|
|||
| AGW Welcome | The Witness Magazine |
|
Marginal
Christianity A bumper sticker asks the question: "If going to church makes one a Christian, does going to the garage make one a car?" Although many people would claim to be Christian by their mere church attendance, this question goes to the heart of Christian identity. There may be almost as many characterizations of Christian behavior as there are people who claim to be Christian. Sometimes they select a particular phrase from the Old Testament upon which to ground their "Christianity"; sometimes they select a single issue, such as abortion, upon which to make their "Christian" claim, disregarding all other issues of peace and justice and love and healing. Although the Old Testament, or Torah, is a literary and philosophical cousin to the New Testament, it is the Gospel, wherein is found the very core of Christianity — the heart of Jesus Christ made known to us. The Old Testament, or Torah, was written before Jesus’ life, so what Jesus asked of us will not be found there. The very core of Christian identity is behavior which implements the lessons Jesus left with us in the Gospels. In these four books are found the history of Jesus’ life, actions and teachings. Therefore, within these four books — above all else — are our lessons, our instructions, for Christian action. If one who claims to be a Christian does not commit themselves to these principles, then one is, at a most generous stretch, a marginal Christian. Jesus gave us abundant instructions and lessons in those Gospels. There is none so specific, so direct, and so profound as in Matthew 25:31-46. [1] This is the essence and model for Christian behavior:
And the admonition continues:
Many people believe they are upright Christians — the very personification of good and justice. They love Jesus. However, quite often their behavior belies their words and evokes critical questions about the public relations image they’ve created for themselves as ideal followers of Jesus. Their "Christian" designation, it would seem, is based on the issues of personal sin rather than on public good.
In the present context of American politics, Jesus would be considered very liberal. In the New Covenant Jesus gave us, those tasks he is admonishing us to do are a mite left of liberal, and "liberal" has been the subject of a deliberately derisive campaign by many conservatives since the Reagan Administration. All one needs do is look at the voting records of elected officials who call themselves "Christian conservatives" or "religious conservatives". It is painfully evident that feeding the poor, welcoming the stranger, giving drink to the thirsty — whatever their thirst — and lifting up the least of these is far from the conservative agenda. Those acts are not part of their history, their belief system, nor ultimately, their voting records, and as such, their Christianity would clearly appear incomplete. It is when people have been given or have acquired power over others that the disparity between their image and their actions as quintessential Christians becomes obvious. No greater betrayal of Christian character is revealed than when an elected official casts votes that depreciate the public good. How do we keep track of our elected officials in terms of true public service? Since 1994, when the Republican Party, aided in no small part by the so-called "Christian" Coalition, became the majority party in both houses of Congress, we have witnessed legislation and policies that have dramatically rendered the rich richer and the poor poorer. Not everyone who has voted or advocated such policies is the subject of this piece. Although many members of Congress, the majority in many cases, have voted such that "the least of these" are further demeaned, the focus is on elected officials who have created a public image of themselves as fervent and dedicated Christians and followers of Jesus, yet have turned on "the least of these" in their Congressional actions and votes. Reality, as demonstrated in their voting records, exposes the illusion of their Christian image. Such voting patterns can be found in examples of a member of the U.S. House and a member of the U.S. Senate, both from Kansas. In 1994, Sam Brownback was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives from Kansas’ second Congressional district. Two years later, he ran for the Senate seat vacated by Bob Dole. The image he created for himself began early on.
