We are all in this together. We sink or swim as one.
Thank you for your years of service to this country
and for giving us the opportunity to see if we can
make things a bit better for our 300 million fellow
Americans — and for the rest of the world.

Now pull yourself together and let's go have a
Frappuccino

Labels: Politics

So its Sunday afternoon and I am exhausted. I did a craft fair yesterday and preached this morning - it was all fun but I'm tired and a bit brain dead. Which is perhaps why I have a series of mini-rants at the moment.

First Mark Driscoll (who get my vote as my least favorite person in the entire universe) is up to his junk again. This time its his blog post on the whole Ted Haggard scandal and his advice for pastors (here). Not only does he assume all pastors work in megachurches and are CEOs and teachers (as opposed to pastors), his suggestions would completely restrict pastors from loving and serving people. So much for following christ. According to Driscoll if the prostiture who washed Jesus' feet with her hair showed up at his home group, he would ask her to never return (so as to protect himself from temptation). Whatever. Oh - and Driscoll managed to find a way to twist this to blame women as well. Apparently women are the ones at fault for either being too sexy and therefore appealing or letting oneself go and forcing a man to look elsewhere. He therefore uses this as another arguement for why women shouldnt serve in any role whatsoever in churches (apparently now not even as secretaries). Why am I not surprised that a scandal involving a male leader caught with a male prostitute would be used by Driscoll to continue his rhetoric against women...

Then there is stupid political stuff. Election day is only two days away, so political stupidity can be expected. In the continuing sign-wars, since there are laws about removing or burning political signs, Hasterts folks have fallen to placing their signs directing in front of and behind Laesch's signs obstructing one's view of his sign. How freaking childish is that. It's like the kid who jumps to the front of every picture so only he can be seen.

And yesterday I actually had a lady tell me (unsolicited I might add) that she hopes the republicans win because she heard in an email from a friend that al-qaeda wants the democrats to win. Now Ive heard that line given as a joke on The Daily Show - but I didn't think anyone actually believed it. And to believe it because you read it in an email forward!!! This my friends is democracy in action.

And finally to wrap up the rants, I have to mention the most recent church sign at our local Yorkville crummy church sign church. It said something like "be happy the SON is shining." Now yesterday when I drove past it - it was cold, gray, dismal, and spitting rain. The trees are skeletons and the chance of seeing blue sky between now and next May is slim. And right as I drove past it the song "Wonderful" by Everclear came of the radio. Here are the lyrics -

Coz when it gets too sad
I think thoughts that I know are bad
I close my eyes and I count to ten
Hope its over when I open them
I want the things that I had before
Like a Star Wars poster on my bedroom door
I wish I could count to ten
Make everything be wonderful again
I hope my Mom
And I hope my Dad
Would figure out why they get so mad
I hear them scream
I hear them fight
They say bad words that make me wanna cry
I close my eyes when I go to bed
And I dream of angels that make me smile
I feel better when I hear them say everything will be wonderful some day

Chorus
Promises mean everything
When you’re little and the world so big
I just don’t understand
how you can smile with all those tears in your eyes
and tell me everything is wonderful now

Please don’t tell me everything is wonderful now

I go to school and I run and play
I tell the kids that it’s all ok
I laugh a lot so my friends won’t know
When the bell rings that I just don’t wanna go
I go to my room and I close my eyes
I make believe that I have a new life
I don’t believe you when you say
Everything will be wonderful some day

No no no no
I don’t want to hear you tell me everything is wonderful now
No no no no
I don’t want to hear you say that I will understand some day
No no no no
I don’t want to hear you say that you both have grown in a different way
No no no no
I don’t want to meet your friend
And I don’t want to start over again
I just want my life to be the same
Just like it used to be
Some days I hate everything
I hate everything
Everyone and everything

Please don’t tell me everything is wonderful now…
Please don’t tell me everything is wonderful now ..
Please don’t tell me everything is wonderful now ..

I don’t want to hear you tell me everything is wonderful now……

Please don’t tell me everything is wonderful…….

It made me wonder how often as a church (the body of christ) we ignore reality and tell happy lies to make ourselves feel better. Everythings wonderful, be happy the SON is shining. When will we get past the lies and the platitudes and be real. Be real enough to cry, to feel, to admit that there is crap in this world, that its all not okay, and get off our butts and do something about it.

Ah. okay - rants over for the moment (at least the stuff its safe to post online...). Feel free to add on if it would help...

Labels: Gender Issues, Politics, Reflections