A Good Week for Those on the Margins

Attorney General Loretta Lynch

“In everything do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets”
Matthew 7:12

The “others” about him Jesus was most concerned, were always those on the margins. It is hard to think about a more marginalized group in American society than the transgender community.

This was a good week for those on the margins.

On Monday the Justice Department filed a lawsuit against the state of North Carolina, asserting that the state’s recent enactment of HB2, a law compelling transgender persons to us the bathroom corresponding to the gender on their birth certificates, and generally prohibiting cities from enacting laws protecting LGBTQ people, violated their civil rights. 

Echoing themes from the Hebrew prophets and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Attorney General Loretta Lynch described the law as “state sponsored discrimination.” Though she did not explicitly compare it to Jim Crow laws, she made the connection clear. 

“You have been told,” Lynch declared, “that this law protects vulnerable populations from harm. That is just not the case.” And she explained: “What this law does is inflict further indignity for a population that has already suffered far more than its fair share. This law provides no benefit to society, and all it does is harm innocent Americans.”

Speaking to the transgender community across the country, she promised, "We stand with you. And we will do everything we can to protect you going forward. Please know that history is on your side." 

Today, the Department of Education made good on that promise by issuing a letter to every school district in the country informing them that discrimination against transgender students is a violation of federal civil rights laws.

Education Secretary John B. King issued a statement saying that “No student should ever have to go through the experience of feeling unwelcome at school or on a college campus.’

Sounding more like a pastor than a school administrator, King spoke of what he wanted the educational community to look like: “We must ensure that our young people know that whoever they are and wherever they come from, they have the opportunity to get a great education in an environment free from discrimination, harassment and violence.”

In an article in The Atlantic, Matt Ford describes the letter as providing “the most detailed federal guidance yet for educators on transgender students and their rights, the departments interpret anti-discrimination laws to apply when a parent or guardian tells school administrators about their child’s gender identity.”

The letter specifically tells school districts that they cannot discriminate against students who choose a bathroom or locker room based on their gender identity rather than the gender on their birth certificate. There are also guidelines on athletics, graduation ceremonies, yearbooks, and other programs.

Ford observes that the letter does not carry legal force, but it puts administrators and teachers that “discrimination against transgender students could bring sanctions, including the painful loss of federal funding.”

For those who care about justice and treating others as we would like to be treated, it was a good week.

The Work of Christmas

When the angels had left them and gone into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, “Let us go now to Bethlehem and see this thing that has taken place, which the Lord has made known to us.” So they went with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the child lying in the manger. When they saw this, they made known what had been told them about this child; ¹⁸and all who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds told them. But Mary treasured all these words and pondered them in her heart. The shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them.

Luke 2:15-20

Like Mary, we should treasure the words of the story and ponder their meaning.

Unfortunately, if we do that, our peaceful holiday cheer will soon be displaced by a deep discomfort at the huge disconnect between the biblical message and our superficial adoption of it in our lives. Even before Jesus is born, in the messages brought by the angels to Zechariah and to Mary, Luke tells us that the baby will bring an unsettling message of social justice.

This year in America we will spend more than $450 billion on Christmas presents. In round numbers, that comes to $1,500 for every man, woman and child. What amazes me is that after I do the math, I am actually surprised that it isn’t higher.

What does that say about us as Christians?

In the fourth verse of her Christmas Carol, “In the Bleak Midwinter,” Christina Rossetti writes,

What can I give him, poor as I am?

If I were a shepherd, I would bring a lamb;

if I were a wise man, I would do my part;

yet  what can I give him; give my heart.

But the reality is that the vast majority of the people singing that carol are not poor. And we are capable of giving much more than a lamb. When we sing about giving him our hearts, it touches us deeply, but we are not really serious about it. If we were serious about it, then we would live differently.

We will never close the gap between our lives as they are, and our lives as we know they ought to be. And there will always be a disconnect between the message of Christmas and the way we live that out. But we can make a start.

This year our Christmas pageant closed with a wonderful poem by Howard Thurman, who was Dean of the Chapel at Boston University for many years and a mentor to Martin Luther King, Jr. Thurman writes about what it means to take the Christmas message seriously. The poem is called, “The Work of Christmas.”

When the song of the angels is stilled,
When the star in the sky is gone,
When the kings and princes are home,
When the shepherds are back with their flock,
The work of Christmas begins:
           To find the lost,
           To heal the broken,
           To feed the hungry
           To release the prisoners,
           To rebuild the nations,
           To bring peace among people,
           To make music in the heart.

The Violence in Ferguson

Why then has this people turned away
in perpetual backsliding?
They have held fast to deceit,
they have refused to return.
I have given heed and listened,
but they do not speak honestly;
no one repents of wickedness,
saying, “What have I done!”
All of them turn to their own course,
like a horse plunging headlong into battle.
How can you say, “We are wise,
and the law of the Lord is with us,”
when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes
has made it into a lie?
The wise shall be put to shame,
they shall be dismayed and taken;
since they have rejected the word of the Lord,
what wisdom is in them?
They have treated the wound of my people carelessly,
saying, “Peace, peace,” when there is no peace.
Jeremiah 8:5-6, 8-9, 11

Before the grand jury verdict was announced, and in his speech after the announcement, President Obama called for calm and said that there was “no excuse for violence.”

It is an ironic statement. When he said it, he meant it to apply to those protesting the death of Michael Brown. The protesters, on the other hand, were protesting precisely because they believed that there was no excuse for the deadly violence done to him.

How we see violence is determined in large part by our point of view. Whites see it differently from people of color. The powerful see it differently than the powerless.

