LSR: A Theology of Liberation

Peruvian professor, author and theologian Gustavo Gutierrez wrote a primer on Latin American Liberation Theology, A Theology of Liberation five years after the first conference of Catholic bishops met in Medellin, Colombia to talk about this emerging theology from and of the poor and indigenous of the regions south of the United States. Some years after the groundbreaking work had begun to be cataloged by Gutierrez, the movement thoroughly expanded to other continents, and to other repressed people - including those within Latin America. And Gutierrez recognized this and added a chapter-long introduction called "Expanding the View." It is from this introduction that we present our Lazy Sunday Reading.

In the final analysis, poverty means death: lack of food and housing, the inability to attend properly to health and education needs, the exploitation of workers, permanent unemployment, the lack of respect for one's human dignity, and unjust limitations placed on personal freedom in the areas of self-expression, politics, and religion. Poverty is a situation that destroys peoples, families, and individuals; [the Liberation Theology conferences of] Medellin and Puebla called it "institutionalized violence" (to which must be added the equally unacceptable violence of terrorism and repression). 

At the same time, it is important to realize that being poor is a way of living, thinking, loving, praying, believing, and hoping, spending leisure time, and struggling for a livelihood. Being poor today is also increasingly coming to mean being involved in the struggle for justice and peace, defending one's life and freedom, seeking a more democratic participation in the decisions made by society, organizing "to live their faith in an integral way" (Puebla), and being committed to the liberation of every human being. 

All this, I repeat, goes to make up the complex world of the poor. The fact that misery and oppression lead to a cruel, inhuman death, and are therefore contrary to the will of the God of Christian revelation who wants us to live, should not keep us from seeing the other aspects of poverty that I have mentioned. They reveal a human depth and a toughness that are a promise of life. This perception represents one of the most profound changes in our way of seeing the reality of poverty and consequently in the overall judgment we pass on it.
... 

Various experiences of being a part of the world of the poor have brought me to a less theoretical knowledge of that world and to a greater awareness of simple but profoundly human aspects of it, apart from which there is no truly liberating commitment. The struggles of those who reject racism and machismo (two attitudes so deeply rooted in the culture and custom of peoples and individuals), as well as of those who oppose the marginalization of the elderly, children, and other "unimportant" persons in our society, have made me see, for example, the importance of gestures and ways of "being with" that some may regard as having little political effectiveness. 

In addition, the experience of these years has shown me that generous solidarity with the poor is not exempted from the temptation of imposing on them categories foreign to them and from the risk of dealing with them in an impersonal way. Sensitivity to these and other dangers is part of a human and Christian praxis whose truly liberating effects extend to those also who are trying to carry on such a praxis for the benefit of the poor and exploited. If there is no friendship with them and no sharing of the life of the poor, then there is no authentic commitment to liberation, because love exists only among equals. Any talk of liberation necessarily refers to a comprehensive process, one that embraces everyone.

The Strings Attached Are Attached to All of Us

We live in this big, intricate, messed up, imperfect world filled with imperfect humans. And it seems like most of us know that and take that for granted. Most American Evangelical Christians sure do. What many of them don't seem to notice, or at least acknowledge, is that we also live in this interdependent, intricately connected, living, breathing society.

Society is not just a concept. It's not an out-there thing disassociated from our everyday reality. It is very present and it is very real. We may not be able to touch it like the hard oak of this heavy but falling-apart table I like to rest my feet on occasionally, but it is every bit as real as the sweat gleaming off my forehead.

So it bothers me to no little effect when people complain about having to participate in society and act as if they owe it nothing - as were the basic arguments raised this last week over the healthcare ruling from the Supreme Court. It's an argument that the poor are using the government to steal from the rich (rather than the truth that the rich are stealing from the poor), or that we're being forced to buy something we don't need. And for all the problems of the Affordable Care Act - and there are many, many - these reasons don't come into play, but expose a deeper problem in contemporary American society and politics: we believe we do not benefit from the very systems that benefit us and we believe that our benefit is not the result of exploiting the very poor of our country and the world.

But first the good stuff. We benefit largely as a result of shared work. That's how a society functions. Everybody puts in; everybody gets results.

