Modern Day Prophet: Jim Wallis Talks About God, Non-religious Folks Listen. Why?

Jim Wallis was like me. He was born in a mostly all-white neighborhood in the Midwest. Growing up in a fairly all-white neighborhood in the strictly segregated city of Detroit, at the age of 14, he began seeing things that troubled him. He asked his pastor about these questions. “How come,” he’d ask, “The people who live in that zip code seem to have a hard time finding work when the people in this zip code don’t?”

Or

“How come the people in that zip code are all one color, mostly, and the places where they live are so much more broken down than the places where people of another color live?”

or

“How come so much crime is in that zip code?”

He was asked to stop asking those kinds of questions. He didn’t. Finally, his white pastor pulled him aside and said words that would change his life. The white pastor said these words:

“Jim. Listen. Racism is a political issue. It deals with politics. Religion is private. It’s between you and God. Racism has nothing to do with Religion.”

And that’s when Jim Wallis left the church.

I guess you can’t blame him. Who wants to be a part of a church or any organization that basically says, “You see that giant problem over there? Yeah, God doesn’t really care about that.”

God wasn’t done with Jim Wallis, however. He went across the tracks to another church. Sat in the same kind of pews. Read the same Bible. Sang the same songs (though made them sound so much better). And there, he began to learn that God indeed was very concerned about his life. God wanted to be more than just Savior to Jim, God wanted to be Savior to the World, and He wanted to use Jim and his talents and passions.

Jim had his second conversion listening to a pastor read these words from Jesus.

For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me. Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? hen did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’

I listened to Jim Wallis tell his story last night at Grace Cathedral in San Francisco. He has been touring around the nation, stopping at any church that will have him, attempting to have a dialogue about religion and its place in America.

Jim Wallis is one of the more misunderstood Christians around. You can tell almost by looking at him. People, desperate for an easy label for him, have said that Wallis is a Democratic, left-leaning liberal member of the “Religious Left.”

You can use that label, but Wallis doesn’t want it, and I think people have the right to label themselves. People assume he’s a workhorse for the Democratic party. A reporter called the day after the 2004 election and said, “You must be disappointed that your candidate lost,” assuming that Wallis voted for Kerry, to which Wallis replied, “Not really. I didn’t have a candidate in this election.”

In his book “God’s Politics” Wallis has been screaming that message – that neither the Republicans or the Democrats get it entirely right, or entirely wrong. He has toured telling this message, and yet still he gets labeled unfairly. His words get twisted. His message convoluted. I know. I’ve read the blogs. And when you have to write letters to Christian leaders defending things you’ve never even said, like Wallis recently had to do with Chuck Colson in this letter, you know you’re being misunderstood.

I wish Mr. Colson would listen before he reacted. I can’t imagine what would make him lash out without understanding or taking the time to understand Mr. Wallis. Even a cursory read of Wallis’ writings would have corrected Mr. Colson. I guess he was too busy to bother with the facts.

I saw Wallis speak last night. He spoke in a strange crowd in San Francisco. The pews of this gorgeous old Episcopalian church were filled with people wearing yamakas, men with their arms around each other, a woman in dreadlocks who was passing out leaflets to become a member of the Revolutionary Communist Party. Typical San Francisco crowd. I also saw a bunch of young black kids wearing matching bracelets and necklaces. They were from a church’s youth group.

And sitting next to me was my father-in-law. He had actually invited me to go to this event. He’s not afraid of spiritual topics, but he tells me that he doesn’t believe in God and can’t honestly come to have a faith like my wife and I talk about. I wish he could, for reasons that people who have come to personally know Jesus understand.

Bob has hinted that his experiences in the Catholic church led him away from God, but somehow Wallis’ words resonate with him in such a powerful way, he’s willing to sit down and listen to this preacher for a solid hour and a half. He bought Wallis’ book, which is number 5 on the New York Times Bestseller List. I looked at it. He wrote more words in the margins of that book than the author did on the page. He nodded his head fervently during the speech. And after the speech, he stood in line to talk to Wallis and get him to sign his book.

