The strange case of George Tiller (deadly words)

George Tiller was a prominent abortion provider in Wichita, Kansas.  He was famous for his willingness and apparent skill in performing late term abortions.  Tiller was a strong willed person who did not shy away from media attention.  He was a lightning rod for controversy and a favorite target of anti-abortion, psuedo-Christian groups like “National Right to Life, Operation Rescue.  Even Bill O’Reilly used Tiller as a well from which to draw ratings.  These groups would have loud, confrontational protests outside Tiller’s clinic shouting at the women going inside.  The rhetoric was strong and often hurtful.  

 

Lone, unbalanced individuals took many cues from these anti-abortion groups.  Tiller’s clinic, along with others, was bombed repeatedly.  Tiller had been shot by a deranged woman, Shelley Shannon in both arms only to return to work the next day.  Tiller and his family received constant threats of violence.  People who worked at his clinic needed the protection of U.S. Marshals to prevent them being hurt.  Finally, his life was taken in the foyer of his church by a man named Scott Roeder. 

 

Roeder said the murder was justified because of how many babies were being murdered by Tiller.  Many agreed with him.

 

You see while only a few of the anti-abortion activists were outwardly violent; all of them were using intensely violent rhetoric.  George Tiller the Baby Killer, George Tiller the Serial Killer, etc.  The language and tactics being used by the anti-abortion crowd created hate and animosity.  It wasn’t a great leap for Shelley Shannon and Scott Roeder to get to violence.  The atmosphere and spirit was already there, they were just unstable enough to bring it out to its natural consequences.

 

George Tiller was shot and killed because of the violent atmosphere created by anti-abortion groups.  Christians who used violent words to incite hatred toward Tiller share responsibility for his murder.  Shannon and Roeder turned those words into a reality.  Violent language puts blood on their hands.

 

Words matter.

 

Let us Christians not forget God spoke the world into being.  It was words from Christ’s lips that calmed a storm.  Our very faith is shaped and changed by the words of Scripture and the words of preachers.  The written word and the spoken word are what allowed Adolf Hitler to rise to power with relative ease.  Words are more powerful than we give them credit for.

 

They come with responsibility.

 

I don’t often talk of sin.  I usually don’t like to get into such a murky area so fraught with guilt and anxiety.

 

But I will here.

 

Every anti-abortion activist that calls someone a murderer sins.  Every person that calls for a violent uprising because they are unhappy with legislative action sins.  Those that use their words to try to incite hatred toward the President or anyone else, for that matter, sins.  Putting hateful, rude, damaging or divisive posts on the internet is sinful.

 

I am not saying expressing your opinion is sinful.  I would never advocate taking someone’s voice away from them.  I would never suggest that you not be allowed to express yourself.  

 

It is how you express yourself that matters.  

 

Violent, divisive and hateful language gets people killed.  There is always someone waiting in the wings to turn your words into reality.  We must always realize that we are called to be lovers.  We are called to find ways to love even those we should hate.  You must work to soften your responses to those things that offend you the most.  Violent rhetoric is dangerous and has no place on the lips of Christians.

 

The saddest part of this whole blog post will be the people that read it, become enraged about abortion and miss the entire point.

A Review of “Relational Theology: A Contemporary Introduction”

Thomas Jay Oord co-wrote a book several years ago called Relational Holiness.  That book helped form my worldview.  I like so many others in my under-30 generation resonate with a relational worldview.  Relational Theology is the future of the Church.  So, I was very excited to hear he was involved with Brint Montgomery and Karen Winslow in compiling a new collection of essays outlining Relational Theology.

Relational Theology: A Contemporary Introduction provides a holistic, well-balanced introduction to Relational Theology.  As I read, I picked up on the many different types of authors.  I recognized some of the names while others were fresh, new voices.  When I first judged this book by its cover, I had prepared myself for heady, scholarly essays using complicated terminology.  I was pleasantly surprised to find the language was accessible and the concepts were clearly laid out in manageable chunks.  Complicated theological thought was made accessible to anyone lucky enough to bend the spine on this compilation.

I’m a bi-vocational pastor.  I don’t have ample amounts of study time.  I have to scrimp and scrape time together to read and build up my mind.  The beauty of Relational Theology is the small essays collected by theme.  You can read an essay while on a break or waiting in line, easily put the book down and pick it up again when you have a little more time.

