MODERN LECTIONARIES

Is Monogamy a Goal or a Byproduct?

2024-08-03T14:11:00.000-07:00

The Resurrection and the Great Commission

2022-04-16T17:28:00.007-07:00

Jesus' resurrection brings the victory of the future into the present, and Jesus gives his disciples a nonviolent commission to counter the imperial violent domination of the powers and authorities of this present age.

Are States "Laboratories of Autocracy?" with author David Pepper

2022-03-27T21:59:00.004-07:00

American democracy is under attack. There is precious little time to save it. Many still aren’t focused on the greatest risk: Statehouses! Corrupt politicians in statehouses across the country are experimenting with ways to undermine democracy in a cynical quest for power. David Pepper, author of "Laboratories of Autocracy," joins us to talk about this ongoing threat and what we must do about it. David Pepper is the author of Laboratories of Autocracy: A Wake-Up Call from Behind the Lines." He is a lawyer, writer, political activist, former elected official, and adjunct professor, and served as the Chairman of the Ohio Democratic Party between 2015 and 2021. He has engaged in numerous fights and extensive litigation over voter suppression and election laws in the Buckeye State. He will talk about the assault on democracy at the state and local levels and what to do about it.

NATO Should Establish a No-Fly Zone in Ukraine

2022-03-12T19:57:00.001-08:00

Congresswoman Linda Sanchez recalls traumatic moments of Jan. 6 U.S. Cap...

2022-01-09T22:01:00.001-08:00

Breaking Down Walls and Abolishing the Law (Ephesians 2:11-22)

2021-07-21T19:05:00.002-07:00

Jesus broke down the walls and abolished the law that divided Jew from Gentile. Now, if we can only learn to live as citizens of the Kingdom of God.

Breaking Down Walls and Abolishing the Law (Ephesians 2:11-22)

Rich Procida

We are a new humanity. By his sacrifice on the cross, Jesus overcame the hostility between us. Now if we can only learn to live as citizens of the Kingdom of God.

Jesus not only put to death the hostility between Jewish and Gentile Christians, he reconciled all the nations of the world to God (2 Corinthians 5:19). The author of Ephesians is not merely calling for unity within the Church. Christ is the ruler over all things (1:20-23). Jesus came to proclaim peace to all the world.

God created us to do good works, not so we might boast, but that we might be “what God made us” (2:1-10). The author reminds us of God’s command to welcome the stranger and not oppress the resident alien, because the Israelites were once foreigners in the land of Egypt (Deuteronomy 10:19, Exodus 22:21, Leviticus 19:34). These early Christians were also resident aliens, strangers to the law, and refugees without hope.

Ancient people valued citizenship. Not everyone could be a citizen. Women, slaves, and resident aliens could not become citizens.

The Ephesians were without God, because they were foreigners. Forced from their homes, they had no place to worship their ancestors. Ancestor worship was common in the ancient world, and every household operated as a place of worship (Larry Siedentop, Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism (2016).

National and city gods resided in their temples and could only be worshiped there. If a nation were conquered and the temple destroyed, the national gods were defeated.

In the ancient world, things that happened in heaven had profound effects on earth. The two realms are intertwined. The fate of nations and the authority of rulers comes from above.

The author of Ephesians sets Jesus above every ruler, authority, power, lordship and name (1:20-22). These words evoke images of earthly governance. When the author speaks of spiritual powers, he is thinking of their earthly representatives, kings and emperors with their armies and official powers (Gupta and Long, see below).

The Romans declared that “Caesar owned all things” (Seneca, Ben. 7.5.3). “Whatever exists beneath Jupiter on high, Caesar possesses” (Ovid, Fast. 2.138) “for the emperor is the State” (Ovid, Tris. 4.15). We human beings have a tendency to worship our leaders and institutions.

In the Empire, people were expected to worship the Emperor as well as the state and city gods. Today, autocratic leaders and despotic regimes require absolute loyalty, too. They encourage devotion to the party or leader, indoctrinate their people, and suppress dissent. Even in Western democracies, the leaders of our institutions and organizations demand loyalty, disseminate propaganda, and manipulate their followers. We treat our favored political candidates like saviors. and devotion to the State takes the form of Nationalism, Totalitarianism, and Imperialism.

People worship the powers. Countries that suppress religion often set up the State as the ultimate authority. Even in nations that profess to be ruled under God, there are many who worship things “made with human hands.”

We worship idols. Ideology plays the same role as theology. Whether it’s the Church and its doctrines and creeds, our political ideologies, or things we overvalue like wealth, power, and status, we all engage in religious devotion to people, ideas, and things.

Yet now we have a new identity as citizens of the Kingdom of God. We are citizens of a new body politic, one governed by the rule of love. Nijay K. Gupta and Fredrick J. Long, in their article “ The Politics of Ephesians and the Empire: Accommodation or Resistance?,” point out that the author of Ephesians uses language of resistance in establishing an alternative political identity based not on territory or ethnicity but on belief.

That belief took the form of monotheism with one king, one ruler, one God above all others. Gentile audiences would have been aware of the Emperor’s co-identification with the gods. They would have recognized the veiled reference in Ephesians 2:2 as referring to the ruling Emperor. Behind the Emperor lay a spiritual force.

In Ephesians chapter 6, the author tells us that “our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (6:12). Our enemies are not merely flesh and blood, they are spiritual as well.

The point of Ephesians 6:12 is that we do not ‘wrestle’ individually, or merely against human beings, or even in human terms. Instead, we are engaged in a cosmic struggle, an ideological and spiritual conflict with human rulers and authorities who are in league with the spirits of this world.

Walter Wink describes these spiritual powers, whether they be angelic or demonic, as “supranatural,” meaning that they arise naturally from our social, cultural, and political institutions. Corporations, the church and the state all have a culture or essence that is real and tangible. Wink calls it the “gestalt” of an institution, meaning the “organized whole is more than the sum of its parts.” While ancient people believed in the supernatural, their experience of “the powers and authorities” were as real as peace and war.

Ancient people experienced these spiritual powers as the cultural, social and political forces embodied in their institutions, leaders, and the State. Walter Wink, in his trilogy on the powers, tells us that for ancient people, “everything visible had an invisible or heavenly dimension. Spirit was at the core of everything. . . the whole universe was a spirit-matter event, and the self was coextensive with the universe.”

We experience these forces in both their demonic and angelic forms when we suffer institutional violence, or when we enjoy our government’s benevolence. Institutions like the state, corporations, and the Church can be both good and evil. It’s up to us to resist their tendency toward evil and to lead them to what is right.

Christ is the example. In our struggle against the powers and authorities, we put our bodies on the line. Many have lost their lives in the struggle, and we are all called to give our lives in service to others, to be what God made us.

The armor of God is different from the armor of soldiers. Truth, justice, peace, faith, salvation and spirit are the tools of nonviolence (6:10-18). In doing battle against the powers and authorities, we are to fight back in nonviolent yet powerful ways.

The author of Ephesians uses the image of the “dividing wall,” which was the wall in the Temple beyond which Gentiles were not allowed under penalty of death. The “Law” which Jesus abolished by his martyrdom referred to Jewish cultural customs and practices, like circumcision and dietary rules. Christ put an end to the culture wars that divide us from those of other faiths, cultures, and lifestyles.

By abolishing the law, Jesus broke down the hostility between us. These divisions include things like race, national origin, religion, and ideology. As Paul writes in Galatians, “there is no longer Jew nor Gentile, slave nor free, or male and female, for we are all one in Christ” (3:28). According to Larry Seidentop, in his book “Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism,” this verse led to the development of the idea of the individual and to human and civil rights.

Paul’s position was radical. In a world where people worshiped the Emperor and their national, city, and family gods, Paul built a new Nation, a new Temple, a new dwelling place for God. In this new nation, foreigners, slaves, and women can all be citizens.

The Noahic Covenant: God Establishes Government (Genesis 9:1-17)

2021-04-25T03:38:00.003-07:00

The story of Noah's Ark provides rich symbolism. As part of the Noahic Covenant, God promises to never again destroy the world by a flood, but God will require a reckoning for every life humans take. All life is sacred, and the taking of human life is especially abhorrent to God. By establishing the death penalty for anyone who takes human life unjustly, God establishes a governing authority to deal with human violence and corruption.

On this show, we read Genesis 9:1-17 and then offer commentary and discussion. Joining Rich Procida is the author and ordained Menninite Minister Bert Newton, Seminarian Susan Cameron, and Founder of Worldwide Friends Dicksie Mathison.

How People of Faith Can Heal the Nation

2021-03-10T22:28:00.002-08:00

In this short speech planned for the Interfaith Solidarity March: interfaith in Action: Healing the Nation and our World, I call on people of faith to de-program those who have turned to conspiracy theories.

http://InterfaithMarchLA2021.eventbrite.com #politics #india #democracy #peace #interfaith #Christianity #progressives

My name is Rich Procida. I’m a Progressive Christian Spiritualist. I write about religion and politics and produce a podcast called “Bible Study for Progressives.” I’ve been covering the problems of propaganda, political cults, and the threat they pose to democracy since the Mueller Report came out.

