The Law Hangs in the Balance of Love

Part 4 in the series What Makes a Christian? Each part stands on its own. See below for links to the other installments.

 

 

Sometimes our greatest breach with Scripture is not when we outright contradict it--it's what we choose to prioritize, diminish or outright ignore. There is a time for everything under heaven (Ecclesiastes 3:1). We need to put first things first and second things second.

 

Much of Christianity focuses on salvation plans and doctrinal ideas.

However, Jesus in full voice in Scripture is very clear what we should prioritize: It is the Greatest Commandment, i.e. love God and love one another.

Maybe I'm just a simple country boy at heart, but it just seems straightforward.

Remember that Jesus presented the Greatest Commandment as the full package: It's the key to the Kingdom and eternity; it's the key to our public witness of our faith; and it's the key to interpreting all of Law--See John 13:34-35, Mark 12:28-34, Luke 10:25-37 and Matthew 22:34-40, respectively.

That last clause above is crucial. In the debate about what to prioritize, Jesus gives us a clue in the Gospel of Matthew's treatment of the Greatest Commandment:

Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’  All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
Matthew 22:34-40.

The last line there hits me like a bullet: All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.

This is a huge statement.

It is a statement that has not gotten anywhere near the attention it deserves. Most Christians are busy arguing about what the Law should be. Jesus is saying there is something bigger, more pivotal and more fundamental than that.

The vast traditions of Christian denominations have this absolutely backwards--we try to figure out how to pepper in love and compassion into a rigid structure of rules, doctrines and practices. Jesus is calling our imagination to do the very opposite--to be immersed in the practice of love in which we pepper in rules, doctrines and practices to give it form and ornamentation when appropriate.

It makes you wonder if we have been reading Scripture at all.

Jesus is speaking against a cold, impersonal use for the Law. If there is anything that Jesus railed against during his years walking this earth, it was making a black-and-white interpretation of the Law as the interface between humankind and the Divine. He was constantly railing against the Pharisees with their tedious "gotcha" games with the Law. Jesus clearly put Love and Mercy before any literal interpretation of the Law.

What does it mean that this commandment is the structure on which the Law hangs? I don't even know. I'm not sure that anyone knows. I think it is extremely difficult for our human minds to wrap around. But we also haven't been working very hard to unpack this meaning diligently over the past 2,000 years.

Jesus Himself is giving us an enormous clue as to how the whole kit-n-caboodle of Church and society ought to be put together--He's saying the whole thing hangs on the Commandment to love. I've been all around the Christian denominational world, and I've never heard a single sermon trying to unpack they meaning of this statement from Matthew.

When your church community makes rules, rubrics and procedures, does it ask:  How does this hang off the commandment to love God and one another?

The question may be implied, but why isn't it more explicit?

The Good News is that Jesus gave some examples to show how to be in relationship with the Law:

Jesus fed the hungry and healed on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:1-13). It may be hard for us to understand this today, but at the time, these were serious offenses. He was violating some of the most sacred practices of his faith tradition. He was not keeping the Sabbath day Holy by resting. Sure, people may have suffered being hungry and ill, but that was considered unfortunate but acceptable collateral damage for being true to God's Commandment.

In terms of the letter of the Law, there was no question that Jesus was at fault.  He did not observe the Sabbath, and the Law allowed for no exceptions--case closed. Jesus had a different view, however.  He saw that he was fulfilling the Law rather than contradicting it (Matthew 5:12). Perhaps feeding the hungry and healing the sick is what made the day Holy, after all.

I would suggest that what Jesus is requiring of us is to take the Law--which is an evolving piece as it is--and keep it in constant relationship with the demands of mercy and the lived experiences of people in their conscience and context.

I hear the Scribes and Pharisees yelling at Jesus, saying, "You broke the law!"

I hear Jesus saying in reply, "You had to be there, and then you would understand."

And that's just it--we have to be there. After all, the word "compassion" literally means, "to suffer with." Outside of a true compassion that can only come--by definition--out of solidarity with others, we cannot possibly interpret--nor implement--the Law appropriately.

While most Christians today do not have any aversion to working on the Sabbath, what are some other religious and lifestyle practices today that are completely prohibited?  What might Jesus say to those in light of this passage from Matthew 12?

***

Some argue that Jesus came to abolish the rigid, black-and-white legal system of Jewish Law only to replace it with a rigid, black-and-white legal system of Christian Law.

This is to profoundly miss the point. I can imagine Jesus doing a major face palm here. Jesus wasn't just changing the content of the Laws themselves but rather our whole approach to Law altogether!

We try to build Love into the Law, but maybe that's not possible. Perhaps Love simply needs to accompany the Law. Or as Jesus puts it, Love needs to support the Law.

The reason is simple: Jesus said that Love is more than just a part of the Law. He said that Love is the structure on which all the Law hangs. In other words, all of Law is in relationship with the commandment to Love. Jesus had every opportunity to tell us to scrap the old Law in favor of a new one. He didn't--He told us that the Law will find its fulfillment in relationship with Love--and in that relationship, Law is secondary to Love. Love and Law are both related and  distinct.


Like double helixes of DNA - Love and Law must be in constant dialogue.

A good way to look at this might be like the double helix of a DNA structure: The letter of the Law is one strand. It must be in constant dialogue with the lived experiences of people and the demands of mercy. The two strands constantly intermingle with many points of direct contact in between.

The DNA model may be inadequate, however. It gives the impression that Love and the Law are equivalents. That is not what Jesus is saying in Matthew--Love is more foundational. The DNA model is a great way to show the interrelationship between the two, but perhaps another model is needed to properly showcase what Jesus is describing.

