Divergence

• "Love your enemies. Pray for those who persecute you." ---Jesus of Nazareth
• "Sometimes you just have to put your religion in the drawer and fry the bastards." --- a person speaking in a church forum on the death penalty 
• "Vengeance is mine," says the Lord.--the prophet Isaiah
• "Justice was done." President Barack Obama

So, Osama bin Laden is dead.

He was killed with precision in a covert mission by Navy Seals.

Upon the President's announcement there was dancing in the streets. Literally.
At the White House, Ground Zero, on college campuses, military academies....

A palpable sense of national pride matched with relief rose up. Curiosity of the who, what, where, when and how gave way to bewilderment coming from the realization that something we never thought would happen, did.

The word "justice" was spoken. "Closure" was uttered.

And within me there was relief...gladness...pride in the courage and valor of those who do things in real life that I only watch dramatized on TV. The gathering of people celebrating across political lines was wonderful to observe because I'm so fatigued of rank partisanship.

Yeah, I felt those things, too.

And yet, as a Companion of Jesus, I found it a feeling hardly satisfying. For like it was almost 10 years ago, I found myself placed in a position of having to grapple with what it means to be a citizen of a country, and citizen of the Realm of God. And what do I do if those two things seems to be, at least for me, on divergent trajectories?

Too much of our country's civil religion co-opts Christianity as impetus to justify any action taken. This is not new. It's just manifest destiny of another kind. There's "cover" in that belief system. It's the cover and justification that comes from believing that your country can do no wrong and that to execute "justice" in this world, as we understand it, or at least as that which benefits us,  is doing "God's work."

We talk about "God and country." Reality shows that the way too many Christians live with the order reversed.

We allow ourselves to believe that to live under the banner of the Christian flag (a strange thing that's been around only for about 100 years created by a Sunday School Superintendent) is to live under the banner of the American flag. The two take prominent place in many of our sanctuaries (whether or not there should be flags in our sanctuaries is a conversation for another time, but the short answer is no, I don't think there should be....the narthex? maybe, but the sanctuary? not so much).

As citizen of a country, one attacked...one that suffered mightily as a result of that attack, one that lives every day with new realities we must attend because of what happened then, the feeling of making a horrific wrong right seems more than justified. Geopolitically speaking, it is the only response that makes sense.

But is it the response that would make the One I call "Lord," inclined to say "well done, good and faithful servant?"

Does Jesus say to us, "You killed a guy. Great job!"

Does the One who comforts us in our grief, celebrate with us in our vengeance realized?

Do we really not know the answer to that question?

While it is our joy to proclaim Jesus as Lord....it is another thing altogether to let him be the Lord of who we are, what we do, what we think, and how we respond when the other things to which we pledge allegiance at least gives us pause to reflect upon whether or not the two things square.

I'm not one who can react to what has happened without a tug of war in my spirit. That this story is one of such global import places it in high relief. But the truth is there's something everyday that challenges the priority of the varied citizenships we hold.

Bin Laden's death is but one of the daily challenges for we who are people of faith. And it is far better to live into the tension of inner conflict than the blind certainty that there is none whatsoever.

But there's this unavoidable truth to which we must all come to some resolution---in the end, there's room for only one loyalty above all.

• "Choose this day whom you will serve."  Joshua
• "You're gonna have to serve somebody, Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord, but you're gonna have to serve somebody."  -- Bob Dylan
• "The Lord our God is one, and you shall love the Lord with all your heart, soul, mind and strength." -- the Shema

No End In Sight

Now, lest you think this is another Michael Moore film (oh, see "Sicko," it'll make you sick) - it's not. As we get closer and closer to the threshold that makes this war truly on a par with Vietnam, which is to say that we go from 4,000 Americans dead to 40,000 - to say nothing of Iraqis whose numbers of causalities are incalculable, before we decide we just need to stop and get out - you know like 10 years from now, there are voices of dissent speaking up to say, "for the love of God, please stop."

Amazingly enough, these are voices of those who've been a part of the beginnings of the story. I find it extraordinarily American, and while it enrages me, strangely, it gives me hope.

Welcome to the Party, Pal

To all those war hawks now reaching the conclusion that something dramatic needs to happen in Iraq, like getting us out of there - I just have one thing to say-

Where the hell you been?

