In my last column published in this space I talked about how God's plan for equality among the people of our world was central to the founding documents of our democracy. I also discussed how various definitions of democracy and equality affect the shape of our society and whether we truly arrive at anything close to actual equality.
I also observed that because the founders couched their equality statements in terms of God's intentions for a created people with natural rights, that we as Christians are perfectly within our rights when we apply our beliefs to the marketplace of public opinion. In fact, it is our obligation to do so. Unfortunately, I noted, we don't agree on which issues should get our attention, and from opposite sides of the values divide, we often view the other camp as corrupted and manipulated by secular political interests.
Christians are much better at singing songs about being "one in the spirit," and proclaiming "one baptism" and "one Christ" than we are at actually closing the gaps that divide us. The truth is we've seen more dividing recently among Christian groups than uniting. It's not my purpose here to measure the pros and cons of the current fractures over sexual orientation issues, except to say those who opt for inclusion always stand a better chance of standing with Jesus. And if we look beyond the church to how Christians influence our democracy, we come back to the statement in that original declaration which says "all," not "some" are created equal.
Looking upon the landscape of our democracy and culture, it seems that acknowledging God-given rights -- and assuring they translate into civil rights -- is no more than a good first step. As disciples, as Jesus people, we must go further in our own lives if we expect our society to become the beacon of light we dream of. Let's be honest, for all its virtues we live in a nation which has traditionally celebrated the self. We are proud of our "rugged individualism." And we live under an economic system that enshrines the pursuit of self interest. But as Christians we are part of a faith system, and claim a scripture, which teaches the denial of self. Deny yourself and follow me, Jesus says. Make your neighbor's interests equal to your own. Paul teaches that unity with Christ begins with the death of the self. In the Old Testament God warns the Israelites against coming into the promised land with its wells they did not dig and groves they did not plant and taking credit for the self. We can't have it both ways. Something's got to give. As Jesus said, no one can serve two masters.
Clearly the founders wrote from a universal perspective, reflecting the emerging enlightenment of their time, when they spoke of an equality endowed by our creator. They would have said that what is true for our young nation should be true for all. One of the best proofs for believing that all who seek spiritual enlightenment seek the same Spirit is that all the enduring faiths share this emphasis on folding the self into God's universal intentions. Of course, America is a nation, not a faith system. But Christians who are also Americans carry two passports. Which master will we serve? If we serve God first, I believe we will also serve the future of our great nation.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Don't Apologize for Swimming in Political Waters
If there’s one thing Christians on the right and left seem to agree on, it’s that our culture leaves a lot to be desired and could do with some radical change. I’m not saying all Christians think that way. There are some in the middle who are generally happy with the shape of things. They’re doing fine financially, living in the dream house, and steadily reducing their golf handicap. Their greatest wish would be for conservatives and progressives to stop fighting amid the pews and leave politics to the lobbyists where it belongs. Then we could come to church minding our manners like they did the 1950s, sit quietly while we sing a few hymns, listen to a nice polite sermon and go home to the real world.
Unfortunately for the comfortable middle, those on the extremes agree that taking action for social change is part of our calling from Christ. We fight because we don’t agree on what that change should look like. We all know that evangelical issues have had the limelight these past decades and been portrayed by secular media as the core concerns of Christians. That’s changing as progressives find their voice on issues like war and poverty, and evangelicals look to expand their horizons.
Please don’t let this get around, but I have friends who are conservatives. Some are even Republicans; and I don’t think they have horns and tails. Not all of them anyway. When we look beyond issues to the philosophies which divide us as a nation -- and as Christians trying to follow Christ’s example toward a just world -- we come up against the promises of democracy embedded in our founding documents. “Created equal” implies that God intended us to be treated as equal by each other and by our institutions. “Endowed by our creator” implies we have a God-given natural right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” It’s clear that the founders saw the world through God’s eyes and envisioned God’s wish for equality as central to the natural order. The tradition in America of religious people taking their beliefs into the political arena goes back to the beginning.
One of the questions eternally debated by citizens and believers alike, is what does democracy and this so-called “equality” require. Some would argue that equality means equal opportunity; others would say we must achieve at least a rough equality of results or there isn’t true equal opportunity. Those who have excelled materially in our society often justify their privilege with a certainty of their own merit. Conversely, the poor are poor because they lack merit. In other words, it’s your own fault baby. Proponents of societal democracy argue that when a culture consistently produces great disparities between citizens, something is probably wrong with the culture. I tend to belief that our creating God doesn’t turn out a ton of garbage. Failure should be the exception and not the norm.
But it doesn’t need to be an “either/or” proposition. It may be more productive to pursue God’s values under both interpretations of democracy. We can demand equal opportunity for members of dispossessed groups, while simultaneously advocating systemic change in our culture. These two tracks often dovetail together to the detriment (or benefit) of individuals and society. For example, the American Medical Association this week offered an apology for past offenses in deliberately keeping black doctors from joining their organization. But beyond the injury to individual doctors, the AMA is convinced that its actions played a role in the poor quality of health care available to blacks throughout the society. Now the African-American doctors are welcome in the AMA but black citizens still lack adequate health care. Apparently, individual rights are easier to restore.
Unfortunately for the comfortable middle, those on the extremes agree that taking action for social change is part of our calling from Christ. We fight because we don’t agree on what that change should look like. We all know that evangelical issues have had the limelight these past decades and been portrayed by secular media as the core concerns of Christians. That’s changing as progressives find their voice on issues like war and poverty, and evangelicals look to expand their horizons.
Please don’t let this get around, but I have friends who are conservatives. Some are even Republicans; and I don’t think they have horns and tails. Not all of them anyway. When we look beyond issues to the philosophies which divide us as a nation -- and as Christians trying to follow Christ’s example toward a just world -- we come up against the promises of democracy embedded in our founding documents. “Created equal” implies that God intended us to be treated as equal by each other and by our institutions. “Endowed by our creator” implies we have a God-given natural right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” It’s clear that the founders saw the world through God’s eyes and envisioned God’s wish for equality as central to the natural order. The tradition in America of religious people taking their beliefs into the political arena goes back to the beginning.
One of the questions eternally debated by citizens and believers alike, is what does democracy and this so-called “equality” require. Some would argue that equality means equal opportunity; others would say we must achieve at least a rough equality of results or there isn’t true equal opportunity. Those who have excelled materially in our society often justify their privilege with a certainty of their own merit. Conversely, the poor are poor because they lack merit. In other words, it’s your own fault baby. Proponents of societal democracy argue that when a culture consistently produces great disparities between citizens, something is probably wrong with the culture. I tend to belief that our creating God doesn’t turn out a ton of garbage. Failure should be the exception and not the norm.
But it doesn’t need to be an “either/or” proposition. It may be more productive to pursue God’s values under both interpretations of democracy. We can demand equal opportunity for members of dispossessed groups, while simultaneously advocating systemic change in our culture. These two tracks often dovetail together to the detriment (or benefit) of individuals and society. For example, the American Medical Association this week offered an apology for past offenses in deliberately keeping black doctors from joining their organization. But beyond the injury to individual doctors, the AMA is convinced that its actions played a role in the poor quality of health care available to blacks throughout the society. Now the African-American doctors are welcome in the AMA but black citizens still lack adequate health care. Apparently, individual rights are easier to restore.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