Maybe the best visual is to use the old standby symbol for Law:  The justice scales--with a tweak. As Francis E. Madojemu says, the key word in Matthew's passage is "hang." The Law hangs on the Commandment to Love:  "Remove it and everything falls down," says Madojemu. In this model, Love is the structure which entirely supports the rest of the Laws.

I hesitate to push any metaphor too far, but I think Jesus gives us a wide berth here. If the Law hangs on Love, then we can infer some things--that Law can only be something that will not disrupt what Love has put in place. If the Law is too heavy and drags down the structure of Love, then it is out of balance. I would refer people to 1 Corinthians 13:4-8 for examples of what qualities this love would have in order to support the weight of the Law. "Love" is, after all, not merely some abstract concept but some rigorous behaviors.

Jesus gave us a metaphor that we should work with, mediate on and pray about.

Take any Church Law and visualize it this way--imagine it hanging delicately in the balance. It's sole lifeline of support is it's connection to the Commandment to love God and one another. How does that change our view of each and every Church Law?

Jesus was ushering in the Law of Love--something that he proclaimed was at the heart of Jewish Law in the first place but had been scabbed over by centuries of human insecurities and institutions.  In short, the Law had become to many a false idol. Fundamentalism is always that--a breaking of the 1st Commandment by making the religious structure an absolute rather than our best attempt to point to God. Jesus was calling us out of making pronouncements without being personally involved and walking side-by-side with people in compassion. He was ushering in the primacy of conscience.

Matthew 22:36-40 is a glaring instance where we can get all the words of Scripture right and still get the message wrong. If we build a system of Laws and make room for Love only as an optional ornament, we have a fundamentally different system compared to a system of Love which is only afterwards adorned with Laws--a system where the Laws simply cannot support themselves at all in the absence of Love.

* * *


This is part 4 in the series, "What Makes a Christian?" Each part stands on its own.
Part 1: The Elephant in the Living Room
Part 2: Like Looking at the Sun
Part 3: John 3:16 vs the Greatest Commandment
Part 4: The Law Hangs in the Balance of Love
Part 5: The First Commandment Shall Be Last

John 3:16 vs The Greatest Commandment

Part 3 in the series, What Makes a Christian? See end for links to the others.

I can go into any number of churches this weekend hear them "preach salvation." What does this mean? Believe this-or-that and you'll be guaranteed an afterlife in Heaven. In many churches across Christendom, this is probably the most common theme in a Sunday morning sermon, Bible study or prayer gathering of any kind, especially in the Evangelical world.

I can understand why people are preoccupied with their own fate--but in the words of Brian McLaren, when did Christianity become an "earth evacuation plan"?

There are a lot of assumptions that go into this kind of theology. It's quite a loaded statement, actually! We assume that the point of religion is to secure an afterlife--an afterlife that is either questionable or not available to us otherwise--and that the key to navigating this properly is to have the right beliefs.

Before you think I am picking on Evangelicals, a similar thing happens in Catholic and mainline Protestant churches. The Creed is rolled out about halfway through liturgy with a litany of "I believe this" and "I believe that."

When did belief trump action? What about simply doing what God tells us to do and trusting our fate in that?

Jesus seems to say it's not what you think but rather who you are that matters:

Jesus is very clear that the fundamental commandment is to love God and neighbor and that our witness of this will be the very mark of our Christian identity (John 13:34-35), that our closeness to the Kingdom (Mark 12:28-34) and participation in eternity (Luke 10:25-37) are contingent on it and that all other rules and parameters can be understood only in light of it (Matthew 22:34-40).

An incredible trickery happened somewhere in the history of Christianity. Early Christians were known as "followers of the Way" (Acts 9:2). Christianity was a holistic practice that impacted all areas of their lives. Somewhere this got truncated, and Christianity started looking more and more like a detached mental exercise.

I suspect I know why: Actions are difficult. Beliefs are easy. Changing one's lifestyle is just about the hardest thing to do. Ask anyone who has struggled with an addiction or has tried to lose weight or change any habit.

For everything there is a season,

and a time for every matter under heaven.

Ecclesiastes 3:1

Like the vagabond poetic soul Qoheleth writes above, all things fit in God's Kingdom.

All words from Scripture fit, too.

I believe our task is to figure out how to order and prioritize them. We can end up with entirely different understandings of what it means to be a Christian--not by outright denying or contradicting anything in Scripture--but rather by choosing what to prioritize and reordering everything else in light of it.

A lot of churches start out with John 3:16 as their starting point. Catholics and many mainline Protestants start off with their doctrinal beliefs as expressed by the Creed. In this series, I explore the centrality of the Greatest Commandment to the faith--putting the commandment to love God and love one another as first and then reordering everything else in light of that. You may end up with a different theology, and frankly a whole different church this way!

For God so loved the world
 that he gave his one and only Son,

that whoever believes in him
shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:16

There is no other verse more widely shared as the end all, be all of Christianity. This is the ultra-succinct, Cliff Notes version of Christianity. You'll see John 3:16 signs at sporting events, on automobiles and shirts. It's just everywhere. It's like Christians are saying: If all you hear from Scripture is one thing, make sure you hear John 3:16.

What's curious is that Jesus gave very different advice. When asked directly, He said follow the Greatest Commandment: Love God and neighbor abundantly. He didn't say "believe." He said, "do."

What's gotten us into this whole mess is our understanding of the word "belief." Scholars say that the modern American mind has been thoroughly influenced by the ultra-literalist approach to English Law that was in vogue several centuries ago. Words were stripped of their literary and artistic allusions and taken in the most basic, face value way.

I don't see any suggestions in Scripture to read it that way, but each of us brings his or her own interpretive lens whenever we read anything. There is a whole science called Hermeneutics devoted to understanding this phenomenon.

