What are we looking for?

Honestly, what are we looking for as Americans? Honestly, what are Evangelical Christians looking for? Honestly, what are liberal Christians looking for? What do we all want?
“Many of us who call ourselves Christian long to be what we call ourselves, but we cannot see how to do it, granted our culture’s basic assumptions about what it means to be a human being. If we assume with our culture that the goal of human life is individual self-development, how does this goal leave space for love that might thwart that development? How does the need for assertiveness in a world that despises the weak fit with the Christ who ‘did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant” (Phil. 2:6-7)? How does an ethos of productivity fit with the image of the cross? We suspect that our culture’s assumptions about human life may be wrong but it is hard to see what alternatives we have.”
Roberta Bondi, To Love as God Loves

Stuff

The fight for traditional-marriage is a front. Why, because heterosexuals are the ones who have brought traditional-marriage to its knees. Those who are conducting this campaign are not fighting for traditional, heterosexual marriage. If they were then they would be campaigning as strongly against divorce, adultery, and against whatever attitude has infected even Fundamentalist and Evangelical marriages, since they fail on par with non-Christian marriages. They are not putting the time and money into such campaigns – only against gay-marriage. No, what all this is about is simply hatred towards homosexuals. They won’t admit that, and legitimately not all harbor hatred in their hearts, but way too many do. The fight is to deprive homosexuals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, of equal consideration and protection under the law. Couching their anti-homosexual attitudes and feelings in positive “save-marriage” language only gives them a feel-good justification for hatred and self-righteous indignation.
This is not humility and is not the love of God, or for neighbor and self. It is motivated by anger, fear, ignorance, and their impurity, haughtiness, pride, and for some vainglory. The desert fathers and mothers would not be proud, and would not recognize the Religious Right’s attempts to be Christian.
Now that their zeal and numbers have won the election and constitutional amendments, their continuing crusade to define Christianity after themselves will go forward. They will attempt to deny the moniker “Christian” to those who disagree with their own particular and narrow view of doctrine and Scriptural interpretation. They will now, feeling even more embolden and justified, push forward in demanding that society capitulate to their concept of living as an American.
Nationalism is an idol. Patriotism is an idol. If we give ourselves over to this idea of “America,” we are abandoning completely the “other” that Christ calls us to. The idols of nationalism and patriotism have caused many within the Church to redefine what “Christian” really is. They are giving themselves over the spirit of this age, to the world. Unquestioning belief is a liability to discerning the will of God. Gathering around oneself those who scratch one’s itching ear is spiritual death. Far too many Christians are only willing to have their ears scratched, rather than have their minds and consciences pricked, challenged, and changed by the enduring Gospel of Jesus Christ.

The election and our nation

The election is over. The speeches have been made. Anyone can tell you that I do not lean very far to the left or right, but I am truly sad. You know, it isn’t so much the man – Bush is just a man – but it is what so many Americans attribute to and give the man that is scary.
“He is God’s man; he does God’s will; he speaks with/for God, and whatever he does is God’s will” – this is what so many are giving to this man.
I read stories yesterday from gay people across the country. I have no problem with people advocating their positions against gay-marriage and the like. It is their right in this country to express their opinions and desires. However, all the acrimony generated by the Religious Right against gay people (not just against gay-marriage or civil-unions, but against the people themselves) is giving so many the justifications to be bold and forthright about their hatred for gay people. It will be a long, dark night for the average gay person in the red-states, and even in some blue-states.
We will look back on this time and shake our heads. It was the “moral issues” that won this election. The primary moral issues are gay-marriage and homosexuality-in-general. It may have been couched in “family values” language, but it was anti-homosexual sentiment that got out the vote in many places. In the same way a majority of Americans look back on the 60’s and shake their heads at want went on in the South, so will we look back and shake our heads at what went on in the red-states. Look for much more violence and discrimination against gay people. It is inevitable.
Here is an example from an e-mail to Andrew SullivanÂ’s webblog:
“I wonder if you noticed that yesterday all eleven states that considered the question of gay marriage voted to ban it. ALL ELEVEN. I think this sends a very clear message — true Americans do not like your kind of homosexual deviants in our country, and we will not tolerate your radical pro-gay agenda trying to force our children to adopt your homosexual lifestyle. You should be EXTREMELY GRATEFUL that we even let you write a very public and influential blog, instead of suppressing your treasonous views (as I would prefer). But I’m sure someone like yourself would consider me just an “extremist” that you don’t need to worry about. Well you are wrong — I’m not just an extremist, I am a real American, and you should be worried because eleven states yesterday proved that there are millions more just like me who will not let you impose your radical agenda on our country.”
And then, another e-mail:
“I’ll tell you, being a 16 year-old gay kid in Michigan just got a hell of a lot worse. When I woke up this morning and saw the anti gay marriage proposal had passed, I was shocked. I realized the situation I’m faced with everyday in school – the American people have just shown my classmates that it’s perfectly fine to discriminate. A direct quote from a ‘friend’ at school today: ‘It’s so cool that all these states just told all the faggots to eat shit and get the hell out…’ Because of the above events, I am at a crossroads … I’m the youngest card-carrying Republican in the county, and am constantly asked to get others involved for Bush/Cheney. Herein lies a problem, I can’t bring myself to do that. Bush totally lost all my support (I know I can’t vote – but I make a hell of a campaigner) when he supported the amendment to ban gay marriages, and I felt bad that in straying from Bush, I was abandoning Cheney, who I have an amazing amount of respect for. Many would say go Democrat… but I can’t do that (that signals the absence of a spine up here), and in the next year, I’m considering dropping my membership to the party. Especially this year, despite how undercut and violated I feel as a gay person, I couldn’t be happier that I am. I’ve got a stronger will because of it, and will lead my life just as strongly.
What more can be said.
Yes, we are at war and we truly need to be gravely concerned with the intent and actions of the Islamic Fundamentalist terrorists. Yes, we do need to be strong and forthright in protecting ourselves. But the answer is not “find ‘em and kill ‘em.” This attitude, expressed by both candidates, may be very American and may make us feel a little better, or stronger, but it is not the way of a Christian. Bring them to justice, bring them to trial, put them away for life, but to simply say we are going to hunt them down and kill them no matter what is against the call of Jesus Christ. It just is. Scripture and reason cannot, CANNOT, justify this kind of attitude, although perhaps it can be justified through tradition. Bush may steadfastly stay on his course and think that it shows resolve and strength, but if that course causes more people to become terrorists, increases terrorist activities across the planet, and alienates our allies whom we desperately need, then all the show of strength and resolve will simply add to the problem.
If he cannot see how his actions are counterproductive to truly solving this world-wide crisis, then it is not God who is directing his thoughts and actions!