Shortly after his 1994 election to the "Gingrich Congress", remembered for its ultra-conservative tilt, Brownback led a group of "New Federalists", organized to reduce the size of government. The departments they chose are revealing. He and his group of "New Federalists" targeted four federal agencies for elimination: Department of Housing and Urban Development (which funds low income housing); Department of Commerce (which, among other functions, oversees the National Weather Service); Department of Education (to be displaced by vouchers for private schools) and the Department of Energy (which funds research for energy efficiency and provides funds to people who can’t afford outrageous and politically driven utility bills). Brownback took pains to see that his public image highlighted religion and family values. When responding to a question about the elimination of these departments, Brownback replied, "We started out hoping if we could get one agency, we’d be doing the Lord’s work." [2] Brownback was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1996 to fill Bob Dole’s unexpired term, in a campaign that, while earlier advocating campaign finance reform, resulted in serious campaign finance questions by its involvement with groups such as Triad and Faith, and Family and Freedom. [3] In 1998, he was elected to that seat for a full six-year term. In January of 2001, this millionaire was selected to represent the U.S. government in a delegation that presented the Pope with the Congressional Gold Medal. Brownback was selected because he is "a conservative known for his strong religious and anti-abortion beliefs." [4] In August of 2000, Brownback wrote a letter to The New York Times in praise of Senator Joseph Lieberman’s nomination to the Democratic ticket. The important point from this letter is that he first described himself as a "Christian Republican from the Midwest."[5] He then attempted to compare himself with Lieberman by referring to the two of them as "part of a political alliance that is quite logically emerging between theologically orthodox Christians and Jews." It is fantasy of enormous proportions to consider such a religious-based political alliance when their very diverse voting records are compared. Joe Lieberman has voted predominantly for bills that would uplift persons in need, in contrast to Brownback’s Congressional voting record on such issues. [5] In 1996, when Sam Brownback vacated his House seat for the Senate, it was filled by Jim Ryun, who, in the 1960's and early ‘70s, gained a reputation as an Olympic runner. He was well known for his athletic feats, but very little else was known about Ryun during his several post-Olympic decades except that he lived on a ranch near Lawrence, Kansas, had managed a Jim Ryun Running Camp for youth, and had spoken to luncheon groups about his Christian beliefs. He was recruited to run for the office by David Miller, at that time, head of the right wing of the Kansas Republican Party. Ryun’s alliance with the Republican Party is within the right-wing faction. Prior to Ryun’s taking the oath of office, an article in a local paper stated that "David Miller of Eudora, the Republican state chairman and a Christian conservative, will make opening remarks before the swearing in and will introduce Ryun’s pastor, the Rev. Bill Vogler of Grace Evangelical Church in Lawrence who will give the invocation."[6] During the event, Ryun "...made frequent references to God in his speech during a ceremony heavy with patriotism and Christian conservative symbolism." [7] His camp information, on the Internet, highlights his religious beliefs and states that he is an Evangelical Presbyterian. He ends letters to potential campers with the line, "Go with God". On his website, Jim Ryun Ministries, he gives a "Christian Testimony". In his page called "Biblical Way to Salvation", Ryun admonishes: Admit you’re a sinner, repent, believe and confess, forgive others, and pray and ask Jesus Christ to be Lord (Controller) of your life. [8] There is nothing on his website about the most important injunction Jesus left with us in the passage from Matthew. There is only one, final reference to Love among his twelve directives to achieving a Christian life. There is nothing about caring for the "least of these," there is nothing about helping our fellow humans in need.
Ryun’s stretch to Christian prototype appears to begin and end on the basis of personal moral behavior. Perhaps it is the fundamentalist view of Christianity that explains Ryun’s Congressional votes, and thereby allows us to understand why he has consistently voted against legislation which would help the needy and bring peace and justice to a variety of situations; why he has used his position of power in a way contrary to what Jesus has commanded of us — which is, again, to love our neighbor. Because when we truly love our neighbor as ourselves, we will work relentlessly to see that they don’t go to bed hungry, that they have the assurance of medical care when they’re ill, that they and their loved ones will not be targets of random gun violence, and that their misery will be alleviated as much as possible by elected officials who (rarely anymore) consider themselves public servants. The term servant is especially relevant. Jesus led a life of servant ministry. He urged us to be servants. But what Jesus had in mind is a servanthood that would lift up the poor, not wealthy CEOs of wealthy corporations. A revealing exchange occurred at a League of Kansas Municipalities’ annual conference in 1999. Brian Footlick wanted to know how a ‘pro-family’ politician like Brownback explained a recent Census Bureau report that 44.3 