« March 2005 | Main | May 2005 »

Soldiers are useful to fight wars, but when they come home as veterans, they often find that the country no longer cares. Veterans of the Revolution were the first to discover this when they returned home in the 1780s. Soldiers are now being abused by the government with the army's frenetic deployment pace, with multiple tours in Iraq, stop loss and the blatant mistreatment of reservists and the national guard. But there is more to come as returning veterans find when they seek help from a VA that is facing severe budget constraints. "Support the troops" includes neither real concern for the army nor an adequate budget for returning veterans.

What does it take to get the attention of the government and the American people. A tragic and monstrous story from 1932 gives a clue. Veterans of WWI were promised a bonus which they never received. The war ended in 1918 and by 1932 with the depression in force and many of them destitute, they marched on Washington by the thousands to ask for their bonus. A Los Angeles Times book review tells the story

The review is a must read for veterans, especially those recently returned. In my own work with veterans, I met many WWI vets who had been there. They were still angry at their treatment--and they were very supportive of Vietnam vets in our struggle for our rights. Let's learn from this and organize now

The story of the killing of Stephen, the first Christian to die for his faith, has a lesson for us in a time when religion is distorted and misused for political purposes.

The Death of Stephen: Reflection on April 17, 2005; Acts 6:1-9, 7:2a, 51-60; W.P. Mahedy

We learn from the Gospel reading today (Jn 10:1-19) that Jesus is not only the shepherd of the sheep, but the gate through which the sheep enter as well. Jesus has come that we might have life and have it abundantly. That is the point Stephen was making in his speech to the Sanhedrin. They didn't like what he said and so they killed him. A little background.

Stephen was among seven chosen to work with the Greek speaking, bicultural Jews from the different nations who were living in Jerusalem. It was probably about a year after the death and resurrection of Jesus and the disciples had not left Jerusalem, so the Gentile mission had not yet begun. The authorities who killed Jesus expected his followers would disband and eventually end up in other messianic movements as had been the case so many times before.

The proclamation that Jesus had risen from the dead and was Lord of all was intolerable to them. They had arrested and flogged the Christian leaders, but they had killed no one yet. So Stephen, faithful to his mission to the bi-cultural, Greek speaking Jews, had been preaching in a synagogue which had members from different nations. It was these people who found the message more than they could bear, so they grabbed him and dragged him before the Sanhedrin. Stephen then preached to the leaders of his people. When he finished, they were so enraged they formed a lynch mob, threw him in a pit and killed him by stoning--without even going through the legal requirement of clearing his execution with the Roman governor.

Stephen's sermon and his murder were decisive moments in Christian history. His martyrdom began the exodus of Greek speaking Christians from Jerusalem, taking them to different places where they spread the Gospel. Present at Stephen's death was Saul of Tarsus, who became Paul the apostle with his mission to the Gentiles. James, the brother of John, was killed shortly afterwards and the original twelve apostles then began their own missionary journeys. Stephen's death pushed the Church out into the world.

Why was Stephen so controversial that he was killed? If you read the long section of Acts which is left out of the reading, you will see that Stephen makes the case that neither the land of Israel nor the Temple are absolutely necessary for the fulfillment of God's plan. He shows that the leaders of the people had always rejected God's word. These leaders to whom he was now speaking were "a stiff--necked people...who always resist the Holy Spirit." They had finally "betrayed and murdered the Righeous One sent by God."

Why did the Roman empire, which so readily tolerated all kinds of religions without any problem, consider the followers of Jesus so dangerous? There is a direct line--a trajectory--from the crucifixion of Jesus, to the killing of Stephen and then James, to the persecution begun by Nero and continued by Trajan at the end of the century, to the sporadic persecutions of the 2nd century, to the systematic efforts by Decius and Diocletian to exterminate Christians in the 3rd and early 4th centuries. You can see why the Sanhedrin wanted Stephen dead, but why did Rome also try to wipe out the Christians? They knew that if Jesus is Lord, then Caesar is not.

Jesus, the Good Shepherd, the gate through the sheep enter the sheepfold, is also Israel's Messiah and King--and precisely because of Israel's status within the purposes of God, Israel's king was always supposed to be the world's true king. "His dominion shall be from one sea to the other; from the River to the ends of the earth" (Ps. 72.8). "The root of Jesse shall rise to rule the nations; in him shall the nations hope" (Isa. 11.10, cited Rom. 15.12).(N.T. Wright).