So when Scripture says that our duty is to "believe" in Jesus, we interpret that to mean the intellectual assent to the idea of Jesus as God and Christ. It's right there on the page, that's what the word "belief" means, right?

If elsewhere in Scripture it says we are saved "in the name of Jesus," we apply the same interpretive lens: We end up confident that if we profess the name of Jesus as the God we adhere to, then our duties toward our salvation are fulfilled. We have to say "Jesus" and not "Mohammed" or "Buddha" or "Krishna."

It's no wonder that many denominations in Christianity have violently split due to their vociferous disagreements over theological matters. When your entire stake in eternity hinges on getting the right theological concepts in order with the right nomenclature, it is no small wonder this has become such a high anxiety scenario!

In The Name Of . . .

Imagine if I were to say I am living my life "in the name of Martin Luther King, Jr."

Let's be honest--that would probably sound pretty awkward at first listen, because nobody talks like that. But with a moment of reflection, you would probably think this sounds like an old fashioned, perhaps overly poetic way of saying that I try to emulate the values and lifestyle of MLK.

In other words, I am trying to live in the tradition of MLK. I don't think anyone would assume that this has anything to do with renaming buildings or streets or that the name itself has some magical significance. Even if there were a change in nomenclature somewhere along the line, it would only be because of what that name represents, rather than some inherent quality of the name itself.

If I say I am trying to live, "in the name of MLK," you would expect me to lead a movement for civil rights or practice nonviolent resistance to structures of injustice. You can't really separate the name of MLK from those activities, because those activities are why you know the name of MLK in the first place.

The name of MLK. only has meaning because of who he was--and who he was is not a static entity--it is a reflection of how he lived and what he said and stood for. Who he was as a noun only makes sense in light of who he was as a verb.

In other words, if we are going to be saved by the "name" of Jesus, let's not be so literalistic to think uttering the name itself is the only condition. "The name of Jesus" is shorthand for all that Jesus has said and done--His teachings and model of life.

This makes perfect sense when you hold it up to Jesus' statement of inheriting eternal life from Luke's passage (Luke 10:25-37). Inheriting eternal life is about being merciful, just as Jesus showed us by being merciful Himself. In other words, helping our injured neighbor by the side of the road IS proclaiming "the name of Jesus."

In Biblical times, your name was tied to your inheritance. If your name is "Smith," that was not just some random combination of letters to make a sound. It was rather your connection to the legacy of the Smith family--their lands, their reputation, their culture. If you conquer some new territories "in the name of Smith," you are not just assigning the unique combination of letters and sounds to this land. You are invoking the legacy and reputation of the people known as "Smith."

If you're going to be saved "in the name of Jesus," it's because you are living into the Greatest Commandment.

With a literalistic eye, it looks like Scripture is contradicting itself. In some passage, it says that we are saved by a profession of belief. In other passages, we are saved by love and good deeds. I'm here to say that those are not in conflict at all.

Scripture is not divided up between a theology of belief and a theology of action--it is a combined, holistic expression.

John 3:16 is a beautiful verse, understood this way--that God's act of sharing Jesus with us comes out of love, and that all who participate in that love through loving both God and one another follow in the Way of Jesus, which is the Way of eternity--to love Jesus so much that you imitate Him and follow His Way. To believe in His message so much that you follow it.

This is part 3 in the series, "What Makes a Christian?" Each part stands on its own.
Part 1: The Elephant in the Living Room
Part 2: Like Looking at the Sun
Part 3: John 3:16 vs the Greatest Commandment
Part 4: The Law Hangs in the Balance of Love
Part 5: The First Commandment Shall Be Last

Like Looking at the Sun

Part 2 in the series, What Makes a Christian?

***

It is amazing how often we fail a most basic mark of the faith.

It is a downright scandal how rarely it is preached.

It's questionable how directly our religious and moral practices stem from it.

Yet if we believe the direct words of Jesus Himself--you know, God--the very ability of others to recognize our Christian identity is dependent on how we follow this.

We gather in churches. We have elaborate worship and praise. And yet we barely give lip service to the first and foremost of the commandments. When we do, it is often to give exceptions--No, Jesus didn't really mean that . . .

I'm talking about the Greatest Commandment--love God and love neighbor. Abundantly.

Christians often spend more time talking about obscure lines from the Bible or obscure doctrines about obscure topics, and it's amazing how very little time we actually spend on the fundamental, core command that Jesus Himself preached to us.

If you want to take the Bible literally: God Himself actually told us what to focus on!

Jesus is very clear that the fundamental commandment is to love God and neighbor and that our public witness of this will be the very mark of our Christian identity (John 13:34-35), that our closeness to the Kingdom (Mark 12:28-34) and participation in eternity (Luke 10:25-37) are contingent on it, that all other rules and parameters can be understood only in light of it (Matthew 22:34-40). That's it. All else gets at best a distant second or third place.

And yet our denial knows no bounds. It's rubrics. It's obscure passages. It's theologizing about the finer points of a Baptism--full immersion or partial? Oil or water?

How about loving God and neighbor as the only full immersion God asks for?

Given the seriousness and centrality of the Greatest Commandment, you would think two out of every three sermons would be focused on it. You would think we'd have task forces set up to evaluate how good we are doing in living it out and suggesting ways to do it better and better.

It is so simple, yet so difficult. We do everything we can to make being "Christian" about something else--it's about church membership, a certain baptismal formula or having the right "beliefs." Even denominations at odds with one another have this in common! Way to go, ecumenism!

You could argue those other things are important, too. But we put them front and center when Jesus was clear that something else was front and center. He actually comes out and tells us to put this commandment first, and we do everything except that.

We don't outright deny the Greatest Commandment. Oh no, we would never be so bold. Rather, we do something far more sinister--we just sort of brush it aside, put it on a pedestal and otherwise ignore it.