The dreams we have, the work we do, the benefits we enjoy, the language we possess, the identities we carry, the food we eat (less that you hunt and grow), the health care we enjoy, the cars we drive, the streets we roll down, these are all effects of the shared work of society. One cannot decide to not participate. One cannot decide that they owe nothing to society nor that society has not given them and continues to give them what they need and often what they desire. If these people want to live like a hermit, fine. Let them fix their own water, electricity, food. Keep them off our roads. Allow them the privilege of developing their own language for their imaginary conversations with imaginary friends. They need to stop using ours for their fantasies.

Look, a socialist road!

Now, if you drive, you have to have insurance, right? Because you're socially responsible for the economic burden that could happen due to any accident that may occur to or as a result of your car. It's part of the price of participating in sharing the roads. Sometimes the cost is nearly unbearable, but when we run into a problem, we're better off for it. That day may not happen for some of us - but it could happen to any of us no matter how safe and responsible we are (or believe we are) as drivers - and that is the point.

Everybody needs healthcare insurance. There is no getting around that. If you don't have it, but something, anything, unexpected pops up (an unidentified lump, an accident, a heart murmur) everybody else pays for it. Everybody needs it. If you don't want it, it doesn't matter. You need it. That's why it's called "insurance."

Everybody shares the load. That's what makes a society. If you can't handle that, never ask for a job, fix your own water, become a hermit. Because we don't deserve to have to share the cost of society with selfish people who take without considering to help and then want to cut off food and survival functions for workers and mothers and children who do or will or want to give back through their sweat, who create wealth for the privileged classes.

Which brings us back to our second point.

American patriots constantly point out how generous the United States is, both in terms of government and private charity. But we don't acknowledge the strings that come attached. We talk about how much we help Haiti and African people but ignore the fact that they are in such dire straights because of oppressive economic lending practices, because we deplete their resources, because we have installed leaders that were horrible for their countries but were good for us.

That's how it's always turned out, in Southeast Asia, in Latin America, in the Pacific... With our influence and money, we get to curry favors and effectually rob what we now deem "developing" countries so that they need to ask for more favors - wherein we or our surrogates come in to effectively own the country and its resources (be it water, energy, diamonds, gold). To add demonic joy, we love playing these countries against each other to distract other countries in the region while we keep them in check (cf, the Middle East).

These are the costs of society that we need to gather and figure how we can do without and how we can run off. We live in Orwellian times. "Freedom" means the freedom of rich white people to steal from most of the rest of the world and not give a sh*t about the rest of us.

We may be free to dream of a better world for us all, but we're not allowed to speak it outloud, for fears that somehow a better world for all is somehow fascist. I believe conservatives should focus more on reducing the costs of healthcare rather than putting all their efforts in oppressing the poor and keeping them from receiving it.

So some things you don't have a choice on. So what? A lot of people don't get to decide whether or not they'll sleep with one eye open or whether or not their home will be collateral damage for our War on Drugs or our War on Terror or our War on War or whatever other euphemism we can figure for Blowing People Up for Political Expediency and to Extend Our Imperialism and Corporate Interests.

Get over it. Get involved in society and help us find better ways to live and act as a civil social humane society.

Until we get to the point where all are protected and truly represented in an equitable system, though, I believe that the government's obligation is to protect the most vulnerable.

I'm a socialist. But I'm one because Jesus and the prophets taught me to be one. If the Christian Right (and most every interaction with people who complain about having to help other people I have had in the last few years has been with a conservative Christian) does not believe in sharing and helping (and it's pretty obvious they don't), and they can't see where the Bible tells us to bear one another's burdens both as neighbors and as citizens through government, I'm not sure what Bible they're reading. Tt's not the Hebrew and Christian one. It's not the one written by Commie Pinkos. Perhaps the Satanic Bible...

Saving Ourselves from this Corrupt Generation

Acts 2 (NIV)

“‘In the last days, God says,

I will pour out my Spirit on all people.

"All people"? Well, there's God being all egalitarian and accepting and open, ain't that it?

Your sons and daughters will prophesy,

And daughters? Well, as long as they're silent about it and let the menfolk handle the serious studying of God's word.

your young men will see visions,

your old men will dream dreams.