Jim Wallis is somehow connecting with my father-in-law, and I wanted to know what Wallis was saying that was impacting him so much. I wanted to know that because I want to learn to talk to him in similar ways, to learn how to bridge the gap between he and I. I want to talk to him about the faith he left behind in the old Catholic Church he was raised in, but found no answers in, no truth in. I want him to get that faith back.

Regardless, whatever Wallis is selling, it’s striking a real chord among people I love. So I wanted to see what it was.

Want to know what Wallis said?

The Bible.

He quoted Amos, Micah, Isaiah and Jesus. He also quoted the Book of Hebrews. He basically said this message:

“God has a plan for you. Inside you, you have a deep burning passion. In the world, there is a deep crushing need. Find where those two intersect, link up with God, and go do that thing.”

He was speaking in code, at times, to people who don’t speak religious talk, or who aren’t familiar with the Bible.

But his message was markedly Christian.

Two Stories
There were two things that he said that really stuck with me. Wallis was at a Catholic school, and a young lady said, “I am a single-issue voter. I vote on abortion and the candidate that takes the strongest stance against abortion. Everyday, 4000 children are killed because of abortion. How can I vote any other way?”

Wallis didn’t say anything. He just waited to see what her peers would say. A voice sprang up.

“Everyday, 9,000 children under the age of three die because of AIDS,” a voice said. “How can you vote any other way?”

Another voice.

“Every day, 30,000 children die from preventable causes, like lack of proper nutrition, clean drinking water or basic medicine. How can you vote any other way?”

This story struck me. It’s not that Wallis is pro-abortion. My goodness. How can you be? What Wallis is saying is that if you’re going to be pro-life, you have to be pro-life everywhere you find life threatened. And the unborn aren’t the only children whose lives are being destroyed.

That's his point. If you're going to call yourself pro-life, you better look to protect all life.

Wallis told that a story about how he was at a conference held by President Bush. Bono, the lead singer of the rock band “U2” got up on stage in front of all these politicians and began stammering.

“You’ll have to excuse me,” he said. “I’m not used to speaking to audiences of less than 20,000.”

That broke the ice. Bono regained his composure.

“I believe that God himself is here, right here in this room. And he is down on his knees. And he is begging you, begging you to care about the people dying of AIDS in Africa. Begging you to do something.”

This is Wallis’ message. God is begging us to do something. He quotes the prophets and Jesus. He shares his testimony, he uses language that even non-religious people understand. He invites people along to solve a giant problem, and in the course of events, while solving that problem, he talks to them about God. He hopes they’ll change their mind, or find something real they can begin to link up to God about.

Second Story
Another story Wallis told also stuck with me. Wallis went to Colorado Springs to meet with James Dobson, the founder of Focus on the Family.

“I understand your organization,” Wallis said. “Everywhere I go, I tell folks that parenting has now become a second-class job, and parents everywhere nod. Parenting is the most difficult job in the entire world and the most crucial. My community, the community I live in Washington D.C. has 80 percent single parents. You just can’t escape poverty, or raise a child right, with 80 percent single parents. You need a whole group of people from a whole bunch of places, teachers, grandparents, youth group leaders, mentors, a whole slew of people to hang onto that child, and hold on tight to keep them from slipping down in between the cracks.”

Dobson nodded his head, fervently.

“I understand family. It’s crucial. Crucial, crucial. But can you explain to me how gay people are causing this problem?”

Wallis said that Dobson tried for an hour. He and his people finally said this to him,

“You know what, we know that heterosexual dysfunction is far and away a much larger cause of the breakdown of the family. But we can’t tell that to our fund-raising department.”

A young man who was gay asked a question at the end of the session. He said, “I understand what you’re saying about gays not being the primary cause of the breakdown of the family, but what I’m not hearing from you, and what I need, is unconditional acceptance for gay people and their lifestyle.”

Wallis was in a corner. No matter what he said, he was going to offend someone.

Wallis dodged the question deftly, refusing to give unconditional acceptance to a way of living that he knows is wrong, but equally unwilling to tell the guy in front of him that he’s not welcome to God. Saying that the gay lifestyle is wrong, in that setting, would have shut this man down.