We box it in, limit it, put the ropes around it because, in truth, it scares the living daylights out of us.

Rubrics, rules, doctrines, Morse code, alien symbols and Cracker Jack box toys--all of these only make sense in their proper place. All too often, we place them first and foremost rather than as secondary or tertiary matters which can only be properly viewed and understood in light of the primary commandment, according to the passage from Matthew above.

We find ways to rationalize. We claim that God must want our bitterness, divisions, hatreds and such, so "loving God" then becomes manifesting these things. We find every excuse NOT to love abundantly, NOT to overflow with mercy, NOT to do all that love requires of us. We can contort anything into what we want, but much of it isn't in the spirit of the New Testament. For example, we can find all sorts of examples in Scripture and Church history to support all sorts of actions. The Bible is full of war and violence of all kinds, so we could claim Biblical support for these actions. Before we blindly imitate them and claim some Scriptural backing, we should ask--does this love God and love neighbor abundantly? If not, it should go to the fires of Gehenna.

Still, individuals and churches do everything they can to wiggle out of these requirements and try to make it out to be about something else. It's not that those other things aren't important--the scandal is the disproportionate amount of energy we put into those obscure things compared to what should be first and foremost.

And let's be clear: It's absolutely and totally a scandal how we treat the Greatest Commandment.

We give lip service to love. We attempt it here and there. But we are like unruly teenagers whose parents have told us to clean the house while they are gone. So we first spend several hours watching TV, talking to our friends, and yes, thinking about cleaning the house from time to time. About 10 minutes before they return, we run roughshod over the house to give the appearance of cleanliness. That is how I see us regarding the commandment to love. We do talk about it, just enough to get that monkey off our back and claim that we are following it. But the level of enthusiasm and energy we put into it is not anywhere near what we are commanded to do by Jesus--you know, God Himself.

I'll stand up and say that theology matters. We need to ponder over the deep stuff. I'm doing it right now. We need to meditate on who Jesus was and is and what that means for us today. Our churches have all been enriched by deep theological traditions. Rituals, church institutions, doctrines--all these matter, too. They have their place--the problem is that they are not staying in their place but have all-too-often assumed center stage.

We shouldn't make the mistake of assuming that theologizing about God is the same thing as being a Christian. That would be like mistaking the pre-game huddle with the football game itself. The preparation time is NOT the game. For far too many, simply "figuring out" their personal theology is an end unto itself. Pope Francis challenges us on this: It 's not just church leaders, but also theologians who should "smell like the sheep." No one is exempt from the hard work of living out the Commandment.

I love theology, but I have to admit my faith is pretty simple.

To me, Jesus' message is both incredibly simple and also incredibly difficult at the same time. Little children get it. The poor get it. Those on the margins of society get it. The more and more "stuff" we have just makes it more difficult to hear the message. It doesn't matter if the "stuff" is material wealth or just something else we are holding onto. It could be anger. It could be our ego. It could be our need to be right. The Gospels predict this. The more attached people were to their stuff the harder time they had accepting the truth of Jesus and following.

Let that stuff go and you start to see Jesus.

Maybe the message of Jesus is like looking into the sun. It's just so bright we can't do it for long. All we can do is hint and squint at it and try to come back to it later when we are ready. There is a case to be made for that.

Maybe humankind will always be sun worshippers--the first and perhaps the only religion.

God Himself gave us the commandment. Why is this not being preached from the mountaintops? Why is this not the cornerstone of all that we say and do? Because:

Jesus is the cornerstone (Psalm 118:22, Ephesians 2:20)

and

Jesus is God (John 1:1, 1:14, Matthew 1:23)

and

 "God is love.

Whoever lives in love

lives in God,

and God in them."

(1 John 4:16)

Therefore love is the cornerstone. Our active participation in love puts us in line with God, the Creator, as love is the creative energy of the universe, and love is the wavelength of eternity.

 

***

 

This is part 2 in the series, "What Makes a Christian?" Each part stands on its own.

Part 1: The Elephant in the Living Room
Part 2: Like Looking at the Sun
Part 3: John 3:16 vs the Greatest Commandment
Part 4: The Law Hangs in the Balance of Love
Part 5: The First Commandment Shall Be Last

The Elephant in the Living Room

Part 1 of the series, What Makes a Christian?

Sometimes I think that the collective witness of Christianity is best expressed by the expression, "the elephant in the living room."

I can close my eyes and envision millions--perhaps even billions--of Christians in this large room, all talking, milling about and being energetic about their faith--but virtually ignoring this giant elephant who is right there in the middle of it all.

They even have to bend and contort themselves to see around this elephant, but they continue to ignore him.

What is this elephant?

Let's look at it this way:

Christians profess that God Himself lived on earth in the person of Jesus Christ.

You with me so far?

God Himself walked among us, teaching, preaching and showing what He meant by His life example. He was very clear what was the most important. 

That giant elephant is the Greatest Commandment.

I hear Jesus saying: Of all the things you do, do this.

If you're gonna put your time and attention anywhere, put it here: Love God and love neighbor abundantly.

Yet, how often is this preached?

Of course, it is mentioned.

What I mean is: How often is it preached like this? 

How often is it preached the way Jesus preached it:

With intensity,

Centrality,

And a sense of utter, singular importance?

I'm sometimes baffled by our ignorance--it must be some kind of collective denial. But it is certainly immensely disrespectful to the person Who we claim is God.

* * *

The Greatest Commandment is in all 4 Gospels:

In Mark 12:28-34, Jesus makes a connection between following this commandment and one's closeness to the Kingdom of God:

Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. The second is this: Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these.

In Matthew 22:34-40, Jesus tells us that all other laws are to be read through the lens of the Greatest Commandment. All other laws are qualified by--and cannot be otherwise understood--outside of this context:

Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.

