Barack Obama, the UCC and the IRS

So my denomination -- the United Church of Christ -- is being investigated by the IRS after a complaint was filed regarding Barack Obama speaking at last year's general synod. You can see the IRS letter regarding the possible jeopardizing of our tax-exempt status here: http://www.ucc.org/news/pdf/lettrirs.pdf

Sen. Obama has been an active member of a UCC church in Chicago for 22 years. He was invited to speak to the synod before he declared his candidacy for the presidency. He was one of about 60 speakers from diverse backgrounds asked to speak about how his faith and his work intersect and inform each other. It was a great speech. You can watch it here: http://www.ucc.org/synod/video-archive.html

First off, let me say I am so very proud to be a part of a denomination that puts Barack Obama, Bill Moyers, Lynn Redgrave, Peter Gomes and Walter Brueggemann on the same stage! What a marvelous collection of faithful, thinking people. This is what the UCC is all about...stirring the pot prophetically and intellectually.

Second, let me say that this is no time for UCCers to panic or get their knickers in a twist. The folks in charge at synod did much to safeguard against a candidate speech: from banning any sort of Obama campaign materials within the civic center to clearly setting specific parameters for the senator's appearance. I think they did a very good job of due diligence. They made it clear they were not endorsing Senator Obama, but were welcoming him as one of us...a UCCer who carries his faith into the public forum.

Third, let me do my best to dispel the right-wing-conspiracy theories. A complaint was lodged with the IRS (yes, probably by one of our politically conservative brethren... so what?), and a cursory examination of the facts merited deeper investigation. A lone presidential candidate spoke at a church event. The IRS is absolutely right to investigate.

Rev. Barry Lynn, a UCC pastor and executive director of People United for the Separation of Church and State, uses this same tool to ensure politics and religion don't mix inappropriately, typically with Republicans and fundamentalist churches. Tax exempt status is a privilege afforded churches. When a church crosses the line and endorses a political candidate, they deserve to have that status reviewed, and possibly revoked, whether they are right wing, left wing or straight down the middle.

Those of you who know me well know that I am an absolute nut about the separation of church and state. For the faithful, faith informs all we do and is necessarily implicit and explicit in our public life. However, a church choosing and promoting a candidate for office is a very bad idea, much like viewing a nation as God's favorite is a serious perversion of Biblical principle that usually spells trouble and atrocity for others God loves just as much.

My allegiance is to God. My country, family and friends must fit within that Holy reality, plain and simple. God comes first and informs and influences my interaction with all the rest, including how I personally choose to vote. But don't wrap Jesus in an American flag. He's bigger and better than that, and no doubt objects to many things that occur under ours and every other nation's flag. God has blessed America. But God has blessed Iraq, Vietnam and Venezuela, too.


So thank you, IRS. Please do investigate this event and let us know if our denomination crossed the line. It is good you are there as a tool to prevent both the misuse and abuse of our churches by the politically ambitious, and the misuse and abuse of the politically ambitious by our churches.

We all strive to give unto Caeser what is Caeser's, and unto God what is God's. As for me, I'm 100% God's, but I'll cooperate with Caeser when it doesn't conflict.

What to Do with a Miracle?

They came to Jericho. As he and his disciples and a large crowd were leaving Jericho, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, was sitting by the roadside. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” Many sternly ordered him to be quiet, but he cried out even more loudly, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” Jesus stood still and said, “Call him here.” And they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take heart; get up, he is calling you.” So throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus. Then Jesus said to him, “What do you want me to do for you?” The blind man said to him, “My teacher, let me see again.” Jesus said to him, “Go, your faith has made you well.” Immediately he regained his sight and followed him on the way. – Mark 10:46-52 (NRSV)

Each morning, Bartimaeus would rise and find his way to a spot along the road where he would do the day's begging. He passed within reach of hundreds of people, dozens of homes, through different neighborhoods without knowing much about the events of these peoples’ lives. He was, no doubt, necessarily concentrating on his own need to make it safely to his workplace. He was blind. How blind am I, in the course of rushing from appointment to appointment, to what is going on around me and in the lives of others?

But today Bartimaeus was in luck. Jesus was approaching. Bartimaeus shouted out and made himself known. He didn’t hold back his feelings despite the crowd trying to shut him up. Jesus had just, by chance, made a sudden, surprise appearance in his life. Their paths were crossing and Bartimaeus recognized this crucial opportunity for what it was. What do you do when Christ suddenly crosses your path...in an idea, in a gesture, in a word that cuts straight to your heart? Do you swallow words you long to speak? Do you hold back a flood of tears? Do you sit back quietly and wait for the moment to pass so as not to cause a scene or draw attention to yourself? Which opportunity will be the last to come along? How many times will I sit and wait for the moment to pass rather than stepping up, speaking out, seizing the opportunity that might never come again?

“Son of David,” Bartimaeus calls Christ. This was not nearly correct, not even close to a full understanding of all that Jesus was, but it was enough. Our knowledge doesn’t have to be perfect, or even accurate. It is faith and desire in the moment, and not how readily we can quote scripture and say the proper words in the proper order, that matters. We should never let our lack of knowledge keep us from approaching Christ in prayer, in praise and worship, in reading scripture. Imperfectly prepared as I am, do I have faith enough to invite God in right now?

“What is it that you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked, even though he could see that the man was blind. Jesus knew what his needs were. Still, he had Bartimaeus name his infirmity out loud. This is what it means to confess before God. Do I want the cure badly enough to seek it out and openly name what's wrong with me?