What we saw on January 6th was the result of a campaign of lies and falsehoods disseminated by political leaders and major news sources. Fox News and other unreliable news networks willfully and recklessly spread disinformation they knew or should have known was false. Some are even being sued for defamation. The “big lie” was widely believed by those who have turned to conspiracy theories and leader worship rather than to their scripture and religion.

Idolatry and false prophecy have captured the minds of people across this nation. Have churches not offered a compelling enough message that their parishioners turn to conspiracy theories? We cast ourselves into the hands of unscrupulous actors, foreign agents, and criminal regimes when we uncritically believe false and blasphemous things.

It’s up to us to deprogram those in our communities who have been inducted into political cults and seduced by propaganda and bring them back to a faith consistent with the tenets, scriptures, and traditions of their faith. This is how people of faith can heal the nation.

Do you Believe in Belief? | Atheist vs Christian Debate with Rich Procida

2021-03-09T17:28:00.001-08:00

Arrest Trump! Biden’s First Crisis

2021-01-24T11:33:00.001-08:00

Arrest Trump! Biden’s First Crisis: f we don’t hold those responsible for inciting, planning, and participating in the assault on the Capital, they will return better organized and led.

Interfaith Solidarity March Speech 2020

2020-09-19T01:09:00.001-07:00

Propaganda Awareness Training

2020-02-29T22:52:00.001-08:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Date: February 29, 2020

Contact: Rich Procida

Phone: (562) 665-3317

Email: Rich_Procida@Justice.com

Author and lawyer Rich Procida will provide and lead propaganda awareness training presentations and discussions at colleges and universities, churches, community groups, political clubs, and other organizations throughout Southern California.

Link to Video: Propaganda! What it is, Where it Comes From, and What to Expect this Election

Whittier, California: If we were to ask why we are so divided or why the Left is often splintered and ineffective or why we are in the political situation we are here in the United States and around the world, one answer would be “propaganda.” In an environment of partisan news and foreign interference, we must become more aware of the manipulative forms of persuasion we face every day. We need to be critical about what we chose to think and believe.

Russia is currently spreading disinformation on the Left while the President and other candidates propagandize their bases. We are surrounded by propaganda. Public relations campaigns, political messaging, and advertising are all forms of propaganda. Simply recognizing the extent to which we are exposed to manipulative and often deceptive forms of communication helps us to be more skeptical consumers of news, advertising and political messaging.

With the election coming, we can expect to be hit with divisive disinformation on both the Left and the Right. If we can become aware of how all of us are susceptible to propaganda and other manipulative and covert techniques, we may be able to see through the lies and distortions that cause division, confusion, and disarray. The propagandist’s ultimate goal is to influence our opinions, attitudes, and behaviors in ways that serve the propagandist rather than our own or our nation’s welfare.

Propaganda comes from the top. We often think of propaganda as coming from fringe groups, but propagandists include governments, political parties, politicians, religious institutions, political groups, corporations, partisan news, and the media.

We have now moved from the “information age” to what Steve Hassan, an expert on cults and mind control, calls the “age of influence.” Overwhelmed by information, we become cognitive misers who use mental shortcuts when analyzing data. This makes us vulnerable to disinformation.

We can protect ourselves by understanding the basics of propaganda and advertising. In his presentation, Mr. Procida describes the effects and types of propaganda and how propagandists spread disinformation and cause division. The presentation can be modified for particular audiences and time frames. From a short speech or sermon to an hour-long presentation or two-hour workshop, Mr. Procida will provide an informative and entertaining presentation and lead an engaging discussion for your group, class, church, institution or community. He is also available for interviews on podcasts and other media.

The stakes are high. Russia is spreading propaganda in an effort to disrupt the election, divide and demoralize us, and cause us to lose faith in our institutions, the Constitution and democracy. We can protect the integrity of the election from foreign attacks on our democracy by teaching people how to identify misleading and divisive disinformation.

Please feel free to contact Rich Procida at (562) 665-3317 to arrange for an interview, speech, sermon or presentation. It’s important to educate people now before Russia and other foreign and domestic sources disseminate propaganda to influence the outcome of the election. Our democracy depends upon an informed and discerning electorate.

Here’s a samplespeech you can view:
Here’s a link to my most recent articles: https://www.laprogressive.com/author/rich-procida/

Here’s a link to my podcast: https://biblestudyforprogressives.podbean.com/

Rich Procida is an author, attorney, and activist. He studied Communications and Social Sciences at the University of Southern California and earned his Juris Doctor at the American University in Washington DC. He is the co-author of a short textbook on foreign comparative law and social attitudes toward explicit media. He currently writes news analysis and opinion articles for LAProgressive.com, blogs at Modernlectionaries.blogspot.com, and produces a podcast called "Bible Study for Progressives.”

###

Reject the Republican Cover-up!

2020-02-01T14:32:00.001-08:00

Reject the Republican Cover-up Speech

Rich Procida

They’re all corrupt! Every Republican Senator is corrupt! The votes to refuse to call witnesses and to acquit the President is a treasonous betrayal of our democracy.

The facts are undisputed: Trump abused his power to undermine our democracy by eliciting foreign interference in our election and then covering it up. 70% of Americans wanted witnesses and documents, but the Republicans don’t care about the will of the American people. All they care about is holding onto power.

They didn’t want witnesses and documents because they knew the evidence would implicate the President. They refused to conduct a fair trial because they don’t care about democracy. They won’t hold the President to account for his crimes, because they know they will lose the election. Winning and holding on to power is more important to them than defending the Constitution, preserving our democracy, and protecting our national security.

They are willing to spread Russian propaganda on the floor of the United States Senate! They are spreading it right now, and I want to warn you about it. The Republicans will spread Russian propaganda against Joe Biden, and they will also spread propaganda against Sanders and Warren or whoever becomes the nominee.

We all need to learn about propaganda. Donald Trump is a propagandist, and so is Vladimir Putin. Propaganda is being spread on the Right and the Left.

There are two things we should all know about propaganda. The first is that propaganda is not always false. More often it’s a half-truth.

The second thing we should understand about propaganda is that all propaganda comes from the top. Our leaders, the media, religious institutions, academia, and political parties and groups all disseminate propaganda. When Vladimir Putin disseminates his propaganda to us it will look like it’s coming from respected sources.

There is nothing Trump wants more than to make the election about Christianity. Imagine this: we are in the middle of the campaign for President when we should be talking about climate change, healthcare, democracy, poverty, and that corrupt dictator in the White House. Instead, we find ourselves in a pitched battle over Christianity.

You heard his speech. There is nothing Donald Trump wants more than to run against “Christian-hating socialists.” Don’t help him paint that picture.

Putin has already spread his propaganda on the Left to trick us into making the election about the supposed threat of “Christian Nationalism.” “Christian Nationalism” is not new and it’s not the threat they make out to be. This election is a referendum on Donald Trump.

The question we face today is whether democracy will be a small blip in world history or whether the people will revolt against authoritarian rule? Will we throw this fascist regime and the corrupt Republican party out of office, or will America decline into dictatorship?

The world is on a precipice. Democracy is in decline here and around the world. The American way of life is coming to an end.

What will you do? What will we do? When democracy is under attack, what do we do? When the President bribes foreign diplomats, what do we do? When Republicans cover-up the facts, what do we do?

That’s right, we have to fight for democracy. Thank you.

When Trump Supporters Attack: One Hero's Reflection on the Bear Mace Attack on Nonviolent Protesters

2019-11-03T19:52:00.000-08:00

Rich Procida

On Saturday, October 19, 2019, Trump supporters viciously attacked a group of nonviolent protesters at the Santa Monica Pier. I was at that rally and I helped to defend people from the attack. At that rally, I wore my red Che Guevera style shirt bearing the silhouette of Barack Obama.
My Obama shirt symbolizes at least in part what all of this is about. The White Supremacists, who make up the hardcore of Trump’s base, are still angry that a Black man was elected President. They fear a nation ruled by people different from them because they believe other people are just as bigoted, unjust, and sadistic as they.
They participate vicariously in the beating and murder of black and brown people by the police. They enjoy abusing and beating up people who are different or weaker than they. It makes them feel powerful, secure and brave when what they really are is weak, insecure and afraid.
We saw this on display when a 55-year-old man was able to drive two young men, one armed with a can of bear repellant, into the hands of the police. For a moment it was me, a 55-year-old white man wearing his Obama shirt against a young man armed with a can of bear repellant and wearing a “Make American Great Again” cap. As I ran after him the idea came to me that I should charge at him like an angry parent.
An angry parent charges after her child to stop the child from doing something wrong or stupid. The parent is angry because her child is doing something shameful and harmful. The angry parent intervenes not only to protect others but also out of love to protect her child from himself.
So I charged at him like an angry parent, with a look in my eyes that said: “You better stop or I’m going to whip your hide as you’ve never been whipped before!” I think I confused and scared them.
When I had them cornered, two police officers on one side and me on the other, one of them started to move toward me but I gave him a mean and angry look. Then the other one ran right through the police officer pushing the officer aside and then the other followed right after. They ran the other way right through the police officers!
Because of what happened that Saturday, I will now call my red shirt bearing the silhouette of Barack Obama my “Super Obama” shirt. Look up in the sky! It’s a bird! It’s a plane! No, it’s “Super Obama!”
I got my “Super Obama” shirt back in 2008 when our dreams of a first Black President came true and hopes of reconciliation and progress drenched the air we breathed. People eventually became disenchanted with President Obama but I never did, because I was never enchanted with him. We often worship our leaders and see more in them than they are.
Whatever you say about Obama, Obama-care has helped millions of people. I’m a Social Security disability attorney and before Obama-care, when people became disabled and could no longer work they often lost everything, their health insurance, their car, their house, and sometimes even their spouse and family. Now they only lose their car, their house, and for some, their spouse, but they don’t have to be disabled to get medical coverage.
So I wore my Obama shirt for eight years and I still wear it today. What my red “Super Obama” shirt means to me is unity. It means solidarity with those who are different from me.
It means solidarity between those of different races and ethnicities, and it also symbolizes solidarity between those of different ideologies and political parties. It gives me hope for unity over those things that divide us most: race, ideology, and religion. It represents hope for a unified Left in solidarity with one another whether we are white or black, socialist or liberal, or Christian or atheist.
Today, we are unified around one thing: President Trump is unfit and must be impeached, convicted and removed from office. President Trump is a threat to our democracy, our domestic tranquility, and our national security. Every day Trump remains in office is a danger to this nation. His self-dealing, incompetence, and abuses of power threaten all of us. That’s why I stand today in solidarity with Americans everywhere to say that this corrupt, white-nationalist, fascist Trump regime must go!