While you continued to play politics, scores and scores more of our sons and daughters have been maimed or killed in action. And don't forget, you were among those calling everyone else who pleaded for a different strategy those cowards who "cut and run."

It has been said that to argue against the war was to show lack of support for the troops.

I say, to knowingly perpetuate engagement in a conflict we started, and one we cannot win, one that has devolved into a civil war - for reasons that defy logic, the counsel of military commanders, who, either retired early to voice their concern, or were forced out because they wouldn't tote the party line - there's your lack of support for those who are bound by oath, duty and honor.

It is among the most egregious abuses of authority we are ever likely to see.

Now, for God's sake, let's get out of Iraq, now, and try to reclaim some of the honor we have lost.

War in Perpetuity

Either we'll succeed, or we won't succeed. And the definition of success as I described is sectarian violence down. Success is not, no violence. There are parts of our own country that have got a certain level of violence to it. But success is a level of violence where the people feel comfortable about living their daily lives. And that's what we're trying to achieve. President George W. Bush

Say What?

I truly don't know where to start with this one.

There are many issues running here.

But the thought that continues in me is that just when I think we can't slide any further down the slippery slope that this war has brought us, I find that I'm wrong.

The cynical side of me (which I freely admit too often dominates my thinking) can easily lead me to the darker places of the soul. Could it be that, in part, a perpetual war keeps the war industrial machine fed and maintains an oil supply issue that will always keep the price per barrel high enough, for long enough, that we no longer think that what we're paying at the pump is too high?

To be sure, on a global scale, what we pay isn't too high - but when $3.00/gallon feels o.k., guess who benefits? And guess who is harmed?

And, if my cynicism carries a bit further down the road, that this administration is, without dispute, in bed with those who benefit from such a scenario, is, I'm sure, only coincidence.

But there's another side to this quote that I can't get past.

"..success is a level of violence in which people feel comfortable living their daily lives."

Nothing reveals the heart more than this.

The day we accept any level of violence is the day we are no longer working for the coming of the Realm of God in it's fullness.

And as long as there is a level of violence we're o.k. with, wars with continue, violence in this country will persist, and the makers of such tools will get richer.

So, rhetoric once again masks larger agendas, only now, it's so absurd, it's as if they're not even trying any more because they know that we know it's a bunch of crap, and we can't do anything about it.

Through my eyes, it's just that simple.

Leftovers and a Few Fresh Servings

Some scattered thoughts left over from '06, and comments on what has been an extraordinary first week in '07 -

• + How was my holiday? What holiday? With Kristy working full time, we only had a couple of days off, so I worked more during a time I usually take apart. Not that I'm complaining, mind you - the season just had a very different rhythm to it than my past Christmas seasons. I even preached on what is traditionally an "associate" Sunday. And it was really o.k.
  
• + Last week, on like the 4th day of Christmas, I'm picking up my middle child from his cousins' house in Collierville, where he basically lived for the whole his holiday break. He's 11, and the spittin' image of my brother, in more ways than I can count, and he says to me, "Dad, do you know what I want for Easter?" He didn't get to tell me - I think it was that "don't go there" stare I gave him back. And then it occurred to me - our children have always received gifts, and often in abundance, but we have not instilled in them the desire to give them. Note for '07, that's something I've got to work on.
• + When I was growing up, my Dad would never ask for anything during holiday time. And even now as an adult, I find he's still among the hardest of people to buy for. "Oh, I don't need anything, just your company." Now, when I was little, I used to think he's nuts because I had the Sears Wishbook dog-eared, cross-referenced, and strategically displayed on the table for any eyes desiring to know what their loving son wanted for Christmas. But I get it now. I've come to realize that the gift of time together, or even the quite of an afternoon is not a bad gift. Often it is a treasure in itself.
• + I've been asked if my opposition to the death penalty applies to Saddam Hussein. Yes - because you can kill someone, doesn't mean you should, even if the guy is bad, maybe especially if he is.
  
• + In the world of the bizarre - on the same day last week, the cable news network I watch covered three stories simultaneously - the execution of Saddam, the death of the 38th President of the United States, and the death of the Godfather of Soul. This may well be a sign of the apocalypse.
• + Or, maybe this is - our President, it appears, is going to send up thousands of more troops to Iraq against the counsel of his Generals, the Iraq Study Group, and a disgruntled American populous - who now see this FUBAR'd debacle for what it is. Oh, yes, I've got KO on this one - stand back and hold on to something -
  

• + As of yesterday, the second in line of succession to the Presidency is a woman. Who'd a thunk it?
• + My list of resolutions for '07 looks strangely familiar. Why is that? Oh, that's right, they're the one's for '06, '05, '04 . . . what's that quote about insanity? It's doing the same thing the same way and expecting a different result. Maybe time for something different - please.
  

