Damn You Autocorrect!

Thanks to an observant friend and reader for noticing that in the seventh graph of the Mormon/Character post below, the word "tenant" was used rather than the intended "tenet."  The penalty of using spellcheck to proof read.

Mea culpa!

It's Not the Mormon Thing, It's the Character Thing

The Republican candidates for president and the pundits of every political stripe have been dancing around the fact that Mitt Romney is a Mormon.  None wants to be accused of being bigoted or narrow minded the way many Protestant leaders were when John F. Kennedy (a Roman Catholic) ran for president.   With all of the tight rope walking and politically correct care being taken not to mention the “M” word, it seems that they are all missing the real issue.

The problem is not that Mitt Romney is a Mormon.  The problem is that Mitt Romney seems to have a problem with Mitt Romney being a Mormon. 

Since he gave his Faith in America speech at the Bush library in 2007, Mitt Romney has been running for president and away from his Mormonism.  In interviews, speeches and on the stump, he has consistently painted himself as a generic evangelical Christian and claimed that any differences between his faith and that of evangelical Protestantism is of little consequence. 

Huh?

There are very real and very deep differences between Mormon theology and that of evangelical Protestants.  In fact, some Mormon nuances on traditional Trinitarian Christian theology would likely find more sympathy in far left Christian communities than far right!  What Romney is talking about when he speaks of the theological connection between Mormonism and evangelical Christianity he is speaking almost exclusively about social issues; marriage equality, abortion rights, the social safety net, etc.  The claim Romney is making is that what you think about gay marriage is what matters.  What you think of Jesus is just trivia.

I know several Mormons and I know from them that this is not core Mormon belief.  Mormons as a whole take their theological beliefs very seriously and do not, in fact, see themselves as just another branch of politically activist evangelical Protestantism.  And Mitt Romney knows this. 

For many years, Romney served as the Stake President in the Boston area.  A Stake is a geographical collection of congregations similar, but not exactly the same, as a Catholic diocese or a Presbyterian presbytery.  The Stake President is the presiding officer of the Stake.  Elevation to such an office surely involves both a deep knowledge and acceptance of the tenants of the Mormon tradition.   Mitt Romney held this office so we can reasonably assume that he is both more aware and more subscribed to the tenants of the faith than many in the pews Mormons may be.  That is his faith and he deserves credit for taking on an unpaid leadership role in support of it.

Yet, Romney has been willing time and again to distort and subjugate his own faith in order to nurture political alliance.  This raises a question about Romney.  Which is it: either Mitt Romney’s faith is not important to him and he brazenly lies when he says that it is or he is simply so craven that he would jettison the faith he claims to hold so dear in order to advance in politics.  Neither seems a very good profile for President of the United States.

The problem is not that he is a Mormon.  It is the way he treats his Mormonism that gives me pause and raises questions about his character.  If he is so willing to throw his faith under the bus to gain advancement, what will he do with the American people? 

Personally, I am glad when a candidate says that his or her faith will inform their decisions in office.   It allows me, as a voter, to determine whether or not those values comport with my own and whether I believe this person will adequately represent me and my neighbors in office.

The constitution does not impose a religious test for office.  But the way a candidate treats the values and principles of his or her religion is a helpful character test as we decide who should hold office.

If Mitt Romney treats the nation as shabbily as he does his own faith life, that says something very unfortunate about his character.

Some See Red, I Just See Grey

One of the best parts of my life is being at the intersection of so many thoughtful and interesting people.  Really, it is great.  Facebook posts, Tweets, emails and even the occasional book length text message bring with them such a wonderful array of positions, ideas and insights.  That has been especially true since the Susan G. Komen Foundation announced its plans to withdraw funding from Planned Parenthood.  The stated reason was a policy that dictates that funding be withheld from organizations under Federal investigation.  The consensus beyond the press release is that SGKF has been under pressure from anti-abortion groups and has “caved” to that pressure.

I have nothing to do with SGKF other than being an occasional donor, so I can offer no insights to their motives.  What the conversation about this controversy has done is bring to the forefront yet again the great unsettled social question of the last half-century; abortion.

In many of the emails, tweets, etc. that have come my way about the SGKF/Planned Parenthood issue has also come the abortion question.  Are you pro-life or pro-choice?

Yes.

That is the only answer I can give to that question.  I am a pro-life pro-choicer.  I am that person who makes the true believers on either side of this issue see red.  If in life there is ever a black or white issue that begs to be treated in shades of grey, it is the question of abortion.

