The Congregational Church of Manhasset (UCC)--CONGOblog

I'm headed to the Show Me State for some R&R and QT and some
other abbreviations, so the CONGOblog will be on hiatus for about
the next 8-9 days or so. In the meantime, here's some reading and
listening material for you to consume in my absence.

The following articles & editorials come out of the NY Times. You
need to register, but registration is rather painless and it's free. I've
found it to be well worth the trouble.

1. Conservative Christian Republican bites other conservative
Christian Republicans--John Danforth, former Senator and U.N.
ambassador, Episcopal priest and pro-life conservative Republican
takes aim at recent moves by Republicans dominated by the Religious
Right. Catchphrase: "As a senator, I worried every day about the size
of the federal deficit. I did not spend a single minute worrying about the
effect of gays on the institution of marriage. Today it seems to be the
other way around."

2. Mary Magdalene, Mary Magdalene, Quite Contrary--Maureen Dowd
points out that the Roman Catholic Church need not fear Dan Brown's
The Da Vinci Code, because it's no feminist manifesto after all.
Catchphrase: It's obvious that Vatican officials did not read to the end of
Mr. Brown's novel or they never would have denounced it.

3. A $16,000 annual Krispy Kreme budget--In case you missed Sunday's
NYT Magazine article about megachurches in exurbia, take a look at what
church could be--complete with latte bar, aforementioned donuts, X-Boxes
for the kiddos and a pastor in an untucked Hawaiian shirt. Catchphrase:
''We want the church to look like a mall. We want you to come in here and
say, 'Dude, where's the cinema?' ''

The rest of these articles come from sites other than the NY Times.
Registration may be required, but in every case it is free, easy and most
likely they won't sell your identity to someone else.:

You mean there was other news besides Schiavo?--It was easy to miss last
week with all the brouhaha about the Schiavo case, but the U.S. Catholic
bishops launched a new campaign last week to end the death penalty in
America. Polls show that Catholic voters against the death penalty base
their views on the commandment (as in the 10 Commandments) "Thou Shalt
Not Kill". Catchphrase: I hope I will see the day when the nation I love no
longer relies on violence to confront violence. I pray I will see the day when
we have given up the illusion that we can teach that killing is wrong by
killing people.

"Decrease the Excess Population"--Isn't that what Scrooge said about the
poor--that we should let them starve and thin our the herd? The pre-ghosts
of Christmas Scrooge would like the new Federal Budget plan very much. At
least that's what church leaders--including the president of our own
denomination The United Church of Christ--are saying. Catchphrase: The
president, who once said his favorite political philosopher was Jesus Christ,
has proposed a budget that “takes Jesus’ teaching on economic justice and
stands it on its head,”

Sometimes the Pope speaks for just the Pope and not the Catholic Church--
It turns out what Pope John Paul II said last year about feeding tubes, etc.
is not the official stance of the Roman Catholic Church, just what he thinks
about the issue. I wish somebody had thought to call Father John Paris,
Professor of Bioethics at Boston College, because it turns out he actually
knows what the RCC teaches about end-of-life decisions. You can hear
Father Paris online explaining it all in an illuminating way.

Thou shalt not use the 10 Commandments for your own political power grab--
I just about ran my office chair off my plastic floor mat when I heard this
commentary by an evangelical minister who actually had the sense and the
courage to point out that the 10 Commandments without any religious
connotation goes against his own faith. This commentary is articulate and
dead on in pointing out the dangers of government making use of religious
symbols for its own ends. This evangelical minister is sure to be burnt at
the stake soon.

In yesterday's post to the blog, I mentioned a friend of mine
named Link who until he moved for his wife's job was a chaplain
at a children's hospital in Virginia. I asked Link to share his
thoughts on the Schiavo case as a health care professional. What
he sent back is one of the most thoughtful pieces of writing that
I've come across concerning the Schiavo case. Here's what Link
wrote:

I was struck by an article I read today about the Colorado Supreme
Court overturning a death penalty sentence because the jury in the
case consulted the Bible. I am less concerned that members of a jury
turned to the Bible in their deliberations than I am about how they
used the Bible to justify a sentence of death. The court said in a
divided statement that in this deliberation the Bible was an outside
source, and just as consultation of news reports or other legal
material would be banned, so should the jurors' consideration of the
Bible. I don't really see this as the Supreme Court of Colorado being
anti-religious or anti-Christian, besides the minority opinion voiced a
pretty strong statement about the Bible being a part of the jurors' own
personal moral values. Instead, I am very frustrated that when the
jurors wanted to know "what God thought" about capital punishment
they decided God was okay with it.

I heard an evangelical and a Roman Catholic discussing their various
opinions on capital punishment as a part of a radio program last week.
I was dismayed by the evangelical's use of the Bible and the Catholic's
inability to engage the scripture in his argument. The evangelical
gave his interpretation of two passages of scripture that people
always seem to bring up when using the Bible to justify the death
penalty. The jurors in this case apparently used these passages as
well.

