Beyond Right and Left - Part III

A key influence in my life half a lifetime ago was Ron Sider's Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger (1978). I haven't read more of his writings since, though I assume he is still producing thoughtful works on the Christian's responsibility to live the life of faith and fight for justice on behalf of the world's oppressed. The other day I checked out the internet to see what he has been doing more recently. Particularly he's come out with an update (2005) of this earlier seminal work that has been so widely read and discussed.

A main theme of Sider's writings, particularly in a more recent book, The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience (2008) is that there is within evangelical Christianity a great inconsistency between Christian beliefs and Christian living. Anecdotally, I wholeheartedly agree, which for me is the reason the field of Ethics is so essential. Ethics, to give it my sound-byte definition, is "living out what we believe." Francis Schaeffer once asked, but never fully answered, the question, "How Shall We Then Live?" It is an answer Sider continues to pursue.

An ongoing theme in Sider's writings and in the organization he founded, Evangelicals for Social Action, is that the Evangelical political agenda refuses to embrace the poor. In stark contrast, there is extensive evidence that Evangelicalism (worldwide as well as with its American version) is on the frontlines in ministries of compassion. Historically, Evangelicals were agitators for political change on behalf of the poor during the 19th Century - everything from abolition of slavery to child labor laws. But since what David O. Moberly has called the "Great Reversal" (1972) at the beginning of the 20th Century, white American Evangelicalism, in particular, has focused almost exclusively on the individual poor and resisted becoming involved in systemic change (thus the preponderance of the word "conservative" in Evangelical political discourse). The most glaring example of this is the Civil Rights movement of mid-century in which, unlike the abolitionist movement of 100 years earlier, Evangelicals either sat on the sidelines or, more accurately, pushed back against the cause for racial justice and equality.

I think about that. Does Christian social and political involvement extend only to the personal? The role of government plays heavily in political discourse among American Christians. The size of government -- which seems to be a key defining point in American politics -- may be an important issue to grapple with, but how does it play out biblically speaking?

Which brings up another point, just what biblical issues are there that we as Believers need to devote our lives to? How are we to be involved with God in fulfilling the prayer Jesus taught his disciples? "Your Kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven." Whatever our beliefs about the "end times", we as Evangelicals wholeheartedly assert that God does indeed have a preferred vision for this world and that we as Believers are called to execute that preferred vision, not just wait for the "by and by."

As I've studied the Good Book over the years, I keep running into foundational themes - themes like justice and righteousness (which so often go hand in hand); mercy and compassion for the most vulnerable; the value of human life at every stage and in every diverse form; God's love for His created order; and the (sometimes grotesquely abused) gifts God wills His children in the forms of prosperity, health, wholeness, and freedom for all peoples.

God's Word doesn't have a lot to say about forms of government, but it has tons to say about how any government should behave. And I don't find the kinds of distinctions we moderns make between personal and systemic justice and righteousness, only that it is God's will that every last person, every last government and social unit, and even all of creation receive and extend all the goodness God desires to bestow -- which is a whole lot.

What I also notice is that God does not distinguish between worthy and unworthy recipients of His blessings. God is said to send rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous, to be no respecter of persons, which means He treats us all alike. There is, in God's eyes, no odd distinction such as "worthy" poor. We are all unworthy -- that is why God's blessings are filed under the category of "grace."

So, I come to the conclusion, once again, that God's preferred vision lies far beyond our left-right continuum. And it is out there in the "far beyond" that we are called to as well. Stick that in your political pipe and smoke it.

Beyond Right and Left - Part II

In an engaging column in the 2009.11.16 print edition of Time magazine, James Poniewozik raises some thoughtful questions about our right-left take on politics: "Categories like Pew's 'liberal,' 'conservative,' and 'neither' imply that our society is as simplistic about media bias as we are about politics (when in fact both involve nuanced positions)."

Poniewozik goes on to speak of the unspoken bias of the moderate or centrist position and he concludes that when we speak of bias, there is a whole plethora of biases in society, right, left and even center. Moreover, there is, he says, no one conservative bias or one liberal bias or even one centrist bias, but all kinds of ranges and variations. Which makes the rantings of talk show hosts sound all the more incredible (as in absurd). Particularly disturbing in all the present polarization is the demonization of the opposition. If someone can never find anything good to say about those "on the other side", then I immediately question the rationality of the speaker's "reflections." (I put reflections in quotes because the word implies something far quieter than ranting provides.)