Even on my servants, both men and women,

Again with the women!! Get it together, already. Women can't preach so why waste your spirit on them?

I will pour out my Spirit in those days,

and they will prophesy.

I will show wonders in the heavens above

and signs on the earth below,

blood and fire and billows of smoke.

Blood and fire! Fire! Fire! Yes! Burn those gays and heathens and Messicans and Arabs!

The sun will be turned to darkness

and the moon to blood

before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord.

And everyone who calls

on the name of the Lord will be saved.’

Oh cool! It's all about the end times and the rapture! Yippeee!! Bring on the BLOOD BATH!!

The above was brought to us by the ancient prophet Micah by way of the Jesus-follower Peter on the first Pentecost, and then interrupted by a common Bible Belt interpretation. It's a selfish understanding of the Bible, one focused largely on our own experiences and formed by a consciousness of privilege and fueled by a spirit of vengeful persecution.

"Wait til Jesus comes back and gets those liberals/welfare dependents/elites for slighting me!"

It's an odd mix to have. Not that there wasn't a lot of blood and wrath on the minds of the Old Testament prophets, or even in the stories that Jesus and the apostles told. But their sites were set on the oppressive empires that were actually oppressing them. Making it impossible for them to live, to operate. Abandoning widows and orphans. Conquering them with military force. Excising all their wealth into a centralized body.

Israel, Assyria, Babylon, and Rome and their emperors and their ways of exploitation and domination were, in the language of the prophets and the apocalyptic writers of the bible, the sun and the stars and the moon that would be darkened and bloodied and overcome. 

If I were the rest of the world, I would know this passage to be speaking of the end of the American empire and her multinational corporation partners. And I'd be rejoicing.

Pentecost

But the end of empire-dom does not occur through bloodshed. It will not happen through the art of war, via tanks or bombs or guns. Neither will oppression cease through a supergroup of superpowered superbeings or via battleships or really terrible lightning bolts coming from a grey-bearded god in the sky. Those are the old ways, the language of oppression and dominance and violence. When we follow the old ways, we are only replacing one tyrant with another. 

If we continue in the old ways, what are we saving ourselves from and what are we being saved into? From the violence of one group to the violence of another? Would we be replacing the czars only to end up under totalitarian rule - dolled up in the language of equality - all over again?

We will be saved by the singular mission of a people united in speaking the same message - the message of freedom, of equality, of sharing, of equal access, and equal power, of beaten swords and spears, of shared plows and tools - and acting as a people liberated from the message of the empire, that "Might is right."

Peter's last words to the gathered crowd were, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.”

How did the new followers then save themselves? From the end of that same second chapter of Acts.

They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.  Everyone was filled with awe at the many wonders and signs performed by the apostles. All the believers were together and had everything in common. They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

The people were not saved into an eternal life that would start after they died. They were saved into a new way of being, a new humanity, a new ethos, a new kind of rule separate from the predominant empire. Jesus' rule wasn't an earthly type of rule - it was one of kindness and sharing and giving and peace. The kind that takes the old and turns it into something new.

".....and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."

The Humiliation of Living Humbly

My new friend David Henson wrote a story about Jesus being born into a migrant family that is worth a good read and meditation. It's a bit of a pick-axe if you're like me and you've heard Linus' gospel story on repeat since birth but can't quite make a tangible or visceral connection to it every year. The original hearers of this particular "gospel" story, after all, were quite shocked by it.

A small distraction from this meditation occurred when David proposed that modern readers tend to think of Jesus' birth as being a humble affair, rather than the humiliation he believes it was.

For most of us, I think he's right. We like to imagine being born into wealth, or at the least to rise into wealth so that our children can be privileged. Chances are, if you're reading this, you have some amount of fortune, if not of the wealth variety, then at least enough to find yourself with a computer, internet access, and some amount of spare time. Rare commodities in most of the world. We may pity those without such access and leisure.

I don't need any research to convince anyone that we actually enjoy imagining the life of the glamorous, the fabulous, and the wealthy. Those are what most movies and television shows portray. The roots and bark of hip-hop culture comes from poverty but bloom wealth fantasies. We play the game of watching the thrones. We like to envision ourselves as masters of fate, as having dominion and persuasion, luxury and attractiveness. The greatest crimes are being ugly, or poor, or weak, or humble, or servile.