War Games

The following is an email exchange between Sarah and me.

I'm a big fan of hers.

She's a PK, like me, and when she was in Memphis she occupied a seat in the very back of the sanctuary. I could always count on a word from her, via email, to encourage and challenge me. I've always had a sense that she and I are resonant spirits.

Now that she's moved, our contact is only through email, and she still challenges me. We have a continuing e-dialogue on matters of physical health and spiritual health.

It is with her permission that I share our most recent exchange.

Hi Johnny!

This is totally off-topic, but I’m in a county in South Carolina that prepares the few, the proud, the Marines and my neighbor is a Marine fighter pilot and I’m a life-long Doonesbury fan and I’ve gotten sucked into the blogs in the Sandbox, which are somehow attached to Doonesbury.

Some things stand out from these blogs – we have absolutely no idea what they are doing every day.

This war is unlike any other. It is more like inner city gang warfare than an occupying country rebuilding another country. And the news does not paint the story. The president (of course) does not paint the story.

These blogs – written by some very eloquent and talented writers – make the war close and real in a way CNN and even the split second news of the internet does not. I am shaken to my core by the things they say.

Another thing that seems to recur in their blogs is complaints about the inadequacy of their uniforms – never would have thought about it. But they must wear uniforms at all times – but that leaves them freezing sometimes. One guy purchases his own Under Armour underwear because it protects him from the fires he has to work in – but they constantly get stolen in the laundry. Things I never would have thought of –

The biggest thing that has changed for me is that these writers could be me – they seem liberal, they are educated, they are thoughtful, they are whimsical. They aren’t the redneck or thug, uneducated, super right-wing, NRA we love George W crew I thought they were.

And the President is going to enjoy Christmas before he makes any new plans for Iraq? How is that possible? These are real people he’s leaving over there – without access to a good beer for Christmas, a tacky holiday sweatshirt, or even a Silent Night for reflection – and he’s going to get through the holidays before he does anything? How is that possible?
Peace.
Sarah
_________

Hey Sarah,

Per usual, you prick the stuff of my soul.

This one is easy. It's either one of three things.

One, W. believes he is the equivalent to the Old Testmament kings - that is, to be hand picked by God (which might actually be so since I'm fairly sure the voters didn't elect him, especially in 2000, and from what I've seen on the HBO documentary, "Hacking Democracy," he lost in '04, too), and that he need not have the mandate of the populus. Rather, he lives under the delusion that he has a Divine Mandate.

Two, this is the equivalent of a little boy playing with his army men (something I quite enjoyed as a boy, myself). But he's not playing with plastic army men, it's real, and he doesn't know how to end the game - except that he's too darned stubborn to quit.

Or Three, he's playing Stratego in real life, and stinks at it.

In an interview with ABC news, he's been quoted as stating that he "sleeps better than most people assume." Nothing could communicate the disconnect of a Commander in Chief out of touch with the real life issues on the ground more than that.

God help us all.
JJ

_____

On his ranch-throne, where he sleeps well, and will prepare to celebrate Christmas, I wonder if his well-protected motorcade will pass any day laborers and think of the day laborers lured to the car bomb or how close that bomb was to one of our stations where American men and women were getting ready to start their day? This war is so real and he is so disconnected from the reality of the majority of the world. He has never known anything but privilege. He never fought war, he never worked hard to get advancement, get into school, make the grade, etc. He never had to work himself out of his own messes. And I think that is why he is able to continue to play with plastic army men – we are all disposable for him, just like everything else in his life has been. So he can restrict what the soldiers wear, what they eat and drink, and let chance and zealots determine how many more of them will die, and tuck himself into bed at night able to believe that they’re all proud to be serving their president. We’ve let our military fall into a position that will be virtually impossible to come out of cleanly. I think it’s a combination of all three – he’s pre-ordained to be the president, proudly leading the country through this troubling time and this fight against terror, but he doesn’t know a thing about strategy, the American soldier, or the American people. His disconnect is so severe he doesn’t even recognize the hand melting the little plastic army men is his own.

