Ponderings

The plight of All Saints Episcopal Church was in the news again this week. All Saints is a large, influential, and progressive congregation in Pasadena, California. (read: important distinction – progressive) Just prior to the Presidential election of 2004, the guest speaker offered a stinging denouncement of the war in Iraq in a sermon entitled, “If Jesus debated John Kerry and President Bush”. Although he begins the sermon assuring the congregation that Jesus wins the debate and he won’t tell anyone how to vote, he is unapologetically critical of the direction this nation is headed. He makes strident statements like, “No matter what rhetoric is used, any public policy that makes a child’s life more miserable is an abomination before God.” Quite frankly neither candidate in that contentious election measured up to the Jesus standard that George Regas offered in his sermon, hence his opening comment that Jesus wins the debate, not either of the balloted candidates. The IRS made noises in 2005 about investigating, but went silent. In July 2006 the IRS sent a summons to the church and its rector demanding information for an investigation. A couple of ironies are of course pertinent, not the least of which is that our closest Roman Catholic Archbishop during that same election cycle threatened to excommunicate voters who strayed from anti-abortion candidates and no one questions the Roman Catholic church’s tax standing. For the IRS to target a progressive church in an election that was visibly swayed by conservative pulpits is at best a mockery. In fairness we should clarify that what is at stake is not a person or group’s right to make political statements, but the extent to which political statements can be made and still be considered “nonpartisan” enough to maintain tax exempt status. And I have to confess that if the IRS functions to muzzle the preaching of the gospel, than I say bring on the taxes. Let’s remove the tax exempt status of all organizations that lobby candidates and that take stands on issues. (read: eliminate tax exempt status all together) But since this an unlikely outcome, and All Saints is bearing the brunt of the legal expense of the latest power play in a divisive culture, our contributions to support their legal defense would be timely.

Christians around this country and beyond will celebrate “World Communion Sunday” on the first Sunday of October. The day was initiated in 1936 by the Presbyterian church as a response to our world’s warring madness. The goal of the founders was to help us look beyond our own parochial borders and recognize as sisters and brothers the Christians of the Sudan, China, Bosnia, and Israel. Traditional for this celebration are using different ethnic variations of bread, multi-cultural music, and readings in languages other than English. Although the Christian label is placed on a wide array ethnic packages, the celebration wants us to remember that we are the same on the inside. But for the same reasons that many Christians are not celebrating World Communion Sunday, I realize that I am having to rethink the “who” of my unity.

In reality it is the diminishing pool of so-called mainline Christians (the members of the National Council of Churches – UCC’s, Presbyterians, Methodists, etc) that will celebrate World Communion Sunday, and we will talk about how we are united with all Christians. Meanwhile the growing para-church organizations like the Family Research Council are growing in numbers, dollars, and influence. Their goal is not Christian unity but rather Christian nationalism, legislating a particular version of Christian morality and economics. And while my mainline colleagues twist themselves into pretzels to point to our commonalties and unity, the mega church just down the road is handing out voter guides that focus on divisive and partisan issues.

As we come to this Sunday, in the midst of Ramadan and the eve of Yom Kippur, I find that I am much less concerned about the labels of religion and much more concerned with the contents. I want to celebrate my unity with my sisters and brothers who seek to follow the God that I know in the healing, feeding, and teaching ministries of Jesus, not the ones who use Jesus’ name to bomb abortion clinics. I want to build on the unity that I share with others who recognize God’s kingdom as one of justice, peace, and inclusive love, not those who use Jesus’ name to preach hate. I no longer trust that a container is labeled “Christian” has contents that I’m willing to share. It’s time to look past the labels and read the list of ingredients.

The problem, of course, with this plan is that the list of ingredients is filled with words that are foreign to us. Wall Builders, Patriot Post, Concerned Women of America, and Patriot Academy are just a few of the names that are new to us. The names sound innocuous but do we know what values they bear? And though we would like to say that all Christians share the basic values of God’s love, it is in the name of Jesus that the Alliance Defense Fund trains attorneys “to battle the radical homosexual legal agenda.” Also in the name of Jesus American Vision’s leader, Gary DeMar, writes that another “long-term goal” should be “the execution of abortionists and parents who hire them.” The ingredients may be hard to understand, but they are undeniably toxic.