The images of the violence in Ferguson are deeply troubling.

I chose the picture above because I hoped it would illustrate how differently we look at things. That picture is not from Ferguson; it’s from the pumpkin festival riots in Keene, New Hampshire last month. For videos of the Keene riots, click here. For images of other riots by largely white groups, you can look at Jon Stewart’s report on the riots at UCONN after the men’s basketball team won the NCAA championship in 2004. For the record, they won again last year, but had a smaller riot. And also, for the record, they don’t have riots when the women win.

For more serious reflection on violence and protest, it’s useful to look back to the Civil Rights movement and the leadership of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

By the mid 1960’s, the disciplined non-violence of the Civil Rights movement broke under the weight of the violence and death they had absorbed and a new generation of leaders in the black community increasingly called for the use of force to achieve freedom and equality “by any means necessary.” In a television interview, Mike Wallace asked Dr. King if he was still committed to non-violence.

He played a tape of Dr. King speaking in those deep resonant cadences so familiar to his preaching style, “Now what I'm saying is this: I would like for all of us to believe in non-violence, but I'm here to say tonight that if every Negro in the United States turns against non-violence, I'm going to stand up as a lone voice and say, ‘This is the wrong way!’”

King’s radical critics would say (and frequently did say) that he had mis-stated the issue. The problem was not that “Negroes” had turned against non-violence, but that the white power structure had never embraced non-violence in the first place. But Dr. King understood that, and while affirming his continuing commitment to non-violence, he went on to say:

I contend that the cry of "black power" is, at bottom, a reaction to the reluctance of white power to make the kind of changes necessary to make justice a reality for the Negro. I think that we've got to see that a riot is the language of the unheard.

A riot is the language of the unheard.

The Crisis at the Border Is Also Close to Home

"The New Colossus"
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
                             Emma Lazarus, 1883

Emma Lazarus’ poem is not in the Bible, but it is sacred scripture just the same. For Americans, it is one of our most sacred texts. It stands engraved on a plaque on the Statue of Liberty, greeting those who enter New York harbor with a clear declaration of what America is all about. Children memorize it in grade school and adults treasure those words throughout their lives.

Emma Lazarus was born on July 22, 1849, one hundred and sixty-five years ago this week. She was the fourth of seven children born to Moses Lazarus and Esther Nathan, Sephardic Jews whose families had come to New York from Portugal in colonial times. She was a supporter of Henry George, one of the great reformers of the Social Gospel era and she was deeply committed to the poor and the outcast. She was widely recognized for her poetry, but she died on November 19, 1887, long before her poem was dedicated as part of the Statue of Liberty in 1903.

Last Friday, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick invoked the spirit of Emma Lazarus in his emotional announcement of a plan to provide temporary shelter for up to 1,000 of the children who have come to the United States in the past several months. The Governor made reference to our historic commitment to giving “sanctuary to desperate children for centuries.” He went on to say that he is haunted by our refusal in 1939 to accept a ship filled with Jewish children desperately trying to escape the Nazis. We turned them away and many perished in the Holocaust. Fighting back tears, Patrick made reference to a passage in Deuteronomy, “My faith teaches,” he said, “that if a stranger dwells with you in your land, you shall not mistreat him but rather love him as yourself.”

In Governor Patrick’s plan, the children would be housed either at Westover Air Base in Chicopee or at Joint Base on Cape Cod. After considering the options, Joint Base, formerly known as Camp Edwards has been selected as the preferred location.

Last night, on Emma Lazarus’ birthday, the Selectmen in the Town of Bourne, my hometown, met to respond to the Governor’s proposal to temporarily house the children on the base, which is largely in the Bourne. George Brennan, reporting for CapeCodonline, writes: “The Board of Selectmen voted unanimously Tuesday night to send a letter to Gov. Deval Patrick opposing the use of Joint Base Cape Cod to house unaccompanied immigrant children, citing the potential financial effects and strain on emergency services.” According to Brennan, those who packed the hearing room were overwhelmingly against housing the children.

Sadly, the Selectmen in Bourne are just a microcosm of America. We see it on the news reports every night. Grown men and women carrying American flags, some with their faces painted in red, white and blue, shouting at scared children, “Go home!” “Not my problem!” “No way, Jose!”

It is ironic that on the birthday of Emma Lazarus, we have decided that we do not want to be the country she believed we were.

When I was a child, growing up in the Bourne school system, no one told me about how badly we had treated immigrants. I grew up with the vision of a lamp beside the golden door and I was proud of that vision. Later, when I learned a very different and more painful history, I was reassured by the belief that even if we had failed in the past to live up to our vision, that vision would call us forward. If we had not always been the country we should have been, we would do better in the future. And I believed that there was a broad consensus among us that, as Martin Luther King said, we would live up to our promise.

Even now, when I am well aware of the human capacity for evil, I am shocked by our response to the children at our borders. In the long term, as citizens of the world, we know (or we should know) that borders are just lines on a map. This is a global issue and it will require a global solution. But in the short term, we need to “welcome the stranger.”

If we were erecting the Statue of Liberty today, would we affix a plaque calling her the “Mother of Exiles”?

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

In a parable about the final judgment, Jesus said that the righteous will ask, "Lord, when did w see you a stranger and welcome you?" And the Lord will answer, "When you welcomed the least of these my sisters and brothers, you welcomed me."

The Stars May Lie, But the Numbers Never Do

Be gracious to me, O Lord, for I am in distress;
my eye wastes away from grief, my soul and body also.
For my life is spent with sorrow,
and my years with sighing;
my strength fails because of my misery,
and my bones waste away.
Psalm 31:9-10

I am not in mourning. In spite of what I have seen, my eyes are not wasting away from grief. But they should be. And we should all be grieving for our nation.