Please accept my strong recommendation:  If your eyes are reading this, they also need to find their way to the pages of Relational Theology: A Contemporary Introduction.  The men and women who’s words are contained within those pages provide clear and concise insight into the relational movement.  The short chapters and accessible language make this the perfect book for long-time Christians looking to understand a new Christian movement.  It is also the perfect way from someone who is exploring to gain an understanding of the cutting edge of Christian theology.  Either way, make sure you make time for this wonderful collection of essays.

On a Compassionate Church

The Hunger Games fascinates me.  The notion that society would get to the point of using children in a blood sport as both entertainment and a method of control is conceivable.  The Roman Empire got to that point with the colosseum and their dreadfully bloody circuses.  It was a way to make the people forget the boot on their neck.  It was a way to make the emperor look benevolent and like someone who would connect with the people.  We, as a society, are in that ballpark now.  Fortunately, we seem to have displaced our violent impulses into television, music, movies and video games.  I am often pleased to see that most Americans don’t have generally negative or violent tendencies toward one another.  We generally don’t want to hurt each other.

 

I do worry, however, that we are living in somewhat of a real life “Hunger Games.”  We don’t sacrifice our children or put them in a stadium, of course, but we do seem to have somewhat of a mentality like those thrust into the killing fields of the “Hunger Games.”  When the competitors look each other in the eye while they stand on their pedestals surrounding a cornucopia of supplies and weapons, they begin a terrible odyssey into darkness and isolation.  Anyone familiar with The Hunger Games knows the whole point of the exercise is to find the last person standing.  It is kill or be killed.  It is every person for themselves.  It does not pay to help others or team up because you will eventually be forced to choose between yourself or your teammate.  You choose to either die or forever live with the guilt of killing someone to save yourself.  It is not a good way to live.

 

We seem to have fallen in to that mentality in the United States.  All of a sudden, it is every person for themselves.  I hear it not only in political discourse but in religious conversation and from the mouths of children.  I remember, as a part of a denomination, it was every church for themselves.  We seem to be asking again, as Cain did, whether or not we are our brother’s keeper.  We keep forgetting, however, God’s answer to that was… “Yeah, you are…here’s a really ugly mole.”  I see, from time to time, glimmers of hope and selflessness.  More often, I see resentment and hate. 

 

We often don’t recognize the need in each other’s lives.  The grass really does always seem greener on the other   We don’t understand each other.  We often don’t try to understand each other.  This lack of understanding chokes our compassion and causes it to whither away.  We stop caring about each other.  We start competing with each other.  Then, the rules change.

 

Have we lost our compassion?

 

Compassion is an interesting thing.  So often, it is mistaken for weakness.  We don’t like to look weak.  We tend to gravitate toward things that make us feel strong and in control.  Revenge is one of those things.  If we can repay pain for pain, loss for loss or embarrassment for embarrassment, we will.  Another easy way to feel powerful is to make someone else feel powerless.  We leverage emotions, violence, money and other things to take someone else’s power away to make ourselves feel strong.  The church often uses guilt to appear strong.  Filling someone with guilt makes them vulnerable.  Vulnerable people look for strength in others.  This gives the guilt creator power.  

 

I see the church’s fear of compassion in the news all the time.  Whether it is the issue of abortion or the zeitgeist of gay marriage, we lack compassion.  The church is not known for its compassionate nature anymore.  Politicians fear us.  Corporations tiptoe around us.  We like that.  It makes us feel powerful.  This attitude dates back to the Roman empire when Constantine figured out how powerful the person of Christ was. He saw the power in the symbol of the Cross.  Christianity became the state religion and the new-found power of the Pope was unprecedented.  Christians went from being an underground band of devout followers to members of the most powerful group on Earth.  Whoever controls Rome, controls the world.

 

That is when our religion started to lose its compassion.  Then, the Protestant revolution started and men like Martin Luther, John Wesley and John Calvin reclaimed the humility of Christianity as they led small bands of followers out of the oppression of the bloated Catholic and Anglican churches.  The church in the United States started out of people escaping oppression.  While Christianity was dominant in the beginning stages of our nation, we still had the mentality of the small, subversive group.

 

As time marched on, we achieved power and prominence.  Christianity steadily escalated back to power in the country culminating in the addition of “under God” to the pledge in 1954 and the replacement of “e pluribus unum” (out of many; one) with “In God we Trust” as the national motto in 1956.  It seems strange that these changes sprung not as a testimony to the faith of a nation but as a response to secular communism during the era of McCarthyism.  Don’t get me wrong, I love any time God is acknowledged by our leaders.  This just reminds me of what Constantine did in invoking the name of Christ to gain political power.