In Luke 10:25-37, Jesus not only gives the command to love God and neighbor, but he also says this is what you must do to inherit eternal life. How often have you heard that preached at church? I am not a betting man, but it would be easy money to say that most preachers only mention this line in order caution us not to take it too seriously--using other lines from the Bible to qualify--or outright negate--this statement by Jesus Himself. They say that Jesus could not possibly have meant what He, you know, actually said:

On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
“What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”
He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
“You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”
But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

Jesus then tells the story of the Good Samaritan. He gives the answer in verse 37:

The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”
Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

In John 13:34-35, Jesus states that our very public witness of our Christian identity itself depends on whether or not we love one another. Otherwise, people will not recognize that we are indeed Christians. Jesus tells us to follow his example. Jesus not only gives the commandment to love, but also states that His life has modeled this love. 

A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.

If there is any doubt as to who is included in the list of people to show love toward, the New Testament is clear--the commandment to love includes everyone from those in our own Christian group to the widows, orphans, outsiders, marginalized people on up to and including our enemies. In other words: Everyone. There is no shortage of Scripture citations to back this up. We will explore this further in the next post, stay tuned!

***

This is part 1 in the series, "What Makes a Christian?" Each part stands on its own.
Part 1: The Elephant in the Living Room
Part 2: Like Looking at the Sun
Part 3: John 3:16 vs the Greatest Commandment
Part 4: The Law Hangs in the Balance of Love
Part 5: The First Commandment Shall Be Last

Enough is Enough: Southern Baptists Vote Against Confederate Flag

 

 

The Southern Baptist Convention voted to "repudiate" the use of the Confederate battle flag today. Russell Moore, president of the SBC Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, wrote this touching piece. The vote was not unanimous, and it was not easy. It had vocal opposition. Make no mistake, though: The resolution still passed with overwhelming support. 

As an outside observer the last two years, I have felt a strong desire of the people of the SBC to put the sins of racism behind them--even if they aren't sure exactly how to do that and if their language around race can be awkward at times. Their efforts, I believe, are sincere. Before the vote today, there was an extended dialogue on racism on the main convention floor--unprecedented in their history as they take the conversation deeper than ever before. The Twitter feed was nearly unanimous in its support for that racism discussion, with only one lone comment expressing exasperation for continued dialogue on the topic--a comment which was ignored by all the rest.

The flag resolution today took real courage, and the SBC should be commended. It will take even more courage as this resolution is implemented in churches and towns all over, as one dissenting voice warned. But they took a giant step forward today.

Those who opposed it said their opposition had nothing to do with racism. Rather, it was based on their right to express their heritage and avoid a never-ending slippery slope of political correctness where everything could potentially come under fire, including the flag of the USA which has also flown on slave ships. Removing every name and every symbol with a negative connotation would not leave much, they argued.

The transformative moment arrived when former SBC president and descendent of Confederate soldiers James Merritt spoke from the floor with leadership and presence. Noting how the flag is often a barrier for evangelization, he said, "All the Confederate flags in the world are not worth one soul of any race." I encourage you to watch it here.

* * *

Imagine you are an African-American walking through an unfamiliar neighborhood at night.

You are alone. Suddenly, a car drives alongside you and slows down. It has a Confederate flag proudly displayed in the back window, perhaps with other aggressive symbols or a gun rack. Your heart starts racing. What do you do? Should you expect to be attacked or will they offer help? You immediately go on high alert. Should you be thinking about ways to escape or defend yourself, or can you just go about your business? You are kicking yourself for being careless and roaming too far into unfamiliar territory--you promise to yourself that if you survive you won't ever go into that part of town again.

There is no luxury to leisurely ponder whether this flag is just an innocent expression of cultural heritage or whether it announces a threat. Your life may be on the line, and you have to react as if it is. You relive this trauma over and over every time you see this flag.

It is precisely in this way that the symbol is itself an act of violence--even when it is just passively hanging in a front yard or in the back of a vehicle.

That's how terrorism works. It's a constant stream of hints, taunts and outright intimidation with the goal of disorienting and destabilizing others--and ultimately limiting and controlling their behavior. It's not just the violence itself that terrorizes, but rather the environment which is saturated with constant suggestions of violence. It often comes in the form of a polite face with a sinister intent. Doubt is dizzying as folks are unsure where and when the next attack is coming and who they can trust.

It may be just an innocent expression of heritage for some folks, but think of the impact it may be having on others.

Just try to put yourselves into the shoes of an African-American person. For decades, this flag has used by the KKK and other hate groups--and continues to be used by them actively in the present day--to terrorize and intimidate an entire race of people.

When people fly that flag, they are continuing to terrorize people who have been through enough. And enough is, by definition, enough.

It's like taking someone for a ride who has just recovered from a terrible car accident and then driving recklessly at high speeds, just for laughs.

It's like inviting a veteran with PTSD over to your house and then unexpectedly setting off fireworks behind him. There is nothing inherently wrong with fireworks, and maybe your family has a long history of using them. But some sensitivity is in order! If that is truly too much to ask, then it begs the question: Why in the world is that too much to ask?

In a twisted way, racist aggression is actually a hidden compliment to black folks--for people to expend that much energy trying to keep others down, they must be completely afraid of what would happen if that other group's full power were expressed. That may be poor consolation to victims of racial terrorism, but it is worth pondering what makes so much of white America so insecure and afraid of real black power. Why else would someone spend so much effort trying to keep another race of people down? It has to be fear.

When Christians refuse to distance themselves from this flag, I have to wonder why.