Over the past few days I have seen dozens of internet postings about Marissa Alexander, a Florida woman who was sentenced to twenty years in prison for firing what she called “warning shots” over her husband’s head. Her husband had a history of domestic violence and she fired the shots after a violent altercation. No one was killed. There were no injuries.

It took the jury less than 15 minutes to find her guilty.

Ms. Alexander is black. But you knew that already, didn’t you?

There are issues with Marissa Alexander’s case. But the broad outlines are hard to ignore. George Zimmerman is “not guilty.” Trayvon Martin is dead. And Marissa Alexander is in prison, while her husband with a history of domestic violence is alive and well.

Racism has been called America’s “original sin” and it is still with us.

We don’t need to argue the specifics of the Trayvon Martin case. On the face of it, it looks bad. But it is just one case. This one case is significant only because of the broader trends. If we look up rates of incarceration, sentencing, capital punishment, unemployment, income, education, or pretty much anything else, what we find is that black people are disproportionately on the disadvantaged side of the ledger every single time. We would like to believe that justice is blind but the statistics say otherwise.

To paraphrase Mary Chapin Carpenter, "The pundits and politicians may lie, but the numbers never do."

In the aftermath of George Zimmerman’s acquittal a white person commented that white people had not rioted after the O. J. Simpson verdict, when a black man was found “not guilty” in the murder of a white woman, and that black people should show similar restraint. And, of course, we should all show restraint. And, so far, things have been relatively calm.

But seriously, O J. Simpson? That’s a great first example. Now we will all wait patiently for the second example.

What the Simpson verdict proved is that money makes a difference. And that in some cases, class may matter more than race.

In the recent court rulings on affirmative action, someone cynically observed that colleges and universities were more comfortable with defining diversity in terms of race rather than class. Racial diversity could be achieved by focusing affirmative action on income. If a colleges and universities achieved economic diversity, they would also achieve racial diversity without ever considering race as a category. Lower income blacks and whites would all benefit. But the present focus on racial diversity allows the colleges to select students from families with higher incomes, regardless of race. And the big gain for the colleges is that such a selection costs less in terms of financial aid.

We know that racism is still a problem in America. We don’t know whether or not George Zimmerman is a racist. The evidence is mixed. We don’t know whether or not the judge, and the jurors and the police officers are racists. But we know that racism is a problem in America. And we know that we have work to do.

We also know one more thing with a reasonable certainty. If George Zimmerman had not had a gun, then no one would be dead. Without a gun he would not have followed Trayvon Martin and the altercation between them would never have taken place. And without a gun, Marissa Alexander would not be in prison. She was not in danger when she fired the warning shots.

Maybe we need to do something about the guns.

A young Girl Takes on the Taliban

When Jesus had crossed again in the boat to the other side, a great crowd gathered around him; and he was by the sea. Then one of the leaders of the synagogue named Jairus came and, when he saw him, fell at his feet and begged him repeatedly, “My little daughter is at the point of death. Come and lay your hands on her, so that she may be made well, and live.”

So he went with him.

He allowed no one to follow him except Peter, James, and John, the brother of James. When they came to the house of the leader of the synagogue, he saw a commotion, people weeping and wailing loudly. When he had entered, he said to them, “Why do you make a commotion and weep? The child is not dead but sleeping.” And they laughed at him. Then he put them all outside, and took the child’s father and mother and those who were with him, and went in where the child was. He took her by the hand and said to her, “Talitha cum,” which means, “Little girl, get up!” And immediately the girl got up and began to walk about (she was twelve years of age). At this they were overcome with amazement.

Mark 5:21-24,40-42

Jesus took her by the hand and said to her, "Talitha cum," which means, "Little girl, get up!"

In a perfect world, when she was 11 years old Malala Yousafzai would have been playing with the Pakistani equivalent of an American Girl doll. But in the violent and unjust world in which she found herself this schoolgirl was taking on the Taliban by voicing her passion for education. As Taliban fighters overran her town in northwestern Pakistan in 2009, Malala spoke about her plans to become a doctor and defied the Taliban’s crusade to subjugate women by denying an education to girls like Malala.

On T.uesday they came for her. Masked gunmen boarded a crowded school bus, singled her out, and shot her in the head and neck as other terrified children watched. She survived, along with two other girls who were wounded. Doctors at a hospital in Peshawar reported that she was in critical condition.

Incredibly, the Taliban claimed “credit” for the attack and promised that if she survived they would come back for her. Ehsanullah Ehsan, a Taliban spokesman confirmed by phone that the Taliban had targeted her and called her campaign for girls’ education rights an “obscenity.” Ehsan went on to say that Malala “has become a symbol of Western Culture in the area; she was openly propagating it.” “Let this be a lesson,” he warned.

In a New York Times column, Nicholas Kristof  reports speaking with Fazal Moula Zahid, a close family friend, who told him that doctors were hopeful that there has been no brain damage and that she will ultimately return to school.

“After recovery, she will continue to get an education,” Fazal said. “She will never, never drop out of school. She will go to the last.”

“Please thank all your people who are supporting us and who stand with us in this war,” he added. “You energize us.”

It would be wrong to see the Taliban as the voice of Pakistan. The government is hardly a model of progressive tolerance, but they are basically at war with the Taliban. On the other side of the political spectrum, it was a major setback for Pakistan’s progressives, who were appalled and frustrated by the attack. Nadeem Paracha, a media commentator posted his sarcastic assessment on Twitter, “Come on brothers,” he wrote, “Be REAL MEN. Kill a school girl.”

