Traveling in Place

Jeff Sessions and Romans 13

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has managed to unite Christians as diverse as Franklin Graham and Pope Francis. He has won condemnation from delegates of the Southern Baptist Convention, leaders of several evangelical organizations, and all the major Protestant denominations. How did he do it? By quoting the Bible to defend the indefensible, totally inhumane policy of separating young immigrant children from their families who cross the border illegally.

Sessions pleads that he is simply following the law, and that the apostle Paul wrote in Romans 13 that we are all “subject to the governing authorities.” Therefore, the policy is biblical. Sessions seems oblivious to the fact that this same passage of scripture was applied exactly the same way in the 19^thcentury to justify slavery. But he’s also a former federal prosecutor, and he’s smart enough to know how disingenuous his remarks are.

There is no law mandating the separation of children from parents illegally crossing the border. At issue is not the law, but how the justice department has chosen to interpret and apply the law. It is therefore a matter of policy. No previous administration of either party has chosen to apply laws protecting the border in this draconian way. Infants and young children are being cruelly and suddenly ripped away from their parents and placed in crowded, chaotic holding facilities. These children will likely be traumatized for life. The justice department has determined that threatening this trauma is a good way to discourage illegal border-crossing. Hit’em where it really hurts, in other words. (The policy is eerily reminiscent of candidate Trump’s promise in 2016 to go after, not only terrorists, but also their families.)

Whatever he says about U.S. law, Sessions is in violation of a higher law. And he’s compounded his crime by quoting the Bible. So let’s spend some time with the

Taking Sides - Or Not

I have a confession to make. I wrote the last post, “Character Matters,” two months ago, around the commemoration of MLK’s “Dream” speech. After I wrote it, I sat on it, and decided not to publish it. When I read it again a few days ago, I asked myself why I had chosen to bury it.

Here’s why. As a public person – and I acknowledge that by virtue of preaching a sermon every week, teaching at a local college, and maintaining a blog, I am a public person– I sometimes battle creeping discouragement because of the era through which we are passing. I pray that it is but a temporary phase, a backlash against more powerful positive forces that cannot be stopped. But I sometimes despair that, for at least the reminder of my lifetime, our society will be enmeshed in a cultural quagmire with no resolution and rising resentment, and I wonder, “What’s the point of saying anything?”

We’ve moved beyond hyper-ideology and polarized politics. We’ve now descended into an abyss of what many are calling “tribalism,” though I sometimes wonder if that phrase really captures the depth of our moral crisis. I prefer to call it “side-ism.” It has nothing to do with a political philosophy, social agenda, or set of civic principles. All of us are being reduced to what “side” we are on. When people speak publicly, their words are not judged on their merits. The only serious consideration is, “Is he/she on my side?” Any language, vocabulary, or even tone of voice that indicates the person speaking is on the wrong side is reason to summarily dismiss everything being said. And sadly, “side-ism” also allows us to spew toxic venom (think Roseanne Barr and Samantha Bee) because everybody on the same side will tolerate it, or even cheer it.

What are the sides? It is tempting to say there are only two: “Pro-Trump” and “Anti-Trump.” The President got elected by taking the side of some Americans against other Americans. I believe he was genuinely surprised that this worked.