If you are married, you technically have the right to wear a ring that your previous girlfriend gave you. After all, it's just a part of your heritage and history. You can put it right next to your wedding ring. You can tell your wife that it's just a symbol of the past, "just trust me." But by doing so, you are putting an incredible burden on your wife. That ring is a constant symbol of doubt about where you stand today. It belongs in the far back corner of some drawer that rarely sees the light of day. Or better yet: In a pawn shop.

I have to admit something: When people say they fly the flag just to express their "heritage," I often don't believe them. Or at the very least, I am left unsure. I suspect they could be expressing passive-aggressive racism in disguise. They may say it's not about racism, but they are doing the absolute, complete bare minimum to show that and leaving the door wide open for doubt--as I pointed out earlier, doubt itself is a weapon of terrorism. Maybe some white people are sincere and don't intend that, but whether it's intended or not, it can and does bring that consequence. When someone does the absolute minimum, it is often a form of resistance.

The flag that we refer to as the "Confederate Flag" was a minor battle flag during the Civil War and only rose to prominence afterwards as a symbol of Jim Crow and the KKK. The Confederacy had other, more official flags, and I have never seen any of them flown. Yes, this flag has also evolved over time to be a general symbol of the South, but it's real claim to fame came during Jim Crow and can no longer be separated from that. It is still one of the most popular symbols of hate groups today. It's usage as a symbol of hate and aggression is simply too extensive, too deep and covers the span of too many years. There are plenty of other flags that could be used to celebrate the history of the South that could do a more convincing job drawing a hard line between any racist connotations.

A symbol can have multiple meanings. I understand the argument that people should be able to avoid racism without having to erase their own cultural heritage in the process. But make no mistake, the history of this flag may be forever linked with white supremacist terrorist groups. It can and will bring those other associations along. It can and will continue to re-injure and re-terrorize, just like in the example above of the person walking down the street. Its usage by white hate groups for so many years means that it promotes oppression by its very presence. If you don't like that fact, then please direct your anger to the KKK and others who have tainted the symbol rather than to the people who say that enough is enough and want to put an end to it.

To those who are opposed: Please stop complaining that the "political correctness police" are taking away all your toys. You sound like little boys, and little boys need to grow up and become men. I'm sorry you feel like limiting hate speech is an unbearable burden of tyranny. The truth is you have a tremendous opportunity--such a small act can go a long way toward healing and helping a great multitude of people.

If you feel oppressed by being pressured to give up the flag, just imagine the oppression the African-American community has experienced for hundreds of years--and continues to experience. 

Little boys pout because their toys have been taken away. Grown men have broad shoulders and know they are strong enough and secure enough to ensure that expressing their rights does not come at the expense of others. The irony is that while you are worried that the political correctness police are "oppressing" you, the fact is that you are putting a tremendous burden on your neighbors and, in fact, oppressing them far worse. Let's find a better way for all. Yes, you still have the right to display that flag--but the question remains, why would you given the harm it continues to inflict?

Today, the SBC showed what mature Christians look like. Instead of focusing solely on their "rights," they made the decision that best expresses Gospel compassion, even if that means enduring tension in the community and making a sacrifice. It is, after all, a small price to pay on a long road of repentance and reconciliation. I was there and believe an historic moment took place. Energy shifted in this denomination, perhaps forever. So for all the SBC members who fear they may be losing a part of their heritage, I say: Fear not. You all did a fine job of building on that heritage today and have much more to share than ever. Congratulations!

'Coexist' Bumper Stickers

What do you think of those Coexist bumper stickers?

What I don't like about them is the word itself: Coexist. It's not the only word used, but it is by far the most widely recognized of the genre.

Coexist and Tolerance work very well as bumper stickers, because their letters translate to religious symbols easily. But the words themselves don't convey enough imagination. Surely, we can do a whole lot better than simply coexist together and tolerate each other!

Respect, Interact. These move us in the right direction.

Harmony, Peace, One Love, Compassion. These are better at calling our imaginations toward true harmony amidst our diversity.

But I think they are all good. They all call us to imagine a better way for people of different backgrounds to live together--to coexist in peace. Coexistence and tolerance may be a minimum, but all too often it is a huge challenge even to have that!

Our Common Home

I have a very tense relationship with neighbors on one side of my home and a very peaceful relationship with neighbors on the other side. On the tense side, we all watch the property line very closely. There is literally a fence, and it gets more entrenched and elaborate each year. We are often on guard since trust is lacking and we aren't sure how to build it. I often avoid that side of the yard. It's hard to be out there and not think about the tense situation. On the other side, I'm not even sure exactly where the property line is. We greet each other warmly and help each other occasionally. It feels like there is a whole lot more breathing room and we spend very little time thinking about it.

Peace is extremely beneficial--it frees up time, money and emotional energy. It improves our health. It does not take an actual war before we experience the value of peace. Any relationship where peace is lacking is costly and limits your freedom.

It is not that much different sharing the same planet. Pope Francis reminds us that the earth is our common home. All human beings share it. Not to coexist, at a minimum, is to live in denial about the shared home we all have and the realities that brings.

Besides, coexisting in peace is a minimum requirement if we are to respect every person's religious freedom.

This page is dedicated to building dialogue--and hopefully better relationships--between religious groups, particularly Catholics and Evangelicals. It seems like the central tension always revolves around this fundamental question--will I put what I know in jeopardy if I affirm something about another group?

I'm here to suggest that tolerating other religious groups does not have to in any way limit your own commitment to your faith. If you follow Jesus as the Way, Truth and Life, this should be easy--because it is what Jesus himself did while walking on this earth!

Jesus did a whole lot more than just coexist--he was constantly interacting with people outside of the "approved" groups of the day, including religious groups. He associated with all manner of people and treated them with respect--including enemies. If Jesus did anything at all in his earthly ministry, it was this mind-blowing witness of treating everyone equally while interacting with literally anyone and everyone--those who crossed his path and those he went out of his way to find.

