Traveling in Place

Exhausted but Hopeful

These days, it seems like every election is the most consequential ever. That includes the midterms. Still, a majority of registered voters will likely opt out of exercising their Constitutional franchise on November 6 (even though a record turnout for mid-terms is anticipated).

YouGov recently conducted a poll of 8,000 Americans for the “Hidden Tribes of America” project. It reveals that only 14% of the public is “highly engaged” politically. This number includes people on the hard left and hard right who are fueled as much by hatred for each other as by their own values. Meanwhile, fully two-thirds of us are “politically exhausted,” and that includes 37% of us who are “politically disengaged” or “passive.”  

These results do not bode well for our democracy, but I doubt they are surprising to anybody reading this. Most of the people I talk to – whether they lean left or right – are just tired of it all, if not outright disgusted at the gridlock, the partisanship, the tribalism, and loss of ideals that once defined us as a nation. Of course, if you’re part of that 14%, you are already shouting that those are all reasons to get involved! But we may not appreciate the extent to which our political peril, a downward spiral that is at least 25 years old, has psychologically pummeled otherwise responsible civic-minded people into a state of near hopelessness. (Let me just say that, even if you feel exhausted or disengaged, you can still vote, and I hope you do. Nobody but you and God need to know how you vote.)

Puritanism Redux

“A dangerous movement, undetected by many, is now challenging and eroding our great tradition of religious freedom. [This movement] must be confronted and stopped.” – Attorney General Jeff Sessions on the establishment of the “Religious Liberty Task Force” within the Department of Justice.

I serve as a pastor in the United Church of Christ, a denomination that in part traces its roots to the Mayflower Pilgrims who are celebrated everything Thanksgiving. This group of 101 religious “Separatists” (so named because they separated from the Church of England) had already escaped religious persecution in England by crossing the channel and settling in Holland, where religious toleration was the law. But since all sorts of other licentious behaviors were also tolerated by the Dutch, this devout group of believers decided to risk a voyage across the Atlantic to the New World, where they hoped to form a new community free to practice the Christian faith as they saw fit in what they believed would be a more pristine environment. They named their new settlement “Plymouth.”

The pilgrims’ understanding of “religious liberty” was simple. All people should be free to worship God as they chose. No one should be coerced to accept a particular faith tradition, but all should be free to express their beliefs without fear of reprisal. It didn’t take long for this principle to be tested. The pilgrims soon realized the New World was actually very old and populated by people with their own traditions and beliefs. For roughly half a century, the pilgrims and natives engaged in sometimes tense but always hopeful dialogue and a rich exchange of practices and ideas.

This peaceful co-existence would soon be overwhelmed, however, by another colonial enterprise just to the north. The Massachusetts Bay Colony was formed out of a mixture of commercial and religious interests. Puritans (not Separatists) came to the New World with the stated intention of creating a “New England,” purifying English religion with a more biblically-based church. These Puritans also sought religious freedom, but only for themselves. When confronted with the presence of natives, they were quite clear about their intention either to convert them to Christianity or drive them away. The Massachusetts Bay Congregational Churches were determined to create a new Christian society, a theocracy supported by local taxes. Citizenship and church membership were one and the same.

July 4 Blues

“I just don’t feel like singing patriotic songs,” a church member said to me a few days ago. She was one of several whom I have heard express, with some sadness, that they cannot get into the mood to celebrate Independence Day this year – not because they don’t love their country, but because they do.

July 4 used to be a national Sabbath – a day when everybody stopped working to pause, reflect on and celebrate the meaning of being a United States citizen. Sure, it’s been a time for picnics, backyard barbeques and fireworks, but always with the stars and stripes prominently featured in the decorations. Iconic images like the Statue of Liberty, the Liberty Bell, and the heads of Washington and Lincoln would turn our attention away from our daily pre-occupations toward the larger vision of our founders.