“I am glad you are here, and I’m glad you said that,” Wallis said. “We need to have that kind of conversation. We need to talk about the ways that gay people are treated terribly, and how that has to stop.”

I understood what Wallis was doing a bait and switch.

“Just come with me, we’ll do God’s work and you can meet Jesus face-to-face,” Wallis seemed to be saying. “Those other issues will work themselves out.”

Culture of Winning In Sports Means Taking Moral Shortcuts: Christians Need to Remind World That Winning Isn't Everything

Great article today in Christianity Today about how in the culture in sports, the idea of winning has trumped everything, including fair play and morality.

Taking steroids will kill you. It makes your brain slow down, damages your heart muscles, turns your testicles into chick peas, etc, etc, etc. But pro athletes continue to use them. Why? Because it allows them to continue to compete. And the attraction of being a sports star is so strong, the money so lucrative, the perks to apparent, that people are willing to give up years of their lives, or trade their character, for the limelight.

And in pro and college sports, the pressure to win at all costs causes people to...well, win at all costs. But this kind of action is really spiritually short-sighted. It assumes that what's important is results, instead of say, character.

The whole thing reminds me of Esau. Esau was the first born, and because of that, he had special privileges. He got a double portion of the family inheritance, which back then, was like a symbol of your family's legacy and history. It's like a destiny. But one day, Esau comes back from a hunt weary and starving and in a moment of desperation, sells his birthright to his brother for a bowl of stew. "Gimme a bowl of the red stuff" are his words, according to the ancient Hebrew. Esau trades his birthright - all that he could be, and all that he was - for a momentary fix.

Good thing we're nothing like that guy.

Black History Month: New Book "Love Stories from the Underground Railroad" Show What Real Love Is

It's Black History Month, and the Tiecheman Blog has to admit it's more than a little ashamed at its lack of cool columns or references to items of note about Black History thus far, celebrating the lives and contributions of my (as my students would say) "brothas from anotha mutha." I was reminded of this l when I read this week's column by Leonard Pitts.

In it, he points out a new book called Forbidden Fruit: Love Stories from The Underground Railroad written by Betty DeRamus, a Detroit reporter.

The book recalls shocking stories of devotion of slave men and women whose devotion to each other during this time period is a lesson in what real love is. When a man is willing to remain a slave rather than leave his wife...that is the kind of devotion that makes the spirit soar.

Pitts writes:
Gives you pause and makes you wonder: how many of us could even begin to understand such a thing? Is understanding even possible when you have been raised on a cultural diet of ''pimps'' and ''hos'' and bling-bling values, when you inhabit an age where love never seems much deeper than sex?

It seems unlikely.

So the stories Betty DeRamus has unearthed resonate with me. They bear retelling and sharing with those among us who have forgotten, or else never knew, who we are, how we got over, and the things we did for love.

How Can the Bible Be Authoritative: Article from N.T. Wright About How God Uses Authority

First off, if you've never heard of Rob Bell, who is the head teaching pastor at Mars Hill Church in Grand Rapids, MI, well, you are missing out. Not to give away all my trade secrets, but the teaching of this man has influenced me this past year probably more than any other person. It's as though he articulates my feelings, and puts into precise words vague feelings that have been rattling around inside me.

You can download his sermons in MP3 format. You can go back 12 weeks, but I'd suggest one of his latest teachings from January 30, 2005 entitled "Directions Parts I and II: Roots and Journey." My buddy Jonathan Ziman pointed it out to me, not knowing that I'd already downloaded it. I listed to it yesterday. Phenomenal.

Anyway, the point of all this is to point you to resources that might encourage you spiritually.

Anyway, Rob Bell mentioned in that sermon this article from a British theologian named NT Wright. If you have theological leanings and want to read the whole thing (and I suggest that you do), you can download it here.

TWO BIG IDEAS

Two points that Wright makes that really hit home with me. One was that the Bible is like a play by Shakespeare, with four acts, but the fifth and final act has mysteriously been lost. So what to do? Well, you can't just rewrite the ending, because that would be unfair to Shakespeare. What you might do, however, is to take a group of talented actors, and have them read and study the characters so well that they fully understand all the nuances and innuendos intended by the author. Then, have those actors continue to attempt to act out the final scenes.