But this Messiah-King-Shepherd achieves his goal by failing to achieve anything. He is executed on a cross--the cross being a symbol of Rome's absolute power over life and death. With the resurrection of Jesus, the cross became a symbol, not of Rome's power, but of the Lordship of Christ. The early Christians subverted the meaning of the cross and they also subverted and ultimately converted the empire. They came not to rule, but to be in love and service to others as was Jesus their Lord. In this way Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not.

By the time Stephen was killed, the cult of Caesar was not simply one new religion among many in the Roman world, but it had become the dominant cult in the Empire, and was the means whereby the Romans managed to control and govern the huge areas that came under their sway. Who needs armies when they have worship? (Wright, ibid). Early Christians obeyed civil law but they reserved their ultimate allegiance to God. They did not accept the empire's basic assumptions. They were truly different. For Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not.

Jesus was crucified because his Kingship demanded an entire new way of being in the world. Stephen's speech to the Sanhedrin made this perfectly clear. There was simply no room in the Roman empire for these people. They were persecuted until the 4th century when the Church was freed by a Christian emperor--but then the Church itself began to acquire the trappings of secular empire. Christians are no longer a threat to the world's empires because they have been co-opted by them. The words and example of Stephen call to us across 2000 years, reminding us of who we are supposed to be.

What is the current empire? What are its ideologies and belief systems? Well, it's many things. Nation--states--ours being the most powerful--are the present inheritors of ancient Rome--at least in part. But the increasingly ruthless and dehumanizing global market seems to be superceding even nations. In fact, as global economic interests come to buy and control more of national political systems, the two merge into a system that rivals ancient Rome in its power to dominate.

The ideology that blinds us to the menace we face and that makes us complacent is to be found within ourselves. We have come to believe in individual self-fulfillment as the supreme good. We now believe in the "imperial self." It is this which enables the materialism, consumerism and greed which feed the new empire. Each individual, supposedly free in a political and economic sense, now makes choices which supposedly express and embody the self--but which really destroy the personal spiritual center and create a vast "spiritual wasteland." In this respect, we may be worse off than were our spiritual ancestors in ancient Rome who had a clear sense of community.

Our new bishop alluded to this in his talk to the clergy last Tuesday when he said that we have a mission to the postmodern world--a world increasingly hostile to our message. We need to think about this, especially here as we prepare for next month's meeting to chart new courses for our parish. The Lordship of Christ is still incompatible with the Lordship of Caesar. The first step in dethroning Caesar must always be to see clearly what is going on. We live here and now in 2005. We are citizens. We participate in civic and economic life. We are limited in what we can do, but we do have some choices. We must first think like Christians before we can act like Christians. We are not isolated atomistic selves, striving only for our own good, we are members of the human community.

We must remember that any product is only a product--despite what the advertising suggests. Any government, including our own, is only a government. It is not a religious entity nor is it a font of wisdom and truth. Any flag is only a flag, not a religious symbol. The dollar, the euro, the pound are means of monetary exchange, not the means of salvation. Nor are our individual selves worthy of enthronement as objects of worship.

Remember Hans Christian Anderson's story of the emperor's new clothes. The emperor loved fine clothes and was hoodwinked by a couple of swindlers who promised to make him some beautiful new clothes, so fine that they would be invisible to all who were not smart and competent. As the two pretended to weave these new garments, courtiers were sent in to report on the progress. No one saw anything, but they could not admit this for fear of being considered stupid. So they reported back that the garments were beautiful. When it came time for the parade to allow the emperor to show off his new clothes, the emperor couldn't see them either, but he couldn't admit this. It took a small child to speak the truth: "the emperor has no clothes." Then everyone saw the truth about the emperor.

So our first requirement is to see the almost complete nudity of the various emperors who dominate our lives. If we first see they have no clothes, we can then begin to think and act differently in small ways. Our own imperial self is perhaps the most troublesome emperor we face. But if we face up to our own lack of adornment, we are open to being clothed truly with the garment of our baptism. For this we need prayer, bible study, reflection, worship.