Jesus had so much respect for the dignity of every single human person that he didn't treat people differently based on the stigmas, classes and cliques that usually divide people. He did not honor those divisions at all, because he was too busy honoring the person.

Jesus bypassed the "media" of his day and went straight to person-to-person dialogue.

Jesus practiced this even during extraordinary circumstances:  He talked to his disciples about love at the very instant he knew Judas was slithering out of the room to make his traitorous deal (John 13:21-38). Throughout his arrest, trial and execution, he was peaceful. He told his disciples to "put down the sword" (Matthew 26:52) and prayed for all those involved in his crucifixion, "Father, forgive them" (Luke 23:34).

There is a place to defend yourself and resist evil, but you don't have to do it violently or lose respect for all people in the process. If people do want to harm us, we should do everything we can to resolve those tensions so that we can coexist in peace.

Bumper Stickers Redux

I always thought the Coexist bumper stickers were clever, and I appreciated their message. But I wasn't comfortable having bumper stickers at all. I have always resisted anything that seemed to oversimplify human life. I'm a whole person with complex thoughts and feelings--and so are you, too. Being a walking, talking billboard for certain causes seemed to minimize the depth of the human experience. It does not invite true dialogue but rather feels like preaching at someone.

But I also realized we communicate in many ways. Some people say a lot by their outfit or choice or automobile. Our world is flooded with advertising of all kinds. One day, I decided it was a huge missed opportunity not to witness to what I believe in this way. If nothing else, it could be a conversation starter or could help embolden others who may be wavering in their faith.

A bumper sticker is perhaps no different than a cross necklace or minister's collar—it is a public statement of what I stand for.

I am asking others to hold me accountable when I display these public statements. I am sticking my neck out on the line, and that is risky. I'm not just preaching my views to others but also setting a standard for myself. There is power is speaking our views out loud in public. Like marriage vows--you stand before the whole community declaring your intentions.

There are lots of criticisms about these bumper stickers. Often, they relate to driving behavior, such as: Those people with the Coexist bumper stickers are always cutting me off or swerving while texting and driving. I suspect comments like these are intended to discredit a movement, making the association that these beliefs must emanate from selfish or naïve people.

Indeed, when something you believe in gets under the skin of someone else, it is always best to conduct yourself in public as politely, intelligently and respectfully as possible. Otherwise, your behavior gives people an all-too-easy reason to discount both you and your views.

While trolling the internet looking for graphics for this post, I discovered that those bumper stickers have a lot of anger associated with them.  On top of that, there are many unkind spin-off's and spoofs, to boot. It seems they strike a nerve. The anger comes from many sides--atheists who think that any religious expression at all is ridiculous all the way to devotees of a particular religion claiming that these bumper stickers obfuscate the uniqueness of their particular religious tradition.

Few people will actually come right out and say that respect and tolerance are against their religious beliefs, so they create a side discussion, instead--saying that the people with these bumper stickers have bad driving habits or that tolerance is a political impossibility given what those people believe.

I think the real reason is that true faith involves true vulnerability. It calls us our of our protective shell. It coaxes us to imagine something better than what we are used to. It seems easier, at least at first glance, staying on guard and keep divisions up. It is much harder to take those brave steps to encounter other people in true dialogue. In the long run, peace is much easier, but it is difficult to take those first steps.

So I will put my Coexist and Tolerance bumper stickers on my car--not to water down my faith or step away from my church tradition, but actually as a very mark of my Christian faith and identity. They feels like Good News to me, and Scripture tells us to share the Good News. I also hope I live up to this by my own behavior.

People will recognize that we are indeed Christians by whether or not we show love. Love requires us to do a whole lot more than just coexist and tolerate others. But those are indeed the very first--and necessary--steps.

Non-Denominational Bible Study: I Never Knew This Was Possible!

by Julie Gerver, guest blogger.

I have never participated in a non-denominational Bible study before and was anxious when I got there!

I work in the Vocations department of Glenmary Home Missioners. We took a trip to East Tennessee to visit our missions there. 

Fr. Steve Pawelk leads a Bible study, which includes at least 15 people of different denominations gathered together to reflect on Scripture. Our group of 8 people dropped in to participate and observe.

When we arrived, I was actually kind of nervous, to tell you the truth! My assumption of different faiths coming together and talking about God was always one of disagreement or conflict. So the thought that a room full of people could discuss Jesus without any tension was kind of amazing. It was quite an experience to see that that can really happen.

 

The group took turns reading from passages and then periodically stopping to discuss what they had just read. They work from a structured Bible study course book.

 

Visitors Mike Cain and Julie Gerver deep in thought.

I have been Catholic my whole life. I have never been in any ecumenical setting as such where I have discussed the Bible or Jesus. I know that one of our focuses at Glenmary is ecumenism, but I never saw it in action in my Catholic life--I have never experienced ecumenism live like that.  

Maybe reading some apologetics books throughout my formation gave me the impression that we have to be armed, ready and prepared--which is true. In a good sense, we have to have an understanding of our faith and be ready to explain that to others. However, my impression from reading those kinds of books is that we have to ‘get ready for battle’-- to fight the attacks that are coming and be ready to fight back.

One of the comments somebody said in the Bible study actually addressed that. They said they are able to come together and discuss Jesus because the focus is on Jesus, not on dogmas or things that can separate people--it is just the truth of Jesus, his love and his coming for us. Everybody is able to share their personal experience of him.

Everyone had very good reflections.

If I didn't know going in that this was an ecumenical Bible study, and if they hadn’t mentioned that they were, I wouldn't have known. It was a united group, and there is something there that’s incredible. 