But Jesus took the opposite approach. A later book in the New Testament said that the Christian God "emptied himself." A result is that he was, "of no stately appearance."

By our standards, it's safe to say that he may have been ugly, but he surely wasn't a sexy, strong stud.

David is right in that we gloss over the full revolution that Jesus' birth signified. But if we suggest that a position is humiliating, we must recognize that it is only that for those who are unwilling to be in such a position.


Such a humble birth - one amongst the beasts and belonging to street-level commoners in a strange land - may be humiliating for the apotheosis and divine cult of the Caesars. These are men who (and let's consider that empires and autocratic states have not changed their essence within the last two thousand years) were conferred the proof of their godness upon the state of their "superior" birth and measured by the tools of their wealth, accumulation, access, and power. The Roman emperor becomes a god to continue the oppressive system and keep the power base faithful. As long as he is faithful to the good of power accumulation - and hence exploiting all those and all that which can be used for the good of the power accumulation - then the god of power is served.

The Hebrew god becomes a man to "confound the wise", "shame the powerful", and turn the world freakingly upside down.  For a god to become man, or man-like, would require that he or she becomes man, and therefore is in tune with what it means to be human, not just become human. And when that god comes in the form of the lowliest of people (which is to say, most of them), then that god can not look down with pity or disgust at the "lowly". That god - Jesus - identifies with the common man because he is the common man.

Christians have a horrible habit of hagiographing everything we respect even though our holy book does not. If Jesus didn't look like the star from The Passion, then he we typically see him as otherworldly. Jesus would have never been tempted to cheat on a math test because he knew all the answers. He would never have struggled with lust, because that's what sinners do. He wouldn't have cried when his friend died, because Jesus knew that his friend was with God... No, wait.

It is nearly impossible for us to imagine our dear Lord and Savior being actual flesh and blood. And often when we do, we middle class Americans like to figure him as one of our own.

But he wouldn't be. Not in the least.

To be sure, if Jesus were born this generation, it's likely that he'd have been born in a ravaged part of the world - say, occupied Palestine or just-"liberated" Iraq. North Korea. Or in the slums of Calcutta, Johannesburg, or Warsaw. Or any number of war-savaged post-colonies throughout Africa and the Americas and Asia.

But if he was born in the US empire - and David makes a good point that Israel/Palestine was in the furthest reaches of its time's super-empire - then it's likely he would have been born to a migrant family, or to homeless vagabonds, or WalMart associates, or to out-of-work coal miners.

His angels would have likely spread their message ("gospel") to AIDS patients, dope fiends, prostitutes, hospice guests. The birth could've happened in a back alley, in North Lawndale, the projects, the Appalachian back roads...

All of which may be terribly shocking for those of us who secretly or openly aspire to be wealthy and beautiful and powerful and who therefore expect that god also worships the wealthy, the beautiful, the powerful. But to the god who became one with humanity, then it only follows that that god is enchanted by the outcasts and misfits - which is to say, all of us.

Local Sabor pt 2

The reasons for buying local are growing by the day - or maybe they've always been there and we just didn't know it. As I've been arguing on this site and at Facebook, the way society does business is going to have to fundamentally change. It is going to have to change from a multinational, centralized plutocracy - where most of the power and resources of the world are held in a few hands - to localized, people-centered democracies. Concentrating on buying locally is an important first step in this process. This is further expanded by the fact that buying local helps the local economy and keeps profits generating in the area. Multinationals centralize their profits - some for investing, some for saving, some for keepsies. But very little - besides some charitable work that disguises this grand theft - actively gos back to the local areas from which the profits were extracted.

As we noted earlier, buying from local independents recirculates money used by local producers for local business. An independent grocer is more likely to staff its store with local workers, to use local vendors, to advertise using local talent and on local-based media. This is currency that is self-generating. This is jobs.

For small businesses struggling to make ends meet - not because their products, vision, or service is inferior, but because they're unfairly crowded out - buying local gives them a chance they may otherwise not have. And it brings us a few steps closer between goods and their consumers and between clients, owners and workers. This in turn makes the company more likely to be ethical and follow ethical practices - not least of which because it is not a faceless, money-first multinational.