 

It is no coincidence that around the time Christianity achieved its highest power in the United States, we also started to develop a reputation for a lack of compassion and understanding.  Small denominations sprung up like the Church of the Nazarene, Pentecostals, and United Methodists that were focused on social justice and compassion.  Inevitably, as time marched on, even these institutions gained power, spread globally and lost their compassion.  Christianity has become about power and individualism rather than the greater good.  

 

So, now it is time for smaller groups to start subverting the norm again.  It is time for us to remember the real directive Christ gave us.  Love one another.  It is time we remember what I consider to be Christ’s most convicting and telling parable. 

 

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne.  All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.  He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.  For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink?  When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” 

Matt. 25: 31-46

The measure of righteousness here is not whether you prayed at school or had an abortion.  It is not whether you were a Republican or a Democrat.  It is not whether you had all the right bumper stickers and T-shirts.  It is not whether or not you listened to K-Love or WayFM.  It is not about your Facebook posts or Twitter feed.  It is not about whether you capitalize pronouns relating to God or are able to recite Bible verses.

What Christ tells us here is that his benchmark for righteousness is whether we cared about the people around us.  Did we live lives of compassion?  Did we take care of people when they needed us?  

Did we love or did we not?

Initial thoughts on the Connecticut tragedy

I’m not going to try to square the 26 deaths in Connecticut today with some sort of scriptural comfort.  I’m not going to try to blame God or the Devil for what happened.  We know who to blame.  We blame the man who pulled the trigger.  It was his finger that depressed the lever on a cold piece of steel.  It was him that stole twenty bright futures.  It was him that stilled the hearts of men and women devoted to making those bright futures happen.  

 

I believe in God and I believe God is working in spite of this tragedy.  The deaths of these children were not a part of His plan.  That is ridiculous.  He will work in spite of the devastation and he will do good with bad but he didn’t plan this.  To suggest otherwise is offensive…

 

Do I believe in gun control?  Yes…firearms should be tightly regulated and people should have to complete a training and licensing process to own them.  Automatic weapons should remain illegal.

 

But guns are not the only problem!

 

We have an over-burdened mental health system in which people cannot always receive the help they need.  Many insurance programs will not pay for the mental health screenings that can help people before they get to this point.  When people cannot get the help they need for depression, schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder, sociopathy, and many of the other mental illnesses that can contribute to a tragedy such as this.

 

But our mental health system is not the only problem!

 

We need to deal with hopelessness.  People live in our society every day with no hope for tomorrow.  Sometimes they take their own life, sometimes they take others with them.  We live in a society where hope is a commodity.  Some have it, many don’t.  We need to reintroduce hope into our society by showing compassion for our fellow person in our social lives, political discourse and our religion.

 

But hopelessness is not the only problem!

 

There are many facets to a tragedy like this.

 

Our lack of real discourse is keeping us from dealing with the root causes of mass shootings.  As long as we are all trying to defend one thing or another.  As long as we are attacking one part of the problem, we will never find a solution.  Stop trying to protect your guns, start to protect our children.  Stop trying to eliminate someone’s ability to have a gun, try to eliminate the conditions that precipitate a shooting like this.

 

Inevitably, many will boil this down to an issue of gun ownership.  It is not only about that.   We need to come together as a society and deal with this pervasive brokenness that keeps stealing our children away.

Hands and Feet

I’ve been thinking a lot about hands and feet lately.  I’ve noticed how similar they are.  Each has five small appendages on it.  The relative length of those small appendages is similar as well.  Both can be used to pick objects up off the ground.  (I know, I’m starting to sound like one of those newly minted Colorado pot users.)  The really interesting thing about hands and feet is they can either be the closest part of my body when I am touching my toes or they can be the most distant if I am stretching my hands over my head.

For all their relative similarities, there are some stark differences between hands and feet.  Someone would be quite offended if they extended a hand of greeting to me and, in return, got a handful of toes.  People the world over know not to use their hands to score a goal in a game of soccer.  If one were to walk around with their hands in a shoe, they would find they have made their hands clumsy and ineffective.  One would also find the experience of putting a glove on their foot to be quite unpleasant.  This seems to make all the sense in the world doesn’t it?  We would feel silly and, dare I say, stupid walking around with our hand in a shoe or our foot in a glove.

Yet, the traditional church is often trying to do just that!  (Lest you worry this was a lengthy discussion comparing and contrasting our feet to our hands.) I have been struck by the similarities between the relationship of our feet to our hands and the relationship of traditional, main-stream Christianity and emergent, post-modern Christianity.  Like our hands and feet, these two disparate styles can either live close to one another or as far from each other as possible.  Unfortunately, it is more often the case that we live separated from (and often opposed to) each other.