The result would be, Wright claims, both creative and consistent.

This is what we are to do with the Bible. It does not tell us how specifically the story will go, but we need to steep ourselves in its mysteries and innuendos, learning to play the part, and then with the Spirit's direction, start in on the newest chapter of the story.

The second point that Wright makes is that evangelicals are much better at studying the Epistles than they are at understanding the narratives, the stories, found in the Gospels and the Old Testament. There's a reason, he thinks, for that. Many evangelicals view the Bible as an answer book, where you go to prove your answer. This is what many folks mean when they say that the Bible is authoritative. It's an attempt to get right answer, put people in boxes, control and manipulate.

This is a misuse of the term "authority" Wright writes (haha). God has all authority, and he uses that authority not to control us, or whip us into shape, but to empower us to go tell His story. And nothing - not religious tradition, not scholars, not religious text, not conventional wisdom, not anything - trumps that.

So what's your story?

God is not only interested in us being, but also in us DOING. We should look to what our story is. What is God trying to do through you? What is your part in this story. How are you connecting with the StoryTeller. And what role do you think God would have you play in all this world. What people are you telling your story to? What people are you telling God's story to. Because that's what this is all about.

The answer to this will vary greatly depending on the person, and his gifts, talents and experiences. But the answer is crucial.

Funny Bumper Sticker

I was driving and saw a hilarious bumper sticker today. It said:

Guns don't kill people. Stupid motherf*ckers with guns kill people.

Hahahahaha. That struck me as particularly true.

Your Baby's Arm is Falling Off? Oh, That's Normal.

So yesterday Nicole and I went to our fifth class at Kaiser Permanente. This one was on infant care. I mention this because during the presentation, the attending nurse was a little flaky. I'm not saying she was stupid. I'm sure she is very intelligent. I just grew concerned when it came time to introduce herself, and she had to glance down at her notes.

Anyway, she told us that she was going to be showing us some slides of some pictures she had. The first thought I had was, "Uhh, the 1970s called. They want their technology back."

Then she started flipping through these various pictures of newborn babies with various congenital issues. Some of the pictures were a bit...uh...gross. The Nurse Who Forgot Her Name gave us running commentary of these pictures which seemed to be of babies with some real problems.

"This is a rash that extends over the baby's back and buttocks and legs," she said, as the smallish crowd of 18 couples all winced collectively at the crimson patches on the child.

"Does it itch?" a guy asked from the back. "I mean, does it hurt the baby?"

"No, no. This is actually quite common. We see it quite often with newborns."

She clicked ahead.

"And this is a baby with white ashy skin."

The baby seemed to be covered in white lotion. Again, we all squinted and recoiled slightly into the backs of our chairs.

"This, too, is quite common. It's nothing to worry about. It normally clears up in a few days."

She clicked ahead.

"This baby's head is slighly deformed from passage through the birth canal," the nurse said, showing us a picture of a kid who looked like he was wearing a dunce cap underneath his scalp.

"This is to be expected as well. It's very common."

She clicked.

"Here, this baby's lips are cracked and have some blisters. It's from sucking on their thumb, actually in utero. This is more common than you'd think. It's not a problem."

She showed us about 100 more pictures. Each time we were camly assured that the condition - though visually frightening - was nothing out of the ordinary. It seemed like she was implying that anything we saw, no matter how out-of-the-ordinary, was actually quite common, and certainly nothing to worry about.

Irritated scalp? Happens very frequently.
Cross-eyed? We see this often.
Pimples? Clears right up. Nothing unusual.
Swollen nipples? More common than you'd think.
Excessively dry skin? Very common.
Red and swollen testicles? Not out of the ordinary.
Head on backwards: Almost to be expected.
Nine fingers on each hand: That clears right up.

Now, I'm not one to be cynical, but it almost seemed like the Kaiser was recommending NOT to ever come to the doctor's office. Which I sort of understand, because new parents are probably pretty likely to over-react, and run to the ER if a baby sneezes too hard.