Leviticus 24:17 says, "Let anyone who kills a human being be put to
death." (NRSV)

First of all, lets just take note that the only time Christians ever
turn to Leviticus for anything is when they need a verse to proof-text
on a thoroughly complex and thoroughly modern issue like
homosexuality or capital punishment. Second, although the verse
seems straightforward it comes in the context of a narrative where a
man is stoned to death for blaspheming the name of God. Anybody
know anyone nowadays who gets killed for blasphemy? Finally,
verses like this one and verse 20 which contains the famous "eye for
an eye" phrase were laws for use in Ancient Israel under the covenant
made between God and the Israelites. Despite the fact that some
evangelicals like to call America the "new Israel", no such covenant
exists with our nation in the same way. Also, it s worth noting that
capital punishment was the penalty for all sorts of crimes that we
would never put someone to death for today (e.g. cursing your
parents--Lev. 20:9, adultery--Lev. 20:10, incest--Lev. 20:11, male
homosexuality--Lev. 20:13, prostitution--Lev. 21:9--the list goes on
and on).

Do we really punish people according to the "eye for an eye"
principle anyway? Prison time and/or monetary damages, yes, but we
do not pluck out a person's eye or cut off a limb.

In Exodus 21, another chapter in the Bible that speaks of the death
penalty for murder, there is a distinction made in the case of a slave.
If you kill a slave, you get punished but not the death penalty. Also,
if you strike a pregnant woman and cause her to miscarry, you just
have to pay a fine (verse 22). I don't hear the anti-abortion folks
pulling out this verse.

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there
is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have
been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists
what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you wish to
have no fear of the authority? Then do what is good, and you will
receive its approval; for it is God's servant for your good. But if you
do what is wrong, you should be afraid, for the authority does not bear
the sword in vain! It is the servant of God to execute wrath on the
wrongdoer. Therefore one must be subject, not only because of wrath
but also because of conscience. (NRSV)

It is interesting that the five verses immediately preceding this passage
(12:17-21) say the following:

Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in
the sight of all. If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live
peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave room
for the wrath of God; for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay,
says the Lord." No, "if your enemies are hungry, feed them; if they
are thirsty, give them something to drink; for by doing this you will
heap burning coals on their heads." Do not be overcome by evil, but
overcome evil with good. (NRSV)

I would say the words "do not repay anyone evil for evil" and
"Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord." apply to not killing
people even if they have killed.

Many evangelical Christians, however, say that the verses in chapter
12 refer to the individual's actions towards another and this is different
from the way a government must act. But how is a government
supposed to act?

Paul here presents a basic Greco-Roman understanding of the world--a
world where the vast majority of people had little, if any, say in the
political realm. There was no understanding of individual rights,
democracy or the political will of the people in any sense as we know it
today. James G. D. Dunn writes in his commentary on Romans:

Paul's opening exhortation [Romans 13:1] was simply the common-
sense wisdom of the great mass of the powerless living within the
power structures of the corporate state. Since politics was the
business of so few, the rest who wanted to be about their own
business naturally took it for granted that they must operate within
the constraints laid down by the ruling authorities. (Romans 9-16,
WBC, Dallas: Word, 1988)

Furthermore, Paul was simply abiding by a view of government
typical to Judaism. The prophets often described foreign governments
as doing the bidding of God, often without the rulers' knowledge they
were doing so.

The problem comes when we want to take these few verses and
abstract from them a full Christian ethic of responding to all
governments in all times. Martin Luther wrote in his Lectures on
Romans "Christians should not refuse, under the pretext of religion, to
obey men, especially evil ones." German Christians in the 1930's
followed Luther's interpretation of Romans 13 and obeyed Hitler.
(Luther quotation as cited in Paul Achtemeier, Romans, Atlanta: John
Knox, 1985)

Luther's fellow reformer John Calvin drew a distinction between
governments ordained by God and those not ordained by God,
"...tyrannies, and unjust exercise of power, as they are full of disorder,
are not an ordained government..." (Commentaries on the Epistle of
Paul the Apostle to Romans as cited in Achtemeier Romans). Clearly
not all governments are ordained by God (e.g. Saddam Hussein, Pol Pot, U.S.S.R., etc.).

I would go further than Calvin and say that no government is capable
of acting in a righteous manner at all times. Government is made up of
human beings--human beings that are sinful, fallible and products of
their own cultures.

Jim Wallis puts it well in his new book, God's Politics (see the post on
this book below):

If evil in this world is deeply human and very real, and religious people
believe it is, it just doesn't make spiritual sense to suggest that the evil
all lies "out there" with our adversaries and enemies, and none of it is
"in here" with us--embedded in our own attitudes, behaviors, and
policies.

If Christians had not heeded the call of God to challenge their
government, there would have been no movements in our country for
abolition of slavery, civil rights for African-Americans, etc. Besides
when was the last time you heard one member of the Religious
Right chastise another for criticizing Bill Clinton or "liberal federal
judges" because they were powers ordained by God?

An unjust law is an unjust law, no matter which government enforces it.
Jesus never said there were not consequences for a person's sin, but he
did point to type of justice that cared for both the victims and
perpetrators of a crime. The movement to move towards this type of
justice is called "Restorative Justice". There's a lot more that can be
said about it. Do a Google search of the phrase and see what you find.

Each Christian needs to tread carefully in their response to
government. She or he must realize that they are citizens of the
Kingdom of God first and their respective country second. Holding
primary citizenship in God's realm does not allow for either the
extreme of libertinism or blind obedience.

Where do we as Christians go for direction? Try Jesus' teachings in
the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7), although Jesus' instructions
are for the Christian community and not a political ethos per se, they
offer us a starting point for how Christians are to act in the world and
what they must balance against the complexities of a pluralistic world.
I would offer that there is no way to balance capital punishment with
Jesus' teaching on justice, peace and forgiveness in the Sermon on the
Mount.

