A Change in Me

When life seems overly-complicated, perhaps with worries and unanswered questions invading our thoughts and even holding us hostage, the section of scripture commonly called "The Sermon Mount" is a place to find unparalleled peace and comfort. Chapters 5-7 in the book of Matthew record the very essence of The Way Jesus proclaimed. These verses contain words of simplicity and power, capable of changing the world by changing each of us. They should force us to stop saying, "What is wrong with the world?" Instead, I think the better question is, "What is wrong with me, and how can I do better?"

Judging others is one of the most destructive forces on earth. In the lives of individuals, it ruins reputations, causes deep emotional damage and wrecks relationships, just to mention a few of its negative effects. Judging others is part of what is causing political gridlock in our nation, and it is, at a basic level, what causes most of the conflict and war in the world. And that is why we are instructed not judge others. What good is there really which can come of it?

Thinking about our own actions and attitudes, judging our own thoughts, and deciding to live a worry-free, faith-filled life is what we are called to do, and doing so is worth the effort it takes. It is not hard to point out what is wrong with everyone else; the more difficult path is to start the process of change by looking within.

When scripture says, "Blessed are the gentle . . . the merciful . . . the pure in heart," it is easier to say, "Why is there so much violence, anger and distrust in the world?" than it is to consider perhaps there is not enough kindness, mercy and purity in me. When we read, "Blessed are the peacemakers" do we wonder why nations can't stop rising up against other nations, or do we consider any unforgiveneness and contentiousness which might reside in our own hearts?

The Sermon on the Mount offers a way to change the world because it lays out a plan for changing me; no one can change others, all of us can only change ourselves. Actually, that lifts a big burden off of our shoulders, knowing we're not responsible for the disagreeable behavior of everyone else. All we have to do is take responsibility for our own actions. Old habits may be hard to break, but only I can decide how I'm going to react every day, in every situation. When negative, outside influences stop holding sway over us, there's nothing we can't overcome.

Discovering Fire

In reading an article about Sargent Shriver, who has recently passed away at the age of 95, I ran across a quote I had never read before, but I can't stop thinking about it. (In 1961, Shriver created the Peace Corps, and he led a life of service in other areas. In 1972 he was a "last-minute" vice-presidential candidate. In his first speech as McGovern's running mate, he closed his remarks with the following quote by Teilhard de Chardin.)

"Someday, after mastering the winds, the waves, the tides, and gravity,
we shall harness for God all the energies of love, and then,
for a second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire."

After doing brief research regarding Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955), I have found him to be quite an interesting figure: a Frenchman who was a philosopher and Jesuit priest and who had trained as a paleontologist and geologist. He had ideas regarding the cosmos which put him at odds with the Church. I'm sure my Catholic friends can shed more light on the Church's feelings about him, but, putting that aside, I am drawn to the sentiment expressed in the above quote. Isn't it remarkable?

As we struggle to find ways to turn the renewable resources of nature into affordable, usable energy to power our planet, it often seems the energy of love is forgotten. Amazingly, environmental issues have created some serious divisions within the Church. I'm not talking about the specifics of carbon taxes and whether or not global warming is real, I'm talking about the very simple notion of taking care of planet Earth. Surely there can be no real objection to being good stewards of the environment? Stewardship is a central theme in the New Testament.

Yet, the clash continues. We're divided, in an ongoing effort to label each other, into "tree-huggers" and folks who think "fuel efficiency" is a four-letter word. "Liberals" and "Conservatives." Well, you get the idea, and evironmental matters are not even at the heart of what I'm getting at. I'm talking about the troubles we continue to have in finding common ground. I KNOW there are things on which all "sides" can agree on every social issue. If emotions can ever be laid aside long enough, progress can be made.

And as I've rambled on this morning, I arrive at my point: love is not an emotion. If it is to be unconditional, (as the love of Christ in us must be) it can never be based on emotions because such things as anger and fear will destroy love which is so flimsy. Love is, instead, a powerful force. When we grasp that idea; when we wrap our hearts and minds around the notion that nothing can overcome a force so great as love, then we are transformed. We have discovered fire a second time!

Words

Since the tragedy in Tucson, there's a phrase I've heard often, "words do matter." It's true. Well-crafted phrases have changed history. Careless remarks can ruin friendships. Harsh words wound deeply. Forgiveness mends souls. But did words play a part in what happened in Arizona? From a scriptural perspective, (and that is my perspective here) one can surmise that violent language contributes to violent actions.

The significance of words is central in the tenets of Christianity because words have spiritual meaning for believers:

According to scripture, God spoke all of creation into existence. ("By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God..." Hebrews 11:3)

Jesus, filled with creative power, is proclaimed to be the Word (see John chapter 1).

Words can create and destroy. ("Death and life are in the power of the tongue..." Proverbs 18:21)

This is why we must pay attention to what we say; if we believe words have sacred significance, then we know we cannot use them carelessly. When politicians claim to be Christians (and it seems to be a current fad to do so), they must choose words which edify, not tear down, words which promote compassion and peace, not hate and conflict.