Sadly, misogyny is a world-wide problem.

Writing on “The International Day of the Girl,” Kristof linked the shooting in Pakistan to an incident in Indonesia where a fourteen year old girl was lured into captivity by sex traffickers and then raped for a week. She was finally released after her disappearance was reported on the local news.

When her school found out what had happened, the school publicly expelled her in front of hundreds of classmates. According to a report by Indonesia’s National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, they did this because she had “tarnished the school’s image.”

In the struggle for gender equality, education plays a critical role. That’s why the Taliban wants to silence Malala Yousafzai.

“This is not just Malala’s war,” said a 19-year-old female student in Peshawar. “It is a war between two ideologies, between the light of education and darkness.” Kristof notes that at the time he spoke with her the young woman said she was happy to be quoted by name. “But after what happened to Malala, I don’t dare put her at risk.”

Throughout Pakistan there are extremist schools financed by misogynists from Saudi Arabia and other nations. Kristof writes, “They provide meals, free tuition and sometimes scholarships to lure boys—because their donors understand perfectly that education shapes countries.”

Foreign aid from the United States is mostly directed toward the military. Less than a tenth of our aid dollars go toward education. The military aid is at best a short term solution. In the long run, it is education that will shape the country. Malala’s struggle transcends nation and gender and religion. It is about shaping the kind of world we want to live in. Her struggle is our struggle.

Jesus took her by the hand and said to her, “Talitha cum,” which means, “Little girl, get up!”

It is through the education of young women in Pakistan and around the world that Jesus’ words will come alive.

Affirmative Action and the Moral Arc of the Universe

¹³Happy are those who find wisdom,
and those who get understanding,
¹⁴for her income is better than silver,
and her revenue better than gold.
¹⁵She is more precious than jewels,
and nothing you desire can compare with her.
¹⁶Long life is in her right hand;
in her left hand are riches and honor.
¹⁷Her ways are ways of pleasantness,
and all her paths are peace.
¹⁸She is a tree of life to those who lay hold of her;
those who hold her fast are called happy.

Proverbs 3:13-18

The Supreme Court is presently considering a case about affirmative action, “Fisher v. the University of Texas at Austin.” Abigail Fisher claims that the University of Texas denied her admission because she is white. She claims that minority students were admitted whose applications were otherwise less accomplished than hers. The University is arguing that race is only one factor they consider in admissions and that they have a compelling interest in having a diverse student body. Although I don’t believe it is part of their argument before the court, the school also maintains that Ms. Fisher would not have been admitted even if race were not considered.

Affirmative action is no longer a government mandate. It is a voluntary program initiated by many institutions because they believe their mission can better be fulfilled by enlarging opportunities for historically disfavored groups.

The Court has been clear that is unconstitutional to exclude minorities because of their race. The question before the Court is whether it is constitutional to implement a race-conscious program in order to increase the opportunities of minorities.

I think we can be reasonably certain that the framers of the constitution would have been against any racial preference that increased the opportunities for minorities. They were in favor of slavery. They would have been against the Fourteenth Amendment and they certainly would not have extended the equal protection clause to include affirmative action. Similarly, it is hard to believe that the majority voting for the Civil Rights Act of 1866 would have held together to approve the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

I am not a lawyer and I won’t pretend to understand the legal technicalities. A ruling in favor of Ms. Fisher seems likely, and several of the justices are already on record against any form of “race consciousness.” Unfortunately, this will turn back the clock on diversity and move us away from a more inclusive society.

As Christians, one of our fundamental beliefs is that God works in history. In the long run, we are moving toward the Kingdom of God. In the imagery of the abolitionist preacher Theodore Parker, popularized by the greatest preacher of the Civil Rights movement, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”

If the program at the University of Texas at Austin is declared unconstitutional, the arc will get a little longer and our task will become a little more difficult.

Thank You, Bishop Talbert!

Do not remember the former things, or consider the things of old. ¹⁹I am about to do a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it? I will make a way in the wilderness and rivers in the desert.

Isaiah 43:18-19

A group of United Methodist clergy and lay people have sent an open letter to the Council of Bishops asking that retired Bishop Melvin G. Talbert be publicly censured for encouraging disobedience to the church’s official position on homosexuality. The letter, signed by more than seventy prominent United Methodists (almost all of them men), expresses dismay at Bishop Talbert’s remarks at a gathering outside of General Conference, and repeated at the ordination service at the California Pacific Annual (regional) Conference ordination service.

In his remarks, Bishop Talbert declared that, “The derogatory rules and restrictions in the Book of Discipline are immoral and unjust and no longer deserve our loyalty and obedience.” He said, “the time has come for those of us who are faithful to the Gospel of Jesus Christ to do what is required of us… . The time has come to join in an act of biblical obedience.” He called on the 1,100 clergy who have declared their willingness to disobey church law and officiate at same sex marriages or civil unions to “stand firm.”

The letter writers express their “deep concern” that Bishop Talbert has threatened the discipline and order of the church, which he is charged with upholding, “by encouraging dissension, disunity and disobedience, and advocating anarchy and chaos in response to the actions of the 2012 General Conference, taken after focused prayer, study, and holy conferencing.”

It is worth noting that almost every United Methodist who has actually read the Discipline disagrees with some part of it. And many of the letter signers are actively engaged in trying to change portions of the Discipline with which they disagree. The Discipline is not an infallible document. And it is not eternal. It is re-written every four years. It simply represents what the majority of delegates to General Conference agreed to at a given point in time.