The point I’m making is not that we used to be more civic-minded or better informed about our nation’s history – though both of those things are true. What I’m struck by is how July 4 used to be one of the few days when we were invited to turn our thoughts to matters of national import. It’s getting harder and harder to remember, but time was when one of the great blessings of being an American citizen was the freedom to go about the affairs of one’s life and trust that the business of the nation would be taken care of without our constant attention. We weren’t like other countries embroiled in civil strife, where despots and failed economies erased any distance between national and personal concern. Ours was a nation of blessed inertia. The delicate balance of checks and balances and various levels of government pretty much ensured that, even though elected leaders might be pursuing policies with which we disagreed, there were still basic parameters – or civic norms – within which the political pendulum was required to swing, and stable institutions that kept those parameters 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.

Character Matters

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

These are among the most memorable words of Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech from the Lincoln Memorial in 1963. Of course, he was talking entirely about race, and specifically about discrimination against Americans of African descent, and his words are no less important today than they were then.

But it is troubling and ironic that at this moment in our history, “the content of one’s character” is no longer considered the ideal measure of any person. I used to believe that conservative Christians placed too muchemphasis on the “character” of elected officials and not enough on actual policy positions. They came across as prudish, overly concerned with sexuality and private morality, and more interested in protecting the pre-born than in the quality of life between birth and death. Never would I have imagined that just one generation later, these same conservative Christians would decide that “character” in elected leaders counts for little or nothing.

When President Bill Clinton was revealed as having engaged in a consensual affair with a White House Intern, Faith and Freedom President Ralph Reed said, “We care about the conduct of our leaders and we will not rest until we have leaders of good moral character.”

The very same Ralph Reed, however, advised conservative Christians in 2016 not to pay much attention to the incontrovertible evidence of candidate Donald Trump’s bad behavior toward women. The infamous “Access Hollywood” tape, he said, “should rank low on their hierarchy of concerns.” Questioned about revelations of an extra-marital affair with a porn star, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said he was giving Trump a “mulligan...a do-ever.”

Couldn't Look Away

I cannot count the number of times I’ve heard this confession, or something very similar, in the last few months.

I have to check in with (insert favorite cable news channel here) every day, because so much is happening that I’m afraid I’m going to miss something. When I start watching, I can’t stop. Even though I know I’m just listening to the same things over and over again, I keep hoping I’m going to hear something that will help me feel better about what’s going on. But it never gets better, and I keep watching.

I completely understand. “Advocacy journalism,” which has both helped to create and benefited from a highly polarized political environment, has become a powerfully addictive consumer product. Millions of Americans spend hours in front of the television getting their fix. The “news” typically amounts to one or two significant stories that you can digest in a few minutes. But advocacy journalism has managed to create the false impression that news is breaking all the time, and if you turn away, you’ll miss it. In reality, what is treated as news is what somebody said aboutthe news. The news is the news, dissected, re-packaged, and repeated by different talking heads. This phenomenon used to be limited to the right side of the political spectrum, first mastered by the Fox News Network. Now, it’s an industry that covers every partisan and ideological perspective.

I’m hearing confessions like the one above more frequently now, because more and more people are realizing that, in their effort to better understand what’s happening, they have fallen into an addiction. They are beginning to look critically at their own TV viewing habits, trying to discern the difference between staying informed and drowning in partisan claptrap.

I was reminded of this media addiction – this inability to “look away” – when I was outside yesterday. Our stubborn, lingering winter has finally given way to a gorgeous Spring, and on sunny warm days, lots of us have been getting outside – working in our yards, walking, biking, or just sitting on the deck with a good book.

After Parkland, Treat the Symptoms and the Disease

This week’s tragedy in Parkland, Florida, marks the 18^th (and deadliest) school shooting of 2018. In the last decade, mass shootings in the U.S. have reached epidemic proportions. After each of these heartbreaking incidents, we offer our thoughts and prayers to victims and survivors. We send money to the grieving communities. A predictable public debate about how to prevent further mass shootings lasts for a couple of weeks but leads nowhere. Then we move on, as though each incident is somehow exceptional.