I learned a great lesson in truth-seeing and truth-telling in connection with the fall of the Communist embodiment of empire. I visited Russia in 1988 and again 1989 to work with the Russian veterans of the Afghan war. We were not tourists and many of us were veterans ourselves, so we formed a real community with the former soldiers and with our interpreters, many of whom were college students. They told us the truth about their war and about what they and their families had suffered under the Communist regime. They no longer believed in their empire. The authorities did not like them hanging around with us and on several occasions security guards wanted to block us, but the young Russians simply disobeyed and once even pushed the guards away. Their new understanding of the truth empowered them to act. I watched a courageous young journalist tell ABC international TV news the truth about the war in Afghanistan.

Seeing the truth enabled the Russians to deepen their spiritual lives. Many of them told us they no longer believed in Marx and Lenin but in God, the real God--and this was anathema to the regime. I had a long discussion on faith with an interpreter in Leningrad and left her my Bible and Prayer Book. On Easter Sunday, 1989, in Moscow I celebrated Eucharist for the American delegation and some Russians. I instructed and gave communion to a young Russian who had not been in Church since his baptism as an infant. The Lordship of Caesar was shown to be a mirage and the Lordship of Christ began to emerge in a new way.

I remember an evening when we sat together and sang Russian and American songs. They sang with us "We Shall Overcome," and in that context the song acquired a new meaning. On our final day in Moscow, they invited us to twist the empire's tail by marching with them in their sacred May Day parade. They snuck us into the parade in their veterans' contingent, so we American veterans who had engaged in actual combat with Communism marched under Communist banners, mocking with our Russian friends their very evil regime. During the parade a young woman stood on the sidelines with an anti-communist banner. The police chased her away, but she too no longer believed and was willing to act.

The next year in the May Day parade a Russian priest marched carrying a paper mache cross and when he passed the reviewing stand he was heard to say: "Christ is risen." So the Lordship of Christ was publicly proclaimed in the regime's most cherished ritual. During that same year, the final confrontation occurred. Tanks surrounded the Russian White House in Moscow and threatened those who had revolted with death. But they would not yield. Olga, who had been an interpreter with us told me by phone what happened. She said that a Russian priest was taken into the White House and baptized some people who thought they would not live till the next day. She also related with great pride how "our boys," meaning the Russian veterans who had become our friends, went up and talked to the soldiers, telling them about the government's lies, and asking them not to fire on their fellow citizens They didn't and the regime fell. I learned a lot from these courageous young Russians. Through them I saw again the emptiness and ultimate deception of worldly empires and how the Lordship of Christ arises from the very heart of evil.

Our situation is very different. But as arrogance, avarice, militarism, individualism, greed and hubris continue to run amok, we see the emergence of some new branches on the tree of evil and of empire. John Paul II, who suffered under Communism and helped to bring it down, had nothing good to say about the capitalist empire with its rampant individualism and materialism. He saw it as much a threat to human values as was Communism. And so it is. It is simply another form of the cult of Caesar--and we must become as much a threat to the empire as were our early ancestors in the faith--for Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not.

When Stephen was dragged out to his death, he "saw the glory of God and Jesus standing at the right hand of God." With Stephen let us ascribe only to God all power and honor, might and dominion. Let us praise him alone now and forever. Amen.

Each new attempt by Republican idealogues to subvert religion to their own political ends seems more outrageous than the last. Bill Frist has reached a new low Not only is this a blatantly cynical political move, it is, from a Christian perspective, another instance of an idolatrous subversion of faith to the ends our newly emerging empire. This over the top, in your face power play requires not just the response of those wishing to preserve traditional American values, but of all serious Christians as well.

Do we have the beginnings of fascism in the U.S.? Chris Hedges thinks so and I take him seriously. Chris is a Pullitzer Prize winning New York Times Reporter and the author of a brilliant book on war, "War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning. The National Catholic Reporter, April 1, 2005, carried a story that quoted Hedges as comparing American right wing Christians to the early fascists in Germany. Having worked in so many societies that "have disintegrated and broken into open conflict," Hedges knows that "the language of violence always presages violence--that you first have to teach people to speak like this before you teach them to act like this."

Hedges believes, as I do, that the theology of the Christian right is a distortion of the Biblical mesage, idolatrous as well as totalitarian. "Dominionism," in his view, is a major threat to American democracy. This is the notion that calls for the political empowerment of "Bible-believing" Christians. I believe as he does that this is a very dangerous idea. It is also foreign to basic Christianity. Christians purport to follow the One who "emptied himself, taking on the form of a slave."