There's much more to be said, but I've said enough already. The rest
can be the stuff of future blog posts. What do you think the role of
scripture should be in the moral life of a believer today?

A friend of mine from seminary named Link E. is a faithful
reader of the CONGOblog (see his comment on capital
punishment in the 2.21.05 post or the shameless way I used a
bit of his life experience as an illustration in one of my sermons)
and until very recently a chaplain at a children's hospital. He
has kept up with the Schiavo case for several years and even
used it as a case study when he chaired the hospital's ethics
committee. He dealt with a number of patients that were in PVS
(Persistent Vegetative State) like Terry Schiavo. He recommends
a web site called Abstract Appeal for those looking for a detailed
analysis of the legal aspects of the case.

Link also asked me for an update on the Darfur Accountability
Act which was introduced the same week that I sent out an
appeal via e-mail for people to contact their respective members
of Congress and ask them to do exactly what this bill calls for.
Senator Corzine (Democrat) from NJ and Senator Brownback
(Republican) from Kansas introduced the bill.

I searched the Senate's web site and came up with nothing about
the status of the bill. I also called Corzine's office to ask about it,
but when I told the intern taking the call that I was not a NJ
resident, I was mysteriously disconnected.

From news accounts, it appears that the bill is probably in
committee and there seems to be little urgency in getting it passed.
To his credit, Senator Brownback has been making the media
rounds speaking about the issue. Here's to hoping Corzine and
Brownback can make something happen and that Darfur doesn't
become yet another example of the West ignoring genocide in
Africa.

That's right! ABC News (or at least a reporter who works for them)
reads the CONGOblog! (or at least was able to find us via Google).

On Thursday of last week, a reporter for ABC by the name of
Amanda Onion called the church and said she had read the
discussion of the Schiavo case on the church blog and wanted
to speak with a minister. Jimmy took the call and had an in-depth
discussion of the case with the reporter. Apparently, she was
doing a story on how various churches were addressing the
Schiavo case and were going to address it on Easter Sunday.

Jimmy told her that he was not going to speak about the case on
Easter, because the case had taken such a political edge and it
would seriously detract from the day. On a different Sunday, maybe.
Jimmy also remarked that he felt like Congress and the President
interfered with what was a family's private pain. He also mentioned
that given the recent spate of sensational shootings in the news, if
the president wanted to "err on the side of life" then renewing the
assault weapons ban might have been a better use of the
government's time.

Alas, only one of Jimmy's quotes made it into the article, and when
I read it to him this morning, he felt like it made him sound like a
minister afraid to take on difficult issues. I reassured him that his
future role as a religious pundit on cable talk shows was off to a
good start. I expect him on Hardball with Chris Matthews soon.

Jimmy's quote is in the very last paragraph. It appears that the
few sentences given to Jimmy represent all of the Christians out
there who do not want to spend their Easter Sunday talking about
the case. (For those who would like an example of Jimmy taking on
tough political issues, please take a look at our sermons page.

Also quoted in the article is Charles Henderson. He's was the
chaplain at Princeton--now retired--and the current Christianity
Guide for About.com. He has a thoughtful piece on Schiavo's
right to die that presents death as a part of life and even draws
some connections with Jesus' words, "Father, Into thy hands
I commend my spirit."

Today is Maundy Thursday and each year I'm always asked,
"Who or what is 'Maundy'." So, as a service to humanity or
at least a service to the humans that read the blog, here is the
definition of "Maundy" and an explanation of Maundy
Thursday.

THE VIGIL OF MAUNDY THURSDAY takes its name from
the Old French mande from the Latin mandatum novum, “a
new commandment.” This terminology comes from John
13:34 where Jesus, having washed the disciples’ feet,
declares, “I give you a new commandment, that you love
one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love
one another.” This took place, of course, in the upper room
on Thursday night during the original Holy Week.

The second question I'm always asked in Holy Week is
"What does Tenebrae mean?" So, here also is a definition
of "Tenebrae" and an explanation of what happens at the
Office of Tenebrae.

THE OFFICE OF TENEBRAE takes its name from the Latin
term for darkness (tenebrae). The service originated in the
Medieval Church as a means of preparing for Easter. The
readings or “office” are from the Four Gospels and depict
the last hours of Christ’s earthly life. This service is
conducted in solemn quiet as the events of the Passion of
Christ are read. Candles are extinguished to symbolize the
flight of the disciples and the suffering of Jesus.

Here are two responses to the 3.22.05 post about my
questions about issues related to the case of Terry Schiavo.

Your questions contextualize the discussion of Terry Shiavo
to address the more inclusive questions: “Who are our
brothers and sisters. Is there an extent to our responsibilities?
If our responsibilities are seemingly without limit, how do we
reasonably manifest them through our actions? What can we
hope to accomplish?” I really appreciate this perspective, so
absent in media sound bites.

Stendhal observed, "It is difficult to escape from the prevailing
disease of one's generation." Ours, perhaps, is myopia.

I think federal legislation in a case like this demeans
the role of the federal government and makes those
politicians supporting it appear like rank opportunists.
President Bush and supporters of the legislation are
taking a concept used in anti-abortion arguments to
support a situation already involving a living being who is
non-responsive to the world. “To err on the side of life” is
a total non-sequitur in this case. Mrs. Schiavo has no life.
The state courts, which have dealt with the case ad
nauseam, have determined that her feeding tube may be
removed. The state court’s determinations should not be
interfered with by the federal government.