Fighting against Tyranny

2019-09-17T23:31:00.001-07:00

Know What the Times Call For: Impeachment and the Anointing of Jesus at Bethany (Mark 14:1-11; Ecclesiastes 3:1-8).

2019-07-23T17:20:00.003-07:00

Mark 14:1 - 11

It was two days before the Passover and the festival of Unleavened Bread. The chief priests and the scribes were looking for a way to arrest Jesus by stealth and kill him; 2for they said, “Not during the festival, or there may be a riot among the people.”

3While he was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at the table, a woman came with an alabaster jar of very costly ointment of nard, and she broke open the jar and poured the ointment on his head. 4But some were there who said to one another in anger, “Why was the ointment wasted in this way? 5For this ointment could have been sold for more than three hundred denarii, and the money given to the poor.” And they scolded her. 6But Jesus said, “Let her alone; why do you trouble her? She has performed a good service for me. 7For you always have the poor with you, and you can show kindness to them whenever you wish; but you will not always have me. 8She has done what she could; she has anointed my body beforehand for its burial. 9Truly I tell you, wherever the good news is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be told in remembrance of her.”

10Then Judas Iscariot, who was one of the twelve, went to the chief priests in order to betray him to them. 11When they heard it, they were greatly pleased, and promised to give him money. So he began to look for an opportunity to betray him.

Know What the Times Call For:

Impeachment and the Anointing of Jesus at Bethany

Rich Procida

I’ve recently come to realize what Jesus meant when he said “the poor you will always have with you” (Mark 14:7). It always seemed a bit cavalier to me. I understood that the anointing of Jesus at Bethany had to happen, but why did he have to be so dismissive of the poor?

This verse has been abused by those who use it to minimize God’s preference for the poor The poor and poverty are mentioned 446 times in 338 verses, and justice is mentioned in 1,576 verses in the Old Testament and 1,376 verses in the New Testament. The very fact that the woman in the story used the oil to anoint Jesus might indicate that we are only free to neglect the poor under very limited circumstances.

Still, it bothered me, until now. The debate over impeachment has led me to understand what Jesus was saying: Know what the time calls for.

This reminds me of the lyrics to the song “To Everything There is a Season” by the Mama’s and the Papas which is based on Ecclesiastes 3:1-8:

For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven: 2a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted; 3a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; 4a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; 5a time to throw away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; 6a time to seek, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to throw away; 7a time to tear, and a time to sew; a time to keep silent, and a time to speak; 8a time to love, and a time to hate; a time for war, and a time for peace.

And now there is a time to impeach, and a time to refrain from impeaching.

For Jesus, that meant it was time to unmask the powers and authorities, to bring down the empire and overthrow the domination system. The reading begins with the Chief Priests and Scribes looking to arrest Jesus and ends with Judas betraying him. Encapsulated by betrayal and treachery, the words of Jesus speak of the times.

Jesus is about to die. He says so much in this passage. Jesus is saying

that his time has come. The Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world is to be sacrificed (John 1:29). Emphasizing the matter of timing, of knowing what we should be focused on at this particular time in history, Jesus, speaking of the woman who anointed him with oil, says “wherever the good news is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be told in remembrance of her” (Matthew 14:9).

We have a very limited time in which to hold President Trump accountable for any impeachable offenses he has committed. This means that this is the issue we as a nation must focus on at this time. If we wait until after the election, it will be too late.

The Democrats are in an unbearable situation. Many have issued omens of fear should impeachment fail and are speaking out of both sides of their mouths when they say that Trump has committed crimes and should be in jail yet they refuse to prosecute him for political reasons. This reminds of a song from the play and movie “The Producers” by Mel Brooks.

It’s a comedy in which two theater producers attempt to produce a flop in order to steal from their investors, but he play becomes a smash hit and the two producers end up in jail. The name of the play they produce is "Springtime for Hitler in Germany." This led me to a humorous way of expressing my exasperation with the Democrats on impeachment.

It’s not “Springtime for Trump in America” just because it’s election season. If the President has committed crimes, as Nancy Pelosi says, on what grounds does she choose not to prosecute when people across the nation are doing time for lesser crimes. Like Jeffery Epstein, too many people have allegedly allowed Donald Trump to get away with crimes throughout his life. Congress should not be one of them.

We do not know the future. We do not know what will happen and what effect opening an impeachment inquiry will have the election. If negative things about Trump come out during the impeachment inquiry, it could just as likely hurt Republicans and help Democrats.

I am uncomfortable with Democrats who say that President Trump has committed impeachable offenses but then won’t open an impeachment inquiry just because they are afraid of losing the election.

The Mueller report is extensive and detailed. Everyone should at least take a look at the table of contents or read the summaries and introductions. The facts demonstrate that the President was encouraging criminal conduct while that unlawful conduct was actually happening and then attempted to obstruct the investigation into that criminal behavior. If impeachment is to go forward, it must be about more than some conspiracy theory that Trump colluded with the Russians behind the scenes, an unlikely scenario from the beginning. Congress has to take into account all of President Trump’s actions and statements from the 2016 campaign to present and put it all together to demonstrate impeachable conduct.

Congress must draw the connections between Trump’s statements and his policies. It might, for example, draw attention to President’s Trump’s racist statements and his negligent and criminal conduct at the border. Or it could consider his encouragement of the use of excessive force by the police while, at the same time, black and brown people are being beaten and killed by police across the country.

The most disturbing thing about Trump’s statements is that he is encouraging violence and lawbreaking at the very same time that espionage and abuses are actually happening. At the same time that Donald Trump, Jr. was looking for “dirt on Hillary Clinton” from foreign agents and Trump was asking Russia to release Clinton emails, Russian agents were actually interfering in our election and working with Julian Assange to produce additional emails. It’s not surprising that documents suddenly appeared days before the election which tricked Keystone Cop James Comey into reopening the Clinton investigation based on a box full of duplicates.

While the Mueller report provides us with some insight into what was going on inside the White House, it’s up to Congress to put it all together and present a case for impeachment. I believe the case can be made that President Trump’s public statements combined with his willful disregard of the civil and human rights of migrants and even antipathy toward people of color explains the administration’s violations of federal and international law at the border. In other worlds, President Trump has used the power of the State as an instrument of criminality.

After all, isn’t this what structural violence is, a misuse of power? Constitutional scholar Cass Sunstein defines “high crimes and misdemeanors“ as an “egregious abuse of power.” The President does not need to be indicted for a state or federal crime to be impeached.

Wilful negligence or reckless disregard for the rights of others in the conduct of his office should be impeachable. His racist statements and encouragement of the use of excessive force by the police is not mere carelessness or rude joking. It’s evidence of motive and intent to commit injury.

I can see scenarios where opening an impeachment inquiry hurts the Republicans, and I don’t believe for one second that Trump or the Republicans want an impeachment fight. It’s important to admit that we don’t know the future. If impeachable offenses are proven it might be difficult for Republicans to explain. On the other hand, if there are no impeachable offenses, Democrats should stop accusing President Trump of crimes or come clean and state what those crimes are.

This is an unbearable situation for Democrats. It’s not “Springtime for Trump in America” just because it’s election season. If Trump has committed crimes then prosecute him for those crimes, and if he hasn’t then don’t tell us that he has.

We must make a decision about impeachment now or we may let a guilty man go free. It’s a matter of holding our leaders accountable for their unlawful and abusive conduct. I think a case can be made that President Trump has wielded his power of the State to commit crimes against migrants and their children. At the very minimum, he has demonstrated reckless disregard and willful neglect toward the civil and human rights of refugees and people of color.

Such a novel approach my carry some risk, but it’s hard to see a downside to impeachment done right. We can drag him through an impeachment inquiry with little fear that he will be removed from office, because if they do they will be disgraced and likely lose the election. If we wait until after the election, it will be too late.