There are obvious similarities between traditional (main-stream) Christianity and emergent Christianity(used here in a very literal sense of a new kind of Christianity that has been emerging).  Each affirms Christ as savior.  Each affirms a monotheistic understanding of God.  Each believes it is important to gather Believers together and commune with God and each other.  Each affirms some sort of order and purpose in the universe.  Each affirms God is the author and sustainer of that universe.  Like the hand and foot, each can be recognized in the other.

However, the foot does not work with things designed for the hand nor does that hand work with things designed for the foot.  So, trying to force emergent Christians in to systems designed for traditional Christians does not work.  The emergent Christians end up leaving Christianity (or at least the organized Church) altogether because trying to be a foot in a glove is maddening, depressing, discouraging and, ultimately, futile.  We simply don’t fit in there.

Traditional Christians end up resenting the new ones for not respecting their way of doing things.  They speak with a false authority that says they are the ones who finally figured this whole “Christianity thing” out and all who follow must conform.  If you can’t conform to the main-stream (often conservative) style of Christianity, then you are a slave to your sinful nature and must be purified so that you may be acceptable in the community.

The real question, is whether or not the hand and the foot can live together.  The stark reality is, put bluntly, traditional Christianity’s days are numbered.  Like Dickens’ “Ghost of Christmas Present,” all the outer shells Jesus’ Gospel wears are perishable.  Not even the emergents are safe from the inevitable, unrelenting march of cultural change.  Someday, we will be the ones watching our traditions and comfortable ways of doing things fade into the past.

The beauty of Christianity is that it outlives each of us.  Christ started a liquid religion in that it takes on the shape of the surrounding culture.  Much like today, he faced opposition from religious people who could not stand the thought of a re-definition of the faith they held so dear.

Emergent Christians cannot thrive in a traditional system.  When we try to live traditional Christianity, we find ourselves facing moral, ethical, and practical conflicts constantly.  Practicing traditional Christianity doesn’t feel right.  It doesn’t suit us.  We don’t respond to the methodology.  We don’t resonate with much of the theology.  Like hands and feet, we can identify with some basic characteristics that make us all Christians but the rest of it just doesn’t work for us.

(Generally) We aren’t homophobic, we don’t deny or resent science, we are inclusive, we resist heavy structure or arbitrary sounding rules.  We are not conquest oriented nor do we desire to dominate others with our religion.  We prefer fluid, mutable religion that is socially responsive.  We don’t want to separate ourselves from the culture.  We want to be part of it.  Sadly, if we wear these characteristics on our sleeves, we are scorned and mocked.  In that way, we are expected to be a foot in a glove.

I know this to be true because I sit here, feeling nervous, as I write wondering what the reaction of Christians will be.  I have spent much of my life disguising and downright hiding my beliefs and feelings because I knew emergents were not welcome.  I always had to include some kind of qualification or capitulation to avoid conflict and scorn.  It is only since I left mainstream Christianity that I have felt any release to express myself as I truly am.  Not just I but all Emergents must choose between virtually constant personal and social conflict and leaving the Church.

It is just as wrong, however, to expect the hand to fit in the shoe.  Emergents need to be sensitive to the great amount to change we are asking many traditional Christians to make.  We are asking them to overturn decades and centuries of engrained theology and practice.  Asking a traditional to live like an emergent is just as unreasonable and just as wrong.  We should never presume to tell someone else how to live.  Often, it is emergents who are judgmental of traditional Christians for not being a hand in a shoe.

The answer comes down to fingers and toes, the things hands and feet have in common.  There are millions of Christians who fit in traditional forms of Christianity.  They resonate with them.  There are millions who resonate with an emergent form of Christianity.  We can live together.  We can occupy branches of the same tree and pursue God.  We have one, great, big thing in common.  We are all just trying to get closer to God.

We have to stop fighting.  Traditional Christians have to relax and quiet down a little bit.  They have to stop fighting with homosexuals and scientists.  It isn’t productive and they unwittingly alienate people like me in the process.  The more traditional Christians fight with the culture, the more they drive emergents away.

It is time to hammer those swords into plowshares and adopt a more peaceful means of relating to the world.  Traditional Christians have to leave their politics at the church door and recognized that God never checked the box for any political party.  This is another one of those things that drives emergents out of community with traditionalists.  The emergent Church will never be able to coexist with the traditional Church as long as the traditional Church continues to fight with everybody!