I am happy that the federal courts are quickly dealing with
this by not interfering with the state courts’ rulings, and I
expect the Supreme Court will not interfere either.

Until yesterday, I deliberately avoided news about the
Terry Schiavo case, but the news was unavoidable and
I was swept up in the excessive media coverage. There
are all kinds of issues here: life and death, autonomy vs.
collective responsibility, the definition of "persistent
vegetative state", political opportunism (e.g. Tom Delay),
2006 election politics, etc. etc. etc.

Here are three questions I have that no one seems to be
asking in the cacophony that is the media coverage of
this case:

1. Yesterday, President Bush said, "This is a complex
case with serious issues, but in extraordinary
circumstances like this, it is wisest to always err on the
side of life." What does it really mean to "err on the side
of life?" Are circumstances extraordinary enough in the
cases of people on death row who have been exonerated
by DNA evidence to "err on the side of life?" Are
circumstances extraordinary enough in the case of the
Darfur genocide to "err on the side of life?" Are
circumstances extraordinary enough in the case of AIDS
in Africa "to err on the side of life?" Are circumstances
extraordinary enough in the case of Iraq where there still
exists no official count of civilian casualties "to err on the
side of life?"

2. Terri Schiavo's medical bills over the last 15 years have
largely been paid via two sources: 1. Medicare 2. a one
million dollar settlement from a malpractice lawsuit. The
same House and Senate that rushed to create a new law
just for Schiavo on Sunday also moved to cut Medicare
in recent budget proposals and passed legislation to
severely limit a patient's options in the case of malpractice
lawsuits. What impact do the actions of this Congress
have upon the many people who will never receive the
kind of attention Schiavo has received?

3. Lobbying groups who consider themselves to be
"pro-life" reported an unusually high interest in this case
and a willingness on the part of their constituencies to deluge
members of Congress with e-mails and phone calls. If this
case were not about a white woman in Florida but say a black
African dying of AIDS or a girl in Asia being sold into the sex
trade, would there be the same level of attention and advocacy?

What are the questions that have surfaced for you as you
have learned of this case?

Today, I got an e-mail from Kenya and unlike most
of the e-mails I get from Sub-Saharan Africa, this one
was not from someone offering to transfer millions
into my bank account provided I just give them my
account number.

No, this one came from a friend of mine named
Sam Harrel. Sam's a friend of mine from seminary
days. He and his wife (along with their kids)
are missionaries in Nairobi, Kenya. They're not the
"Poisonwood Bible"-convert the heathen into
white-Protestant-Southerners type of missionaries,
but rather they're the work to build institutions that
will last and do it alongside and according to the
culture and desires of the people you're supposed
to be helping--type of missionaries. They're also
the type of folks who spend their time working to
help the poorest of the poor. Their main ministry
is helping to run a community center for the people
who literally live in and on Nairobi's trash dump--
one of the largest above ground trash dumps in the
world.

Sam was responding to the e-mail I sent out a while
back about the Darfur genocide. I thought it would
be interesting to hear from someone who is actually
working in Africa amidst the overwhelming need
and great beauty of that continent.

Chase:

It was good to hear from you and of your efforts on
behalf of those in Darfur.

Welcome to our world. As you know, we are engaged
on behalf of the poor and marginalized in sub-Saharan
Africa, particularly those in the Eastern/Central region.
We work primarily with children at risk and we have
colleagues who are doing the same in the South and
soon in the West. I would only say the Darfur is the
tip of the iceberg when it comes to human suffering in
the region. At times we are numbed by the staggering
scope of human misery from the Democratic Republic of
Congo to Southern Sudan to the after effects of Rwanda.
As Tony Blair rightly said, there is a Tsunami a week in
places like DRC.

Amidst the media spotlight on Darfur, make no mistake
that Darfur has multiple twins in other places. For our
first few years here, I ran around like a chicken with my
head cut off trying to advocate on behalf of all such
instances. Either we were not heard or folks were numbed
to our stories. In any case, we have chosen now to engage
personally with those in our midst in various parts of
Kenya and the immediate surrounding region.

It is difficult to be an advocate, a crusader, a community
development worker, a strategic planner – all in what Paul
Farmer (Mountains Beyond Mountains) describes as “fighting
the big defeat.” Fact is, we can’t be all of those things
nor should we try. That’s why we need folks like Bono, Tony
Blair, Genocide Watch, Chase Peeples, etc., etc., to raise the
alarm in various ways. The solutions are rarely one-
dimensional. For instance, sanctions on Sudan would include
putting at risk the newly signed peace between the South
and the North which has the potential for long term change.
A larger and more well equipped peace-keeping force would be
a minimum.

Meanwhile, we will do what we can, particularly on behalf of
the young children of sub-Saharan Africa. Daily we make choices
as to which direction to take, what to be involved in, balancing
the needs of our own kids with the needs of those to whom we
minister, etc.

Anyway, I wanted to appreciate your efforts, renew contact
and ask for your prayers.

Cheers,

Sam

Happy St. Patty's Day! In honor of the occasion,
here's the prayer I used at today's Men's Club
meeting:

I arise today
Through the strength of heaven;
Light of the sun,
Splendor of fire,
Speed of lightning,
Swiftness of the wind,
Depth of the sea,
Stability of the earth,
Firmness of the rock.