Because politics has been a rather nasty business at most times in history, my expectations for politicians, in general, are fairly low. But my expectations for Christians, in all professions, are extremely high. If our standards don't inspire us to rise above the fray, to speak against evil, rather than spew it, we are not living up to our calling.

While it is most assuredly within our rights as Americans to use violent imagery, for those claiming to be followers of Christ, it is wrong. Is a particular person or political party to blame for this latest shooting rampage? No, one individual did this horrible thing.

But can't we consider that, perhaps, just maybe, we all bear some responsibility...for creating a society (by either our action or inaction) which often glorifies violence and can't seem to stop trying to overcome evil with more evil...for not having an intelligent, national agenda to deal with mental health issues...for not loving our neighbors as we know we should? Can't this latest tragedy be an opportunity to think about and discuss a better way to go about proclaiming our ideologies?

Conservative Christians, Liberal Christians, every follower of Christ who doesn't identify themselves as either and believers of all faiths must lead the way in promoting peace, harmony and understanding. From a spiritual viewpoint, it is not only possible to disagree in a civil, respectful manner, it is mandatory.

By now, most will have heard about the man in the Arizona who killed six and wounded at least a dozen others, including his target, Representative Gabrielle Giffords. Maybe you've heard that one of the fatalities was a nine-year-old girl, Christina Taylor Greene, who had gone to Representative Giffords' meeting because of the girl's budding interest in politics. (Apparently, she was on her school's student council.)

The girl's uncle, Greg Segalini, told The Arizona Republic that his niece was a student at Mesa Verde Elementary School where she was involved in many extracurricular activities ranging from ballet to baseball. She also enjoyed horseback riding and swimming. "She was real special and real sweet," her uncle said. Family members describe her as a vibrant individual and someone who was excited about life.

Did you know Christina was born on September 11, 2001 and was featured in a book Faces of Hope: Babies Born on 9/11?

I predict that people of all political stripes will take this information, and run with it, trying to justify the "war on terror" or decry it. Will try to prove the "rightness" of their political leanings and the "wrongness" of everyone else. I have some thoughts on what you can do with using a child's death to further a political agenda, and if I see you doing it, you will hear those thoughts.

Was the shooter just a deranged guy with a gun or did he have political motivations? Apparently, the answer may be both. Did he "take matters into his own hands" after seeing Sarah Palin's website (now taken down) graphically illustrating the need to "target" particular politicians (including Rep. Giffords) by placing their political homebases in the crosshairs of a gunscope?

Sarah Palin has, of course, expressed her condolences to the victims and their families, and there is plenty of rationalizing going on amongst her supporters as to how her rhetoric could not have anything to do with this tragic turn of events. Really? Are we to believe there was never a conversation amongst Palin and her staffers/advisors (does she have advisors?) as to the possibility her actions might lead to violence? Were they so callous as not to care? Were they so naive as to think, in this politically-charged environment with emotions running high, that something like this was impossible?

I'll leave the political debate to others, but I will say this: Stop parading around as a follower of Jesus if you're going to put your political opponents in the crosshairs. You can't have it both ways. Either find ways to disagree in a civil manner, according to some level of spiritual maturity, or leave the mention of God out of your proceedings. When will enough be enough? Is this really how we want to behave as a country? As Christians?

I implore everyone to stop trying to mix politics and religion -- it's a toxic brew. A little girl is dead, and if you think political rhetoric wasn't, at some level, responsible for her death, then you're living in a fantasy world.

America's Religious Journey

This isn't going to seem to be a typical "fresh start in a new year" post, but bear with me as I want to comment on a book I have recently finished reading titled, "God of Liberty - A Religious History of the American Revolution" by Thomas S. Kidd. It is a fairly thorough study of the part religion played in the formation of our country, and I would recommend it to anyone curious about the intent of our founding fathers regarding the government's role in religious matters.

Religion in America is a complicated issue; that's not news to anyone. It should also not be surprising that the current, often acrimonious religious mood, is probably a logical result of bitter disputes among our founders, both the politicians and the clergy of the day. After all, Ecclesiastes 1:9 asserts "...there is nothing new under the sun."

Some would say that our religious freedoms are under constant assault, but I suspect the state of government in religious matters may be closer to what most of the revolutionaries had in mind than we might realize, although those from both the left and the right will find supporting evidence for their views (because that's what we all tend to do).

Quoting from the book, "Of course, religious hypocrisy abounded in America then, just as it does now...But we cannot underestimate the great good that public religious values served in the revolutionary period...[helping] envision a republic where individual freedom could be guided by ancient ideals of the Scriptures: charity, justice, and protection for the weak and poor.

"Does the national significance of these precepts mean that America was founded as a Christian nation? Yes, in the sense that believers -- the majority of whom were Christians of some kind, with an important minority of Jews -- played a formative role in the creation of the American Republic. But today's advocates of a 'Christian America' tend to misunderstand or underestimate the extent to which Americans already held widely varying religious beliefs at the time of the founding. The founders' religious agreement was on public values, not private doctrines."

We are a nation founded by people who disagreed on the specifics of many important matters, but they managed to forge ahead by finding common ground on the larger issues. Cooperation, tolerance and compassion are certainly worthy goals for a new year (or any time), and I'd like to keep on trying to attain them, wouldn't you?