Now, the arguments made against buying local are legion. They are not without merit on the face, but they're deceptive and evil in practicality. The main reason to support the global economy, or so we've been told since the days of NAFTA, is that it supports and gives jobs and infrastructure to those who would not otherwise have money or access to resources.

But then we realize that those same people were better off before the multinationals came in and convinced them of their need for international commerce anyway. The emperors of the multinationals - with the aid of the mad men on Madison Ave - have convinced the world that having enough is no longer adequate. In doing so, they have traded in the economy of need and joy to that of excess and leisure. Yet since most of the world's citizens cannot possibly achieve that level of excess and leisure*, they are left hungry and overburdened. Even those of us who have the good luck to be in a part of the world and have access to jobs and resources that give us this E&L are finding ourselves fundamentally unsatisfied. (Picture the emptiness and sorrow that inspired this raving piece of antisocial anger of the Wall St leafletteer.

In the two-thirds world, the main resource, the main source of revenue, the main capital is human slavery. So although the PR firms and think-tanks can try to convince us that buying clothes from the Gap and Nike is supporting the Vietnamese and Laotians who make the clothes, those laborers are certainly not getting the wages appropriate for their work. To understate.

The systemic oppression of people within the third world - and largely though not at all exclusively non-white folks in the first world - is the price we pay for the nice stuff we get through globalism. Globalism, by the way, is just a nice-sounding way of saying that a few people have rigged the entire world into an intricate, overly-complex, centralized web in which those few people themselves profit immensely, a few more of us profit well enough to not rise against the system substantially (although thank heavens for the Spring and Occupy movements, largely organized by the richest third of the world - ones who can largely afford higher education and technological devices to spread word and message), but most of the world workers are in all actuality slaves. At a dollar per twelve hour day.

Buy and support local. It just tastes better.

---------------------------------------
*

Quote attributed to Gandhi. Picture stolen from Goodnighmoonlight.

pt 1 is here

The Poor Will Always Be Amongst ...

While doing a quick surf on the interwebz yesterday, I rediscovered why I so much hate Megan McArdle's pseudo-intelligent writing. This famous statement from Jesus was a title for one of her posts that - as usual with this cryptic statement - was used to justify an anti-poor agenda. In her case, she was arguing against the validity of at-risk hunger in the American poor. The logic was akin to, "See, they're all so fat! Ergo, they don't need MORE food money."

It's a pretty despicable show of aggression against the marginalized, but Christians all throughout this country use Jesus' words against his intentions all the time. On Facebook, some of my friends and I were discussing this term and what it means. I like some of their alternative perspectives - that it may be about the "poor in spirit", that it's also a sign that Jesus used the poor as an example to look to when he would no longer be around. We were discussing this term, of course, because we hear it being used as an excuse to do nothing for the poor - or nothing structurally, at least. That and, "All people are sinful. Therefore, whatever we do will simply fail. We will have to wait until Jesus comes."

The thread itself was on this great resource, Let the Churches Do It Is a Deceptive Myth (h/t to Slacktivist), that makes the - all-too-rare - case that churches cannot and will not pick up the slack for government if the "government would only get out of the way." It also clarifies that there is tremendous work still to be done with/for the poor NOW, and we don't have to wait for the gov't to get out of the way, but rather partner with them and fill in missing pieces.

But back to "The poor will always be amongst you..."

photo © 2006 Franco Folini | more info (via: Wylio)

Jesus was quoting the Old Testament. He does that a lot. Sometimes when you're reading your bible, it'll point that out for you. Sometimes you have to dig a bit deeper. Sometimes he makes commentary on and updates the ancient scriptures. Sometimes, he uses the ancient scriptures to put the present reality into horrible context. This is what he was doing in this case.

The original quote is found in the book of Deuteronomy. Not one of the nicest books in the world, let alone the Hebrew canon. But it is within this passage where we discover that all servants/slaves must be released from their debt service during the seventh year. In fact, all debts are to be canceled on the seventh year (pretty outstanding, even by today's standards). And it is here where we find this about treating the poor:

There need be no poor people among you, for in the land the LORD your God is giving you to possess as your inheritance, he will richly bless you, if only you fully obey the LORD your God and are careful to follow all these commands I am giving you today. For the LORD your God will bless you as he has promised, and you will lend to many nations but will borrow from none. You will rule over many nations but none will rule over you.