It kind of reminded me of a really funny skit Garrison Keillor did a few months ago. It's called "A Message from your HMO Insurance Provider."

You can read or listen to it here.

Putting People Into Easily Recognizable Camps Is Easy, Not Always Best

The following is an excerpt from an email from a friend of mine, one the smartest guys I know. I didn't get his permission to post this for the rest of the world, so I'll leave it anonymous.

Nowadays I notice that the talk from liberals and conservatives is getting bloodier by the day. I see a common trend of both sides…and that is the fact that no one sees any good in the other side. Both camps completely discredit each other, refuse to see anything positive in each other’s efforts and/or ideas, and turn to rhetorical mudslinging. I was talking to a fellow Christian the other day and he brought up several times that ‘those liberal have nothing but hate towards us!’ Are all liberals bad? Do they all hate the conservatives?  Is that what they’re all about? Should we throw them all in one hand-basket and slap a shipping label with “hell” on it? I was re-reading the passage where Abraham negotiates with God over Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham ‘wears’ God down to ‘if there will be ten righteous people in the city, I wont destroy it.’ Should the Christians not have the same attitude towards people? Why throw all liberals in one category?

Another thing I noticed is the polarization within the Evangelicals when it comes to political views. This is something I have been thinking about recently, and have only ‘brainstorm’ level concepts on it. Paul teaches that in Christ there is no Jew nor Greek, no male, nor female, and so on. Should in today’s Christianity be liberals and conservatives…and they all hand so tightly to their views? Why are they unable to agree on some issues? Doesn’t the Bible have statements about most of these issues, so we can all have the same stand on it, regardless of what that is? Or is it that today we fancy the fact that we are ‘free thinkers’ more than our submission to Christ? Is Democracy over-ruling Theocracy within our own hearts? I do not know what the answers to these questions are.

I heard an interesting statement from my atheist friend the other day: ‘true religion is not compatible with democracy.’ 

How about them apples?

How about them apples indeed.

I had an interesting experience the other day. I got an email from this dude, and I can't stand getting emails from this guy. Every time I open them up, they're these fiery rants or links to some other conservative's fiery rant. So I groaned internally. Then I read the email. It was about this guy's friend who has cancer. It was a request to pray for his friend.

That'll cut through the political B.S. pretty quick. In line with this above posting, I better get to praying quick for this guy's friend.

"Better Luck Tomorrow" Showed Things I Wished I Hadn't Seen, Reminds Me Of Things I Can't Forget

My best friend Jon recommended that I see the movie “Better Luck Tomorrow.” He even let me borrow it. My wife and I made a pizza, and sat down last night to watch it.

I wished we hadn’t. I turned it off midway through the movie, so I never saw the surprise ending. I don’t need to. There are some things you don’t need to see in order to understand them.

I went to bed angry after watching that movie (or parts of it). I woke up at 5:45 Sunday morning. I’d been dreaming about the movie. I am still angry. Not just kind of angry, but irrational, furious angry. Christ in the Temple angry.

At first I was mad at Jon for suggesting that it’d be a good thing for me to watch the movie. I had a friend who once suggested that I watch the movie “Old School.” I was on a plane, and I popped in the DVD he lent me. The opening credits featured women taking their shirts off. Boobs. In the opening credits. I slammed the lip of my laptop down so quickly I was afraid for a second I’d broken the backlight. I think some people around me saw what I was watching. I was furious at my friend. It’s like saying, “Here taste these brownies. They’re made with real poop.”

What the hell? You gave those to me? You thought that’d be good for me?

I had the same reaction at first to this movie. But then I realized I was far too angry - and not at Jon. I mean, I was irrational angry. At one point, I found myself in the garage yelling. I don’t know at who. I don’t know how long I was in there, practicing this speech. I don’t know who the speech was for.

I think I finally figured it out, though. Why I am so angry. I’ve had this exact feeling once before. I’ve had this reaction once before to another movie.