Which brings me to the point that there is little room in our current world for nuance of thought. And yet no two people are ever going to agree on everything, unless one of them is a master of mind control. But we generally do not acknowledge the existence of nuances or at the least assume that any differences are immaterial.

However, as I advance on what I trust is an authentic journey of faith, I realize that these subtleties do make a big difference. Friends have encouraged me to watch this video claiming that Obama is a Muslim. I guess it balances out videos friends on "the other side" have sent me. Otherwise I find nothing in it of value or truth. But I do note that the video makes a big deal of apparent nuances, such as word choices and posturings. It is what I wrote of a couple postings ago in this blog about "where there is smoke, there is not necessarily fire." Nuances are tricky things to differentiate.

This past weekend I got into a fun scrap with some FB friends over some political ramblings and one of those friends said that some position I had or he claimed I had was an oxymoron. My oldest son read that later and clarified that it was a paradox more than an oxymoron because too many words were involved. My investment in his education is proving useful.

What makes something oxymoronic or paradoxical (depending on how many words are involved)? Really it comes down to perspective. From one person's viewpoint a pro-life Democrat or a pro-environmental Republican is an oxymoron. If we look at these things on a right-left continuum, we are forced to conclude that the truth must lie somewhere on this continuum and the truth is that truth cannot therefore be oxymoronic.

Or can it? I take a fresh look at faith and realize that faith is always oxymoronic, paradoxical from a human perspective. God exists beyond the realm of human perspective. Somehow God the Infinite through Jesus the Revealer has invaded and inhabited our finite time-space dimension, but this God is not confined by that continuum as we are. Thus the biblical writer speaks of Jesus as being yesterday, today and forever the same. He is beyond our 3D universe.

If we can, in the same way, see the relationship between God and our finite world of politics and faith, then it gives us a fresh perspective. If there is a right-left continuum, there is no one point on the continuum that embodies truth. Truth is beyond our human reasoning, be it right, left or middle. Truth, in Jesus Christ, invades and inhabits our right-left continuum, but Truth is not confined by that continuum as we are. The truth, therefore, does not, as the saying goes, lie somewhere in the middle any more than it does on the right or on the left. It is much richer, more nuanced and far more dynamic than that. But what the truth of Jesus Christ reveals to us is that it can be known by us mere mortals, even in our one-dimensional political universe.

Beyond Right and Left - Part I

"Moderates do not have principles." Time to switch back to the station I usually listen to. I was on my way home from a fundraiser breakfast in Salem and had stopped by to see my son at college. As the favorite station was getting a bit fuzzy, I had moved over to AM. A famous radio talk show host was bombasting away, explaining to the world why there was only one way to think. At the least, he kept me awake.

Yesterday was election day in a few places across the country, places like New Jersey where I grew up, local and state elections that I hadn't been following. Limbaugh was attacking moderates who advocated for the Republican "big tent" concept. Moderates like the big tent idea in the two main parties, otherwise they'd have to be independents and independents don't usually fare too well in this nation, especially moderate ones.

I take what Rush was saying to mean that people on the political right and left (as we Americans traditionally define right and left) have principles. But those in what is called the middle are compromisers. They lack principles. He did use those terms that way.

I'm not sure my political beliefs line me up in the middle -- or on the right or left for that matter. Which is why I put "unique" as my political persuasion on both my website and on my Facebook info page. I find it a very arduous task to sort out Biblical and Kingdom principles in this human life -- a task nonetheless worth pursuing.

In the life of Faith, there are no neat categories of actions to be taken or positions to be staked. The Bible is not a one-answer fits all catalog of dos and don'ts. It is filled with principles and parables and perspectives that cover all areas of life -- along with some very specific commands, some of which are for all times and all peoples and some of which are very time and people specific. If the Bible were more catalogish and specified, we would not need faith's other two anchors -- the Holy Spirit and the Community of Faith -- to help us sort out life.

So I don't feel totally comfortable with any one position on the traditional left-to-right line on which we tend to paint political, moral and religious persuasions. I like better the idea that, at the least, this line is more a circle in which the most liberal libertarians and the most conservative libertarians meet somewhere on the other side, opposite those big tent moderates who hang between the Republican and Democratic parties. (Every country has its own variations on these themes, so to my non-USA friends, please pardon my culturally specific applications.)

Even at that, I am not sure such a circle captures the heart and passions of God. Make it into a sphere and you get closer. But God is so beyond our three-dimensional world, the sphere would have to have an unlimited number of dimensions.