If anyone is poor among your fellow Israelites in any of the towns of the land the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward them. Rather, be openhanded and freely lend them whatever they need. Be careful not to harbor this wicked thought: “The seventh year, the year for canceling debts, is near,” so that you do not show ill will toward the needy among your fellow Israelites and give them nothing. They may then appeal to the LORD against you, and you will be found guilty of sin. Give generously to them and do so without a grudging heart; then because of this the LORD your God will bless you in all your work and in everything you put your hand to. There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your fellow Israelites who are poor and needy in your land. (Deuteronomy 15; NIV)

This isn't just about a bunch of nice individuals. This isn't just about being kind. This is to be a concerted effort by the collective people of Israel. In other words, "the government"...

The writer, Moses, mentions specifically that there will be plenty of resources to share, so there should not be any poor amongst them. However, he knows their hearts, and he knows reality enough to say that "There will always be poor people in the land."

"Therefore...."

Therefore...

Are there poor people among us? Why?

Chickens at the Roost: The Sermon I Wish Obama Did Hear

I have no sympathies for any statement that would damn a people or a nation - I just want to make that clear before going any further.

Jeremiah Wright is a misunderstood preacher, to say the least. But I would like to revisit his famous "Chickens are Coming Home to Roost" sermon.

There is a move in Psalms 137... A move, if you will, from worship, to war. A move from the worship of the God of creation, to war against those God has created...

There is another move... They have moved from the hatred of armed enemies to the hatred of unarmed innocents. The babies; the babies. "Dash their heads against the rocks!" That, my beloved, is a dangerous place to be. Yet that is where the people of faith are in 551 BC. And that is where too many people of faith are in 2001 AD.

We want revenge. We want payback. And we don't care who gets hurt in the process.

I remember thinking, when there was a race- and American Exceptionalism-fueled controversy over Rev. Wright's sound-bites, that he was very, very right. (Even as his most controversial parts were quoted from a white ambassador.)

photo © 2011 Will Merydith | more info (via: Wylio)

And while Obama's many fans tried to explain this sermon away*, saying that he never heard such a sermon while he was there, I woke up this morning wishing that he had paid more attention to it. I shuffled through my apartment this morning praying that a sermon like this would continue to burn through him a searing conscience. The United States of America is a land founded on and needing genocide, slavery, and war in order to Manifest its Destiny.

Our empire-building has relied largely on emptying the bellies of our enemies, on trampling and building on the land of the inhabitants, on 'bashing their babies against the walls' of poverty and war. Although I don't expect these patterns to end - let alone reverse - anytime soon, I would like to see us face our demons and perhaps begin the process to conquer them.

*It's funny how those who claimed that Rev. Wright is so racist for mentioning the topic of race in his church cannot see that all churches are context-heavy - and many white churches continue to prop up White American exceptionalism and refuse to question White Supremacy, if they're not outright condoning it.

My Own Personal Master of War

Our friend Rachel Held Evans asked yesterday how we live lives of non-violence in the face of so much wanton violence - especially as violence seems to be the only tool the American Empire knows how to do.

Of course, the problem with this is that we rarely question our own violence - or our complicity in the violence around us. I talked before about my boisterously violent imagination, but I guess I hadn't considered outlining solutions. Here's some of Rachel's considerations:

• I can meditate on the teachings of Jesus.
• I can refuse to be violent with my words.
• I can study the imaginative work of peaceful activists like Mother Teresa and Martin Luther King Jr.
• I can strive to internalize and exhibit the fruit of the spirit.
• I can pray for our nation’s enemies.
• I can educate myself on foreign policy.
• I can practice being a peacemaker in small conflicts in order to prepare for larger ones.
• I can control my temper.
• I can love the people in my life that it is hardest for me to love, so that maybe one day I will be prepared to love actual enemies.
• (And I can be grateful that, for now, I don’t really have any. )

I can be faithful in the small things in case one day I am trusted with something bigger.

photo © 2008 Myrrien | more info (via: Wylio)I think these are good focalizing and centralizing points. They help us to prepare the mind and the spirit for the long-haul of passive-resistance, of loving the enemy when the enemy may not be so lovable.