million Americans lack health insurance and that the number of uninsured increased by 833,000 in a year. "Since the bulk of these uninsured are from the lower-income levels and since the bulk of them are children will you here and now say that you will support insurance for these kids if it comes up again in Congress?" Brownback responded, "If you’re asking me to nationalize health insurance, no, I won’t." He stated that it is a matter of affordability. [15] Yet, never did Jesus fail to heal someone because of affordability. Nevertheless, both Brownback and Ryun have established among the voters that they are nothing less than model, quintessential Christians, while systematically rejecting what Jesus has asked of us. Their voting records on several major issues are found in the appendix of this article. Peace, I give you peace... The U. S. Army’s School of the Americas (SOA, called "School of the Assassins" by detractors) is an institution housed at Fort Benning, Georgia that has become infamous for its involvement in Central and South American politics and terrorism. The name was recently changed to the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation in a public relations move. [16] It is a school that has "trained about 60,000 Latin American military personnel over the last 50 years, mostly in counterinsurgency warfare… its graduates have repeatedly been implicated in the worst human rights abuses in the hemisphere, including many assassinations and massacres in Colombia, Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, Peru, Nicaragua, and elsewhere." [17] One of the most egregious episodes of inhumanity to poor people, specifically natives of Central and South American nations, has significant connections to the School of the Americas. In 1981, the Atlactal Battalion, fresh from U.S. special forces training, massacred over 900 civilians in El Mozote, El Salvador. Ten of the 12 officers in charge were trained at the SOA. President Clinton apologized to the people of Guatemala about this school because right-wing Guatemalan government troops, trained by the U.S. Army at Fort Benning, committed foul acts which resulted in the death of over 200,000 native Guatemalans in several years. [18]
On July 17, 2001, twenty-six people were arrested for protesting at Fort Benning. The "SOA 26" entered federal prisons in the U.S. Their crime: trespassing, by holding a solemn funeral procession at the base last November on the anniversary of the 1989 assassination of six Jesuit priests, their housekeeper and her 14-year-old daughter in El Salvador. Nineteen of the 16 officers cited as responsible for the crime were SOA graduates. [17] Among the 26 federal criminals are: 88-year-old Sister Dorothy Marie Hennessey and her 68-year-old Sister Gwen, 19-year-old college student Rachel Hayward, a homemaker - age 56, a hospital chaplain, 67, a husband and wife team, 77 and 72, several Catholic Workers, several students and another nun, aged 75. The litany of some of the atrocities committed by SOA graduates can be accessed on the School of the Americas Watch website. A review of the voting records of Sam Brownback and Jim Ryun regarding the SOA indicates their support for the institution. In the 104th Congress, legislation was introduced to prohibit military aid or weapons sales to countries that abuse people’s human rights. Then-Representative Brownback voted "no." [26] In the 105th Congress, legislation was introduced to close the School of the Americas by eliminating funding. The legislation failed and Ryun was among the "no" votes. In the 106th Congress, Representative Moakley of Massachusetts offered an amendment to close the SOA and prohibit the establishment of a successor school for at least 10 months. It failed and again, Ryun assisted its defeat with a "no" vote. [19]
How can someone who loves Jesus (who blessed the peacemaker) exert his power to support and fund the training of people who kill and torture natives of their home countries for the purpose of keeping right-wing dictators in power, some of whom gained that power with a little help from the USA? Both men voted, as did most of Congress, for anti-terrorism legislation passed after the horrific tragedy commonly known as 9/11. [11] Most of the provisions are needed protections that Americans would certainly not argue with. Perhaps, however, many victims of terrorism in Central and South America are wondering how members of Congress can justifiably distinguish between acts of terror committed against the U.S. and acts of terror committed against them, our neighbors, at the hands of U.S.-trained foreign military. Some might be considering that our government acts with a certain degree of hypocrisy. And as terror goes — would it not include citizens of our nation whose bodies have been ravaged by disease but have no means for getting medical help or even alleviating their pain, simply because they have no money and Congress refuses to pass national health insurance? Would feelings of terror not emerge in children who are painfully hungry, or among those searching for a place to sleep on a street or under a bridge or in an alley way? Are we, as a nation, not inflicting terror on our own citizens when we refuse to provide the very basic necessities of life to the most unfortunate among us? Isn’t this exactly what Jesus was talking about in the Gospel of Matthew? What is the difference between protecting fellow humans from air piracy and suicidal maniacs on the one hand and protecting them from the ravages of abject poverty on the other? Who is so bold as to distinguish one form of terror from another? The Money Trail Why do you call me "Lord, Lord" and do