On the other hand, emergents need to be patient.  We need to realize traditionalists are being asked to make some pretty big changes.  They are being asked to change things that have been around for hundreds of years.  That kind of change doesn’t happen overnight and it doesn’t feel very good.  We need to be tempered in our response to the traditional church.  We don’t have to take abuse from traditionalists but we also cannot dole out abuse against them.  We will never be like them and they will never be like us.

But we can get along.

Like hands and feet, we have a choice.  We can either be as far apart as possible or we can live together in harmony.

It is up to us.

Taking the Lord’s name in vain…

Gosh, Gol, Gol Dernit, Geez, Dag Nabbit.  These substitutes are only the few I could think of off the top of my head.  One of the most entertaining things in my life has been hearing the creative substitutes Christians create for “taking the Lord’s name in vain.”  Why not?  It is one of the big ten commandments.  Thou shalt not take the Lord’s name in vain.  So, we have made great efforts not to say God in anything but a descriptive or nominative way.  Using the word God or Jesus Christ in an expletive manner is strictly forbidden.  I really don’t have a problem with that.  I also don’t think its as big of a deal as what I consider to really be taking the Lord’s name in vain.

When I used to leave the house for a trip or party, my Dad would tell me not to embarrass the family.  He would tell me to remember that I carried the Fairchild name.  He was right.  My last name is the same as my mom and dad’s.  It is the same as my grandparent’s.  It is the same as generations of Fairchilds (Fairchildren?) before me.  What I do, reflects on that name.  When my wife and I were married, she took my name.    Now she is a Fairchild.  She has taken my name, so now her life reflects on that name.

When we go about calling ourselves Christians, we are literally taking on the name of Christ.  We have taken the name of God.  Now our actions and words reflect on that name.  We are now representative of God.

Have we taken that name in vain?

When we are judgmental or hurtful, we have taken the Lord’s name in vain.

When make people feel small or belittled, we have taken the Lord’s name in vain.

When we alienate people based on social or political preference, we have taken the Lord’s name in vain.

When we are abusive or hateful for the sake of our religion, we have taken the Lord’s name in vain.

How we live our lives after we have taken the Lord’s name determines whether or not we are taking it in vain.  We have been called to love God with everything we have and to love the people around us as much as we love ourselves.  Jesus himself said that was the most important thing.  When we do not express love with our lives, we are taking the Lord’s name in vain.

There are only a few months left until the presidential election.  Lets make sure we don’t take the Lord’s name in vain when we express our views.  Let’s not get into the business of determining who is a Christian and who isn’t based on their political views.  Lets not let our support of one candidate or the other drag us down and cause us to take the Lord’s name in vain.

Lets remember that before we are republicans, democrats, libertarians, etc; we are husbands, wives, parents, friends, colleagues, partners, and most important Christians first.

Thou shalt not take the Lord’s name in vain.

3 great things about Christianity (And how we’ve missed them…)

1. Literally anyone can participate.

(How that makes it great…)

The religion Christ taught his disciples to create is wide open.  It crosses cultural boundaries and political boundaries.  It is based on the universal principle of love.  Everything emanates out from that central, unifying fact.  Christ came to love, Christianity is based on love.

That central basis on love means that anyone, anywhere, anytime can participate.  There are no requirements or restrictions on who can participate in Christ’s religion.  A person does not have to dress, act, think, or speak a certain way to be a part of the Christian community.  The nature of Christianity should make church the most accessible, comfortable place in the world for a person to be.

(How we’ve missed it…)

Unfortunately, Church is one of the most intimidating places for a person to go if they don’t know anyone.  It stands above many other social situations because of the fear of guilt and judgement one may experience.  We subtly create restrictions around who can and cannot participate in our religion.

People should not have to be nervous about going to church.  We should not be known as a place of judgment or condemnation.  The Christian Church should be universally known as a safe place for people to go to be loved.

We are not.

2. The Christian message can be fit in to any culture.

(How that makes it great…)

The Christian message is universal.  Christ’s message of love was meant for all people in all economic and social situations.  The notion that God passionately loves all people and Christ came to connect us with that love has no cultural consideration.  The message can work in Orange County, California.  It can also work in Sudan.

I became a Christian because my parents were Christians.  I stayed a Christian because I came to understand the core message of God’s unending, unrelenting, passionate and free love.  I stayed because I recognized that love and salvation extended to all people with no conditions or fine print.  I stayed because I realized the Gospel was universal and could be expressed through the Culture, not in spite of it.