I arise today
Through God's strength to pilot me;
God's might to uphold me,
God's wisdom to guide me,
God's eye to look before me,
God's ear to hear me,
God's word to speak for me,
God's hand to guard me,
God's way to lie before me,
God's shield to protect me,
God's hosts to save me
Afar and anear,
Alone or in a multitude.

Christ shield me today
Against wounding
Christ with me, Christ before me, Christ behind me,
Christ in me, Christ beneath me, Christ above me,
Christ on my right, Christ on my left,
Christ when I lie down, Christ when I sit down,
Christ in the heart of everyone who thinks of me,
Christ in the mouth of everyone who speaks of me,
Christ in the eye that sees me,
Christ in the ear that hears me.

I arise today
Through the mighty strength
Of the Lord of creation.

In this sermon about Judas, Jimmy quoted the song
"Until the End of the World" by the Irish rock band U2
and told a little bit about the background of the song.
It was inspired by The Book of Judas by Brendan
Kennelly, a literature professor at Trinity College, Dublin.
It sounds like a fascinating read, especially if you (like me
and Jimmy) love U2. Read more about it.

I started reading Anne Lamott's new book Plan B: Further
Thoughts on Faith. She is a terrific author, and I make use of
earlier work Traveling Mercies: Some Thoughts on Faith
on a regular basis (see the 3.9.05 post and my last sermon
Turning the Tables). I saw her at a recent book signing in
Manhattan and she was pretty darn cool--the details of which
will have to wait for a future blog post. Anyway, in her new
book, she quotes Bono, lead singer for U2. She writes:

I don't know why God won't just spritz away our hardships
and frustration. I don't know why the most we can hope for
on some days is to end up a little less crazy than before, less
down on ourselves. I don't know why we have to become so
vulnerable before we can connect with God, and even
sometimes with ourselves... I guess we're simply not meant
to understand some things. Bono, of U2, who is a Christian,
says that his favorite song is "Amazing Grace" and his second
favorite is "Help Me Make It Through the Night," and most of
the time, I have to let it go at that.

Wow! Who knew that the NY Times was reading the
CONGOblog? I write on Monday about the remarkable
faith of the woman held hostage by the suspect in the
Atlanta court murders and today they're writing
about that very same subject. Where's my by-line?

Speaking of shootings, I've been quite disturbed by
the coverage of the murder-suicide that took place
at a Wisconsin church on Saturday. This case seems
to be a text-book case of the media and law enforcement
being utterly clueless in dealing with religious people.
Both the media and the police have jumped to the
conclusion that the church's religious beliefs are
somehow to blame. Apparently, I'm not the only one
feels this way. The Revealer, NYU's blog on media
coverage of religion, offers some insightful criticism of
how this case has been covered.

From what I know of this particular church (not a whole
lot), I doubt I would agree with much of their theology,
but I feel deeply sorry for its members--not only has
one of their members shot the minister and the minister's
son before killing himself, but the media have begun
to call them a cult or to ascribe the blame to the church
itself. Could it be that the shooter was merely in fact
suffering from a mental illness? Could it also be that
the average news reporter is too lazy to actually try
and understand what these people believe?

When someone shoots up a factory or kids shoot up
a school, the media does not blame the business or
the school? Why should it be different when an act
of violence occurs at a church?

If you are a regular viewer of The Daily Show With
Jon Stewart, then you are probably familiar with
Stephen Colbert's semi-weekly bit called "This
Week in God". Last week's was particularly funny.
Click here to watch it at the DS' web site. (Warning:
if you don't like irreverent pokes at religious foibles
then you better skip this one.) I appreciate Colbert's
skewering of religious topics all the more after
finding out that he's is a devout person of faith.

I rarely can stay up late enough to watch the Conan
O'brien show, but somehow I did on Friday. One of
the skits involved God (yes, God) walking out on stage
speaking in acronyms similar to the W.W.J.D. (What
Would Jesus Do?) phenomenon. It was hilarious!
The best part of the skit occurred when Conan asked
God why bad things happen. God's answer involved
at least a 75-letter acronym response. Thankfully,
Max Weinberg interpreted and offered a lengthy
treatise on good, evil and free will. I will keep an eye
out to see if and when they post it on the NBC web
site. For now, you can go there and see the "World's
Fastest Menorah" and the "Bunjie Jumpin' Baby
Jesus". (Click on "Video Moments" and then page
3 of the video clips.)

Speaking of W.W.J.D., my favorite rendition of this
acronym is "Who Wants Jack Daniels?" The
minister of our church, however, keeps trying to
convince me that it stands for "What Would
Jimmy Do?" Blasphemy!!!!

Today I've been watching the interview footage of Ashley
Smith, who survived being held hostage Friday night by
Brian Nichols, the man who shot a judge, a court reporter,
a deputy and a customs agent in Atlanta. This is a
remarkable story of survival, courage and most of all
spirituality.

Smith, a single mother whose husband was killed four
years ago, apparently kept calm and spoke with Nichols
about her family and her faith. She read from her Bible
and from a popular book called The Purpose Driven Life
by California Baptist minister Rick Warren.