My own thinking on abortion has been shaped and formed by a number of factors.  First, I am a Christian and do have a theological belief in the importance and primacy of life (not sanctity, that is another issue altogether.) Second, I have walked the path of abortion with many parishioners and I know that for those directly involved these are not easy or quick decisions.  Finally, and very importantly, in the end I do not have a uterus and therefore do not get a vote.

Theologically abortion is a complicated issue.  I believe that live begins at conception.  Whether that is human life or not is a metaphysical question of existence and consciousness that goes beyond the basic question of life.   A fertilized egg is life and as a Christian I believe it is both inappropriate and ethically questionable to speak flippantly about life.   That life has value and dignity and should not be dismissed as though it is merely a byproduct in a laboratory.

Yet that life is not a life alone in the universe.  It exists in a very real relationship to another life.  And that life has to be taken into consideration as well.  Abortion abolitionists would sacrifice the life, in its fullest physical, psychological and spiritual form, of a mother for the life of even a fertilized egg.  This position lacks even the most basic sense of human decency and dignity.  If, theologically, human life begins at conception, it certainly does not end after birth.  And the life of the mother must be of great importance.  A hard cast rule that neglects the dignity and life of the mother as much as if not more than the life of the fertilized egg in her womb is not and cannot be a theologically sustainable ethical rule.  If life is valuable, then all life is valuable.

My own inclination is to argue on the side of very strict regulation of abortion.  To allow abortion to be something spoken of as casually as any other thing in the medical world has a tendency to coarsen our public discourse and blind us to the very real ethical issues involved.  My inclination is tempered, however, by bitter experience.   I knew a couple (not parishioners) who learned that their unborn child suffered from a number of severe genetic issues.  Alone none was so severe as to prevent a healthy pregnancy.  Together, however, they were termed “incompatible with life” and the doctors recommended that they abort.  The reasons for the procedure were to prevent an almost certain complicated late term miscarriage that may have impaired their ability to have another child. 

I think about them whenever I read about some of the popular anti-abortion legislation floating around today.  Had she been forced to watch an ultrasound or had to sit through a graphic depiction of the procedure or forced to go home and wait for 72 or 96 hours, what was already a devastating experience would have been made hell.  She was not there to “get rid” of something.  She was there so that those medical professionals could walk with her through what is one of the most horrific things a family can endure. 

I believe we need to have a serious conversation in this country about the issue of abortion and how it can be properly regulated so that we do not devolve to a place where abortion is looked upon as birth control or brushed off as no big deal.  But we need to do that in a way that recognizes that this complicated issue will not have a simple solution and the wellbeing of the mothers and, yes, fathers involved must be a part of that conversation.

Finally, I believe that my voice in this issue is one on the periphery.  As a Christian, I have a place at the table in the church’s conversation about abortion.  As a citizen, I have a place at the table in the nation’s conversation about abortion.  But when it comes to deciding whether or not an individual woman may or should have an abortion, I just don’t get a vote because I don’t have a uterus.

World AIDS Day and the Church

December 1 is World AIDS Day.  This year the international day of remembrance of those whose lives have been changed and, too often, lost marks the beginning of the fourth decade of the AIDS epidemic.  The march of time has brought with it moments of shame (think Ronald Reagan's refusal to even say AIDS) and moments of triumph (medical breakthrough after breakthrough). 

World AIDS Day is a day that transcends any nation or religious community.  It is owned by humanity as a whole.  Nonetheless, it is worthwhile to consider what World AIDS Day can say to and through the church.

At its heart, World AIDS Day reflects three important theological values of the church: care for neighbor, grace for broken souls and the power of hope in tomorrow.

Care for neighbor is what happens every time a caring hand, a sympathetic ear, a compassionate embrace or a word of compassion is shared.  AIDS is not someone else's disease.  It is humanity's.  Like every health crisis that impacts the well-being of the children of God, when one is impacted we all are.  As Dr. King said, we are all gathered in a web of mutuality.  Unlike so many opportunistic health crises, AIDS has impacted the full cross-section of humankind from Hollywood stars and power brokers to African villagers and Haitian city dwellers.  AIDS underscores that every one of God's children is my neighbor.  On World AIDS Day, we recall that Christ's call to care does not stop at the corner of the street but in every corner of the world.

Grace for broken souls is the grace Christ brings to the world.   The World AIDS Campaign motto for 2011-2015 is "Getting to Zero."  The goal is not only to get to zero new infections but to achieve zero discrimination toward those who are living with HIV and AIDS.  Every time discrimination is set aside and a heart is opened, it is grace that rushes in to fill it.  On World AIDS Day, we recall that Christ's grace has the power to open the most closed mind and soften the hardest heart.