Understanding Progressive Christianity: A Historial Approach (Galatians 3:23-29)

2019-06-23T02:04:00.001-07:00

Galatians 3:23-29²³Now before faith came, we were imprisoned and guarded under the law until faith would be revealed. ²⁴Therefore the law was our disciplinarian until Christ came so that we might be justified by faith. ²⁵But now that faith has come, we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian, ²⁶for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. ²⁷As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. ²⁸There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. ²⁹And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise.

Understanding Progressive Christianity:

A Historical Approach (Galatians 3:23-29)

Rich Procida

The God of Christianity is a Spirit who works in history. These interventions include Moses bringing the Jews out of slavery in Eygpt and Jesus bringing salvation to the world. God spoke through the prophets, apostles and the Church and also through us (Luke 12:11-12).

Spirit intervenes in the world through human beings. While there is terrible evil in the world, when we examine history closely we can see Spirit’s handiwork. While God works through all people of all faiths, the story of Western Christianity is the story of Christianity’s impact on the Western world.

Paul’s conception of radical equality before Christ changed the world. The recognition of the equality of individual souls endowed people with moral agency and awakened a vision of society as an association of individuals rather than of families, tribes, and castes. The individual would become one's primary social role which would eventually lead to the recognition of human and civil rights, the separation of church and state, the establishment of democracy, and the rise of liberalism.

Larry Siedentop, in his book Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism, describes liberalism as the child of Christianity. Ancient people assumed that inequality was a natural part of the world. One’s social role determined one’s identity and rights. Paul’s revolutionary idea of equality before Christ would eventually lead to the development of civil and political liberty and equal rights.

There are some two thousand verses on justice and poverty in the Bible. Justice and care for the poor and oppressed can be found throughout scripture in every part of the Bible from the law and the prophets to the Gospels and Epistles all the way to Revelation. God lifts up the lowly and brings down the powerful, and feeds the hungry and sends the rich away empty (Luke 1:52-53).

The stories about rich men and how difficult it is for them to enter the kingdom of God pepper the Gospels (Matthew 19:16-30). The Story of the Good Samaritan, of loving our neighbors and welcoming foreigners, is at the center of progressive Christian ethics (Leviticus 19:33-34; Luke 10:25-37). Justice and care for the needy are major themes in scripture.

By now you may be thinking “how could there be anything else but progressive Christianity?” Well, as we all know, things didn’t happen that way. In order to accommodate the emperors of Rome and for a variety of often political reasons, Christianity became less about the teachings of Jesus and more about the person of Christ. Teachings about justice were neglected and corruption slowly engulfed the Church.

The Church kept scripture from lay people all the way up to the Reformation. The invention of the printing press made the Bible widely available, but many still couldn’t read or afford a book. Progress was slow after hundreds of years of overemphasizing doctrine and neglecting justice.

There were radical reformers more radical than Luther and Calvin who eschewed state power, but Luther and Calvin still held theocratical and authoritarian views. When German peasants revolted against their feudal lords, Luther sided with the nobles and called for the peasants to be put down like mad dogs. Three centuries of religious war followed the Reformation.

Then came the Enlightenment. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) brought us idealism. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) brought us the promise of progress through his dialectical process whereby a thesis is countered by an antithesis resulting in a synthesis of ideas over time. Friedrich Schleiermacher (1763-1834) brought us liberal theology and the critical study of scripture.

Along with the discovery of science came a new skepticism toward miracles and a critical reading of scripture. In an attempt to get to original sources, scholars engaged in multiple quests for the historical Jesus. Modern scholars expected belief in the supernatural to decline over time and sought to find out more about the human Jesus.

By the early 20th century, Christians focused more on ethics and social justice and less on miracles and conformity to doctrine. The Social Gospel put into action God’s mission to bring salvation to the ends of the earth by addressing the problems of poverty and injustice. The Catholic Worker Movement sought to “live in accordance with the justice and charity of Jesus Christ.” Deitrich Bonhoeffer, in his book “The Cost of Discipleship,” warned us against what he called “easy believe-ism” and “cheap grace” to describe those who think that being a Christian means believing doctrines rather than doing justice.

Fundamentalists revolted. Unwilling to do God’s work and aghast over the decline of dogma they deemed fundamental, fundamentalists of the late 19th and early 20th century rejected the Social Gospel and reacted negatively toward the growing influence of science and philosophy. They opposed the teaching of evolution in public schools.

By the 1930s, modernists had won the debate and fundamentalist withdrew from mainstream Christianity. Liberal Christians developed alternative theologies that didn’t require one to believe in miracles. More of a movement among scholars and clergy, none of these liberal theologies ever took root among the laity.

Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) applied existentialism to Christianity. Paul Tillich (1886-1965) brought us a God of “ultimate concerns” and “the ground of our being.” Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1976) applied Heidegger’s philosophy to Christian life and encouraged us to demythologize the text.

Liberation theology refocused the church on the major biblical themes of justice and charity. Theologians like James H Cone (b. 1938) and Gustavo Gutierrez (b. 1928) saw in the Exodus narrative, the Gospels, and the focus on justice for the poor in scripture a God who prefers the poor and marginalized. While Liberation theology grounded us in the Bible, it also led many to socialism.

Socialism became popular among liberals and progressive scholars and clergy, but it and many of the new theologies never gained favor among lay people. Many churches never changed their liturgies and continued to recite ancient creeds. For a variety of reasons, the Church failed to challenge the orthodox reading of scripture.

While the Social Gospel had won the early battle, fundamentalism won the war. Evangelicalism would return in the 1950s through the Billy Graham crusades and the Christian Right would emerge in the 1970s and all but overtake the Republican party. At the same time, membership in liberal mainline churches declined precipitously.

Christianity is in decline in America. Those who believe in the supernatural either turned to Evangelicalism or to the New Age movement while those who no longer believe in miracles adopted humanism, socialism and other ideologies. Progressive Christianity arises out of this context.

Progressive Christianity stands upon the long liberal tradition of the Church from ancient Judaism through the Enlightenment and into the present. It focuses on the biblical themes of liberation and justice. Progressive Christianity is in some ways a response to conservative Christian neglect of biblical social ethics.

Progressive Christians seek to reintegrate major biblical themes like justice and charity back into Christian belief and practice. Fundamentalists neglected the basic biblical mandate to live justly. They have blamed the poor, turned the foreigner and the refugee away, squashed the lowly and gave tax cuts to the rich. Many Evangelicals have, in Jesus’ words become children of the devil (Matthew 25:15).

What we need is a reunification of the Church around the central biblical themes of justice and charity. While some Progressive Christians are orthodox theologically but liberal politically, others entertain radical theologies. The most important thing is that we focus on doing God’s work in the world.

Bibliography

John R. Donahue, Seek Justice that You may LIve: Reflections and Resources on the Bible and Social Justice (2014).

Kirk R. Macgregor, Contemporary Theology: An Introduction (2019).

Enrique Nardoni, Rise Up, O Judge: A study of Justice in the Biblical World (2004).

The Future of Christianity in America and the World

2019-05-12T21:34:00.000-07:00

Rich Procida

The Church is divided. The traditional line of division within western Christianity between Protestant and Catholic has receded. The Church is now divided between liberals and conservatives and between north and south.

The recent schism in the Methodist Church over gay rights illustrates the point. At its general conference in St. Louis this year, the delegates rejected gay marriage and LGBT clergy. Conservative Methodists in America combined with representatives from Africa, Asia, and South America to defeat the inclusive One Church plan and opted for the Traditional plan instead.

The balance of power is shifting to the south. While Western Christianity is in decline, Christianity is growing throughout Asia, Africa, and South America. This shift is often misdescribed in the West as "Post-Christendom."

Christianity is still the largest religion in the world and growing throughout the global south. Churches in the southern hemisphere are predominately Pentecostal or Catholic and socially conservative. Social conservativism will increase in the United States if only through migration.

America is just as Christian as it has ever been but its growth is among migrant communities. These communities bring with them the versions of Christianity they practiced in their home countries. America has become a missionary field for Christians from the global South.

It’s Western Christianity that is in decline. The most common reason people give for leaving the Church is that they do not believe the theology anymore. The type of Christianity coming up from the south may not be any better.

Christianity first split between East and West. Then Western Christianity split between Catholic and Protestant. While not a full-fledged division, there is now a corresponding split between North and South.

Protestant Christianity splintered wildly, but today’s division is not between Protestant and Catholic or between denominations. The division within Catholicism and Protestantism mirrors the division along geographical lines roughly drawn between North and South. The division in Christianity today is between liberal and progressive Christianity vs conservative and traditional Christianity.

While perhaps not a full-blown division, there are differences within progressive and liberal Christianity. Some are traditional in belief and practice but liberal politically while others entertain radical theologies. Even within Evangelicalism there is growing discussion of justice and God’s preference for the poor alongside their theory of salvation by grace and not by works.

There is a growing social justice movement in the Western Church. Along with this comes a retreat from politics by others. The later is part of the normal cycle for Christians when they feel under siege.

What role is Western Christianity to play in God’s mission to the world given its declining numbers and relevance, and how can it stem the gradual losses in participation? The Western Church is still a powerful force in the world, and it isn’t going away anytime soon. The question is what do we do now?

Both Mainline and Evangelical Christians have their own solutions. Conservatives commonly call for a return to traditional beliefs, something many young Americans have already rejected. These are the same things their compatriots in Europe left long ago.

