|
Friday, July 18,
2003
Arise, Alabama, Shine for your Light Has Come
I have written before about the Alabama
tax reform movement and the role played by Evangelical
Christian and tax law professor Susan
Pace Hamill. This effort has tremendous potential to transform
the public perception of role played by Christians in political
discourse away from pious busybodies toward faith-inspired
advocates for the less-advantaged in our society. D-Day is
September 9 when Alabama voters will decide on the state constitutional
amendment required for tax reform.
The Christian
Coalition of Alabama wants no part of this movement. They
are among the most
visible of the groups in opposition to reforming a state
tax system that is arguably
the most unfair to the poor, especially the working poor,
of all the fifty states. Michael at "Minority of One,"
the blogosphere's
expert on the movement, chronicles some of the Christian
Coalition's fellow travelers.
There is more that we can do about this effort than just
be informed. Alabama
Arise, a coalition of 150
religious, civic and community groups dedicated to improving
the lives of poor people, is organizing workshops around the
state to disseminate the truth about tax reform and counter
the lies
being spread by reform's opponents. You can become
an associate member or contact the individual listed here
to help in other ways.
The Christian Right: Answering the Who, What and Where
Questions
Dean Esmay
and I have had on ongoing
dialogue about the Christian
(Religious)/Right. Dean has raised some pertinent issues
and I have tried to respond. One of his questions that I haven't
dealt with is who or what or where is the Christian Right_
I'm still learning that it is much more than Falwell and Robertson
and Dobson, and the more I learn, the more complicated it
gets. But I have reached the point where I'm ready to give
it a first shot. Next week, I will try to define and identify
"the Christian Right."
What does the Bible say about...
I began a new feature at "The Right Christians"
on Wednesday entitled "What
does the Bible say about..." These topic-driven pieces
will aim at providing some guidance and encouragement to the
serious Bible student who does not have an extensive background
in biblical languages or history. During the weekend, expect
two new installments: marriage in the New Testament/Greek
Bible and slavery. Check back mid-day Saturday.
Obscure Bible passage of the day: Isaiah 60:1-3
"Arise, shine; for your light has come, and the glory
of the Lord has risen upon you. For darkness shall cover
the earth, and thick darkness the peoples; but the Lord
will arise upon you, and his glory will appear over you.
Nations shall come to your light, and kings to the brightness
of your dawn." (NRSV)
Comment
May Alabama arise and shine as the prophet dreamed for his
Zion.
Feedback
Comment
Home
Thursday, July 17, 2003
Spooky Tunes
Do you like to watch scary movies_ I'm not talking about
the ones that are heavy on the blood and gore, but films in
the Hitchcock tradition that can make you jump out of your
seat once or twice. There's a little "rush" that
comes from that adrenaline. There's the sense of relief at
the end when the source of fear is eliminated (at least until
the sequel) and the hero/heroine is safe. It's even better
when the lights come up and you head back outside into a real
world that might seem just a little less scary than when you
bought the ticket.
I've been to something like a scary movie sitting at my computer
this week. It
all began when my curiosity drove me to explore why a
group called the Alliance
for Marriage, whose board contains many people with admirable
records as civil rights leaders and progressive Christians,
would spearhead the effort for the Federal Marriage Amendment
when even the Bush White House is leary of giving its full
support. The money trail pointed in the direction of the extraordinarily
wealthy "philanthropists" of the far right like
the Olins, the Coors, the Bradleys and Richard Mellon Scaife.
The Alliance for Marriage, despite its laudable
goals as displayed in its mission statement, appears to
have more in common with the Institute
for Religion and Democracy and the Institute
on Religion and Public Life than grass roots organizations
of progressive Christians like The
Center for Progressive Christianity.
This is the part of the movie where the naive but well-meaning
hero/heroine should have the common sense to turn back. But
I could feel the adrenaline working just a little, partly
because of some vague things I remembered about that name
Scaife, but even more because it angered me that people who
were not even members of a denomination would use their inherited
wealth to encourage strife and discord among Christians.
Into this maelstrom courageously dove the voice of reason
yesterday. Jim Lokken, who has ministered for years to the
gay community, wrote the following in an Evangelical Lutheran
Church in America forum on Ecumenical Lutheranism and has
given his gracious permission to reprint it here:
"Most of us in this environment are clergy and
are highly educated. We become passionate over issues and
commitments, as we should. We need to remember, however,
that we are vastly outnumbered by people who do not share
either our education or our concerns, and while just as
capable of passion, tend to be passionate for different
reasons.
I recall sitting in a coffee shop in Times Square, New
York City, in 1966. I was then 33. I was talking with a
college-age young man, tall, blond, thin, obviously gay.
He was upset about being kicked out by his parents. We sipped
coffee and talked. I listened more than I talked. The young
guy held my hand and poured out his story.
At a nearby table sat a middle-aged couple who appeared
to be tourists. Ordinary people. They finished their meal
and got up to leave. The woman looked at us and said in
a loud voice, "You people are disgusting!" Having
delivered her judgment, she and her husband left. We said
nothing.