Bartimaeus, upon receiving his miracle, followed Jesus. Many did not after being healed. They experienced God’s healing power and then went back to their ordinary lives, content that they had won some improvement. Think of all the mind-blowing opportunities they missed out on by dropping back out of the picture! When we experience the Holy in some dramatic way, and then just go home to our ordinary lives, that feeling begins to fade. We can tell over and over again that one story of a time when we experienced a miracle. We can confine God’s work to one or two easily managed occurrences, or we can allow the maker of that dramatic change into our lives and follow along the way, truly becoming a disciple and a witness to countless wonders. Will I limit God to a few crisis moments in my life, or will I open my life completely to challenging, miraculous, spontaneous power beyond my control?

Archbishop Rowan Williams: Gentleman and Scholar

So I've finally figured out what's going on in England and around the world right now. You've heard of the flap over the Archbishop of the Anglican church, the Right Reverend Rowan Williams, and his "Civil and Religious Law in England: a Religious Perspective" -- the foundation lecture at the Royal Courts of Justice? Maybe not. I mean, it's not like the foundation lecture at the Royal Courts of Justice exactly knocks Britney and Paris' kid brother out of the news...("hey kids, the archbishop is entering the lecture hall! Turn up the television, Marge!")

The Archbishop of Canterbury gives this lecture regarding English law and the growing Muslim community in England, and all hell breaks loose around him! The British and American press start screaming for his head!

If you've seen the flak but haven't read the lecture, you should. You can read the full text here:http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/1575. Unless you're a grad school professor or Ph.d. candidate, you'll probably find the lecture a tough read. I mean, it's a scholarly paper, filled with intellectual caveats, profound nuance of argument and obscure citations. It takes some time to penetrate and fully understand what the archbishop is suggesting, but here is what I found after two or three careful reads: In it, rt. Revd. Williams decidedly does not call for the introduction of Sharia law in England, does not consider Islamic law "unavoidable," and most definitely recognizes serious issues with Sharia as practiced in parts of the Muslim world...in particular, the horrific misogyny and draconian punishments we have all seen reported. Instead, he calls for everyone to step back, breathe deep and look at potential areas of constructive engagement; what he calls the possibility of some transformative accomodation of select areas of Sharia law not in serious conflict with British law and principle. He sets out a choice for England: either ignore this growing, restive population and isolate it further to everyone's ultimate detriment, or approach the widely varied Muslim minority constructively with the goal of finding some norming realm of public engagement. consideration and, ultimately, law. Simple enough. Smart enough.

But there's your key to the whole flap: the lecture is a tough read. I've read the most inane commentaries on this issue, including:

1. a positively pathetic piece by Anne Applebaum of the Washington Post in which it quickly becomes clear that she either never read the lecture, or at least dosed off through entire sections. She calls his language "mild-mannered, legalistic, jargon-riddled," showing clearly she hasn't spent a whole lot of time in academic circles. His entire statement of the present realities for most Muslim women and his call for their protection -- and the protection of all individuals under British law -- is completely lost to her somehow.
2. even worse from investors.com, inwhich their editorialist not only bases his/her entire rant on half a misapplied quote from a radio interview, rather than the lecture itself, he/she then goes on to call England a "safe haven for religious dissenters since the days of the pilgrims." Quick check -- why did the pilgrims run to Holland and the New World? Are we smarter than a fifth grader?
3. worst of all, absolute dreck all over the internet -- comments based on the comments of comments others wrote about comments regarding comments of a writer who also failed to read the lecture.

Our problem is this, I believe: We in the western world, with our steady diet of journalism-for-ad-dollars, sitcoms, CSI:East Podunk, politics-for-sport, religion-for-profit and debutarts, can no longer easily bend our crania around the well-measured thoughts of a gentleman and a scholar. We have no patience for the challenges of reasoned inquiry. Just think how many of our pundits and preachers throw around the term "intellectual" as an insult, as if the engagement of our God-given reason is somehow a sign of god-lessness and human impotence! "Lean not on your own understanding" does not mean "be thou a complete moron!"

What has happened to the Archbishop is so sad. What it suggests about us is positively tragic! Our society has nearly abandoned reasoned discourse. Serious journalism is hard to find, replaced by the sort of "personality" reporting that lacks depth sufficient to inform in any real way. An uninformed electorate spells danger for a democracy.

Turn that same lense on the collective church and we don't fare so well, either. John's great opening to his Gospel speaks of Christ as Word...Logos... REASON. Yet so many of our fundamentalist Christian brothers and sisters revel in their opposition to the scientific process. It is mortifying to see so many embrace willful ignorance as if it is a sacrament of their Lord. At the same time, many of our more liberal denominations take socio-political stands that seem muddled and counter-intuitive at best. And then there is the whole bland, neither-hot-nor-cold church that hasn't heard a prophetic word since the sexton barked his shin on the organ bench in 1978. We Christians have definitely tended toward intellectual laziness.

All the more reason why we should embrace and celebrate rt. Revd. William's latest paper and its presentation. As any good prophet will do, he pulled the dressing off a deep societal wound nobody wanted to deal with, and now he has people talking. That is the usual result of the work of the prophet. The usual goal of the prophet is to get people thinking and acting accordingly. That goal has confounded God and God's prophets for milennia. No wonder Jesus wept.