(How we’ve missed it…)

Much like the Jews in Galatians who preached that people needed to be circumcised to truly experience Christ’s saving work, the modern American church has mistaken our culture for Christianity.  We have spent a long time nursing a near pathological need to scripturally prove everything that we do.  This has resulted in us confusing our cultural preferences for Christian fundamentals.

Christians do this with all kinds of things.  Alcohol, dancing, manners of dress, scientific discovery…every Christian group has their own thing.  We end up protecting our culture more than we work on spreading the Gospel.

When we confuse our culture with the Gospel, we limit its capacity to work.

3. Christianity can be a positive part of the culture.

(Why that makes it great…)

At the beginning of the Book of Acts, it is said that the Church enjoyed the favor of their community.  They were so focused on helping people that even those who did not accept the religion thought well of them…with few exceptions.

Christianity should be popular.  We should be seen as a group of people who love everyone, especially those we disagree with.  We should be seen as compassionate.  We should be seen as caring, as accepting.  Christ was seen that way.  Generally, the early Church was seen that way.  Christians have the awesome ability to build real relationships with people outside our religion.

(How we’ve missed it…)

We have positioned ourselves as a negative entity that is against the culture.  We fell in love with spiritual warfare and picked a fight with the culture around us.  (We are currently losing that fight, if anyone is interested.)  We positioned ourselves as anti-homosexual, anti-abortion, anti-secular music, anti-secular schools and anti-a lot of things.  We are known for what we are against.

When we are known for what we are against, we have failed miserably.

Very few people like us.

We don’t notice because in fighting the culture and separating ourselves, we really only hang out with other Christians.  (Also, anybody who doesn’t like us is a tool of the Devil.)  We like ourselves, so what’s the problem?

We should be viewed as Christ was viewed.  People knew he was loving.  People knew he was accepting.  People knew he was compassionate.  People knew he was king.  People knew he was safe.

They don’t know that about us…but they could!

I write this because I have faith in our ability to reclaim what makes Christianity great.  It will take some work and some of us will be uncomfortable, but we can do it.  

Our condemnation addiction…

(Moving forward, it is important you know how I define sin.  I believe sin is intentionally hateful, hurtful, overly selfish, or destructive action that is against what a person best believes is God’s intention.  God is love, God wants us to love. Sin is, simply put, anti love (Thank you Diane Leclerc).  I don’t usually like to try to define specific sins.)

In a darkened, smokey room there sits rows of metal folding chairs.  Each of the rusty, dented folding chairs is meant to hold a someone dealing with a dark issue.  There is a table in the back with donuts and warm coffee.  Slowly, the chairs fill and the cigarette smoke thickens.  An introduction is done and finally someone from the back moves to the podium to introduce themselves.

“I’m the Christian church and I’m addicted to condemnation…”

We have a condemnation problem.  In the United States, this problem can be traced back to the puritans.  It can be traced to Jonathan Edward’s sermon “Sinners in the hands of an angry God” in which he suggested that God had a bow stretched with an arrow toward our hearts and it was but for grace that he did not deliver that death blow.  God is a boot, we are the worm.  God is only seconds from completely destroying us at any given time.

This fascination with condemnation has remained a strong thread in American Christianity throughout the centuries.  It seems to be a condition we simply cannot shake.  We have a guilt and condemnation based system.

I have had perfectly pleasant conversations turn venomous in a second when I suggest that God may not be very interested in condemning us.  When I speak against judgement and condemnation, Christians want to make sure I don’t forget about sin, hell, and condemnation.

If I didn’t know better, I would say we Christians are in love with hell.

I mean, we talk about it all the time.  We explode in an uproar when someone dares to challenge its size or population.  We criticize those who would dare downplay Hell’s role in our spirituality.  We fight to make sure converts know where they will go if the screw up.  We have decided Hell should be one of our most used evangelism tools.

Our love affair with Hell is dangerous.  Our addiction to condemnation is killing us.

The gospel is not about condemnation.  The Gospel is about love and redemption.  Scripture seems to say something about Christ not coming into the world to condemn it. Christ came to extend God’s love to us in an unabashed, unrestricted way.

Our over reliance on condemnation and judgement doesn’t make any sense.