I saw the movie the summer after I graduated college in 1998. The movie was called “Kids.” Like “Better Luck Tomorrow” it got lots of awards and accolades. Like “Better Luck Tomorrow” it’s about kids. Like “Better Luck Tomorrow” no adults even make their way onto the screen. Like “Better Luck Tomorrow” it shows what happens when adults aren’t present and kids descend into amoral lifestyles. Like “Better Luck Tomorrow” it shows how immorality can spiral out of control into massive tragedy. And like “Better Luck Tomorrow” I left the movie with this pit of despair and depression, as though something deep inside of me had been assaulted.

"Kids" is filmed as though it were a documentary. It follows a kid, Telly, probably 14 years old. He steals 40s in the legs of his giant pants, gets high, skates and concentrates on his central task in life: have sex as much as possible.

In the opening scene, Telly uses charm and lies to force himself onto a girl 2 years younger who’s never had sex. I have no doubt that there are Tellys out there whose pick-up lines are just as ridiculous and whose style is just as forceful. I also have no doubt that they are often successful. In the next scene, Telly is walking down a Manhattan street with his friend Casper, recounting how much he loves having deflowering virgins. The dialogue is so shocking that even as a 22-year old college student, I felt my innocence being ripped away.

The movie moves on. They smoke. They go to Washington Square Park to buy drugs. They skateboard. They steal alcohol. They get in fights. They get drunk. They pass out in a stupor. Rinse. Repeat.

The plot turns and follows one of the female characters. She finds herself in a clinic, getting tested for HIV. A nurse walks out and calmly tells her that she is positive. In an effort to escape this news, she goes to a party and gets hammered. The final scene of the movie has Casper waking up to find the whole party passed out in a drunken stupor around him. He turns and finds a girl passed out next to him. He takes off her pants. She doesn’t wake up. He has sex with her motionless, limp body. Right there. On the couch. With dozens passed out around him. The camera pans back and we see that Casper is having sex with the HIV positive girl. He doesn’t know she has HIV. She doesn’t know he’s had sex with her.

Fade to black.

Literally and figuratively.

The implication here is that Caspar, the most promiscuous guy in the film, is now going to unwittingly spread this disease to dozens of unwitting women. But we get the feeling that even if Telly or Caspar knew they had HIV, they wouldn’t change the way they behave. They are like animals, prowling around searching for their next orgasm.

The movie continues to haunt me. There are images from that movie, and lines of dialogue that I still cannot get out of my head.

I saw the movie during those formative years of my life, when I was struggling to figure out what my place was in this world. I was just out of college, searching for answers spiritually, trying to figure out what the purpose of life was. And then I saw this movie. And something clicked in me.

I knew this movie was the enemy. Not the movie itself, but what the movie portrayed. This stark, bleak, hopeless picture of reality. “This is the enemy,” I thought to myself. “And I must fight against it.” I decided at that moment to use whatever powers I have to go into communities or places and ensure that this kind of amoral, cynical destructive version of life is stamped out. Or curbed. Or spoken out against. Or something.

The movie “Kids” became my arch-villain. Everything it stands for. Everything it portrays. It’s a symbol for everything bad.

And that’s when I started working with youth. It’s been 8 years now. I’d like to say I’ve made some dents. My classroom at Gunderson is sometimes a bubble from reality. And I am naïve and optimistic and idealistic. I stopped chaperoning dances at my school because it depressed me. I watched my students dance, and I saw that they moved in ways that showed they don’t have much innocence left. You could smell alcohol on their breath, and their cars smelled like cannabis. So I don’t chaperone dances because it depresses me. It reminds me of the enemy, and how near it is. And how little effect I have.

There are moments when I win, though. When goodness wins. When kids come alive in a discussion, or stay after school to talk to me. These moments are happening more and more these days. And the more they happen, the more I realize the task is too big for me. One of my best students came up to me on Thursday and said she had been taking her dad’s pain killers. Oxycotin. 6 pills a day. She’s been trying to numb out. This girl lost her mother her sophomore year. Her dad’s kidney are failing, and doctors had to amputate his foot over Christmas. Her 18-year old brother is head of the house. I walked with her down the halls and sat with her as she talked to a drug counselor who’s going to put her in a 20-day detox program.