During the night, Nichols told her that she was "an angel"
sent by God to him, and then later he said, "I am already
a dead man." Smith told him that he was not dead and
that God loved him. When the morning came, he let her
go to pick up her daughter who had been at a church
function. She told Nichols that what he had done was
wrong and he needed to face the consequences. She
said that it would take more of a man to give up
peacefully and face his punishment than to go out
hurting others and himself. Nichols later surrendered
without firing a shot.

I was struck by Smith's courage and her humble
countenance. During her press conference and the
later interviews, she never interjected herself or her
God into the conversation but simply answered the
questions asked of her. I was amazed at how even
in the midst of being held hostage by a murderer
she managed to hold onto her own humanity and to
see him as a human being as well. Although she
had opportunities to grab one of his guns, she did
not do, because she "did not want anyone else
to get hurt--not even him."

The analysts and pundits may dismiss her words of
concern (even now) for Nichols as Stockholm
Syndrome and dismiss Nichols' response to her as
the actions of a deranged man. I prefer to think
that God used her to care for a hurting person who
had done some terrible acts of violence.

Alright back to Constantine or at least some of the religious issues
raised by this average movie. (see the 3.8.05 post for why I'm
spending time on this movie).

In addition to all of the stuff that seemed derivative of other
supernatural thrillers (e.g. angels losing their wings a la Kevin
Smith's Dogma, crucifixes burning the foreheads of demon-
possessed little girls a la The Exorcist, blowing away demons
with a special shotgun a la Blade...I could go on), it did raise
the issue of how a person gets into heaven.

The hero Constantine having committed suicide in his youth,
gone to hell for having done it and then resuscitated and
brought back to life (see the 3.8.05 post on suicide) seeks to
earn his way into God's good graces by "deporting" demons
to hell and performing regular exorcisms, etc. As he is told
by the interestingly female angel Gabriel, he "knows" God
exists from personal experience but does not "believe" in
God. Everything he has done since he received a second
chance at life has still been self-serving despite whatever
good he has done. It is only at the end of the movie when
(predictably) he sacrifices himself for another with no
thought to his own gain that he gets the pass to go into
heaven. (We get to see yet another shot of Keanu Reeves
floating in a cruciform position--as if he were on a cross--
just like in the 3rd Matrix movie. It's just as cheesy here as
it was in that middling film.)

We step out onto thin ice when we begin to talk about who
gets in and who does not get into heaven. I tend to err on
the side of grace and say that a whole lot more people
are going to be there than religious people--esp. religious
Christian people--like to think. Ultimately, the Bible
is very clear that it is God's decision--not ours--and the
categories we use are most likely inadequate for the task
of who gets in the pearly gates.

Jesus seemed particularly concerned to show that God is
not pleased with self-righteous hypocrisy but rather authentic
religion. (See Matthew 23 and Luke 18:9-14) Jesus spends
a lot of time talking about humility on our part when we
approach God.

Jesus also speaks frequently about our final judgment being
related to how we treat the poor and powerless in society.
Matthew 25:31-46 and Luke 16:19-31 offer some harrowing
parables of Jesus regarding what happens to those who do
not help people in need. I've heard a quote recently that I like
and it relates to this subject. Dr. James Forbes, Senior
Minister at Riverside Church in NYC, said last year at an
anti-poverty rally, "If you ever expect to get a reservation in
heaven, you will have to have a letter of recommendation from
the poor to get in.”

The traditional Protestant view on salvation from damnation
or gaining eternal life is that it comes by faith alone rather
than works. This understanding comes from Paul's letter to
the Romans. Passages like Romans 3:21-26 point to the idea
there is no one who is ever good enough to deserve God's
love and the gift of eternal life. So, God gives these things
to us freely when we respond to God in faith. Being a "good
person" is simply not enough to get you into heaven.

There is a danger in reading Paul's words solely on an
individual basis. I think there are good reasons to read
Paul's words in terms of God's actions towards humanity
collectively rather than one person at a time. Yet, we are
creatures of the Enlightenment and we think in individual terms.

In what can generally be called the evangelical view of
salvation, the faith of the individual and God's gift of eternal
life can be reduced to a mere transaction. A person prays a
prayer and God lets him or her into heaven. (There is some
oversimplification here.) The strength of this view is that it
is simple and immediate.God provides it when we ask with a
sincere heart.

I tend to fall back on a question a college religion professor
of mine asked one day: "Was Abraham a Christian?" The
young, conservative, Southern Baptist students (myself
included) responded, "No. Since Abraham lived before
Jesus how could he be?" Yet, we all knew that Abraham
made it into heaven. How could that happen when Jesus
had not done the whole death and resurrection thing yet?

Yet, as my professor pointed out, in Romans 4 Paul
describes Abraham as the epitome of faith. Abraham
responded to God before there was a religion
about God. He did not know who God was or even God's
name, but he responded in faith to follow where God lead
and to trust in God's promises. Abraham clearly made it into
heaven. I think of the example of Abraham in dealing with
questions of who gets into heaven and how. It is not
using the right words, being a part of the right church or
racking up good deeds but rather how each person
responds to God based upon their experience of God that
gets you in the door. .

How do you believe people get into heaven? Do you believe
in a heaven at all? If so, what does heaven look like to you?

P.S. Check out "heaven" and "death" on the sermon subject
page to read a few sermons Jimmy and I have preached on this
subject.

Today's Lenten service was on HOPE. I put the service together,
so I thought I'd share some of the sources that are on-line from
which I drew material.