Mainline churches took a different approach. They took the modernist turn and sought to explain the stories of the gospel scientifically. The Jesus Seminar with the likes of Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan exemplified this approach.

The quest for the historical Jesus, the last in a number of earlier quests, assembled a group of multidisciplinary historical and biblical scholars and asked them to vote on which of the sayings of Jesus could be attributed to him and which of those sayings he probably didn’t say. Their critical historical examination of scripture added greatly to our understanding and interpretation of scripture in its historical context.

These scholars searched for Truth in the only way the knew how, using historical and scientific methods. In the stubborn conflict between science and religion, they took the side of science in an effort to modernize Christianity. As a result, they clung tightly to their presupposition that as scientists and historians they could not confirm or deny miracles.

Their over-identification with scientific principles lead them to reject the supernatural entirely. Some held open the possibility of life after death, but they all read the Gospel stories for their meaning regardless of their historical accuracy. In fact, historical accuracy was not the point of the Gospels.

The Gospel writers were evangelists. Their purpose was to spread the Word. The stories are more of a vehicle to that end then a factual retelling of the life of Jesus.

While there are historical facts in the Gospels, the stories serve the broader purpose of promoting a new vision of governance where there is only one God and our leaders are merely human. More than that, kings and emperors are actually servants of God. Jesus taught that the greatest among us are our servants (Matthew 23:11).

Christianity was a radical new social movement. Its leader became the God of the very empire that executed him. It would grow to become the largest religion in the world.

The truth these scholars revealed is something that many Christians did not want to hear: the miracles described in the Bible probably didn’t happen. This includes the resurrection and ascension. In fact, the whole idea of the supernatural is unscientific superstition that has no place in the modern world according to these overzealous scholars.

In their over-identification with their scientific training, they did the unthinkable and developed the concept of “strategic atheism.” This idea allows those who no longer believe in the supernatural to call themselves Christian. While we are right to question what we believe, we are wrong to cast the modernist-fundamentalist split as the central conflict in the Church today (1 Thessalonians 5:20-21).

Most Americans today have New Age beliefs, including nearly half of all Christians and many who attend church regularly. Belief in the supernatural is widespread across the United States. Like Newton practicing alchemy, Americans believe in science and the supernatural.

Religion without the supernatural is philosophy, and spirituality without the supernatural is psychology. It doesn’t matter whether one believes in the supernatural or not. Americans see no conflict between science and the supernatural, and most probably think that scientists should be investigating the supernatural, too.

Interpretation, however, does matter. On this, there are plenty of differences between traditional and liberal believers as well as between Evangelical and Mainline churches. The overemphasis on substitutionary atonement and the obsession with “saving souls” needs to be balanced by a renewed focus on salvific action in the world.

The focus should be on doing justice. This is referred to in scripture as “faithfulness” and “righteousness” (Exodus 1:15-21). The Hebrew and Greek words for “righteousness” mean acting or living justly.

It is important to recognize that the concept of religion as separate from politics didn’t exist in the first century. Kings and emperors were gods and sons of gods and every nation was a theocracy. The Old Testament is a collection of the historical and legal documents of the Jewish nation, and the New Testament is a collection of the writings of a social movement initially referred to as the “People of the Way.”

The Bible is just as much a political document as it is a religious one. The question isn’t whether people should mix their Christianity with their politics or whether religion should be a purely private matter or even how we should live personally as Christians or as spiritual or ethical people (Assuming one doesn’t believe as I do in the feminist maxim that the personal is political). The question is: What will Christianity become?

Will the church be an institution that promotes discrimination and violence around the world, or will it be a faith of love and justice? In many ways it is both, but how can it become more compassionate? More liberating?

The Bible is the fountain of Western culture. Its roots run deep within us. If you grew up in America, you’ve been Christianized.

Christianity is still a powerful force in the Western world, particularly in the United States. It will remain so into the foreseeable future. To argue that we should ignore or abandon Christianity is to fail to appreciate its ubiquity, influence, and power.

What have Christians become, and what are they likely to become should current trends continue with or without significant resistance and change from within? By “institution” I refer not simply to the brick and mortar buildings but to the spirit, culture, and ideology of institutions. There are good reasons to believe that change only happens from within.

If we had something good to share with others one would think we would want to share it. The reason the Mainline Church has declined more quickly than Evangelical churches, Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses is that these churches have recruitment programs whereas Mainline churches do not. Evangelical churches are missional in orientation whereas the Mainline church is cultural and more about personal identity.

Both have a problem with young people leaving the church but Mainline churches are satisfied to rescue those leaving conservative churches or to welcome those returning to their faith later in life in a quest for meaning. Many Mainline ministers are engaged in some form of what I might characterize as “palliative care,” overseeing the gradual, inevitable, and in some ways not unwelcome demise of Western Christianity. Faith is thought to be personal and not political, and if it is political you would be hard pressed to find a congregation outside Universalism that is engaged to any significant degree in “justice advocacy.”

The unintended result of this approach is the increasing irrelevance of the Church in people’s lives. Many churches have grand missions but it’s difficult to see how they accomplish the Church’s larger mission outside their own congregations. Following Gushee and Stassen from their book Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context, I distinguish between charity work and justice advocacy.

Many liberal churches categorize social justice broadly so that it includes charity work. While it may be true that social justice includes charity, charity work is what churches have always done. It’s easier to do something the church has done before than to do something new and different.

The result is that churches do a lot of charity work and little advocacy. Justice advocacy is neglected as the group becomes bogged down with organizing nearly every function at the church all broadly defined as “social justice.” I can see no better way to kill justice advocacy at church than to bury it in a workhorse group that takes on everything at Church.

Justice advocacy deserves its own committee. Dealing with politics at church is difficult. It requires the full attention of the church’s minister and governing body as it needs to focus on Christian ethics and public policy. It should work closely with the denomination as most mainline denominations have public policy guides and justice advocacy resources.

Churches should also work with the community so as to advocate with them and build coalitions. The Church is an organizing institution. Some believe religion and politics should be separate. but we cannot sincerely compartmentalize our lives when it comes to God.

As spiritual and religious people we cannot separate our spirituality from our calling to be compassionate and ethical. We must not sacrifice our social ethics on the altar of personal salvation or enlightenment. To choose not to be involved in justice advocacy is a political decision.

The Church goes through cycles of political involvement followed by withdrawing and regrouping when Christianity becomes too controversial and believers can’t take the heat. Evangelicals who advocate for withdrawal from politics are like wolves in sheep’s clothing. Their reaction is against the rise of progressive Christianity just as much as it is a refusal to address certain political issues at church. What they are really promoting is spiritual indifference toward impunity, corruption, and war.

Some may argue that we can do our justice advocacy alone or with other groups separate from our religious activities, but if we are called by our faith to engage in social justice activities, why should we not do them at Church? No one tells people to do charity work on their own outside church. Such a suggestion would be ludicrous just as it is ridiculous to suggest that we engage in justice advocacy alone. In the end, we fail to do God’s will and fail to fulfill God’s mission to the world.

Jesus Christ Liberator

The solution is to be missional. That mission is social justice advocacy. We are to bring down the powerful and lift up the lowly, feed the hungry and send the rich away empty, welcome the stranger and treat the foreigner as one native-born, and live and act justly as individuals, as the Church, as a community, and as a nation.

The Greek word for “nation” as used in the Great Commission in Matthew where Jesus commands us to “make disciples of all the nations” is “ethne.” It refers to people groups like ethnicities, identities, and nationality. It is the same word used to describe the nations of Egypt, Babylon, and Assyria.

The translation for the word “ethne” does not refer to personal individual souls or isolated persons. Instead, it refers to people identified as members of a particular group and not as individuals alone. Jews, Christians, and Muslims, by virtue of their inheritance of God’s promise to Abraham, are called to be a light and a blessing to all the nations of the world, to bring God’s salvation to the ends of the earth (Genesis 18:18; Isaiah 49:6).

This is the calling of many faiths, to be a blessing to others and to be compassionate toward all of humanity and to all of life. We cannot do this unless we take action to end impunity, violence, exploitation, and war. Since we are called to advocate on behalf of others as Christians and as spiritual and ethical people, we should engage in these activities at church just as we engage in works of charity at church.

If it wasn’t for Pope Francis and the work of progressive Christians and liberal Evangelicals, the Church could be headed south is more ways than one. Religious activists and reformers must work for a more inclusive Church enlivened by its mission to do justice. In this way, we “love mercy, act justly, and march with the poor, the marginalized, and the oppressed—to walk humbly with God among us (Micah 6:8).

Bibliography

David E. Fitch, The End of Evangelicalism? Discerning a New Faithfulness for Mission (2011).

David P. Gushee & Glen H Stassen, Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context (2nd ed. 2016).

Graham Hill, Global Church: Reshaping Our Conversations, Renewing Our Mission, Revitalizing Our Churches (2016).

Philip Jenkins, The Next Christendom: The Coming Global Christianity (2002).

Christopher J.H. Wright, The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative (2006).

x

"Irruption of the Real:" The Resurrecton of Jesus of Nazareth

2019-04-20T01:39:00.001-07:00

Rich Procida

Individual ideologies and theologies give us incomplete pictures of reality. The world is too complex. No Ideology or theology can explain everything. Every ideology and every theology overlooks or misses something. There is always something that resists symbolization. This is the view of Slovenian philosopher Slovoj Zizek who I have accessed primarily through a book called “The End of Evangelicalism? Discerning a New Faithfulness for Mission Towards an Evangelical Political Theology” by David E. Fitch.