If the Discipline is changed every four years, then we can assume that those who advocate change believe that the previous version was “wrong” in some way. Historically, most of us would agree that the Discipline has been wrong in some significant ways. It took sixty years before the Discipline opposed slavery, and it took nearly two hundred years before the Discipline endorsed the ordination of women. It took more than a hundred years before the Discipline included a Social Creed.

Today is the 49^th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. I find myself thinking of Dr. King on many issues these days, but on this issue what comes to mind is the speech he gave in Montgomery in the spring of 1965. Some remember it as the “Our God Is Marching On” speech, others remember it from the repeated call and answer: “How long? Not long.”

I know you are asking today, "How long will it take?" (Speak, sir) Somebody’s asking, "How long will prejudice blind the visions of men, darken their understanding, and drive bright-eyed wisdom from her sacred throne?" Somebody’s asking, "When will wounded justice, lying prostrate on the streets . . . be lifted from this dust of shame to reign supreme among the children of men?" Somebody’s asking, "When will the radiant star of hope be plunged against the nocturnal bosom of this lonely night, (Speak, speak, speak) plucked from weary souls with chains of fear and the manacles of death? How long will justice be crucified, (Speak) and truth bear it?" (Yes, sir)

I come to say to you this afternoon, however difficult the moment, (Yes, sir) however frustrating the hour, it will not be long, (No sir) because "truth crushed to earth will rise again." (Yes, sir)

How long? Not long, (Yes, sir) because "no lie can live forever." (Yes, sir) . . .

How long? Not long, because the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice. (Yes, sir)

I don’t know how long it will be before the United Methodist Church rights this wrong, but it will not be long. And when we finally repent of our sin (what else can we call it?), Bishop Talbert will be one of the people we need to thank.

What Would Earl Warren Do?

The spirit of the Lord shall rest on him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord. ³His delight shall be in the fear of the Lord. He shall not judge by what his eyes see, or decide by what his ears hear; ⁴but with righteousness he shall judge the poor, and decide with equity for the meek of the earth.

Isaiah 11:2-4a

It has been almost forty years since Earl Warren died. In my earliest memory, I thought his name was "Chief Justice Earl Warren." I don’t remember whether or not I was surprised to discover that he was not a Native American. Later, I remember the bumper stickers that said, “Impeach Earl Warren.” They were rare on Cape Cod, and more of a curiosity than anything else.

Earl Warren was a Republican, appointed Chief Justice by President Eisenhower after serving three terms as Governor of California. In the second election he was unopposed in the general election, having won the nomination of the Republican, Democratic and Progressive parties. Before serving as Governor, he was the Attorney General, and before that he was a district attorney, known for his skill and toughness.

Sadly, as Attorney General, Warren was the driving force behind the compulsory internment of Japanese citizens during the Second World War. He was convinced that Americans of Japanese ancestry could not be trusted to be loyal to the United States and that the internment was an act of self defense by the government. In his memoirs, Warren wrote of his deep regret regarding "the removal order and my own testimony advocating it, because it was not in keeping with our American concept of freedom and the rights of citizens...Whenever I thought of the innocent little children who were torn from home, school friends, and congenial surroundings, I was conscience-stricken.”

As a young person, I believed deeply in the goodness of the Supreme Court. They were the keepers of the flame of liberty. They were the ones who would keep us on course. And I believed that when a person was appointed to the court, he (or later, she) would feel the gravity of that sacred office and rise above partisanship. In those days I had a very idealized view of history, and I had no trouble believing that decisions like “Dred Scott,” or “Plessy v. Ferguson” were aberrations, and that “Brown v. Board of Education” was and would always be the norm.

I have been reflecting on the debt we owe to “The Warren Court.” Without their ruling on segregation, it is hard to imagine the Civil Right Act. And it’s hard to imagine the subsequent Civil Rights gains for women and more recently for gays and lesbians. Our expanding view of equality is a legacy of the Warren Court. Earl Warren and his colleagues were in the right place at the right time.

One suspects that the outcome would have been very different if the Warren Court had ruled on “Citizens United,” and on the related case in Montana.

And it is interesting to wonder how the Roberts Court would have decided on “Brown.” In one sense that’s not really possible even to imagine, since the Roberts Court would be very different without that decision. Justice Thomas certainly would not be on the Supreme Court without Earl Warren’s leadership on “Brown.” And we probably would not have any women, either.

If the Warren Court were considering the Affordable Care Act, I think the Chief Justice would have to recuse himself. One of Earl Warren’s unsuccessful initiatives as Governor of California was universal health care.

A Generation at Risk

¹³People were bringing little children to him in order that he might bless them; and the disciples spoke sternly to them. ¹⁴But when Jesus saw this, he was indignant and said to them, “Let the little children come to me; do not stop them; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs. ¹⁵Truly I tell you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it.” ¹⁶And he took them up in his arms, laid his hands on them, and blessed them.  Mark 10:13-16

A century ago Walter Rauschenbusch wrote an impassioned plea to pastors and leaders to embrace the Social Gospel, to combat the poverty of cities and rural areas, to stand up against the exploitation of workers, support the rights of women, promote universal education, and join in building the Kingdom of God. If churches want to save souls, he argued, then they must also save bodies.

Young people, he said, already understand this. They are already committed. And if the churches do not join with young people in this struggle, then they will lose a whole generation.

A great deal has changed in the past hundred years. Women can vote. Workers are protected. We have Social Security and Medicare. We have made great advances in combating racism and sexism. We protect people with disabilities and we treat mental illness with more humanity. We have made great progress.