I don’t know if this is a success or a failure. Probably a bit of both. When she comes out clean, I’ll spend some more time with her. Try to get her into my AP English course. It’s a bubble, but she needs a bubble. And maybe I can help somehow.

I think about one scene in the movie "Kids." The kids are all on the subway and a legless beggar wheels his way through their compartment. If you look closely, the platform supporting his half-body is a skateboard. Movie critic Roger Ebert said this about the film:

“Most kids are not like those in "Kids," and never will be, I hope. But some are, and they represent a failure of home, school, church and society. They could have been raised in a zoo, educated only to the base instincts. You watch this movie, and you realize why everybody needs whatever mixture of art, education, religion, philosophy, politics and poetry that works for them: Because without something to open our windows to the higher possibilities of life, we might all be Tellys, and more amputated than the half-man on his skateboard.”

I don’t need any more reminders of the reality. I see my arch-villain every damn day.

What I’d like to see are a few more superheroes.

Thinking back on it, Jon only suggested that I should see the movie. Perhaps he suggested it so I'd be able to better respond when my kids brought it up.

He never said that I would enjoy it.

The Church Won't Be Able to Influence the World If Nobody Trusts It

I heard a story the other day that grabbed my heart.

There is a family in my church that is going through some hard times. The dad had gotten laid off from his job and the mom was having some complications from giving birth to their fourth child. They were in dire financial straits, and were going to have to move to a one-bedroom apartment in order to make ends meet. The couple was in a Bible study with a few of their close friends. On the day they were going to move, the whole group showed up to help them move. Only the didn’t move them to that single bedroom apartment.

They moved them into their new house.

One of the guys in that small group had a rental property. He gave the family that property. Not loaned it. Not let them use it. Turned over the deed. He bought them a house. Bought them a house.

There is something about generosity like that that cuts through all the religious crap. There’s just something indescribably good about that - about that kind of care and selflessness and most of all, love. Regardless of your faith or beliefs, regardless of whether you believe anything, you’re like, “You know what, that is a good thing.”

I say this because a lot of people look at Church, look at Christians and don’t say that. When I tell people I’m a part-time pastor at a Christian church, people look at me as if I just told them I wear my grandmother’s underwear for recreation. Sometimes there’s confusion in their faces. Often, fear and distrust. And let’s be honest, not all of that is unearned.

I’m a school teacher and the other day, on our in-service day, a bunch of my co-workers and I went out to lunch. We were sitting around and a co-worker said, “You know what: the institution of organized religion has been nothing but a destructive force in America.”

I was sorry to hear him say that. I think what he said is not true. I think it ignores a great deal of history, and is, I think, very dismissive. The Revolutionary War was supported and fanned into flame largely by New England preachers. The number of sermons given by pastors and ministers in support of ideas like freedom and liberty and self-sacrifice and self-rule, etc, were vast and were largely responsible, in some very important ways, for crystallizing this nation's ideas about itself and what it stands for. Same thing happened during Slavery, as abolitionists used the pulpit to decry that most wretched practice of human trafficking. And then later, during the Civil Rights Movement, pastors preached the necessity of brotherhood. Dr. King especially used his position as pastor to urge non-violence: to demand that no protestor give in to the seeds of bitterness or anger or violence. The church has always been an important pillar of support and contributor to American Civil Discourse.

Dismissing the church as being corrupt is like saying: “the American legal system has been nothing but a destructive force in American history.” There are certainly some black eyes that the Church and those who take her seriously must account for: Southern preachers promoting slavery or segregation, for example. But the American legal system has its own black eyes. The Dred Scott case for example, which said that black people are property, or Plessy v. Ferguson, which said separate but equal segregation is acceptable. The system righted itself, though, just as the church has had its internal critics always seeking to help her sail in the right direction.

And I think this is where we are now.

Just as in any other point in our history, there are tensions and forces pulling our nation. As a pastor, I think that I would be seriously misguided if I began to believe that the purpose of my institution is to ensure that a particular political party is championed. My allegiance is not to any party: I have loyalties that are far higher than any governmental system.