The first quotation on hope I made use of comes from an article
by Anne Lamott--one of my favorite authors. In this article on
Salon.com, she speaks about redemption and how God gives
us new lives. Warning to the easily offended: one of the reasons
I love Lamott is because she is so good at being both reverent
and irreverent at the same time. In this article she drops some
curse words amidst her thoughtful words about God.

The next one came from Archbishop Desmond Tutu. In it, he
speaks about the relationship between forgiveness and justice.
Hope is a prerequisite for the act of forgiveness.

Frederick Buechner is a writer who has influenced the lives of
both ministers at our church and many more ministers we both
know. We have to be careful not to quote Buechner all the time
and in every sermon just because his writings are so rich with
spiritual wealth--and darn it, he just says thing so much better
than we can. Here's an article on what Buechner calls "The
Stewardship of Pain."

Barbara Brown Taylor has become a celebrity in ministerial
circles. Her books on preaching and ministry have become
required reading at seminaries. She is an Episcopal minister,
writer and seminary professor. I enjoy reading her sermons
and even more so her simple reflections. I always finish
reading something by her and think, "Wow, that was simple
and profound--perhaps profound because it was simple."
This reflection comes from her experience browsing through
the bric-a-brac found on a counter in a museum gift shop.
Amidst the souvenirs, she found "hope," "gratitude," "love,"
"forgiveness," "tears," and "loss."

Finally, the closing prayer today came from Thomas Merton,
the late trappist monk and great spiritual writer. I occasionally
find this prayer tacked to refrigerators or office doors. Every
time, I stop and pray it.

Yesterday I went to see Constantine. In a nutshell, I'd have to say
that it's so-so. You could wait for video and be just fine or maybe
even wait until TBS and TNT get a hold of it and play it non-stop.
I happen to have a weakness for mediocre action movies, but if
that's not your cup of tea, then you should probably pass on this
one.

The Constantine in question is not the Emperor who made
Christianity the official Roman religion, but a pasty-looking, chain-
smoking, skinny-tie wearing exorcist who lives in modern Los
Angeles played by Keanu Reeves. The plot is a little complicated
and even weak at times, but in general Constantine has the ability
to see and fend off demons who are trying to enter our world.
Through a mix of holy water, crucifixes, "dragon fire" and shotgun
shells, he "deports" the demons back to hell. He teams up with
an L.A. cop, played by Rachel Weisz, whose sister has recently
died under mysterious circumstances. Oh yeah, the son of Satan
is trying to take over the world as well. Much of the movie
seemed like a collage of other films: The Matrix, The Exorcist,
Men in Black, and various other mediocre apocalyptic thrillers.

So, "Why," you ask, "would I waste valuable CONGOblog space
on a mediocre movie?"

The simple answer is that the movie explores a mixture of religious
issues, and in its few original moments actually offers some food
for thought about the way we conceive of evil, Satan, God, angels
the Church, death and suicide. It's this last topic--suicide--that I
think deserves special attention.

In the film, Constantine (Reeves), haunted by his ability to see
the demons in our midst, committed suicide. He was dead for
a few minutes and brought back to life. In those few minutes
of death, he went to hell, because, as the movie says over and
over, suicide is a "mortal sin" that cannot be forgiven by God.
Ever since, he's been trying to earn his way into heaven by
operating as a guard on the border between heaven and hell.
Weisz' sister also committed suicide, although prompted by
demons (I think. Her motives were never spelled out.). As
we see in the film, she too, also ends up in hell.

I take the topic of suicide seriously, because my grandfather
committed suicide and I've seen the pain and confusion that
my family went through dealing with that fact. I was about 13
at his death, and I remember asking my father the next day if
Papa had gone to hell. I'm not sure where I got that idea, but
I guess I picked it up somewhere. My father gave me the
response that I offer people today who deal with a loved one's
suicide.

He said, "God understands that a person who commits suicide
is suffering greatly and God's grace extends to that person."

I don't really know what the "official" stance of the Roman
Catholic Church is on suicide, but I think the popular idea of
what happens to a person who commits suicide must be
similar to that presented in the film: suicide is a mortal sin,
a person takes a life (their own), there is no opportunity to
repent and ask for forgiveness, so that person goes to hell.

This seems to me to be an awful thing to offer grieving loved
ones. Furthermore, it doesn't seem to give God and the grace
God offers much credit. The fact of the matter is that each of
us will die with particular sins that we did not specifically ask
forgiveness for, but thankfully God's grace is not dependent
upon whether or not we've rattled off our list of sins.

This view of suicide also seems to elevate one "sin" (I put
the word in quotes here, because I think it's debatable
and highly contingent upon particular circumstances.) above
others. Paul speaks about our status as sinners in general
terms--"All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God."
The grace of God given to us is a gift that we accept rather
than something we earn. It does not depend on us. Since
each of us operates in a mode of sinfulness, no sin is
greater than another--although the consequences of
particular sins may differ in scope.

That being said, I do not wish to ignore or somehow belittle
the pain a suicide causes loved ones left behind, not to
mention the fact that it is a poor choice as opposed to the
option of seeking help and working to overcome one's
own pain. I feel sorry for my grandfather--sorry that he
was from a generation that did not seek out psychological
help through counseling and medication--sorry that he
lived with the pain of depression throughout most of his
life. Most of all, I'm sorry that I didn't know him better.
He missed out on a lot of years that he could have spent
with his children and grandchildren. We missed out on
years we could have had with him. It's sad to think of
what all of us missed.