It would be like a person in a pool drowning.  They are flailing around, clinging to anything they can for life.  They don’t care what they grab on to, they are just trying to survive.  Then the lifeguard paddles out with a smug smile on his face.  He has a floatation device and he is feeling pretty good about it.  As he gets closer, he looks at you, evaluates you, and measures your effort.  Then, once he has sufficiently diagnosed your drowning problem, he explains it to you.  He tells you, at length, why the way you were swimming and the way you are flailing about is causing you to drown.  He tells you how poor your aquatic skills are.  Then he tells you that if you can stop drowning, he’ll help you.

As absurd (and negligent) as that situation would be, it is something we do to people every day.

Nobody would ever argue that sin is a good thing.  Nobody would recommend someone sin more.  I’m not suggesting that.  I just think we spend too much energy on sin.

Sin is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.

Sin (remember my personal definition above) is an expression of a weary spirit that is unsustained by the energy of God.  Focusing significant attention on sin is like putting make-up on a melanoma and calling it cured.

What someone who has not yet started a relationship with God really needs is someone kind, comforting, and encouraging.  Someone who sees them as Christ does: uniquely valuable, special, and worth dying for.

We treat non-Christians like enemy servants of the Devil who would like nothing better than to come into our churches and drag us down into the depths of Hell with them (seems to me that this could be considered symptomatic of one’s own, apparently wavering, Christianity).  So we condemn them and focus on trying to adjust their behavior.

Condemnation is not our job.

Our job is to be the conduit through which people experience the love and grace of God.  Our job is to be a cool drink of water on a hot day.  Our job is to be a soft tough instead of the strike of a fist.  Our job is to be a safe place to explore spirituality.

We don’t need to preach to sin directly as often as we do.  I don’t think it needs to be a major part of our message. If we do approach the subject of sin, it should only be in the confines of a close, trusting, personal relationship.  Our fear of not calling out sin, in my opinion, demonstrates a lack of faith in the Holy Spirit to do the work of convicting a person’s heart and spurring them to loving action.

Fire and brimstone just doesn’t work anymore.  Hell doesn’t do much for our cause.  Love is stronger than condemnation.  Kindness works better than judgement.

In every interaction I can find between Christ and “sinners,” I see Christ loving, affirming, and helping the person before he talks to them about lifestyle.  Also, let us not forget that we are not Jesus Christ and should, therefore, be much more careful about being the voice of conviction.

Instead of telling someone all the things wrong with them, why not focus on encouraging all that is great about them?  Why not try being someone’s biggest fan?

It is time for a little Hell rehab.  It is time to focus on love, grace, and respect.  It is time to break our addiction to condemnation.

Why Westboro Baptist Church is not the problem…

To all my Christian family:  I am one of you.  We are all in the same boat.  As you read, know my deep love and respect for you and my desire not to destroy, but to edify and push for growth and change.  I recognize that the Christian portrait is made up of many colors and there are many different opinions within the Church.  I am expressing mine and addressing a problem I perceive to be rampant within our family.  Please read this post in its entirety before setting your mind to an opinion about it.  That is all I ask.

Nate

—-

Fred Phelps and his loyal band (of mostly blood related) followers are at it again trying to snatch their share of headlines in the wake of the Aurora tragedy.  They have made some tentative announcements that they are planning to picket the memorial of the theater shooting victims for an, as of yet, unspecified reason.  I’m sure they will float some kind of ridiculous excuse for their picketing and there will be a firestorm of controversy surrounding their activities.

As I ruminate on the Phelps’ and their place in our religion, I am confronted by a startling and sobering reality.

They are not the problem.

Even the most cynical atheist can see that they are simply insane.  Nobody takes them seriously except as a footnote on national news programs.  They have jumped the shark so many times with their protests that even Fonzie would change the channel.

No, the Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) is not the problem…we are.

They are the most noticeable and vocal of the negative factions of Christianity (and sorry folks, unfortunately, they fall under our umbrella), but they are not the most damaging part of the Christian community.

Many Christians don’t like to admit that what they disagree with is WBC’s tactics, not their message.  We wouldn’t say it like that or put it on a sign or say it in such a controversial way.  Christians like to separate ourselves from those who take some of our message to what is, honestly, a logical conclusion.

We use code words where WBC uses homophobic overtures.  We say things like: “I support traditional family values” or “I protect the institution of marriage.”  We speak of homosexuality in nicer terms than WBC but we still seem to consider it the most carnal of sins and one for which most participants are unrepentant.  We actively support legislation that removes or limits the rights of  homosexuals.  We often vote against homosexuals.  Politicians often pander for our votes by saying they would go so far as to amend the constitution to limit the right of marriage to only heterosexual relationships.