An “irruption of the real” occurs when someone takes the beliefs and tenets of his or her faith or ideology to the extreme. Jesus did this when he put his life on the line because he believed that the one and all-powerful God of Israel would save him, overthrow the rulers and authorities of this world, redeem and restore Israel to its rightful place among the nations, and take dominion over the world (Mark 14:62 and 15:34). The truth is suddenly revealed often in a humiliating fashion so that people are forced to confront the fact that what they thought would happen, what they believed, didn’t come to pass, at least not as they expected.

This is the story of the Gospels. The disciples expect the Messiah to be a victorious king who would defeat Israel’s enemies (Mark 10:37). Something amazing did happen, but it wasn’t what they expected.

That something was the resurrection and the rise of the Jesus movement. Not all “irruptions of the Real” are victorious as the resurrection. Most end in humiliation and the reexamination and reformulation of one’s beliefs. Without the resurrection, Jesus’s ministry would have ended the same way, another prophet and martyr killed by the authorities (Mark 15:34).

But that’s not what happened. Some of Jesus’s followers, including Peter and James, had visions of Jesus after his death (1 Corinthians 15:5). This led them to believe that God had raised Jesus from the dead.

In this article, we examine Fitch’s concept of an “irruption of the Real” and apply it to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. We will talk about Zizek’s concepts of “master signifiers” and “sublime objects” and the role they play in motivating us to organize around ideologies and beliefs. Fitch, an Evangelical himself, uses Zizek to demonstrate how some Evangelical beliefs became disconnected from what they meant generations ago and now fail to serve God’s mission in the world.

Fitch points to the decline in the public perception of Evangelicals to suggest that there is something wrong with Evangelical witness in America. Some of his insights can be applied to Christianity more broadly. He says “there are reasons to suspect that our social presence as Evangelicals has become inhospitable to the world and God’s mission in it.”

Christians should reflect the Gospel they preach. “Evangelicalism has become an ‘empty politic’ driven by what we are against instead of what we are for,” Fitch argues. Evangelical beliefs have turned Evangelicals into something inconsistent with what they claim to believe.

Fitch defines “ideology” and, in my opinion, it’s corollary “theology,” as “a set of beliefs and practices that bind a people together into a functioning community or politic. In Marxist terms, ideology is that naive or ‘false consciousness’ which constructs social reality for people. It is what people assume about the way things are and how these assumptions are maintained in order to live together.”

Our political and social systems are composed of institutions, rituals, social norms, and even language itself. Zizek calls this the “Symbolic Order.” The “Symbolic Order” is a type of groupthink that shapes who we are and our life together. It appeals to our desires and insecurities.

Political systems are held together by ideologies and theologies. All political and theological systems are founded upon the story of some early trauma that tells us who we are and what and who we are for or against. Ideology and theology hold us together by covering over social antagonisms and internal contradictions oftentimes by setting us against others.

The religious and political beliefs that identify us a part of a religious or political group are what Zizek and others have called “master-signifiers.” Master-signifiers bind a community together by aligning them for or against something. They are sufficiently vague to play into people’s desires, and they create a fantasy around which people can rally without actually referring to anything concrete.

Every ideology or theology provides a “fantasy” that allows people to act as if we all believe the same thing when in reality we don’t. People do not believe in things like “freedom” or “God” in the same way, yet it is this very nebulous character that allows us to act as if we all believe the same thing. Things like the “Kingdom of God” to Christians, the Socialist Utopia to Marxists, and the “free market” to capitalists are vague fantasies around which people rally yet they have no real meaning except to signify who and what we are for or against. “Master-signifiers” are more about the antagonisms that underlay our social relations than they are about any ideal or plan of action.

Zizek calls this “the Real.” The only things that are real are the antagonisms that the ideology or theology covers over and misdirects often against some feared or loathsome other. For SocialIsts, the “other” could be the dreaded “neoliberals” or the capitalist loving property owners Marx called the “bourgeois.” For capitalists, their bogeymen are financial regulations and the rise of the working class. The scapegoats for Evangelical Christians are those they consider to be morally degenerate, such as homosexuals and liberals.

These false beliefs can cause believers to be complicit with brutal and exploitative systems of domination, such as totalitarian regimes, fascist dictatorships, racist institutions, and theocracies. Each of these systems uses ideologies or theologies to justify their existence and to explain why they continue on their economic or political course. This is true for democratic and economic systems, as well.

Using Kant’s concept of the sublime, Zizek describes “ideology” as vastly more powerful than we can perceive or understand objectively. Under the influence of ideology, the beliefs and ideas we rally around and pursue together become unobtainable “Sublime Objects.” We feel great pleasure lusting after them and their allure holds us captive to the ideology.

Things like “the Party” in some Communist regimes, “God” in theocracies, and “freedom” in democracies are all Master-signifiers elevated to the level of “Sublime Objects.” No one can really pin them down yet everyone under the influence of the ideology is said to believe in them. The concepts are nebulous enough so than many people can believe in their own way yet powerful enough to rally an entire people around a unifying fantasy.

For Zizek, fundamental antagonisms lie at the core of every political system. For example, the ideology of capitalism covers over the inequality between the poor workers and the rich elite they work for by promoting the idea of “Freedom.” These antagonisms are the only things that are real in the system.

Fitch goes on to describe what he calls an “Irruption of the Real.” An “Irruption of the Real” occurs when excessive fealty to an ideology reveals the underlying antagonisms and emptiness of the ideology. Irruptions of the real are like tears in the political fabric that reveal too much so as to pave the way for further unraveling.

Another, perhaps overly simplistic way of saying it is that an “Irruption of the Real” is that moment of truth when everyone realizes that the emperor has no clothes. These awkward events reveal the absurdity of what we say we believe by revealing the contradictions and underlying antagonisms behind the ideology or theology that upholds the system.

Irruptions of the Real can make room for revolutionary change. Ironically, these irruptions are not instigated by those who oppose the system. Instead, they are caused by those who take their ideology or theology too seriously.

Ideology is immune to overt criticism, says Zizek. Every ideology has already “internalized its own critique.”Outside criticism merely affords ideology the opportunity to recreate itself. As such, an ideology can only be overthrown from within.

This is exactly what Zizek suggests we do, take the ideology or theology to the extreme to reveal its absurdity. This is called the “tactic of overidentification” or “subversive conformity.” Only total conformity can make explicit the implications of the ideology and reveal the emptiness its core.

Political systems are inherently unstable. “Irruptions of the Real” happen all the time. Works of art, cinema or poetry can reveal the absurdity of what we say we believe. There can also be unintentional irruptions when an adherent takes the ideology too far or too literally thereby exposing the contradictions, antagonisms and lack underlying the ideology.

“Irruptions of ‘the Real” expose the contradictions at the center of our politics. They reveal that which is left unsaid, what or who is being excluded, and what drives the system. “Irruptions of the Real” expose the sources and forces behind the ideology’s continued dominance.

Zizek would describe these moments of Truth as “decisive revolutionary acts.” An ideology can lose its hold over people, and new leaders can emerge who more directly engage the system’s depravity and lack. This can only happen from within the movement.

An Irruption is a forcible or violent invasion or uprising from within, as opposed to an eruption which is bursting out. Ideologies collapse from within. By taking the ideology to its logical conclusion, we reveal the contradiction and emptiness at its core.

Jesus took Judaism seriously, so seriously that he went to the cross believing God would save him (Mark 14:62). In the Gospel of Matthew, the chief priests and elders ridicule Jesus for trusting God (Matthew 27:41-43). He thought God would save him, but look where it got him! Hanging on a tree! Dying! Cursed by God! (Matthew 27:39-44; Deuteronomy 21:23). There is more than a little irony when priests ridicule those who trust in God.

Just as Jesus “breathes his last,” Matthew tells us:

“the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. The earth shook, and the rocks were split. The tombs also were opened and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised. After his resurrection, they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many. Now when the centurion and those with him, who were keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were terrified and said, “Truly this man was God’s son!” (Matthew 27:50-54).

In other words, there was an incredible irruption that “shook the earth.” The tombs of the saints were opened and the bodies of the dead arose and entered the holy city. Even the centurion, the one most indoctrinated by Roman Imperial dogma, could see the truth. The imagery represents an unveiling of the contradictions at the core of Roman Imperial theology and the collapse of that system.

The resurrection represents victory over the powers. The crucifixion looks at first like humiliation, and then something amazing happens. The movement is reborn. Some of Jesus’s followers have experiences of the risen Christ. This leads some of them to believe that Jesus had been raised from the dead.

This inspires stories of the resurrection as God's vindication. The true ruler of the world is among us in the form of the "Son of Man," which is an idiom for "humanity. Our leader ought to serve us, not the other way around (Matthew 23:11).

Our system and the ideology that supports it tells us that the competition of interests groups ultimately leads to a compromise that best suits us all. This is not the biblical way. Rather than represent our interests, the Gospel tells us to change our priorities.

We are to “proclaim good news to the poor,” “release the prisoners, and “set the oppressed free” (Luke 4:17-19). We are to “bring down the powerful,” lift up the lowly, feed the hungry, and “send the rich away empty” (Luke 1:52-53). We are to distribute our resources based on need and share everything in common just as early Christians did (Luke 2:44-45).