And the churches can take credit for playing a major role in this transformation. In the Methodist Church we created a new liturgical season between Pentecost and Advent, called Kingdomtide and devoted to studying and celebrating the biblical foundation for building the Kingdom of God. This was never a unanimous effort. There were always individual churches, and sometimes whole denominations, on both sides of every major issue. But overall, there was a shared commitment to advancing equality and justice.

Unfortunately, today much of that commitment can only be described in the past tense, and in many ways, we are in the same place we were a century ago.

Half a century ago, when the churches were at the height of their institutional power, one of the great leaders (I think it might have been Harold Bosley, but I cannot find the reference) said that in the future our greatest challenge will be keeping a vision of the Kingdom of God alive in the human heart. Today, when we have a widening gap between rich and poor, and a reluctance to do anything about it; when we are willing to cut food stamps rather than increase taxes, we seem to act as if Jesus was only kidding when he talked about economic justice. Our vision of the Kingdom of God is faded and distorted by self-interest.

Today Christians are better known for gay bashing than for social justice.

George Barna, a Christian Evangelical and social researcher, reported that among young people ages 16-29, the most common perception of Christianity was that it was “anti-homosexual.” This was true for 91 percent of those who identified themselves as non-Christian, and for 80 percent of those who called themselves Christian. This same age group is overwhelmingly accepting of gay people, and approximately two-thirds of them support gay marriage.

The anti-homosexual agenda is wrong. And it is self-defeating. It is pushing young people away.

This doesn’t just damage the individual churches or denominations that pursue an anti-gay agenda, it hurts all churches. When J.P. Morgan lost $2.8 billion in a misguided trading scheme, it wasn’t just J.P. Morgan whose stock went down the next day, bank stocks were down across the board. When people see a video of a pastor telling his congregation that they should smack a son who isn’t acting like a real man, or another pastor saying that gays and lesbians should be kept behind an electrified fence, it doesn’t just hurt those individual churches.

No one who knows anything about the Gospel accounts would believe for a nano-second that either of those ideas would pass the Jesus test. We might not always know what Jesus would do, but we can be fairly sure of some things that he would never do. Unfortunately, for millions of people those pastors and their congregations are defining Christianity.

If we want to bring young people into the church, we first need to bring the church back to Jesus.

It Feels Like Exile

The spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me, because the LORD has anointed me; he has sent me to bring good news to the oppressed, to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and release to the prisoners; to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor, and the day of justice of our God; to comfort all who mourn; to provide for those who mourn in Zion— to give them a garland instead of ashes, the oil of gladness instead of mourning, the mantle of praise instead of a faint spirit. They will be called oaks of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, to display his glory.

They shall build up the ancient ruins, they shall raise up the former devastations; they shall repair the ruined cities, the devastations of many generations.

For as the earth brings forth its shoots, and as a garden causes what is sown in it to spring up, so the Lord GOD will cause righteousness and praise to spring up before all the nations.

Isaiah 61:1-4, 11

It feels like Exile.

Of course that is overly dramatic, and I have not ever been in any situation even remotely like the Exile, but still for many United Methodists, watching our General Conference unravel so much that we hold dear and then once again declare that our gay and lesbian (and bi-sexual, and transgender) sisters and brothers are not really welcome, has felt like Exile.

It feels like wilderness and desert. But as Walter Brueggemann observed, it was in the Exile that the Hebrew prophets did their best work. In was in the Exile that hope was born. The Exile gave birth to Rabbinic Judaism, which in the fullness of time gave birth to Christianity.

It is not by accident that the Advent scripture readings bring us back to the Exile. Christianity begins in Exile.

Within the United Methodist Church in East Greenwich, and within thousands of other United Methodist Churches, nothing will change. We will continue to proclaim the grace of God. We will celebrate the wideness in God’s mercy. We will do our best to embody the living presence of Christ in the world. And we will include everyone, even the people who want to exclude us.

But General Conference 2012 has made our job harder. Because some people will read about what happened and think that General Conference speaks for us. In some cases they will ask me what it means and where we stand, and I will do my best to explain it all. In other cases they will just drive by and shake their heads.

Like Israel in Exile, we are called to action, to build up and raise up and repair, and to proclaim “good news to the oppressed, to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and release to the prisoners; to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor, and the day of justice of our God.”

In other words, our task today is the same as it was two weeks ago. We are called to be faithful. And we know that God will continue to sustain us. In the words of the Psalmist, “the steadfast love of the LORD endures forever, and God’s faithfulness is to all generations.” Even in what feels like Exile.

“For as the earth brings forth its shoots, and as a garden causes what is sown in it to spring up, so the Lord GOD will cause righteousness and praise to spring up before all the nations.”

The Metrics of Ministry

Proclaim the message; be persistent whether the time is favorable or unfavorable; convince, rebuke, and encourage, with the utmost patience in teaching. ³For the time is coming when people will not put up with sound doctrine, but having itching ears, they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own desires, ⁴and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander away to myths.

II Timothy 4:2-4

In the late 1960’s, Bill Ziegler was appointed to serve one of the largest churches in New England. He was widely regarded at the time as the best United Methodist preacher in the region, and one of the finest in the nation. Wherever he served, the churches grew and the congregations loved him. But he arrived in this new city at a difficult time. In the city, racial tensions and unrest played out against a national background of conflict. Locally, there was a case of police brutality which had brought tensions to the boiling point.

Bill dived into the conflict. He immediately became involved in civic affairs. And in his sermons he addressed these issues with honesty and compassion. Bill was always known as a “prophetic preacher,” who, like the Hebrew prophets, and like Jesus, lifted up God’s call for justice. He named the demon of racism. He talked about the need for reconciliation. And he proclaimed the Gospel in the context of the tension.