We will share communion on Sunday and we will talk about believers around the world. But we won’t limit our inclusion to those who bare the name of Christ and we won’t pretend to have unity with those who use our Lord’s name to promulgate hate. As we break the bread and share the cup, we will pray for God’s wisdom and learn to read the strange new words in the list of ingredients.

Donita had a good idea this week. It’s time to revamp the bulletin she suggested, and she had a sample of a format that was appealing to all of us. But it’s now 4:49pm on Friday and she, Terri, and I have spent many hours on this simple little project - which I think is now complete, for this week anyway.

Computers make for endless possibilities and every great new idea comes with the implicit invitation to invest. Our investment of time is often more precious even than money. I still remember a staff meeting several years back when Sue exclaimed, “Katy, I don’t have time for any more of your good ideas!”

As I think about the hours I whiled away on this bulletin revamp project, I realize that part of my willingness to invest was the benefit. Of course I have a vested interest in the product outcome but I also enjoy the creative outlet of moving graphics and texts around on a page. I’m late for a meeting now, but I can honestly say I feel refreshed after my afternoon of computer play.

The key of course is choice. I was invited to share in a ministry that gives me energy, not assigned to a task that I find unfulfilling. If I was forced to spend the afternoon gardening, I’d be very crabby now. But as I dash to the meeting, I go confident that those nourished by gardening will continue to enjoy their ministry — because on my dash out the door to the meeting I’ll stop and smell the wonderful fruit of their labor.

Peace to you…

A vatican first, an apology from the Pope.

Still the violence incited by the Pope’s quotation of an ancient and derogatory reference to Mohammad continues to swell. News of the apology was frontline news in the so-called Western world, but did little to quell the passion of those offended.

Perhaps the nature of the apology bears review. The pope said that he was “deeply sorry” for the reaction to his speech, that it had been misunderstood. The official Vatican statement read similarly, that he “regretted that his speech on Islam offended Muslims”.

The apology was sincere and thoughtful, but did not acknowledge offense given. He did not express regret for his speech, but rather for the reception it received. In a world of competing cultures and languages, it is no surprise that often our words are given meaning unintended and offense is taken where none was intended. For this the pope is sincerely sorry. His apology was for offense taken.

The stinging denouncement of Muhammad that was quoted by the pope, however, was offense given. This was a quote that was unnecessary in the speech, inflammatory in nature, and should have been edited out of the speech long before the pope boarded the plane for Germany. Assuming that the quotation was, as the vatican insists, not intended to offend, he made a mistake. A big one.

We make mistakes in life. We give and take offense. The mark of leadership is not perfection but acceptance of responsibility. And an apology for offense given is not too much to ask.

We shuddered again yesterday at the news of yet another school shooting somewhere.

Except this one wasn’t over there, this one was here. In St. Louis. Not in a “public” school. But in an elite Christian academy in West County.

Thankfully there was only one casualty, the shooter himself, and he will presumably have a full recovery. But the veil of invincibility has torn.

Violence in society is nothing new. The weapons change with our technological advancements. Just as we are able to communicate with others more quickly, we are also able to destroy them more easily. And economics plays a role. As trinkets have become cheaper in the past few decades, so too the weapons of war. We scan the heavens, the airwaves, and the internet for what makes our children so different in this generation of school violence, but I suspect there is nothing new. We’ve simply raised the stakes with the ready availability of weapons.

One solution of course is to try to remove weapons. A prohibition, gun control.

Although I’m not opposed to such measures, I suspect the more effect route is a more proactive one. We need to offer to ourselves and our children a moral education that keeps up with our technological one. Our technological learning has far outpaced the idea of a moral code book and our moral education needs to equip our youth to face violence in themselves and others. A moral education which embraces complex realities and faces ambiguity. A moral education which addresses both personal and communal responsibility. A moral education which equips us for conflict mediation rather than domination.

Children will be children, but we’ve created a world with advancing dangers. It is incumbant upon us as parents, religious leaders, and educators to reconsider the moral and ethical grounding that we offer to our children.