Several things were obvious. One was that she was a
total stranger who had no idea who I was or the relationship
between me and the young man. She looked and made her assumptions.
It was also obvious that whatever disgusted her was
entirely in her own head, and she took it with her wherever
she went. Whatever she imagined gay people to be like was
entirely her own concept, uninformed by facts. She probably
imagined us to be the sort of people who do unspeakable
things, and that we're all alike. Perhaps she knew of some
bad examples, and generalized them.
It's a familiar stereotype. I think it's shared by many
in our church, though I hope not too many. The clergy should
know better. But the stereotype has nothing to do with the
Bible, or with psychological, sociological, physiological,
or theological understanding. It's just a gut feeling. It's
a negative judgment of people who are "different."
It's very frustrating to be rejected by people not because
of what you really are, but because of what they *think*
you are. That's why some of us regard this as a "justice"
issue in the same way that civil rights was a justice issue
in the 1950's and 1960's.
What percent of the people in the ELCA are theologically
well informed, read issue-oriented journals, go to assemblies
and conferences, take advantage of adult educational opportunities_
I don't know. I'd guess that it's less than 1 percent of
the laity, and less than 10 percent of the clergy.
When we debate, then, about these issues, I think we
should be appropriately humble and realize that "the
ELCA does/believes so-and-so" is a statement about
a group that for the most part cares little about academic
theology. The majority can get exercised about trivial issues
-- hymn choices, church decor, changing familiar language
-- but has probably never read the entire Bible, nor the
Lutheran Confessions, and has no intention of doing so.
To them it's not only difficult to grhtml, it's irrelevant.
Sexuality is another matter. Each of us considers him
or herself to be an expert, and it does affect our lives.
So we get passionate (pun intended) even when we are uninformed.
It's an issue unlike any other.
We need a process for addressing this issue that gets
our heads out of the books, that speaks to prejudices and
stereotypes, that unmasks denial, that makes Aunt Polly
and Aunt Esther stop and think before rendering their judgments."
Jim's advice to those of us in the ministry is wonderful.
We must make the effort to hear and understand those who appear
to us as--let's be honest about it--prejudiced and ignorant.
He is surely right that we are not confronting people's informed
views about theology, the Bible, psychology, or sociology.
As I have argued
here before, we are facing their worldviews, their concepts
of morality, their "common sense," and "practical
wisdom."
I would like to do one thing in response to Jim's call that
does not "get our heads out of the books." The Bible
has been misused by so many for so long for so many invalid
causes that I would like to make yet another try to use the
Bible as a weapon against prejudice and ignorance rather than
as a tool of those detestable traits. I am initiating today
a new feature at "The Right Christians" titled "What
does the Bible say about..._" The goal is to provide
those without special training in biblical languages or history
to learn more about what the Bible says about topics of current
interest. In the process, I hope to impart to readers of this
feature, in as painless a manner as possible, some of the
skills that are useful for a modern, serious reader of the
Bible. Anytime I use theological jargon, I want someone to
call me on it. Whenever I sound like I'm lecturing seminarians
in an advanced exegetical course rather than speaking to anyone
who might venture here able to name fewer than ten books of
the Bible (my situation two decades ago), let me know. I want
to be informative and challenging but accessible.
For my first attempt at this, I chose something easy and
non-controversial: marriage
in the Hebrew Bible. I'll appreciate your feedback.
We have no choice but to make these kinds of efforts. If
Christianity becomes the exclusive possession of the Falwells
and Grahams and Robertsons, it will become nothing more than
an anachronistic and despised caricature of the faith handed
down to the saints. As we learned yesterday, there
are those who would like to see just that. Jim Lokken
hasn't given up yet. And neither have I.
Obscure Bible passage of the day: Jeremiah 31:33-34
"But this is the covenant that I will make with the
house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will
put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts;
and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. No
longer shall they teach one another, or say to each other,
"Know the Lord," for they shall all know me, from
the least of them to the greatest, says the Lord; for I
will forgive their iniquity, and remember their sin no more."
(NRSV)
Comment
A familiar passage for Lutherans who hear it every Reformation
Sunday, it recounts Jeremiah's dream of a time when no one
will need to be instructed about God. Karen's "dream
of a world without religion" reminds me of this passage.
Until we reach that day, people who want to quote the Bible
to condemn others might benefit from a little instruction
themselves.
More on Gay Marriage and Homosexuality
Hart Roussel gives us yet another fine piece about the difficulties
in using the term "marriage" for gay unions in "At
a Loss for Words." I have a comment on this one.
Charles Utwater expands on his controversial treatment of
Romans 1 and Jack Good responds with a very helpful metaphor
for scripture as family album here.