It was uncomfortable. And dissension grew in the congregation. A group of prominent parishioners gathered and sent a delegation to see the Bishop. They told the Bishop that Bill was dividing the church, that members were staying home and some were withholding contributions. The Bishop sent a District Superintendent to talk with Bill.

It was a short conversation. The District Superintendent explained the complaints and said that the Bishop wanted Bill to stop upsetting people with controversial issues. Bill asked his visitor, “Do you think I’m not preaching the Gospel?” No, he had not meant to imply that. “Does the Bishop think I’m not preaching the Gospel?” Again, the answer was no. “Then get out of my office,” said Bill, “My job is to preach the Gospel.”

As I write this, United Methodist lay and clergy delegates from around the world are gathering in Tampa, Florida for General Conference. Over the next ten days they will discuss and debate a variety of issues including an ambitious plan to restructure our general agencies and boards. Within that plan is a provision that would eliminate the guaranteed appointment of clergy.

Those who favor eliminating the guaranteed appointment say that it is necessary in order to deal with ineffective clergy. And that is a real concern. But the purpose of the guaranteed appointment is to defend the “freedom of the pulpit,” one of the most treasured pieces of our United Methodist heritage. Pastors can be moved, but they cannot be fired.

The truth is that over the years few pastors have been as fearless as we are supposed to be in our preaching. But it is hard to see how that will improve when effectiveness is defined by a set of metrics measuring attendance, finances, baptisms, and church growth. Those measures are important. But our first responsibility is to be faithful. We follow someone, after all, whose invitation was to “take up the cross daily and follow me.” 

More Thoughts on the Birth Control Debate

Each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another except perhaps by agreement for a set time, to devote yourselves to prayer, and then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. This I say by way of concession, not of command. I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has a particular gift from God, one having one kind and another a different kind.I Corinthians 7:2-7

The Apostle Paul is regularly criticized for having a bad attitude toward women, and for infecting Christianity with it. As a long time fan of Paul’s theology, I have spent many hours defending Paul’s views with friends and colleagues. And just for the record, I want to say again that many of the worst “anti-female” passages attributed to Paul were not actually written by him. And we need to take all of it in context.

But compared to the sentiments expressed in the recent debates about health care and birth control, Paul sounds like the voice of reason, even after two thousand years. Within the covenant of marriage, he argues, the satisfaction of sexual desire is not a sin, and married couples should not withhold that pleasure from each other. And note exactly what he says, “Do not deprive one another except perhaps by agreement for a set time, to devote yourselves to prayer, and then come together again.”
One is hard pressed to conjure up an argument against birth control from Paul’s perspective.

In the conflict between Roman Catholic agencies and institutions and the requirement of the Affordable Care Act, that employee health insurance provide free coverage for birth control prescriptions, the church has argued that as a matter of religious freedom it should be allowed to deny that coverage to women. Religious freedom is enshrined in the first amendment to our constitution, and it is cornerstone of who we are as Americans. But that is not the last word. This is a real healthcare issue for women, as well as a serious family issue.

I wrote earlier about how similar coverage is already mandated in 28 states and many Roman Catholic institutions already comply with those mandates.

In one of the doomsday arguments against the regulations, opponents raised the specter of Catholic Charities being “forced” to close and thereby putting a giant hole in our social safety net. There is no doubt that Catholic Charities is a major supplier of social services to the poorest people in our nation, and they deserve our thanks for that ministry. But we should note that of their $4.67 billion annual budget (in 2010), $2.9 billion (62%) came from federal grants. Only $140 million came directly from Diocesan churches. The rest came from in-kind gifts, investments, community campaigns, and program fees.

And one more thing to think about: The Roman Catholic agencies in question already provide coverage for Viagra. It is not surprising that many women’s groups see the whole argument as profoundly anti-female.

The Darkness Brings on Blindness

Whoever says, “I am in the light,” while hating a brother or sister, is still in the darkness. Whoever loves a brother or sister lives in the light, and in such a person there is no cause for stumbling. But whoever hates a brother or sister is in the darkness, walks in the darkness, and does not know the way to go, because the darkness has brought on blindness.
I John 2:9-11


Today is Epiphany, the first day of the season of light. We celebrate the light of the world, which we see in Jesus. And we remind ourselves that we believe in light rather than darkness.

It is a powerful image, which speaks to the heart of our spiritual journey. We are always seeking more light; always doing our best to choose light over darkness; reminding ourselves that we can trust the light.

It is a struggle, because we are tempted by the darkness. Often the world seems to love darkness more than light. And there are some who will try to make us believe that darkness is light, and light is darkness.

Sometimes the campaign against the light is led by people who call themselves Christian.

One such campaign is led by a group which goes by the ironic acronym, “FACT.” The Family Action Council of Tennessee is promoting a bill to amend the state’s anti-bullying law to provide an exemption for expressions of religious belief.

The amendment would do two critical things. First, it allows an exemption for religious and philosophical statements of belief, as long as no physical harm is threatened. Students would be permitted to say that God hates gay people, or that gay people are going to hell, as long as they didn’t threaten physical violence. And second, it forbids teachers and administrators from naming protected groups. In other words, a teacher could not tell the class that bullying a gay student was wrong, only that bullying was wrong.

It only takes a nanosecond to realize that both ideas are designed to take away any protection for LGBT students. The amendment is darkness rather than light. It is also mean and stupid.