However, we mortals don't live in more than three dimensions, at least not on an ordinary basis, though I think that is what the Ancient, Paul, was referring to by being caught up to a higher level. Still, it is hard to bring those dimensions into everyday life -- witness the intense and passionate controversy surrounding applications of John's book known as "Revelation".

I don't think God purposed that life be all so complicated for us earth-bound humans. The complications are what we theological and philosophical types call "sin" and "evil". Which is why God sent Jesus, to help us rise above sin and evil and complications, and why Jesus said he'd come back and why many Believers talk about something called the Millennium, a futuristic time when he would show us what God intended all along, a time of living uncomplicatedly in the unlimited dimensions of God here on earth as human beings.

Most Christians agree to some degree with this notion of God's Kingdom on earth. Where we really disagree is how and how much God's multidimensional intentions and expectations impact our here and now. It is what theological types have called the "Already but not yet" of God's reign on earth, something people like Rush and other Righties and Lefties don't quite get.

Where there’s smoke – Part III

A newcomer to digital social networks like Facebook, I’ve noticed how people spout and move on. Occasionally I subject myself to bombastic talk radio. Even more rarely do I tune in to people shouting at each other on the TV. What I see and hear and shy away from are people freely expressing generalized sound bytes that come across more like rants than invitations to further discussion. They are throwing up regurgitated hash and leaving a foul smell in their wake.

These same people get lost, confused or defensive if you respond in a way that attempts to open up the discussion. What is missing, sadly, in so much of our modern world is thoughtful dialog. Is it lack of time or just lack of interest?

One of my favorite pastimes when we lived in China was stopping by to visit a friend in the open market or dropping in on a friend at his or her work post. In much of the Asian culture, two rules of social intercourse are paramount. One, you don’t just jump into business, you slide into it after taking time to catch up on life a bit and inquire after one’s parents and ask, “have you eaten yet”. Two, you don’t shove an issue in another person’s face; you slide into it as delicately as you can.

This sliding approach sounds far too indirect to us Westerners given to in-your-face Jerry Springer style relating. But the social slide is a multi-millennial habit formed to preserve a bit of mutual social respect and courtesy in even the most heated of conflagrations. The goal of dialog is making or keeping a friend, not winning an argument.

I think about this as I switch off an AM radio talk show and seek a moment of quiet on a local classical music station. The Chinese have a saying, which basically means you purposely go down your friend’s path with him for a while so that he will be willing to return the favor and walk down your path with you. The idea is that I listen to what my friend is saying and seek to understand where she is coming from, and then that friend will be willing to do the same with me, listening to my point of view. We both gain out of it.

One of my favorite books is E. Stanley Jones’ Christ at the Round Table. The book is hard-to-read by easy-reading modern standards, filled as it is with the dialogs Jones had with a variety of thinking people – Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims, Christians, Nonbelievers even – in a setting where the playing field was leveled and everyone was given full opportunity to express ideas and ask questions.

I don’t fear for our modern civilization as long as priority is given to thoughtful insights and honest probing. The truth is that truth, given a fair and equal hearing, will in the end win out. The person who has the truth is not afraid of truth being lost as long as it can be expressed.

As a Believer I am confident that when all views are given equal opportunity of expression the Jesus I know will shine brightest. I don’t need to shout him; I just need to allow him to be revealed.

Share ideas that are contrary to politically correct speech whether you be in church or in the country club and there are sure to be those who will question your credentials. “Where there is smoke, there is fire,” they say. “Surely you are one of Them.”

And yet, long before modern democratic ideals welcomed open discourse, Jesus provided a safe place for just such an openness. Too many moderns fear compromise. They exaggerate the effect of open investigation. The enemy is not the opposing view; the enemy is a closed mind.

Where there’s smoke – Part II

One of my favorite parables is the one where Jesus contrasts the Pharisee and the Tax Collector. What strikes me every time I read this story is how things are not always as they seem.

I’ve described the story before like this: Which of the men is closer to God, the Pharisee who is very religiously devoted and is always at the temple praying; or the Tax Collector who stands way outside, because he is so bad and such a stranger to houses of worship? Jesus’ surprising answer is the tax collector. This guy that everybody loves to revile and isn’t even clean enough to get close to in the temple is actually closer to God than this Pharisee who has worked hard all his life to be just what God expects!

Why do I like this story? Because, I think, it is much more real life than what we generally assume. We’re always looking at resumes and outward appearances. We’re always checking what the best references have to say. And all that background checking shows us nothing about what is going on inside someone, what we call the heart, the core of a person.