Do you also get the feeling that some of the problems we’re having in Iraq stem from W. trying to prove to Senior that he can do what his daddy couldn’t? And now that Senior’s understanding of the fine line he walked in 1991 has been proven true, do you think W is being a stubborn teenager who refuses to admit that he was wrong? I read something recently about the Bush clan’s need for loyalty – but how W. broke from daddy in bringing Rumsfeld along for the ride and in going back to Iraq. Could his inability to change course be a grossly over-blown example of my dad and brother stubbornly arguing over the proper way to (fill in the blank)?

He makes my stomach hurt.

Sarah

____________

Mine too, girl - Mine too.

It Takes a Real Man to Say "I'm Lost."

October, 2006

More U.S. troops have died in Iraq this month than in any one month period over the previous two years.

Over 600,000 Iraqis have died in the war.

American Civil Liberties are now no longer at risk, they have been "legally" absconded through the "Military Commissions Act."

In a recent interview, the President said that Iraq could become like Vietnam - which means for him, I guess, that 55,000 more troops need to die, and God knows how many Iraqis, before we decide our mission is truly accomplished.

Of course, Vietnam comparisons really ought to be tough for George and Dick - They wouldn't know very much about that, would they?

Deferral in the face of personal involvement - they got that one cold.



As I lay awake in the wee hours this morning, it occurred to me that "stay the course" is just a geo-political way of never being able to say "I'm lost."

Having been in situations, more than once, when I was lost, and too damned proud to ask directions, whom did I get mad at?

My wife, of course -

who told me that I should just pull over and ask directions.

The problem with her "logic" is that it means I have to admit not only that I'm lost, but that I need the counsel of someone else to help get me out of the mess I've made for myself. A mess complicated even more by the fact that had I been honest about being lost many miles earlier, it wouldn't be so hard to get back where I need to be.

That makes sense, doesn't it?

But what do I do? Blame the person who points out the obvious with hope that we could get back on track.

Of course, I guess I'm taking my life into my own hands by confronting the guy who can declare me an "enemy combatant" and throw me into jail without charging me or giving me a chance to defend myself.

This is what we've come to?

For shame, America. For shame.

Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall. Proverbs 16.18

Murrow Among Us, Thank God!

Below is a stream of Keith Olbermann's comment on the recent speech given by the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, that those who would dare offer dissenting voices in the face of government decisions, particularly those of a military variety - are either "intellectually or morally confused." And, that they are not unlike those who saw no real threat from Hitler in the 1930's, with history having labelled them "appeasers."

This is one of those rare moments when a commentator does what a commentator, living in a country where freedom of the press and freedom of speech rate number one on The Bill of Rights, should do.

This is not about political party - it really isn't.

It's about what power, unchecked, unchallenged, becomes -always.

Among the absolutes of the human condition, this is one.

There is also a theology to dissent. It is not meant to injure. That's way too easy. Rather, it is meant to confront power, where power is abused to separate God's children one from another.

Dissent was the role of the prophet - the role of Jesus - the role of the first Christians - a role played well by Christians until Constantine made Christianity the religion of the state, and we haven't been the same since.

It is the role of any who lovingly hold the other accountable.

It's Methodist, for God's sake. Or, at least it was.

It's at least Wesleyan.

I don't know KO's religious leanings, and I don't care.

But this translates well into the citizenships I hold.

Too often it becomes cliche', but I believe it to be especially true now.

We live in perilous times.

In ways that have never before been a part of my vocabulary apart from Biblical criticism, I understand anew the role and warnings of apocalyptic literature.

These are the days when our voices must be heard despite the efforts to silence or diminish them.

It matters not whether you are for or against the war or this administration.

I cannot fathom any American,

or any Christian for that matter,

especially Methodist Christians, who share that name with the Commander in Chief,

who can sit idly by and think that what's happening right now, or what has happened since 2001 is right, honest, moral or faithful.








The man who sees absolutes, where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning, is either a prophet, or a quack.

Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet.

Mr. Rumsfeld’s remarkable speech to the American Legion yesterday demands the deep analysis—and the sober contemplation—of every American.

For it did not merely serve to impugn the morality or intelligence -- indeed, the loyalty -- of the majority of Americans who oppose the transient occupants of the highest offices in the land. Worse, still, it credits those same transient occupants -- our employees -- with a total omniscience; a total omniscience which neither common sense, nor this administration’s track record at home or abroad, suggests they deserve.