Epiphany is a good time to remind ourselves that Christians are always called to walk in the light, and choose light over darkness. Bigotry is always wrong. But Christians have a special responsibility to reject bigotry in the name of God. It is blasphemy.

whoever hates a brother or sister is in the darkness,
walks in the darkness,
and does not know the way to go,
because the darkness has brought on blindness.You can read the proposed bill at this link:
http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/107/Bill/SB0760.pdf

Choosing Sides

Therefore, if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort in love, any sharing in the Spirit, any sympathy, complete my joy by thinking the same way, having the same love, being united and agreeing with each other. Don’t do anything for selfish purposes but with humility think of others as better than yourselves. Instead of each person watching out for their own good, watch out for what is better for others. Adopt the attitude that was in Christ Jesus.Philippians 2:1-5
The Council of Bishops of the United Methodist Church released a letter to “members of the whole church” following at their November meeting. In the letter they urge their sisters and brothers in Christ to give witness to “a more excellent way” as we confront the issues that divide us as a church.

Then they write:

“One of the deep disagreements and divisions within the church is over the practice of homosexuality, recently heightened by a group of clergy who have declared that they will perform holy unions in opposition to the Book of Discipline. This has caused different experiences of deep pain throughout the church.”
The words are carefully chosen. The Bishops want to insist that the issue is “the practice of homosexuality.” It is about behavior, they say, not about sexual orientation. They concede that sexual orientation may not be a choice, but behavior is a choice. This, in their minds, removes it from civil rights.

And on the other hand, they do not speak of clergy being in defiance of the Discipline, but of “opposition.” It is a more conciliatory phrasing. Citing the Book of Discipline, they "implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons" (par. 161F). And they promise to “continue to offer grace upon grace to all in the name of Christ.”

Then they go on to say that they will be faithful to the covenant they have made as Bishops to uphold the Book of Discipline. In other words, clergy who officiate at same sex marriages or civil unions (or blessings of any kind) will be held accountable.

Clearly, they are trying to thread the needle. In their minds, there is pain on both sides of the issue and they want to be sensitive to both sides. I believe they are sincere. And I know that it is painful for them, and I know that they are trying to be faithful. I also know that within the Council of Bishops there is disagreement on the issue of how the church relates to gay and lesbian persons.

There is a group within the church which is outraged that any of us might oppose the Book of Discipline. But the reality is that pastors and lay people act contrary to the Book of Discipline all the time on issues as diverse as a woman’s right to an abortion, which the Discipline supports, to all forms of gambling, which the Discipline opposes. There are probably very few Methodists who do not disagree with the Discipline on something large or small. The Discipline is not a Methodist version of Papal Doctrine. It does not carry any sense of Divine authority. It is no more and no less than what a majority of the Church’s elected delegates believe at a point in history.

At one time the Discipline condoned slavery. And then later it condoned segregation. For a long time it prohibited the ordination of women. It is a human document. It has changed many times and it will change in the future. The exclusionary statements on homosexuality will be overturned. And we will all be embarrassed that it took so long.

The Bishops are attempting to speak pastorally. And I applaud them for that.

But I cannot see the moral equivalence in the pain that is felt on both sides. Gays and lesbians feel the pain of exclusion. Those on the other side of the issue feel the pain of potentially having gays and lesbians fully included in the life of the church.

One side is oppressed. The other side worries that the oppression will end.

I don’t think it’s hard to choose sides.




The full letter is printed below:
Letter from the Council of BishopsAs noted in the recent summary of the Council of Bishops November meeting, the Council of Bishops has released the following letter to members of the whole church:

November 10, 2011

Dear United Methodist Sisters and Brothers in Christ:

Grace and peace to you from Jesus Christ who calls us to faithfulness during a time of great and unsettling change around the world that God loves so deeply and also within the Body of Christ where Jesus is both head and redeemer.

We give thanks for each one of you as you seek to be faithful witnesses and fruitful disciples wherever God has called you to live and share the grace that offers salvation to the world. Your faithfulness brings encouragement, inspiration and hope to us and to all who live in the influence of your witness.

In a time when the world seems to be torn apart with division, inequality, injustice, hatred and violence, as Christians we bear responsibility to give witness to "a more excellent way" (1Corinthians 12:31). The church is not exempt from struggles. We are not the first to experience upheaval in culture and church and we are not the first to have serious and deep disagreements about issues of great importance.

One of the deep disagreements and divisions within the church is over the practice of homosexuality, recently heightened by a group of clergy who have declared that they will perform holy unions in opposition to the Book of Discipline. This has caused different experiences of deep pain throughout the church. As the bishops of the church, we commit ourselves to be in prayer for the whole church and for the brokenness our communities experience. Furthermore, we "implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons" (par. 161F). We will continue to offer grace upon grace to all in the name of Christ.

At times like these we call upon each other to remember and renew our covenant with God and with one another as United Methodist Christians. As bishops chosen, consecrated and assigned by the Church, we declare once again our commitment to be faithful to this covenant we have made. As the Council of Bishops we will uphold the Book of Discipline as established by General Conference.

Even in the midst of our differences, we believe that we can together be about our mission to make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world. We invite all United Methodists, lay and clergy, to join us in strengthening our congregations unto greater vitality for the sake of our mission.

To that end, may we continue to live together in the spirit of Philippians 2:1-5:

Therefore, if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort in love, any sharing in the Spirit, any sympathy, complete my joy by thinking the same way, having the same love, being united and agreeing with each other. Don’t do anything for selfish purposes but with humility think of others as better than yourselves. Instead of each person watching out for their own good, watch out for what is better for others. Adopt the attitude that was in Christ Jesus. (Phil. 2:1-5).

Your brothers and sisters in Christ,
The Council of Bishops of The United Methodist Church