Another significan American writer, Jim Wallis (God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It, p64) points out the American religious right went for immediate political power rather than undergo the much longer process of building a moral movement and changing values. Their aim from the beginning has been to achieve electoral power.

The result, as we have seen recently, is to energize the political base, to stifle the opposition and to achieve political and economic objectives, not through persuasion but by naked political power.

The successful movements of social transformation in the past which had their roots in religious faith--the abolition of slavery, women's suffrage, child labor reform, civil rights--all built a popular base and "constructed a moral argument." Political change grew out of the moral base and was seen as consonant with the deepest religious faith. The Religious Right simply doesn't operate this way. It's time to wake up and look at what is really going on in our country.

The Rich Man and the Poor Man: A Reflection based on Luke: 16: 19-31

The parable stands on its own. Its meaning is perfectly clear. Nothing is said about how the rich man gained his wealth. That is irrelevant to the story. His sin consists entirely in that he gave Lazarus nothing and allowed him to starve. His failure to assist the poor man lands him in Hades where his status as a child of Abraham means nothing. There is no way this story can be “spiritualized” or mitigated in any way. Its meaning is crystal clear. In the first century where great opulence for the few was contrasted with desperate poverty for the multitudes, the story must have been thoroughly offensive to the leaders of the people who were acquiring considerable wealth and ignoring the poor. It is no less clear and no less offensive today than when it was first uttered. Jesus excludes such people from the kingdom.

While first century Jews were able to understand the parable and ground it in the biblical teaching about justice and the obligations of wealth, we seem to have lost that capacity. We no longer hear and understand the voices of Israel’s prophets and we are unable to apply scripture to our economic life. Our individualistic "me and God" version of our faith hides from us the fact that our entire global economic system is geared to one end–the making of vast amounts of money. This results in tremendous wealth for a great many people, but increasing misery for vast numbers of our fellow humans.

In the early 21st Century we are literally living out this parable of Jesus, but we have to ask the question: on which side of the parable’s dividing line do we stand. Are we with Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham or are we on the other side of the eternal divide?

It has been proved beyond doubt that our economic system is rooted in a Calvinistic version of Christianity. But the concern of early Calvinists for living a common life before God has long since eroded and we are now in what Max Weber called an "iron cage." We are left with only a pseudo religious language that justifies our acquisitiveness, but with no real rooting in religious faith. Weber wrote: “In the field of its highest development, in the United States, the pursuit of wealth, stripped of its religious and ethical meaning, tends to become associated with purely mundane passions, which often actually give it the character of sport.” Max Weber died in 1920 and we are now much further along the road.

The struggle over Wal-Mart is only a symptom of a global process gone mad. The issue is touched only lightly in the present political campaign, but no political leader anywhere in the world dares to really deal with it.

Before he died in the year 1600, the great Anglican theologian Richard Hooker said that he thought the Reformation had gone too far in the direction of individualism. In the 17th Century, Descartes gave individualism a new dimension by relating everything real to the his own clear and distinct ideas. By the middle of the 20th Century, Descartes’ "I think therefore I am," had become a Freudian "I feel therefore I am." By the end of the century, consumerism and the commodification of everything has led us to the bumper sticker conclusion that "I shop therefore I am."
As the 20th century neared its end, the industrial side of capitalism gave way to the financial and the name of the game became moving vast amounts of money in and out with huge profits for a few and impoverishment of the multitudes. So the parable in today's Gospel has no less significance than when Jesus first told it. Even worse, we are now living out on a global scale that which Jesus condemned.

Most of us feel trapped by these large systems, so why bring this issue up at all? Well, none of it had to be this way. Individualism didn't have to run rampant. For centuries there were correctives, but people allowed them to erode. We didn't have to give our own feelings priority over every other consideration, but we did. We didn't have to define ourselves primarily as consumers, nor did we have to allow everything to become a commodity, but those were the choices along the way that we decided to take. None of this is set in stone. Things are reversible. The future is always open ended. But the direction of the future depends upon us. Twenty-first century capitalism does not have to embody almost completely the life style and the choices of the rich man in the parable, but it now does. What do we do about it? How do we take this parable seriously in our lives?