Dissent and disagreement with government is the life’s blood of human freedom; and not merely because it is the first roadblock against the kind of tyranny the men Mr. Rumsfeld likes to think of as “his” troops still fight, this very evening, in Iraq.

It is also essential. Because just every once in awhile it is right and the power to which it speaks, is wrong.

In a small irony, however, Mr. Rumsfeld’s speechwriter was adroit in invoking the memory of the appeasement of the Nazis. For in their time, there was another government faced with true peril—with a growing evil—powerful and remorseless.

That government, like Mr. Rumsfeld’s, had a monopoly on all the facts. It, too, had the “secret information.” It alone had the true picture of the threat. It too dismissed and insulted its critics in terms like Mr. Rumsfeld’s -- questioning their intellect and their morality.

That government was England’s, in the 1930’s.It knew Hitler posed no true threat to Europe, let alone England.

It knew Germany was not re-arming, in violation of all treaties and accords.

It knew that the hard evidence it received, which contradicted its own policies, its own conclusions — its own omniscience -- needed to be dismissed.

The English government of Neville Chamberlain already knew the truth.

Most relevant of all — it “knew” that its staunchest critics needed to be marginalized and isolated. In fact, it portrayed the foremost of them as a blood-thirsty war-monger who was, if not truly senile, at best morally or intellectually confused.

That critic’s name was Winston Churchill.

Sadly, we have no Winston Churchills evident among us this evening. We have only Donald Rumsfelds, demonizing disagreement, the way Neville Chamberlain demonized Winston Churchill.

History — and 163 million pounds of Luftwaffe bombs over England — have taught us that all Mr. Chamberlain had was his certainty — and his own confusion. A confusion that suggested that the office can not only make the man, but that the office can also make the facts.

Thus, did Mr. Rumsfeld make an apt historical analogy.

Excepting the fact, that he has the battery plugged in backwards.

His government, absolute -- and exclusive -- in its knowledge, is not the modern version of the one which stood up to the Nazis.

It is the modern version of the government of Neville Chamberlain.

But back to today’s Omniscient ones. That, about which Mr. Rumsfeld is confused is simply this: This is a Democracy. Still. Sometimes just barely.

And, as such, all voices count -- not just his.

Had he or his president perhaps proven any of their prior claims of omniscience — about Osama Bin Laden’s plans five years ago, about Saddam Hussein’s weapons four years ago, about Hurricane Katrina’s impact one year ago — we all might be able to swallow hard, and accept their “omniscience” as a bearable, even useful recipe, of fact, plus ego.

>But, to date, this government has proved little besides its own arrogance, and its own hubris.

Mr. Rumsfeld is also personally confused, morally or intellectually, about his own standing in this matter. From Iraq to Katrina, to the entire “Fog of Fear” which continues to envelop this nation, he, Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, and their cronies have — inadvertently or intentionally — profited and benefited, both personally, and politically.

And yet he can stand up, in public, and question the morality and the intellect of those of us who dare ask just for the receipt for the Emporer’s New Clothes?

In what country was Mr. Rumsfeld raised? As a child, of whose heroism did he read? On what side of the battle for freedom did he dream one day to fight? With what country has he confused the United States of America?

The confusion we -- as its citizens— must now address, is stark and forbidding.

But variations of it have faced our forefathers, when men like Nixon and McCarthy and Curtis LeMay have darkened our skies and obscured our flag. Note -- with hope in your heart — that those earlier Americans always found their way to the light, and we can, too.

The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in Salt Lake City, so valiantly fought.And about Mr. Rumsfeld’s other main assertion, that this country faces a “new type of fascism.”

As he was correct to remind us how a government that knew everything could get everything wrong, so too was he right when he said that -- though probably not in the way he thought he meant it.

This country faces a new type of fascism - indeed.

Although I presumptuously use his sign-off each night, in feeble tribute, I have utterly no claim to the words of the exemplary journalist Edward R. Murrow.

But never in the trial of a thousand years of writing could I come close to matching how he phrased a warning to an earlier generation of us, at a time when other politicians thought they (and they alone) knew everything, and branded those who disagreed: “confused” or “immoral.” Thus, forgive me, for reading Murrow, in full:

“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty,” he said, in 1954. “We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.

“We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular.”

And so good night, and good luck.