Feedback
Comment
Home
Tuesday, July 15, 2003
Divide and Destroy
While I was researching and enjoying the story about the
divisions within the Christian Right over how to respond to
Lawrence v. Texas, I came upon what I first thought
was a curiosity. A group calling itself the Alliance
for Marriage has positioned itself as the foremost proponent
of the Federal Marriage Amendment. This proposed federal Constitutional
amendment is short and simple:
"Marriage in the United States shall consist only
of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this constitution
or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law,
shall be construed to require that marital status or the
legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples
or groups."
DANIELS: The United States has seen a strategy in the courts
to try to strike down our marriage laws through lawsuits
filed by activists. The latest one is pending in Massachusetts.
It will be decided this summer. And most experts expect
that this suit will begin a process of a challenge to all
of our state and federal marriage laws around the country.
HUME: How so_
DANIELS: Well, once marriage is destroyed in one state...
HUME: Now, wait a minute. When you say marriage is destroyed,
what do you expect the Massachusetts Supreme Court exactly
to do_
DANIELS: The Massachusetts Supreme Court is likely to strike
down the marriage laws of Massachusetts, declaring them
unconstitutional under the state constitution....
...HUME: All right. So, you're down to your belief then
is the only way to keep this from coming about is to have
a constitutional amendment. Now, the history of these things
is that even if they get out of Washington that they tend
to stall in the states that don't happen. Why are you --
where are you most concerned_ Do you think it will pass
Congress_
DANIELS: I'm most concerned about the Beltway. Actually,
I think our amendment will reverse the typical paradigm.
You're exactly correct. Typically they'll make it out of
the Beltway, they'll wither in the states. This is written
to be so friendly to the authority of the states over benefit,
civil unions, domestic partners, et cetera. It simply protects
marriage as a union between man and woman and leaves everything
else to the states that I think it will fly through the
states.
Thirty-seven states already have laws that have been passed
to try to protect marriage. That's one state short of a
ratification vote. The battle will be the Senate.
Coming out of the background he did, it's not surprising
that Truman used hurtful language and quickly resorted to
racial and ethnic stereotypes when frustrated. Harry will
never escape being justly criticized for those failures. Where
he still can be a model, however, is in his ability to overcome
that background to become a champion for Israel and African-Americans.
Harry's innate sense of fairness and the trait that White
House butler Alonzo Fields described that led Truman to encounter
every human being he met by looking them in the eye and allowing
them to do the same with him prevented his prejudices from
dominating his public service or his person-to-person relationships.
Bluma Jacobson, wife of Harry's old business partner and close
friend Eddie, described how Truman reacted after Eddie had
had a bad night playing poker with Harry and some old pals
during a Presidential visit back home to Kansas City:
The Mission
of the Right Christians
"The Right Christians" was founded
to serve people of faith who object to the agenda of the Christian
Right. Our purposes are fourfold: 1) serve as a source of
information about Christianity and politics; 2) provide a
voice for those whose faith leads them to different conclusions
about political issues than those of the Christian Coalition,
etc.; 3) create a Web community for the mutual support of
like-minded Christians and those of other faiths; and 4) reach
out to those in the Christian community who have begun to
question the motives and agenda of the Christian Right.
There is currently no formal membership process
for "The Right Christians" but we welcome your comments,
encouragement and prayers and invite you to participate
by offering your own contribution in the form of opinion pieces,
scholarly papers or even Weblogs focused on particular topics
within the more general area of Christianity and politics.
We would especially appreciate points of view from outside
the Christian community, e.g. Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, agnostics,
etc.
Home
About the Founder
Allen H. Brill, founder of "The Right Christians",
is a private citizen and Christian who wanted to see viewpoints
of progressive Christians better represented in the public
forum. He provides a Weblog on issues involving Christianity
and politics that is updated five times a week.
Rev. Brill is an ordained Lutheran minister
educated at Concordia Seminary in St. Louis, MO. He is also
a member of the South Carolina Bar with a B.A. degree in Government
from Harvard College and a J.D. from the University of Virginia
Law School.
Home
About "The
Right Christians"
We thank the Rev.
Al Sharpton for our name. Confronted by an anti-abortion
protester at NARAL's January rally to celebrate the 30th anniversary
of Roe V. Wade, Rev.
Sharpton responded, "Young lady, it is time for the
Christian right to meet the right Christians." Our site
is not otherwise connected with the Sharpton campaign and
he is not responsible for its content nor we for his campaign.
We do appreciate his stating so succinctly what we have been
feeling for some time and wish him well.
"The
Right Christians" was founded by the Rev.
Allen H. Brill and is currently under his direction.
Home
Participate
You are invited to contribute to "The Right
Christians" by
submitting letters, articles or even a blog on a specific
topic. Use the Volunteer
Form to get started.
We have some ongoing opportunities
to participate:
We would especially like
to add the following:
Diverse Sources:
Roman Catholics, Jews,
Muslims, Buddhists and other religious groups; pastors or
former pastors of Evangelical or neo-Pentecostal congregations;
academics in the areas of church history or systematics
Experts in the following
areas:
contemporary Christian
music; the business interests of the Christian Right; "Christian"
publishing
Home
|