not do what I tell you? (Luke 6:39-49) [1] The answer is simple: money. Always follow the money trail when words and actions of an individual don’t mesh. Look to see who’s paying these elected officials to do their bidding. Elected officials dance to the tune of their benefactors while trying to convince their constituents that what they vote for/against is in the constituents’ interest and for the public good. Jesus said, "You cannot serve God and mammon," [1] and this, certainly, is the point of demarcation at which the Christian public relations campaigns and the voting records diverge. Sources of contributions and voting records often times are very closely related. A sample review of the money trail related to these two elected officials follows the voting record in the appendix. Yet, these two people have made successful public relations campaigns, convincing the public that they are the very most dedicated Christians. This is in spite of the fact that their positions of power do not reflect the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which is "so terribly contrary to everything we know and practice" and is "above all, the Gospel of the littlest, the least, the lost and the lonely — all those the world calls nothing." [25]
So, is a good Christian someone who attends church on the two most holy days of the year? Is it someone who throws money at a church every year without further participation? Is it someone who lifts their arms and sings that they love Jesus? Or are good Christians those who love Jesus, and because they do, attempt to lift up the least, or sick, or their neighbors, or their political constituents, or those within the far reaches of the legislation they support or oppose in their positions of power? The August 15th, 2001, issue of the Boston Globe published an opinion by Harvard Divinity Professor Allen Callahan which described how Jesus responded to several situations when confronted by critics. At the end of the article, based on Biblical text, he predicted what Jesus would do in the company of contemporary politicians:
Professor Callahan directs his remarks to the decisions made by President Bush and the general class of Congressional representatives and spin doctors. What must he think of these people who pass themselves off as "orthodox Christians" and "religious right" and "Christian conservatives"? HOTLINKS: Brownback and Ryun have company. Not all members of Congress who voted the same way they did claim such devotion to Jesus — but they do have company in those who designate themselves as the "religious right". To facilitate separating the images from reality, there are a number of sources for tracking most elected officials and they include: Project Vote Smart, Public Citizen, the Friends Committee on National Legislation, the Center for Responsive Politics, the League of Conservation Voters, the Mennonite Central Committee, Common Cause, and more. Many organizations whose purpose is to help persons in need and maintain environmental health make voting records accessible to the public. Some also publish campaign finance records. The priest was talking about people who feel they are superbly Christian and yet make the choice to follow only a bit of the Gospel when he said, "A diluted Gospel is insidiously more evil than a rejected Gospel". [32] The non-churched must be very confused about public officials who claim such Christian devotion and yet act otherwise. The contradiction between their words and their deeds gives Christianity a bad rap — and that is why it is evil — it degrades the very religion they claim to embrace. Jesus couldn’t have been more clear in what he expects of us if we are to associate with his name. It is amazing how very far we drift, even though the bottom line is quite clear: "Jesus answered him, ‘Those who love me will keep my word, and my Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them." (John 14:23)
Footnotes from the article may be found in a separate Appendix page. |
Instead,
it is very much the perspective that has been described in the book, Stealing
Jesus,How Fundamentalism Betrays Christianity. It is the fundamentalist
view of Christianity that author Bruce Bawer calls the "God of law"
(as opposed to the God of love). The central theme of this dogmatic view
of Christianity is sin and repentance, with emphasis on sin rather than
love, much as is the distortion that sex, rather than greed, is the original
sin. Bawer asserts: there is a significant difference between the God
of law and the God of love and this contrast is best described in the
story of the Good Samaritan. As we have heard the story, it was the Samaritan,
rather than the law-abiding Levites, who helped a fellow human recover
from illness. Bawer says of the Samaritan, "What he does is simply
this: He loves his neighbor — and he recognizes that a neighbor is
not just somebody who lives next door, or looks like him, or shares his
beliefs and prejudices. A neighbor is simply another human being —
any human being." 
On
January 21, 2001 in Guatemala, SOA-trained Col. Byron Disrael Lima Estrada
was arrested for the 1998 murder of Bishop Juan Gerardi. Bishop Gerardi
was bludgeoned to death two days after he released a comprehensive human
rights report on the Guatemalan civil war, called "Guatemala:
Never Again." 
Judith
Scherff is an ecologist with graduate degrees in systematics and ecology
from the University of Kansas, and political science from Pittsburg State
University. She has published The Mother Earth Handbook and The
Piracy of America, both environmental anthologies; and for
the Episcopal Church, wrote the booklet Just and Proper Use. Judy
may be reached by email at