The power of hope for tomorrow is what continues to sustain the millions of men and women who live with HIV and AIDS.  It compels us all to continually strive toward the promise of God's tomorrow.  Recall the Psalmists words.  The lament, "my God, my God why hast thou forsaken me?" in Psalm 22 is followed by the affirmation that, "The Lord is my Shepherd.  I shall not want."  On World AIDS Day, we recall that God's love and God's care do not abandon us ever; not today, not tomorrow, not ever.

As I join others from my community to read the names of those who have lost their lives in this epidemic, I will pray that this World AIDS Day will remind the church of our responsibility to our neighbors, the power of Christ's grace and the promise of God's tomorrow.

Dignity and Deals

“People in places many of us never heard of, whose names we can't pronounce or even spell, are speaking up for themselves. They speak in languages we once classified as ''exotic'' but whose mastery is now essential for our diplomats and businessmen. But what they say is very much the same the world over. They want a decent standard of living. They want human dignity and a voice in their own futures. They want their children to grow up strong and healthy and free.”

Former Vice-President and Senator Hubert Humphrey said these words almost half a century ago as the last remnants of 19^th century colonialism were giving way to 20^th century movements for independence.  In the decades following WWII, millions of people in the 2/3 world stood up to the powers of the world and claimed self-governance and dignity.

Over the last year, we have seen much of the same thing happen in the events of the Arab Spring.  Millions of people have stood together and cried, “enough!” to forces of oppression and degradation.  At the heart of much of the rhetoric of the Arab Spring has been the importance of liberty as a necessary ingredient of full human dignity.  We as a world have witnessed the power of the many against the few and the refusal of whole nations to continue to submit to systems of enslavement and degradation.  They demand nothing less than their basic human dignity.

What a contrast between the masses of people in Tahrir Square in Cairo risking their lives and putting themselves in harm’s way for a taste of freedom and the masses of American shoppers camping out and putting themselves in harm’s way to get a $2 waffle maker or $100 plasma TV.

At few times in modern history has the juxtaposition between societies been so great.  While millions around the world demand the most basic of human rights and the most elemental level of human dignity, millions of Americans shove and struggle not for their rights but for their waffle irons and TVs.

Personally, I don’t care whether someone wants to get a cheap deal on Black Friday.  If lining up all night to save $50 is your thing, then I say go forth and shop.  The shopping itself is not the problem.  What troubles my soul is the idea that while so many of our neighbors are struggling for their very dignity as children of God, we are so easily distracted by shiny objects with a sale sign over them.

With seeming obliviousness to the difficulties in our own society much less around the world we line up for the sales as though our only concern is more effecient and cost-effective consumption.  Is our freedom and liberty as a people really so perfected that we have nothing more to worry about than how much we pay for an appliance or electronic component? 

In a nation where the division between rich and poor is greater than at any point in human history; where tens of millions of children go to bed hungry; where cities are willing to spend millions to move out protestors whose message they dislike but nothing to house the homeless; are our priorities really where they need to be? 

I am not sure that it is an either/or proposition in the end.  It may very well be possible to be a saavy shopper without becoming so distracted by consumption that you forget the world around.  The trouble comes when saving money blinds our eyes and our souls to the world and the very real needs in it.  A good deal is a good thing until it demands of us so much of our time and energy that we become enslaved to the very desire for the deal and, in our enslavement, robbed of our dignity.

So line up for the waffle irons and TVs and other super-duper deals, but while you wait to save a few dollars take a moment and consider what this system of consumption and consumerism and human commodification is doing to your and your neighbor’s dignity. 

In other words: what does it profit a person to gain a cheap waffle iron but lose their God given dignity?

The Gospel and the 99%

“Take care!  Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of possessions.”  Luke 12:15

A holy thing is happening across America today.  Men and women; old and young; religious and irreligious, people are coming together in a chorus of protest against the culture of greed and avarice that dominates American society.  Braving the brutality of the police, the indifference of their neighbors, the scorn of the media and the nearly unstoppable tide of American culture, they are taking a stand.  Their motivations may not all be rooted in the message of Jesus Christ, but what is happening is an embodiment of the gospel.  It is a holy thing.