Have I gone too far? Have I taken the Gospel too seriously? Too literally?
I hope so.

Welcoming Americans and Their New Age Beliefs Back into Church Again

2019-02-18T23:21:00.000-08:00

Welcoming Americans and their New Age Beliefs Back into Church Again

Rich Procida

Opposition to New Age beliefs arose among academics and church leaders concerned about the rise of the “prosperity gospel.” In 2009, well known Socialist Barbara Ehrenreich, in her book “Bright-sided: How Positive Thinking is Undermining America,” criticized the positive thinking movement associated with books like “The Secret” and preachers like Joel Osteen. She and her followers then mischaracterized these ideas as “New Age.”

A recent poll conducted by the Pew Research Center confirmed what polls over the last ten years have told us: most Americans have New Age beliefs. This includes most of those who call themselves Christian and many who regularly attend church on Sundays. The research described “New Age” as believing in psychics, reincarnation, astrology, and that things like mountains, trees and crystals contain spiritual energy.

The New Age movement consists of a broad range of beliefs and practices, from believing in the supernatural to mixing the beliefs and practices of other religions. Some people may mix Buddhist practices like meditation or Hindu practices like Yoga with their Christianity. Others might adopt Native or Spiritualist beliefs and practices. Some would also describe Wicca and Pagan practices as New Age.

The “prosperity gospel” is the Christian version of positive thinking. That’s why it’s called a “gospel.” It is associated with preachers like Norman Vincent Peale, who wrote “The Power of Positive Thinking,” and Joel Osteen, the toothy preacher and author who teaches that God wants all of us to be happy and successful.

The New Age version of the prosperity gospel is the belief that one can “manifest one’s own reality.” This idea is associated with books like “Ask and it is Given: Learning to Manifest Your Desires” by Esther and Jerry Hicks, and “The Secret” by Rhonda Byrne. While there may be some truth to these teachings, neither the “prosperity gospel” nor the “manifestation doctrine” describe the totality of Christianity nor the New Age movement. Both ideas can be abused and become a distraction, and neither represent the central message of the Gospel nor what it means to be a spiritual person.

A scientist by training, Ehrenreich and many of her fellow academics, as well as many church leaders, are skeptical of the claims of positive thinking advocates. They worry that the focus on magically manifesting personal riches obscures the real causes of poverty, unemployment and poor health care. “The threats that we face, individually and collectively, won't be solved by wishful thinking but by a clear-eyed commitment to taking action in the world,” writes Ehrenreich.

The critics of positive thinking are surely right that just thinking and believing you are a millionaire doesn’t make you one. Those who envisioned their multi-million door homes, fancy new cars, and beautiful partners would surely come to recognize that their affirmations and fanciful musings didn’t magically manifest for them large homes, fast cars and beautiful women. The “prosperity gospel” and the “doctrine of manifestation,” like other religious doctrines, can be misused and taken to an extreme, but painting the entire New Age movement with the broad brush of positive thinking is like equating all of Christianity with the “prosperity gospel.” It’s a mischaracterization.

James Carroll, in his book “Constantine's Sword,” argued that early Christians mischaracterized the crucifixion by blaming it on the Jews rather than on the Romans. Christians should remember the many Bible verses that condemn mediums and psychics (e.g., Leviticus 20:27) as well as the history of the Church and its treatment of witches and people who believe differently. Many Christians continue to condemn New Age practices as evil and demonic.

Liberal Christians tend to read these verses as if they referred to Halloween ghouls and goblins rather than to the real people they were and are. There are many people, including myself, who consider themselves to be psychic or mediums, or who practice wicca or believe in crystals and tarot cards. It’s time to put aside age-old prejudices and recognize that New Age beliefs and practices are spiritually valid religious activities.

While Ehrenreich's criticism of positive thinking is valid, the consequent misidentification of the “prosperity gospel” with the New Age movement lead even liberal churches to resist the rising tide of New Age belief and practice. On the Left, there is also skepticism toward the supernatural.

Most modern philosophers are naturalists. Many liberal churches have taken to understanding the cosmos scientifically. Ministers draw spiritual inspiration from nature, adopt natural theologies like process theology, and preach spiritual psychology and social justice.

Apparitions in spirt orb.

Both conservative and liberal clergy, mainline and evangelical churches, as well as seminary and college professors, distance themselves from belief in the supernatural. They presume that superstition has no place in the modern world, and they expected belief in the supernatural to decline over time, not grow. New Age beliefs and practices can be taboo even in liberal churches.

The Pew survey found that the one thing those who have New Age beliefs share in common is a belief in the supernatural. Another Pew study found that 29% of Americans believe they have been in touch with a spirit of a deceased person, and 18% say they have seen or been in the presence of a ghost. The Church must come to acknowledge what people around the world already know: Americans believe in ghosts.

When powerful cultural forces collide with traditional religious beliefs, religious institutions respond in two ways simultaneously: resistance and assimilation. Sometimes referred to as syncretism, this phenomenon has been an issue ever since Christianity first began to engage in missions. The mixing of traditional spiritual beliefs with Christianity is also occurring in Africa, Asia and South America where Christianity is growing.

The Western Church is in decline. While most Americans consider themselves Christian, fewer and fewer are interested in going to church. A 2016 Pew Research study revealed that one of the most common reasons people give for not affiliating with a religion is that they don’t believe the theology anymore.

Another significant portion of those Americans who do not attend church are those who describe themselves as “spiritual but not religious.” They see no need to engage in religious rituals or to attend Christian worship services. Nearly all these people have New Age beliefs.

If we recognize that we are in a period of both resisting and assimilating powerful cultural forces, we might choose to do more assimilating and less resisting. Many American Christians already hold New Age Beliefs. The process of assimilation has already begun.

Christians who hold New Age beliefs are already among us. Should Christians be open to psychics and mediums? Can we have classes on tarot and crystals alongside Bible studies and other small groups?

Churches are not known for their diversity of opinion or openness to new ideas and theologies. Even liberal and progressive churches have traditionalists and conservatives among them. Those who attend church regularly often have traditional beliefs.

There are many verses in the Bible that condemn psychics, mediums, wizards and sorcerers (e.g. 2 Kings 21:6). At the same time, there are also verses in the Bible that tell parents to kill their rebellious children (Deuteronomy 21:19-21), require women to marry their rapists (Deuteronomy 22:28-29), order the Israelites to commit genocide (1 Samuel 15:3) and say that women should not speak in church (1 Corinthians 14:34). We don’t follow these commands for good reasons.

Once we recognize that there are verses in the Bible that we don’t follow, we should also consider that there are other verses we shouldn’t follow. Prohibitions against homosexuality and divorce, among other things, belong in this category as do teachings that condemn people who practice divination, witchcraft or spiritualism. These are real people who are simply practicing their faith and living their lives as best they can.

Discerning scripture properly was a significant part of the conflict between the Pharisees and Jesus. The Great Commandment, to love God with all our hearts and to love our neighbors as ourselves, is a primary principle that tells us how we should interpret all of scripture (Matthew 22:34-40). It requires that we consider the effect our teaching and actions have on others. God’s Law cannot violate the Great Commandment.

Does a teaching lead us into conflict with those who are different from us? Does it tell us that our enemies are those who think and believe differently, have a different lifestyle or sexual orientation, or are of a different culture, race or religion? If a teaching sets us against others, rather than against the powers and authorities that rule this world, then it is not of God and may even be demonic (Ephesians 6:12).

Jesus exclaimed: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cross sea and land to make a single convert, and you make the new convert twice as much a child of hell as yourselves” (Matthew 23:15).

Some of the things Christians have done in the name of God have caused terrible harm and suffering. In the wrong hands, the Bible is a dangerous book. The Bible should have a warning label on it: “Handle with care!”

We can assimilate New Age beliefs and practices, just as we have assimilated the ideas of science, philosophy and spiritual psychology into our spiritual discourse, so long as we stay centered in scripture and focused on the mission of God (Matthew 23:23). We can incorporate New Age ideas and beliefs into our discussions so long as we focus on the mission of the Church: to bring God’s “salvation to the ends of the earth.” (Acts 13:47) We can welcome, accept, and even teach New Age ideas and practices in our churches so long as we integrate spirituality with ethics.

The Great Commandment, to love God and to love our neighbors as ourselves, is as spiritual a commandment and any commandment could ever be. If we keep the Great Commandment at the center, teach scripture using the latest scholarship, engage in social justice advocacy, and do works of charity, we can avoid the self-absorption and inwardness of much of modern spirituality. We can then focus on doing the good works “God prepared beforehand to be our way of life” (Ephesians 2:10).

These good works include welcoming the stranger and being transformed by the renewing of our minds so that we may shed our prejudices and discern the will of God (Matthew 25:35; Romans 12:2). While we may be of one body, we have many different members with a large variety of spiritual gifts (Romans 12:3). We should recognize people’s spiritual gifts by welcoming them into our congregations.

Paul once called “the Law” “a ministry of death, chiseled in letters on a stone tablet” (2 Corinthians 3:7). Gentiles could not be expected to cut off their foreskins and follow Jewish custom and dietary laws. If they were required to do so, Paul feared that the Jesus movement would never become more than a small Jewish sect.