I'd like to consider a few other ways to reduce violence in the world and would like some further suggestions:

• Write your senator, president, representative and tell them that war is never just.
• Phone bank them to tell them to begin defunding the Dept of Defense (or the more accurate name of the "Department of Attax!").
• Realize that our consumerist way of living both funds and necessitates war and violence against third world citizens.
• Live local. Stop driving.
• Walk, bike, share.
• Buy local foods.
• Buy less meats, and certainly fewer factory farmed meats.
• Buy fewer clothes. Send your old ones to the cleaner for alterations. And buy them second hand. And then give back to the Salvation Army or other thrift store (but not one that sends them overseas, because that destroys native textile work) when you're done with them.
  
• Call Obama and beg him to give back his Peace Medal.
• Petition that no public school be run and indoctrinated by US military.
• Ask to de-fund the CIA.
  
• Reuse.
• Recycle.
• Renew.
• Buy less crap. A lot less.

And now I'd like to hear some of your thoughts. I'll add to this list as we discuss this. Thanks!

When Evangelicals Aren't Evangelicals

Much is being said right now about a poll taken by the Pew Research Center and featured in Christianity Today, the stalwart of American evangelicalism (and sometimes its better conscience). A quick glance over said results boiled my already-feverish blood. In it, we see a contrast between those who consider themselves Evangelical Christians and those who do not consider themselves EC's in relation to how to fix the budget 'crisis' in the United States.

So you can see that Evangelicals, who are supposed to take the bible seriously, favor by a margin near 2-to-1:

• Reducing aid to the unemployed
• Reducing funds for the environment protection
• Increasing moneys to the military

In the following areas, they lead non-Evangelicals in support of decreasing:

• Aid to the world's poor
• Money for health care
• Funds for education (financial aid for higher education, public schools)

Fewer are in favor of increasing funds for the following areas than their non-Evangelical counterparts:

• Veteran's Aid
• The environment
• Infrastructure
• Education (2-to-1 margins)
• Unemployment
• Aid to the World's Poor
• Scientific research (nearly 2-to-1 margins)

photo © 2009 Blatant News | more info (via: Wylio)In short, self-described American Evangelicals favor bombs and bullets over books and bread.

After a quick perusal, I questioned on Facebook whether or not we even deserve the title "Evangelical" anymore. But I didn't explain what I meant by that, of course, and so I got my chops busted. So, allow me to explain.

Evangelical means, basically, A messenger who delivers the Good News.

The term 'good news' (or 'gospel') at the time of the New Testament writings was derived from the language of Caesar, the head leader of the known world at the time, and it was about Caesar. The gospel was declared in every city, town, and area under Roman rule that the new heir to throne was either born or ascended to the throne.

The Good News of Christ is that the King of the Universe was born among us and, through his death, burial, and resurrection, is taking his place at the right hand of God.

American Evangelicals are so stuck in being American that we are less about delivering the Good News than about being American. The Good News is that the same God who created the universe was born, walked, sang, laughed, and suffered with us, as a poor man on the fringes of civilization in an oppressed nation. He was a healer, a teacher, a lover, a burden-carrier. God was fragile and was killed in the cruelest way - hence making a mockery of the system of oppression of the prince of the air (the 'Adversary', Satan).

And then he rose again and began the process of redemption and renewal of all of creation.

Essentially, the Good News is about God's work of redemptive love through the work of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

That, above, is one way to tell the story. Sometimes it comes through loud and clear, as if through a bull-horn (yet sometimes that way obfuscates that same Good News). Other times, it's much more subtle. As the great St. Francis of Assisi insisted, "Preach the Good News at all times. If necessary, use words."

What I worry about is that by holding these lines, that by denying access to food and health care to the poorest of the poor on some weird grounds that they don't deserve it, or that there isn't enough to go around (and yet ignoring the excesses of the super-rich, or even just wealthy Americans), that we've failed to deliver giving any good news. We are, in effect, giving them Bad News.

God loves you, and so do I, but you have to work harder with what you have in order to get the things that many of us have had as a birthright...

God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life. No, not right. God loves you and has a wonderful plan for you AFTER you die...