Christ knew that perhaps the greatest violence that can be committed against a people is to keep them trapped in poverty.   Poverty imprisons not only the body but the soul.  Unfair wages, the concentration of wealth and high unemployment keep the vast majority of people in this nation dependent on a very few.  The economic freedom of the 99% is controlled by the whims and wills of the 1%.   The net result is that in the wealthiest nation the world has ever known, 49 million people live in poverty and 16 million of those are children. 

We have more than enough wealth and resources to feed and house every man, woman and child in this nation but, like the wealthy farmer in Jesus’ parable; we hoard and store our surplus just in case.  Rather than feed the hungry in front of us today, we hedge our bets against our own hunger tomorrow. 

The greed that is so endemic in our culture is more violent than any weapon.

The violence does not stop with the poor, however.  Like any unjust system, the violent consequences of our unjust economic system imprison not only the poor but the rich as well.   When life becomes about the protection of wealth and possessions, we become prisoners to them.  The fear and anxiety of loss overtake our souls and rob us of the fullness of life.  Material self-satisfaction may satiate us in the moment, but we will be hungry again an hour later.

The movement of the 99% against the economic enslavement of our culture is a holy movement.  It is an affirmation that the life and freedom, economic as well as political, of every child of God must be at the heart of any just system.  It is a declaration that despite the dominance of injustice in our midst, there is yet a confidence in God's justice in the world. 

Until we are freed from the violence of poverty in our culture, we will remain spiritually imprisoned as a people.  And God in Christ yearns as we do for our freedom.

“Do not be afraid, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.  Sell your possessions, and give alms.  Make purses for yourselves that do not wear out, an unfailing treasure in heaven, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys.  For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”  Luke 12:32-34

Pride Goeth Before the Twitter Pics

I don’t particularly care that Anthony Weiner sent pictures of his namesake to female friends via Twitter. It would not be my choice, but it is a free country and he is free to make as many juvenile decisions as his little adolescent heart desires. Merely having bad judgment does not make you ill-suited for public service. We have kept much worse offenders in much higher offices for much longer.


In the end, the problem is not what he did but that he thought he would not get caught.

I tell kids in the church all the time, “be careful what you put out on the internet because once it is there, it is there.” The warning has become almost cliché, but it is not untrue. I know many pastors who have seen their ministries in a particular church unravel because of an ill-timed Facebook post or a Tweet written in anger. Beneath the creepy and beneath the layers of adolescent lust that are exhibited in Rep. Weiner’s exhibitionism lies the true sin in this whole sad affair.

Pride.

What Weiner showed (metaphorically at least) is his belief that he among all people could avoid the light of the truth. He seemed to think that he is immune to the light that shined on Sen. Larry Craig, Sen. David Vitter, Sen. John Ensign, Gov. Mark Sanford and Gov. Arnold Schwartzenegger. And lest he think his membership in the Democrat Party or his liberalism inoculates him to being subject to the truth coming out, don’t forget Sen. John Edwards, Gov. Jim McGreevey and President Bill “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” Clinton.

The truth will out.

Everytime.

Sometimes it takes a while. But the truth will out.

As a matter of public debate, this “scandal” will go the way most of them go. There will be a week or so of bloviating from the opposition, the media will take advantage of showing soft core porn as news, the talking heads will run out the clock on the Jersey Shoresque drama and things will eventually go back to normal. What debate there is will focus not on the events of the scandal but which side can claim the highest of the low ground they share.

We live in an era of great and deep need in our communities. People are in real pain and in need of their government’s full attention. When public servants spend their time arguing about who is the least creepy, when elected officials attention is focused on not getting caught or embarrassed, it is no wonder that it seems that the people have been forgotten. The inexcusable arrogance of Rep. Weiner is not an isolated incident. Of the current members of the United States Congress (including some elected to this congress who have left) no less than six have been caught with their brains in their nickers. And each one thought that he was special enough to avoid getting caught. None were.

I make no claims of perfection nor am I by any means immune to the sin of pride. In fact, pride is probably the strongest club in my bag. None of us escapes the realities of sin and election to public office is surely no inoculation to human sinfulness. In fact it may truly increase your susceptibility to infection! I am not a prude and what consenting adults choose to do is not my concern (no matter how stupid it may be!) I do believe that public lives deserve some measure of scrutiny. However, when our shared attention remains on the prurient details of this sort of event and we ignore the underlying reality of pride that got us here, we risk ignoring the greater threat to our public good.

If the saying is true that pride goeth before a fall, when it comes to our elected officials perhaps we should take a moment and wonder whose fall their pride proceeds. Is it just their own or might we be joining them?