We hate homosexuality (and quite possibly homosexuals) as much as WBC.  We say nice things to make each other feel better like “Hate the sin, not the sinner.”  Even our attempts to appear tolerant are laced with intolerance and rigidity.

We are intolerant in our own subtle and insidious ways.  We are the ones training our children to abhor or at least mistrust homosexuals.  Organizations like The Boy Scouts of America, Focus on the Family, and Chic-Fil-A have taken strongly anti-homosexual stances.  We reward them by cheerfully handing them money and supporting their causes.  We are the ones condemning homosexuals to hell before they’ve even had a chance to die.  We are the ones all but barring them from our places of worship.  We are the ones encouraging legislators to deny them basic human rights.  We are the ones talking about them as though they are lesser, much more warped beings than we are.

We are the ones that keep them away.  We are the ones that have shown them fists instead of helping hands.  We are the ones that see them as illegitimate.  We are the ones quoting Bible verses to justify our hurtful and sometimes sinful behavior.

I have no prescription for you about your beliefs on homosexuality.  As with everything, it is left to you to develop your own conclusion.

You may decide homosexuality is a sin, you may not.

I know one thing, even if you land on the side of it being a sin:  The Tax Collector (Zacchaeus), The Woman at the Well, The Woman Caught in Adultery, The Denier of Christ (Peter), The Persecutor of Christians (Paul), and many others seem to suggest something about how we are to treat people.

Homosexuals are people and should be treated with love and respect.  They should be welcomed into our houses of worship as family and treated as brothers and sisters from the same Father.  They should not be categorized by their sexual preference but by their membership in the Human Race.

Yes, Westboro Baptist Church disgusts me as much as anyone else. But they are not the problem here, we are.  Until we adjust the way we respond to homosexuals in this world, we will always be the problem.  No person should ever be kept from the loving arms of Christ.  There is no exception to that rule.

May God have mercy on us for all of the times we have hurt His children.  We can be better.

I will of course be interacting with people in the comments section of this post and on Facebook.  Any hateful speech or remarks will be deleted as soon as I notice them.  I love and welcome productive conversation.

God and Politics

I have been disturbed by something lately. I must confess, I am a little bit of a news junkie. I like to watch the various twenty-four hour news networks and stay on top of the latest happenings in the world. Politics is always at the top of the news. I have noticed something very disturbing about our political discourse.

It seems religion has become one of the primary issues in our elections. During the 2008 presidential campaign, one of the issues Barack Obama was attacked on was whether or not he was a Muslim. The Christian right was in an uproar over the notion that a non-Christian might be elected to the presidency. It was unthinkable that someone outside the Christian community would have that much power.

Nevermind Barack Obama was and is a practicing Christian. Even the rumor that he was a Muslim was enough to throw many Christians into an uproar.

Candidates run on platforms of Christian values. They adeptly figure out what it is Christians want to hear. They will cry out against abortion, homosexuality, and other religions. They create conflicts and persecutions that simply aren’t there. It is good politics to figure out what your base is and give them something to fight about. History makes something shockingly clear. When Christians start to fight, it gets really ugly really fast.

I grew up in Greeley, Colorado. Like most small towns in the middle of America, social and fiscal conservatism is the overwhelming norm. Good Christians vote for Republicans. Good Christians always vote to define life at conception. Good Christians always vote against marriage equality. I was told time and again that I needed to sign on to the right wing agenda to really be a part of the church.

I have never been a conservative. I have never been a Republican. I have always had a hard time with both fiscal and social conservatism. I have been told time and again that I don’t understand Christianity. I have been told I am obviously not reading the same Bible as everyone else. Many people would consider me an incomplete Christian because of my political leanings.

I do not write this as a complaint. I do not seek sympathy. This is not a gripe session to vent pent up anger and frustration about a childhood in cnservative America. This is a window into the reality of the political church. This is not a problem limited ti conservative. Liberals who have spiritualized their politics are just as judgemental and just as exclusive.

The real danger of spiritualized politics is how much it limits our ability to connect with people. If I cling to the belief that the only good Christians are Liberal Christians, I cannot reach a Conservative person. How can I be so foolish as to use one side of my mouth to tell someone God loves them and the other to tell them they have to conform to my political views to really experience that love?
We cannot spread the message and be divisive at the same time. When we hold the belief that spirituality is indelibly grafted to a specific social or political structure, we create an impossible situation for people of differing ideals to come to faith.

The crux of the matter is this: Only about half of all Americans hold Conservative viewpoints. Only about half are ideological liberals. Are we willing to limit the Gospel to half of our fellow Americans? Can we live with that?