But how many times do they have to occur before we realize that they are not exceptional? The killing of innocent people, whether children and teachers in school, young adults at a dance club, worshipers at a church, or country music fans at an outdoor concert, has become horrifically normal.

There are too many guns in this country, and guns designed for military combat, whose purpose is to slaughter masses of people, are too easy to get. We have the loosest gun laws in the world and more people per capita are killed by guns here than anywhere. Any fool can see the connection.

Maybe – just maybe – the Parkland shooting will be the final straw. Today, tears of grief have given way to outrage. Parents and teachers from Parkland are not mincing words. They are angry that Congress does nothing to curb gun violence. They are demanding action. They say the NRA has way too much power, and that both the President and Congress are too afraid to do what’s right. They are tired of all the excuses, and they want something done now.

At some point in the tired debate about gun violence, there is always a discussion about “the symptoms” and “the disease.” And because this discussion usually carries spiritual implications, I want to address it.

Are We Going Backwards?

On Martin Luther King Day, plenty of preachers and protesters lamented that we as a nation seem to be going backwards. Racism, which never went away but was at least purged from the public sphere, has now been legitimized as a way to express perceived victimhood. Membership in racist hate groups is rising steadily, and since 9/11, more Americans have been killed by racial hate crimes than by radical Jihadist terrorists.

How sad that this year’s King holiday fell in the middle of a pitiful debate over whether the President of the United States called Haiti and African nations “s***hole” or “s***house” countries, as if one is any more acceptable than the other. How lamentable that some public figures are actually dismissing, or worse, defending this characterization on the grounds that many prior presidents also used foul language (That is not the point!), or that this President is just talking the way his supporters talk in private (So the president is only a reflector of society and not a leader?), or that he was actually speaking the truth about the economic misery some nations find themselves in (due to decades of oppression in the global economy that our nation has supported), or that his careless language doesn’t matter so long as good policy results. (The end justifies any means, in other words.)

But to indignantly call the President of the United States a racist, while painfully obvious, is not really helpful. In truth, we are all racists. We are not all equally racist, but we’ve all been shaped in powerful ways by the narrative of “race” that has informed our nation’s history. In reality, there is only one human race, but for the last 600 years, beginning with European colonization of black and brown people, the myth of different human races has been used to justify the supremacy of “white” people and the subjugation of “dark-skinned” people. It is impossible not to be infected by the sin of racism, even in subtle ways that escape our personal awareness. To accuse the President of racism risks the implication that those leveling the charge are completely free of racism themselves, which is simply not true.

Voting Christian Conscience

Even though Roy Moore hasn’t yet conceded the Senatorial election in Alabama, the results are pretty clear. He lost. Even President Trump, his biggest cheerleader in the last couple of weeks, has congratulated his opponent, Doug Jones, on his hard-fought victory.

Now the analysis cycle is in full motion. The women’s vote was key – it was the mirror opposite of the men’s vote, but more women voted than men. Democrats are emphasizing the historic nature of the election. It’s been a quarter century since any Democrat has won statewide office, and an aggregate of polls still had Moore leading right up until Election Day. Republicans, on the other hand, are taking the “nothing to see here” approach, insisting that the unique circumstances of this election make it impossible to draw any conclusions about larger trends.

There is a critical aspect of this election that is under-appreciated by the secular media. Alabama is one of the most churched states in the country, and Roy Moore ran aggressively as a champion of conservative Christian values. His campaign rallies were like revival meetings. He regularly invoked the name of God and called on Alabamians to “stand up for the Lord” by voting for him. He deflected charges of sexual molestation earlier in his life by characterizing them as veiled attacks on his faith. His campaign was presented as a crusade of good against evil, a courageous effort to fight back against the persecution of the Christian faith. The reason he hasn’t yet conceded is because he must “wait on God,” as he told supporters last night. I guess he means that the apparent result of the election is only a temptation not to put our trust in God, who will eventually intervene to see that his favored candidate, Mr. Moore, wins.

Moore framed this election as a referendum on Christianity. To his great surprise, I’m sure, a bi-partisan coalition of Christians banded together to repudiate him and elect Jones.