If this nation heads to a place where one party is seen as “The Party For People Who Believe in God” and another party is a place for people “Who Don’t Believe in God” then we are in a very dangerous setting.

The Church has always been, and must always be, co-belligerent. It must take active stands against any action that violates what is good and right, and must applaud any action that promotes those things.

For the Church is unique in her role. But the church can only really work in her role in this nation, in my community, or in any community, if she is believed and trusted. Just as the rule of law breaks down if there is not confidence in justice, or the role of the executive breaks down if there is distrust or corruption.

If I’m going to make the claim that Jesus teaches the best possible way to live, then the congregation I am a part of must be a place of such radical love and goodness that it’s undeniable.

I belong to a church where a guy sees his friend struggling, and he bought him a house. And my goal is that the next story of radical generosity will be a story about something I’ve done to help someone out. I want this not so that I can get praises, but so that people will begin to trust the church again.

And maybe, just maybe, trust God.

"Houses of Worship Free Speech Restoration Act" Sends Messages that a Pastor's Role is to Be Political: Is this Good for Christ's Church?

Time Magazine recently ran an article that talked about the 25 Most Influential Evangelicals in America. I read it excitedly, because I wanted to see who made the list, since I'm an evangelical. I was confounded by it. The thing about this list is that a large number of the people on this list are people I've never heard of, but are people up high in the political machinery. Speechwriters. Financiers. Lobbyists. I hadn't heard of any of them. The other number were Pastors and Speakers and Theologians, like TD Jakes, Bill Hybels and J.I. Packer. I'd heard of all of those.

This is troubling for a number of reasons. First of all, it sends the message that Evangelical Christianity is linked in some ways arm-in-arm with politics, especially Right Wing Conservative Politics. This is a dangerous message, mainly because there are hordes of people, like me, who don't buy into that. But the fact that Time chose the representatives that way shows that they believe that Evangelical Christianity is innately political.

This is even more distrubing, especially considering a new act introduced into Congress called HR215, otherwise known as the "Houses of Worship Free Speech Restoration Act."

The current law allows any religious leader here in America the freedom to preach any message that he/she desires with one exception. If he/she expresses an opinion, or makes a statement that is considered to "influence legislation" or "participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office," they risk the tax exempt status. This law, if passed, will repeal that.

This will allow religious leaders to make overt forays into politics from the pulpit without penalty. I'm not sure what this will do, but it sure does sound bad. It sounds as though some religious leaders consider pushing specific legislation an important function of the local church.

I'm pretty sure the point of the local church is not to preach about laws that need to be introduced to Congress. Isn't it to talk about the unique and powerful message about who God is, who Christ is, about sin and restoration and salvation? I mean, isn't it?

If the local church loses its perspective on this issue - which in some ways it appears like it is doing because somebody is pushing for this law - then won't we have a really, really, really big problem?

What do you think?

Students Who Hate Learning Becoming a "Brobdingnagian" Problem

Leonard Pitts, Jr, the Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist from the Miami Herald is one of my favorite writers. His commentary pieces often are so good, pretty much the only thing I would add is "Me too!."

His column today about the anti-intellectual environment that some poor kids (especially poor black kids) can face hit a nerve with me. See, I teach kids, many of whom have been told that learning isn't cool.

Sure, maybe nobody ever sat them down and said, "Now remember son, stay away from books - those will only hurt you." But still, the message is sent. For example, this Saturday, at Gunderson, the high school I teach at, we're having a meeting where parents and teachers and students will meet to build bridges, talk about expectations, and help parents get information to help their child suceed academically. My buddy Gerson is organizing it. He said that of the 140 parents called, six said they'd come.

Six.

Out of 140.

Now I know the valley is tough. And I am fully aware that some parents have to work two jobs, just to afford rent for a tiny place for their family. And I know that sometimes, parents aren't involved in their kids lives as much as they want to be because they're working so much.

But sometimes, don't you just have to tell your boss you'll be late? I mean, this is your kid. One parent we called said, "Will my kid get in trouble if I don't come."

????

I wanted to say, "Yes, your child will be in trouble because you'll be sending the message that in a list of priorities, their education is pretty low."

But I didn't.