But it is not position, it is direction. When the Pharisee stands up and proclaims, “God, I thank you that I am not like…,” his face shifts from wherever he thinks God is to faces in the crowd, and particularly to the face of the Tax Collector, who is presumably way in the back, behind him. So this Pharisee ends up facing away from God (metaphorically speaking since God is supposedly everywhere). Meanwhile, the miserable, evil Tax Collector who is way far off is actually facing toward wherever God is supposed to be, presumably meaning toward what they called the “Holy of Holies” in the Temple.

While the Pharisee is facing away from God, the Tax Collector is actually bent toward God, albeit with his head bowed but in the general presumed direction. The one who is closer, then, Jesus is saying, is not the one who has positioned himself nearer to where he presumes God to be, but the one who is bowing in humility in a direction that moves him closer to God.

It is direction not position. Jesus says the tax collector is the only one of the two who goes home justified. Theological types refer to positional justification, by which they mean that we are justified (meaning made good) in God’s sight, not by what we have or haven’t done, but by our position in Christ. What they are getting at is that we are justified by what Christ as done, not what we have done. Which is true.

I prefer to think of it more as directional justification. Which way are we headed? What is our bent?

You see a lady of the night. She’s a mess. But inside with whatever last clearheadedness she can muster, she’s crying out, “God if you exist, help me.”

You see a real classy lady who is in church all the time, gives loads of money to help the church with this or that project, volunteers for everything and prays and reads her Bible all the time. She’s a perfect wife and mother to boot. But inside, in the midst of all that busyness for God, she’s telling God what to do about everyone and everything else and yet not really noticing God.

Which one is closer to God? The one who is moving toward God, no matter how far back she starts. That is directional justification.

There is a lot of talk these days about politically correct speech. Whether it is on TV or in church or … just about anywhere. It’s an abominable vice of both the political and religious right and the left (or whatever other forum of life you are talking about). But as much as we want to judge the speech of those around us, we can never tell what is going on inside the heart of our neighbor. Only God can do that.

I think about that. Just because there is smoke does not mean there is fire. Good or evil.

Where There’s Smoke – Part I

Our home has two seasons – deck and fireplace. In the warmer (and drier) weather of summer, the deck becomes our family hangout, especially in the cooler evenings. When cold (and wet) weather sets in, the hangout spot is the family room fireplace in the pre-dawn mornings as kids sleepily get ready for school.

This year’s fireplace season started this week. Fires each morning warm up our cold, dark house. I sat working the wood and the flames early today, waiting until the fire was burning on its own so I could go and prepare everyone’s tuna fish lunch sandwiches. Then a log caved in where smaller pieces had turned to ash and billowing smoke spewed out. I shifted the logs with the poker, causing flames to shoot up, instantly dispelling the smoke.

As I watched the flames eat the smoke, the expression, “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire,” came to mind. And I realized how inaccurate that statement can be. The opposite is what was playing out in my fireplace this morning – as it does every morning. Smoke is more often a sign there is no flame – or at best a very weak one. Once the fire flares up, the smoke (as a visible, choking cloud) disappears.

What that expression, “Where there’s smoke…”, speaks to is the notion that one thing obviously leads to another. If A is true, then B must be true. But that is not necessarily the case. In fact reality may very well be the opposite of what we presume.

Waiting for this morning’s fire to combust, I thought about how much misperceptions play a role in society, even among people of Faith, people who are called to consider all possibilities and “give the benefit of the doubt” (otherwise known as “grace”).

One prime place for Illogic 101 is on Facebook. I’m a newcomer to this social phenomenon and as much as I check it to stay connected, I find myself wearying of the free flow of verbal smoke. Today someone wrote about how common sense is such an oxymoron in our society. And while in this statement the writer proved astute about the lack of common sense, I am not sure that our society is any more oxymoronic or nonsensical than any other in our present world or in generations before.

The tendency that social networkings do foster, be they internet-based or the more traditional face-to-face kind, is the inclination to spread common nonsense. A favorite writer of mine is Hans Christian Andersen and I’m particularly fond of his tale, “It’s Absolutely True,” starring some very silly barnyard hens. Often, as I look after to our own hens, Andersen’s word pictures come to mind.

The story is how a hen loses a feather and how that ordinary moment turns into a supposed frenzy of self-plucking cacklers that even the original feather-loser doesn’t recognize. As with Andersen’s barnyard inhabitants, very intelligent people with a lot more smarts than my own fowl start jumping to conclusions about fires when all that can be found is some choking smoke. I’m aware that conclusion-jumping is as old as the stories of Abraham’s lot in Genesis. Making assumptions is a trait common to all mankind.