Well, begin with small things. Is shaving a few pennies off the cost of everything of primary importance? Do we really need to feed these huge corporate gluttons every time we go shopping for something? And we need to ask how we encourage our politicians to feed our narcissism and greed? Yes, there is a huge con-game going on and we are being "had," but we are willing victims, consenting at every step of the way. So the first step is recognition, the second is action.

While still working in a large health care system, it was clear that cost-cutting measures were conflicting with the needs of patients. I asked a colleague what we should do about it. I will never forget her answer. One word: "Resist." She was right, at every step of the way, resist and make patient care the first priority. Our resistance made a difference. So, in your work place, resist to the fullest extent possible the intrusions of those dressed in the purple finery of today’s parable and act in behalf of Lazarus.

It is not possible to do this unless we understand the full extent of how profoundly authentic religious language has been eroded and replaced by a market-driven drivel that even Calvin wouldn’t recognize. Scripture reading, meditation, reading theology, thinking critically: all these are crucial first steps in seeing through the distortions and deceptions that surround us today.

There is another reason for bringing this up today. History shows that human nature remains pretty much the same. That’s the reason Scripture is always true and always relevant. But there are moments of ebb and flow in human affairs. There are times when various types of evil are turned loose in the world and reach epidemic proportions. At other times a sense of the common good prevails and the monsters are held in check at least for awhile. Some serious observers believe that our current global economic system is leading us towards upheavals of catastrophic proportions. I believe this is true and I believe disastrous consequences will be felt both at home and abroad. The rise of global terrorism and the mass migrations of people are not unrelated to the economic system.
Now is the time to wake up. Now is the time to recognize that this is not just a political or economic issue, but a religious problem of the first magnitude.

The most serious distortion of religious and moral discourse now lies in the economic arena. A shallow "me-and Jesus" blessing on the relentless pursuit of money and the market mentality that trumps everything else has no connection with the Christian Gospel. Today’s parable should bring us up short and remind us that there are insuperable obstacles to the kingdom of God. When you read today’s parable in conjunction with the judgement scene in Matthew 25, you understand that Jesus attaches eternal consequences to the kind of behavior condemned therein.

We are called upon to have a certain set of attitudes within us that extend into all dimensions of our lives, including the economic. We are called upon to "have that mind in us which was also in Christ Jesus, who, though he was by nature God, emptied himself, taking on the form of a slave becoming obedient unto death even the death of the cross." We are called upon to transform our lives in accordance with his, "for God has given him the name that is above every name and at the name of Jesus every knee should bow...and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father." Amen. (Phil 2: 5-11)

(Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, Ch 5)

John Paul II, one of the great historical leaders of our time, though he leaves a mixed legacy within the Roman Catholic Church, was to the rest of the world a prophetic voice in the true biblical sense. Unquestionably he played a part in the non-violent collapse of the Soviet Union and the downfall of communism in eastern Europe. His opposition to the war in Iraq was unfailing and his critiqe of capitalism was as stringent as was his opposition to communism. He decried the materialism that now dominates our lives and identified its source as unbridled capitalism. He took stands dear to the hearts of many progressives. What is not as well known, however, is the spiritual and theological root of his view of the world.

It has been said of John Paul that he was a man of "Carmelite spirituality." He was profoundly influenced by the Sixteenth century Carmelite mystic, John of the Cross--whose great work, "The Dark Night of the Soul," is one of the great spiritual classics. John Paul suffered as a young man under the dark night of the Nazi regime. His beloved Poland was then oppressed by the Soviet boot, a night of great darkness indeed. Like John of the Cross, Pope John Paul knew that the darkness at the foot of the crossof Christ, is a prelude to the light of Easter. His prayer life--and hence, his entire life and ministry--was based on that fundamental ground. This quite simply was the source of his appeal to people. He was clearly and obviously a very holy man.

The very name of this website bespeaks the same assumptions--the name is ultimately derived from John of the Cross. The rampant materialism, militarism, lack of concern for the environment, arrogance and bellicosity which now surround us represent a growing darkness. Political remedies for these ills are insufficient. The spiritual underpinning is crucial. Sadly, the form of Christianity which has now been co-opted by the American right offers only more of the same. We thank God for the life and work of John Paul II. May he rest in peace.