I observed a great way to interact and share our faith: You meet the person as they are. It is like you are saying, I care about you--I'm not trying to force anything on you, I care about you as you are. And that’s really cool. That helped me--first, to see that it is possible to get together and have positive interactions with people from different traditions. And second, to see that it is about loving each other as human beings, and the rest will follow. 

This Bible study group was very welcoming. The group had formed an identity where they were comfortable with who they were, so there wasn’t any of worry like, I have to be careful what I say, or Why are they here? I really felt a spirit of . . . well, a Christian spirit!

Afterwards, I was in the parking lot, talking to people as they were leaving, and it was just very friendly. People were saying, it was so good to meet you, that kind of thing. It was just human beings coming together and sharing what’s important to them. 

 

This was ecumenism 101 for me!

 

Fr. Steve Pawelk gives an explanation.

 

Fr. Steve Pawelk shares this:

 

The group started when the local Methodist church canceled their adult Bible study. People missed it and started coming to the one we had at the Catholic Church. Besides Catholics, we have people who identify as Quaker, Lutheran, Episcopalian, Methodist and unaffiliated spiritual. We have had Baptists drop in, as well. Some have stopped coming but not because they are offended by the views--mostly because the course work was too academic for their tastes, as sometimes we get technical and look at the Greek words and such. We are intentional to prevent anyone from bashing the beliefs of another tradition. Our goal is not to win a point, but rather to reflect on how our various traditions interact with Scripture. There are now more non-Catholics who attend than Catholic!

 

 

Traveling Ecumenist writes:

 

This group shows they have enough in common in Christ that the denominational differences don’t have to come up. You still have to live your life in Christ today and tomorrow whether we resolve denominational differences or not.

Pope Francis reminds us to get to know Christ first--the doctrines and dogmas come second. They are important, but we need to get them in the right order. This Bible study group certainly lives that out!

 

 

Sticking Our Necks Out

Carolina box turtle after I put him safely on the side of the road.

In honor of World Turtle Day, May 23:

While driving through winding, mountainous roads in East Tennessee, this traveling ecumenist found the traveling turtle. At least, I think he was traveling, and I really don't know if it was a "he" or "she," but for the sake of simplicity I will just keeping calling him a "he." 

He was curled up in his shell about 2/3 of the way across the road. 

I remember learning that many turtles are killed when attempting to cross roads and that we ought to help.

I initially drove away. I wanted to help, but what could I do? I didn't know what I was getting into, and I figured prudence is best in such a situation, I reasoned, or perhaps rationalized. I was not sure how treacherous road conditions were or what might jump out of the ditch and bite me.

Some might say that I could come dangerously close to voiding my "country boy" roots in saying this, but I would disagree--it is precisely because I am from the country that I know not to interact with wildlife without knowing what I am getting myself into. Handling unfamiliar wildlife is one of those things you just don't do.

My conscience eventually got the best of me, and I drove back.

Turtles are serious causalities of our highway system. The least we can do is help them across now and then. I remembered reading in an article somewhere in the back of my memory that if you spot a turtle on the road, pick it up by the back of the shell and move the turtle to the side of the road in the direction it seems to be going.

I was still tentative about reaching down and picking him up, so I found a stick and scooted him along into a relatively level grassy area by the side of the road. After a long while, he stuck his neck out. I took that as a good sign that he was alive and well.

A mentor of mine told me once: "People are like turtles—we only move forward in life by sticking our necks out." This little guy seemed ready to move forward.

Native Americans and other religious traditions find resonance seeing themselves in the animals around them. Whether your faith tradition understands this as a direct reincarnation or just a model for our personalities, I think there is great value in exploring these relationships.

Someone once told me that the turtle is a spiritual guide for me. When I first heard that, I was taken aback. I saw this as negative. Aren't turtles slow animals who hide in their shells? It took me a while to admit and accept that the turtle is indeed my spiritual animal guide, at least one of them, and that this is an extremely good thing.

The turtle gets a bad rap. What does it mean to be a turtle? Old soul. It withdraws. It is awkward in this world, true--but here is what turned it around for me: It is graceful and agile in the waters (i.e. the spiritual realm). It is slow and steady with a strong moral compass.

The turtle doesn't speak to every part of me, but where it's true, it's really true, and the turtle has been a great guide for me. I have learned to embrace this part of me.

It is interesting the ways that an animal guide can manifest in your life. You'd have to know me well to see the turtle side. If you see me working, I rarely sit down, I'm always moving. I've been called the Energizer Bunny. I don't seem very turtle-esque at first glance. But deep down, the turtle is there guiding me. My sense of purpose, standing my ground in that, my sense of right and wrong, taking a project and progressively moving it forward. I may be energetic on the surface, but at the deepest levels of myself, I'm slow and steady in who I am and what I stand for.

In some senses, I'm the opposite--I'm not very withdrawn in political debates, for example!  But I do withdraw and freeze up in a lot of settings, for sure. I admit that's not my favorite part of myself. Yes, the turtle does hide in his shell, but you know what? He also stands his ground.

Traditionally, the turtle is symbolic of the way of peace, whether it’s inviting us to cultivate peace of mind or a peaceful relationship with our environment.

Symbol of the world, of the Earth

Ability to stay grounded, even in moments of disturbances and chaos

Slowing down, pacing yourself

Determination, persistence

Emotional strength and understanding

Ancient wisdom

I think another animal guide for me is the wolf:  Fierce. Mystical. Loyal. Family-oriented. I've been called a coyote at times.... a bit of a loner with entrepreneurial tendencies, a la Wiley E. Coyote. I feel a lot resonance there, too.

But today is a day to remember the turtles around us, inside us and those guiding us!

Happy World Turtle Day on May 23!
https://www.facebook.com/WorldTurtleDay