I think about this, how much we assume about life, faith, politics, our neighbors, even ourselves. And I wonder how little of life really is what we think it is. I’ve been troubled by the emotional frenzy of American political life, be it on the right or on the left. I’ve become more and more amazed at the truncated perspective people have about other people’s views on God and faith. And I wonder, just wonder, sometimes as I sit and tend my early morning fire, what God thinks of all this human smoke.

God made mankind, both male and female, so that they (God and people) could share in relationships, where they really, truly get to know each other. Not just assume that A leads to or means B, or presume that if there is smoke, then there must be fire. In the mornings, I don’t even dare assume that if there are flames that I then can walk away from an actual fire. “It ain’t over until it’s over” is another common saying. Jesus put it in terms farmers of the day could understand: “Don’t separate the wheat from the tares until harvest time.” Or as we fowl-tenders say, “Don’t count your chickens until they hatch.”

Absolute Essentials – X

So what does it mean to have a relationship with Jesus? Having a relationship with Jesus involves both revelation and faith. Both are provided by the Holy Spirit. They speak of something that happens in us as we start realizing something very real about Jesus and his significance. We may not understand very much at first, but we are aware that there is something more to Jesus than was meeting the eye.

A relationship with Jesus is all about responding to his initiatives. These promptings come through the Holy Spirit whether we are aware of the Spirit’s involvement or not. We really only have a very simple choice at each of these promptings. We either reject the impulse of faith and revelation we are experiencing or we accept it. The more we accept it, the more we can accept. The more we reject, or to put it another way, the less we accept, the harder it is for us to accept. Kind of like answering your alarm clock in the morning.

Now, just because the Holy Spirit prompts us and we push away that prompting does not mean we’ve blown it once and for all. God is far too gracious with us for that. But we can continue to reject that prompting long enough that we no longer feel any promptings by the Spirit. Again, kind of like ignoring your alarm clock so much that it is a totally useless sound except as a frustration to your neighbors.

But, conversely, as we do respond to those promptings, we begin growing in our relationship with Jesus. There is no set pattern or timing to that process. It is not a science that can be programmed. Relationships defy such structuring. But things will begin to evidence themselves as that relationship grows.

A growing desire to do God’s will. A hunger to know God more. An interest in connecting with others who have these same promptings. And an urge to share about this relationship with others and to spread some of this love and grace around.

The more we are with Jesus, the more we want to be with Jesus and his people. The more we receive his love, the more we want to pass it on. The more we respond to Jesus, the more we want to respond to Jesus.

A relationship with Jesus is not about how much you pray or even how you pray. It is not about how much you read or study your Bible or how often you go to church or do this or that, like witnessing or feeding the hungry even. The more we know Jesus the more we will be drawn to do these things. But it is not a quantifiable thing. Nor is it something we should quantify as a sign of our spirituality. That is the sin of the Pharisees that Jesus so vehemently rejected in the 1st Century.

But a relationship with Jesus will come out, will show itself in that we are drawn to know more about God, to spend time with God, to connect with God’s people, and to be about the Father’s business, just as Jesus so clearly articulated at the tender age of 12.

Closeness to an infinite being like God is less defined by position than by momentum. Justification is position and it is something God provides for us. Through the death of His Son, Jesus, God declares us justified, something we accept simply by faith. God through His unfathomable grace declares us to be righteous in His sight, not by what we have done, but purely by what Jesus has done on our behalf. So this closeness is not about justification.

The closeness is an ongoing responsiveness to God through Jesus Christ. How do you get closer and closer to a God who is so infinite He has no end? It is by giving in to that hunger, that urge (that prompting) inside of us that says I desire more of this Jesus. Maybe that is what I mean by momentum – ongoing responsiveness, continuously giving in to the desires inside of me to connect with Jesus.

In this, a relationship with God is not unlike a relationship with another human. It makes sense that our human relationships are patterned after our relationship with God. And, Jesus tells us, that that relationship (the one we can have with God) is patterned after the relationships God the Father, God the Son (Jesus), and God the Holy Spirit share with each other. As theologians tell us, God as Three-in-One is a relational God and so that relational aspect defines the interpersonal universe as we know it. We are, after all, created in the image of this relational God.

How do we know how to relate to this God? By realizing that the best in our human relationships is a mirror reflection of relationship with God. It comes out of an inner desire to connect. That inner desire is planted in us by the Holy Spirit. God loves us so much that He initiates and all we have to do is start responding.