they don’t get it

There is truth to the conservative Anglicans who say the liberals just don’t get it.
As much as I am critical of the self-righteousness and arogance of many conservatives right now, many liberals are no different (and probably more so).
It reminds me of the controversies between John Henry Newman and his cohorts (Mozley, say) and Tyndall and his (Powel, say).
The strains of difference between these theological and philosophical beliefs are still being played out today. There are those who believe that the Enlightenment, rationalism, and science, etcetera, are the basis for claims of truth and that our understanding of truths of God must be in line with science and rational thought, which ultimately are all of God. Then, there are those who believe that we begin with the truth claims of God as revealed in Scripture and Tradition, and our understanding of the world and humankind must first begin with God’s Truth. Or, something like that.
It is my experience that many more liberal people, and many progressives, do not understand the subjective experience people have with God – an honest relationship. It is also my experience that many conservatives are too willing to just make a belief claim without substantial and honest justifications/apologetics for those positions – many of their beliefs are very thin and sometimes just irrational and inconsistent.
I don’t know. I don’t want to be in an organization that is only one or the other. I’m afraid the Episcopal Church will end up being only one, like the denomination I left for Anglicanism.

Itching ears

When I was growing up in the Pentecostal/Evangelical side of God’s church, I heard all the time how liberals did nothing but: “…to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.” (2 Timothy 4:3)
I moved into Anglicanism because I recognized that a good many Evangelicals, especially with the politicalization of Evangelicalism in the U.S., who where doing the very same thing. The ability to engage with people with different opinions of Scriptural interpretation was becoming less and less possible. Now, everyone must believe the party-line without question else we are giving in to the cultural zeitgeist, forgoing any real concern for Scripture, or simply denying God all together.
Now, I am witnessing this same attitude engulfing Anglican-Evangelicalism. No one can read a history of Anglicanism and not recognize that there has always been an allowance for different Scriptural interpretations on all manner of things, along with different expressions of piety and worship style. It didnÂ’t always make people gleeful, but it allowed for staying-together. There have always been people who have said we can no longer abide by such an attitude. Puritans, Quakers, Presbyterians, and Methodists are only a few examples of groups of people who said Anglicanism was apostate in their time because the whole Church did not come over and agree with their particular understanding of things. Read all the controversies that were surrounding the Church during the Tractarian period during the 1800Â’s.
Now, so many religious conservatives or traditionalists or Evangelicals refuse to read about or honestly consider different views of Scriptural interpretation over many issues, especially homosexuality in this time. If it does not agree with pre-determined opinions or prescribed interpretational systems, then it is completely discounted, outright.
I am sad to see within Anglican-Evangelicalism that we have accepted the worst attitudes and methods of many American-Evangelicals. Fifteen years ago while working as a campus pastor with the Assemblies of God, we were heretics to most other Evangelical campus ministries because we were Arminian or worse yet because we were Pentecostal/Charismatic. Now, I am a heretic to many because I consider and listen to those who say our traditional Scriptural understanding concerning homosexuals and homosexual relationships have been incorrect – and think their exegesis is more reasonable, even after reading Gagnon, even not wanting to find loopholes, etc.
It is my humble opinion that 2 Timothy 4:3 can be applied to a good many people on both sides of the issue, and it is to these people that the Windsor Report is a failure, and it is to these people that the Windsor Report presents a call back to the Anglicanism of history and to listen, consider, and respect those with whom we differ.

From the Bishop of Bethlehem, PA.

This is Bishop Marshall’s response to the Windsor Report:
Insitution over inspiration?
Initial reflections on the Windsor Report from Bishop Paul
October 19th, 2004
Dear Colleagues,
In preparation for our November Bible study, please read the Windsor Report at http://windsor2004.anglicancommunion.org/index.cfm.
On our own website you should also read the gracious words of our own Primate and the Primate of Canada in response to the report. Two African archbishops have also expressed their appreciation for the work of the commission, and I’m sure that others will be reported on the Bethlehem of PA electronic list. Considering the dire threats and gloomy predictions that have been abroad about the content of the report, we can all rejoice in its overall moderation. Its constant emphasis on “bonds of affection” is a great blessing to me personally.
As you read the report and the early responses, however, I think there remain some hard questions to be asked of this document in the nine months or so during which it will be processed at various levels in the Anglican Communion. I offer some initial reflections to assist the discussion of the document in our November clergy Bible studies and in your parishes or study groups. A more detailed commentary and response will be the work of time and patience. I will join the bishops of the Province in responding on November 19.

Continue reading