I believe that the God, whose grace I have experienced,
embraced my grandfather at his death and took away his
pain. God did not punish him for his final act, but instead
looked with compassion upon a hurting man who had
exhausted what options he believed were available to him.
Someday, I'll see my grandfather again and we both will
see more clearly. We'll get to know each other better then.

Suicide as mortal sin that sends you to hell may function
as a plot device in a Hollywood movie, but it is bad
theology that causes a lot of unnecessary pain.

Funny, I had thought that a movie review would provide
some lighter fare for this blog, but my thoughts ended up
being rather heavy again. Ah well, tune in next time
(hopefully tomorrow) and I promise it will be light-hearted.

Constantine presented Satan as a washed up playboy
in a dirty tuxedo, any other portraits out there?

It's been a slow week for postings on the CONGOblog. I had jury
duty this week and had expected to be on a youth ski trip this
weekend, but my other chaperone caught the flu. It's too bad for
the kids, but at least I'm not in a full-body cast due to my horrible
skiing.

A large bit of news that happened this week and relates to previous
posts on this blog is the decision by the Supreme Court to abolish
capital punishment for juveniles. It's nice to think that we are now
following in the steps of countries like Iran and China which so
value human rights (note sarcasm here) and have already done
away with the execution of juveniles. This decision along with the
2002 decision to abolish the execution of people classified as
"mentally retarded," seems to me to mark a very good trend in the
way our country is thinking about capital punishment.

The decision was a close one (5 to 4) and Justice Scalia gave a rare
oral dissent yesterday. He complained that the court had usurped
the rights of state legislatures and defied the Constitution. Of
course, I feel sure that if the case were about abolishing abortion,
Scalia would have led the charge to do so no matter what individual
state laws did or did not say.

I am sure that the continuing debate will be framed in terms of
"activist judges" vs. judges who take a "strict view of the the
unchanging Constitution." Which judges fall in which category
depends, of course, upon which side of a particular issue you fall.
I am glad about this decision, but I wish the debate could be framed
in terms of the value of each person's life--even a person who has
taken the life of another--and the harm done to society by continuing
a cycle of violence..

In other news, the Supreme Court took on the case of the public
display of the Ten Commandments. Sounds like a good topic for a
future blog post...

I must say, Kristof is doing a beautiful job on the NY Times op-ed
page bringing up the genocide in Darfur. Today, he describes how
we have a total of 3--count 'em--THREE--soldiers there on the
ground to work with the African Union force to "monitor" the
genocide. The monitors say the signs are easy to spot when an
entire village is about to be systematically killed, but when their
teams arrive to try to see what is going on, they are stopped by
Sudanese troops. Later when they do get to see what happened,
they find infants shot, 3 year-olds with their faces smashed in with
rifle butts, dead women who appear to be raped, etc.

Today, Sen. Corzine (D-NJ) and Sen. Brownback (R-KS) are
introducing a bill today called the "Darfur Accountability Act" that
calls for, among other things, the strengthening of the African Union
force and establishing a no-fly zone. Clearly troops are needed on
the ground to stop the Sudanese government backed militia doing
the slaughter and to stop the government helicopters and planes
assisting them.

I just called Senators Clinton and Schumer, and Rep. Ackerman
urging them to support this act. I encourage you to do the same.
You can find contact information for your senators and
congressman/congresswoman at the following sites:
www.senate.gov and www.house.gov.

You can read the Kristof NY Times piece at their site. You do need
to sign up. It's free and they don't send you anything. If you still
don't want to join up, e-mail me and I'll send you a copy of the article
from their site.

Here's another response to my e-mail/blog posting about Darfur. This
one is from Richard V., who has been visiting our church over the last
two months.

Thanks Richard! I hope you keep visiting our church, because your
words are appreciated.

Let's keep alert to this problem and do what we can to keep raising it
before the powers that be.

I've received some positive feedback from a number of folks about
my Sudan Genocide e-mail. I also sent the e-mail to friends and
acquaintances. A number of folks wrote letters or sent e-mails to
their Senators and Representatives. Here's some of the interesting
stuff people passed on to me:

Ray P., a church member, who works in the financial industry let
me know that there are some financial sanctions already in effect
against Sudan. I'm assuming that these were already in place in
response to the earlier civil war in the country and charges that
the Sudanese government had supported terrorist groups.

Bill T., a friend of mine from Atlanta, wrote his Senators and
Congressman. He received a nice response from Rep. Chambliss
from GA. Chambliss mentioned what legislation and funding has
already passed through Congress, however the genocide continues
and he made no mention of what further steps Congress will take.
Bill also passed along a link to a site which seems to offer some
great information about the genocide and links to organizations that
are working to stop it. The site is www.darfurgenocide.org.

Jeremy R., a friend of mine from Houston, TX, wrote his letters and
passed along to his church's e-mail list.

Katrina L., a church member, wrote that she was glad to do
something about the Sudan genocide and wanted to raise our
awareness about a similar problem happening next door to Sudan
in Uganda.

She wrote: The February 2005 issue of the Smithsonian Magazine
has a very powerful and in-depth article discussing the genocide in
Uganda. I was particularly moved by it and, like you, continue to
think about the atrocious acts being committed there.