But no, the Bible is full of Good News, and that good news has a lot to do with the poor, the downcast, those with handicaps, the widows and orphans, the neglected. Much of it is also filled with scary things for the rich.

He has brought down rulers from their thrones
but has lifted up the humble.
He has filled the hungry with good things
but has sent the rich away empty.
- Luke 1:52-3

“God blesses those who are poor and realize their need for him,^a]">[a]
for the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs.
⁴ God blesses those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
⁵ God blesses those who are humble,
for they will inherit the whole earth.
⁶ God blesses those who hunger and thirst for justice,
for they will be satisfied.
⁷ God blesses those who are merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
⁸ God blesses those whose hearts are pure,
for they will see God.
⁹ God blesses those who work for peace,
for they will be called the children of God.
¹⁰ God blesses those who are persecuted for doing right,
for the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs.

- Matthew 5

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
for he has anointed me to bring Good News to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released,
that the blind will see,
that the oppressed will be set free,
and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come
- Luke 4:18-9

Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you.
- James 1:27

Speaking of James:

Believers who are poor have something to boast about, for God has honored them. And those who are rich should boast that God has humbled them. They will fade away like a little flower in the field. The hot sun rises and the grass withers; the little flower droops and falls, and its beauty fades away. In the same way, the rich will fade away with all of their achievements.
1:9-11

For example, suppose someone comes into your meeting dressed in fancy clothes and expensive jewelry, and another comes in who is poor and dressed in dirty clothes. If you give special attention and a good seat to the rich person, but you say to the poor one, “You can stand over there, or else sit on the floor”—well, doesn’t this discrimination show that your judgments are guided by evil motives?

Listen to me, dear brothers and sisters. Hasn’t God chosen the poor in this world to be rich in faith? Aren’t they the ones who will inherit the Kingdom he promised to those who love him? But you dishonor the poor! Isn’t it the rich who oppress you and drag you into court? Aren’t they the ones who slander Jesus Christ, whose noble name you bear?

Yes indeed, it is good when you obey the royal law as found in the Scriptures: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” But if you favor some people over others, you are committing a sin. You are guilty of breaking the law.
- 2:2-9

“All these I have kept since I was a boy,” he said.

When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was very wealthy. Jesus looked at him and said, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” - Luke 18: 21-25

And then there's the Final Judgment, the parable of the sheep and the goats. And there is no mistake whom God favors there.

photo © 2010 Nicola | more info (via: Wylio)

We have favored, however, bombs and bullets over bread and books.

And yet, American Evangelicals tend to protect the rich from the poor. We pretend that if we do good by the wealthy, they will shower us with their favors. And then maybe we, by our abundance of wealth, can take care of the poor.

But that's never really been the case. The Evangelicals of the 19th century worked hand-in-hand with the poorest of the poor and knew that blind charity would just not be enough to take care of those who were generationally poor, or those who had fallen on hard times. Or those who were sick and not wealthy. Or those who were so far on the verge of poverty that all they needed was to fall back just a teeny tiny bit and they would end up homeless and rejected, despised by all (sound familiar?).

And when they realized that charity was not enough, they implored the government to step in, do its duty, and protect its citizens.

Modern-day Evangelicals tend to want to protect the rich - who have more than they can possibly imagine what to do with - from the poor - who cannot imagine what it means to have more than they could possibly imagine what to do with.

Maybe it's high time that Evangelicals started charging the imagination up, and helping the wealthy to find ways to help the poor, both at home and abroad.

Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.
-Phil 2:1-4

We need to stand up for the REAL heroes!

Oh, those poor, fragile multi-millionaire multinational corporate executives! Who will save them from the ridiculing of Oliver Stone? How can their brittle and heroic egos survive such a crushing? How can they truly enjoy their hard-earned million dollar Christmas bonuses? They worked very hard at making sure those third-world employees didn't rise up and demand living wages. Do you know how many women they've had to chain up at their work stations? All those armies don't come for free, you know!*

image from http://osocio.org/message/make_child_abuse_slavery_and_neglect_a_thing_of_the_past/

*Real Facebook response. I'm tired of all Americans/Christians standing up for immorality. Give it a rest, already. Poverty is the enemy.