We can follow the path of the Western Church in Europe slowly dying, asking people to believe in doctrines, or we can welcome Americans and their New Age beliefs back into the Church again. Americans are a deeply spiritual and religious people, and most of us hold New Age beliefs. We must strive to make room for diversity of belief and practice in the Church.

What Can Jesus Do but Die for You? The Healing of Blind Bart and The Way of The Cross (Mark 10:45:52)(Proper 25B, Ordinary 30B, Pentecost 23)

2018-10-25T18:11:00.000-07:00

Mark 10:46-52 As he and his disciples and a large crowd were leaving Jericho, Bartimaeus son of Timaeus, a blind beggar, was sitting by the roadside. 47 When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout out and say, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!" 48 Many sternly ordered him to be quiet, but he cried out even more loudly, "Son of David, have mercy on me!" 49 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." 50 So throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus. 51 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." 52 Jesus said to him, "Go; your faith has made you well." Immediately he regained his sight and followed him on the way.

What Can Jesus Do but Die for You?

The Healing of Blind Bart and The Way of The Cross

By

Rich Procida

The disciples didn't understand the Cross. Peter didn't understand. When Jesus told the disciples that the “Son of Man” must suffer, be rejected, tortured, and killed, Peter began to rebuke Jesus. But Jesus turned and rebuked Peter, saying: "Get behind me, Satan!" (Mark 8:31-38).

James and John didn't understand, either. They expected to sit next to Jesus in his glory (Mark 10:35-45). Even today, Christians fail to understand the Cross.

We often see the Cross in terms of the pearly gates and streets of gold (Revelation 21:21). We sort of just skip over the crucifixion and go straight to heaven without experiencing suffering and death. How often do we truly contemplate what it means to "take up our cross" and "follow Jesus" (Mark 8:34)?

Bartimaeus, on the other hand, understands. He shouts out: "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!" When people ordered him to shut up, he cried out even more loudly, 'Son of David, have mercy on me!"

The title "Son of David" is a royal title. By calling Jesus “Son of David,” Bartimaeus was proclaiming him the King of Israel. To say that anyone ruled over Israel other than the Emperor or his appointee constituted an act of treason against the Empire. Israel’s elite would also consider it blasphemous (Mark 14:61-65; 15:1-5).

When Peter, in a moment of clarity, confesses Jesus to be the “Messiah,” Jesus orders Peter and the disciples not to tell anyone. But when they come to Jericho, Bartimaeus is literally screaming that Jesus is the Messiah, the King of Israel! All this shouting would have reminded ancient Jews and Christians of the mythic battle of Jericho in the Book of Joshua.

In the Battle of Jericho, God tells Joshua to have his army march around the city once a day for seven days, and on the seventh day they should “shout out a great shout!” Joshua did as God had instructed. When the seventh day came, “they raised a great shout” and the walls of the city collapsed enabling the Israelites to defeat the Canaanites (Joshua 5:13-6:27).

Who could believe that such a silly thing as marching in a demonstration could accomplish anything let alone bring down a city-state? What Jesus is about to do, riding into Jerusalem on a donkey, seems just as silly. How could such a simple demonstration set off a cascade of events that would ultimately transform the world?

Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem was not the only triumphal entry that day. At the other end of the city, Pontius Pilate rode in from the West with his consort of armed Roman Centurions, chariots and horses in a show of power and force characteristic of an occupying army. By entering on a donkey, Jesus, the disciples, and their fellow demonstrators mocked Roman rule (Borg and Crossan).

The next day, Jesus curses a fig tree (Mark 11:12-14). The fig tree represents the regime: the politician-priests and elite who ruled over Israel under Roman occupation. Many were corrupt, and the system served the interests of the rich and powerful much like today.

Jesus will later condemn these rulers, accusing them of “devouring widows houses.” He will then point out a widow who gave everything she had to the public treasury. She had nothing because all she had were two worthless coins, not enough to buy anything (Mark 12:38-44).

After cursing the fig tree, Jesus enters the temple and drives out the money changers. The cleansing of the Temple was another protest. The Israeli elite had turned the Temple, the seat of government and the house of God, into “a den of thieves” (Mark 11:17). They took people’s money yet failed to care for the needy, a violation of Israel’s covenant with God (Exodus 22:21-27; 23:9; Nardoni at 80-81).

King David, as King of Israel, was expected to rule justly with special concern for the needs of the poor and oppressed (Psalm 72). God is partial to the stranger and the outcast. These are represented throughout the Old Testament as the poor, the widow, the orphan, and the foreigner (Donahue at 13).

In the next chapter, Jesus will tell the story of the “Parable of the Wicked Tenants.” The tenants of a vineyard refuse to pay their landlord. The owner sends his servants to collect the rent, but the tenants beat and kill them. Finally, he sends his own son, thinking that the occupants would surely respect his son, but they kill him so that they could take his inheritance (12:1-11).

The Parable of the Wicked Tenants would have reminded first-century Jews of Israel’s violation of the covenant under the reign of King Ahab and Jezebel. King Ahab married a Syrian, Jezebel, and instituted the worship of Baal. When Ahab asked his neighbor, Naboth, to sell him a vineyard, Naboth declares: “The Lord forbid that I should give you my ancestral inheritance.”

Naboth’s words echo the commandment in Leviticus that the land belongs to God and that humans hold it merely as tenants (25:18-24). Despite this, Ahab and Jezebel plot to kill Naboth and take his vineyard. In the process, they violate the covenant in several ways.

Jezebel brings false accusations against Naboth, arranging for false witnesses so she could steal Naboth’s land and have him put to death. In so doing she violates the commandments against bearing false witness, stealing, murder, and coveting (Exodus 20:13-17, 23:1-3 and 6-8; Deuteronomy 19:15-20). By cursing the fig tree and reminding us of the Battle of Jericho and of Naboth’s vineyard, Jesus is declaring the Roman occupation and the Israeli regime unlawful and illegitimate (Donahue at 72-73).

Yet look at what happens when Jesus teaches us the lesson of the withered fig tree. As Jesus is leaving Jerusalem, Peter points out that the tree Jesus cursed had withered. Jesus responds: If we have enough faith we can throw mountains into the sea (Mark 11:20-23).

The fig tree represents the corrupt regime. Its death becomes a symbol of hope. Faith can move mountains and overthrow empires.

The execution of Jesus began a mass movement that would outlive the Roman Empire. Christ became the God of the very empire that crucified him. Over time, Christianity would transform the Western world.

One example is the belief in “the equality of souls.” Paul’s teaching that there is no longer Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, or male and female, was revolutionary. It undermined traditional social hierarchies which were considered natural, unchangeable and a matter of fate; and it elevated the rights of individuals as children of God and as individual souls. The new concept of the individual as the primary social unit would eventually lead to the rise of Western Liberalism and the recognition of human and civil rights (Siedentop).

One act of faith can spark a movement. One crime against a child of God can sometimes galvanize a nation. What Bartimaeus understands is that to follow Jesus is to resist oppression, to protest injustice, to boldly speak truth to power, to live justly, and to put our lives on the line.

Like the withered fig tree, the Cross became a symbol of hope, the remembrance of an innocent martyr who gave his life so that we might live. Jesus did nothing so vain as to die on a cross just so we could sit next to him in his glory in heaven. Jesus died for the sake of the Kingdom of God on earth.

When a rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life, Jesus told him to sell all that he had, give it to the poor, and follow him (Mark 10:21). Our commitment to the Kingdom of God requires that we act in this world to bring release to the captives, good news to the poor, and liberation to the oppressed. In this way, we serve God, love our neighbors, and bring God’s salvation to the ends of the earth (Isaiah 49:6).

We never know what the results of our actions will be. If we have faith and act on that faith, God can use us in both small and large ways. The Cross gives us hope and courage because, like Bartimaeus, we understand that sometimes, one act of faith can change the world (Mark 11:22-14).

Questions for Discussion:

1. How does the Battle of Jericho and Naboth’s vineyard parallel Jesus’s triumphal entry into Jerusalem, his overturning of the money changers’ tables, and his victory over the powers on the Cross?

2. Given the context described in the article, how does the Cross bring God’s salvation to the world?

3. How does the text leading up to the crucifixion tell us about what it means to follow Jesus?

Bibliography

Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan, The Last Week: A Day-by-Day Account of Jesus’ Final Week in Jerusalem (2007).

John R. Donahue, Seek Justice that You May Live: Reflections and Resources on The Bible and Social Justice (2014).

Enrique Nardoni, Rise Up, O Judge: A Study of Justice in the Biblical World (2004).

Larry Siedentop, Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism (2014).

Organizing at Church: Two Philosophical and Ethical Questions

2018-10-11T19:59:00.000-07:00

Organizing at Church: Two Philosophical and Ethical Questions

By

Joseph Dowd, Ph'd

What are the philosophical or ethical implications of mixing faith with politics? While our overriding goal must be to understand and deal with the alt-right and the rise of white nationalist politics, I think there are some important questions that the left needs to ask. Although I’m sure that lefties will have plenty of disagreements over the issues that I’m about to raise, this is not the time for squabbling and infighting.

The first question is this: should the left make more of an effort to ally with religious organizations and appeal to religious values? Once upon a time, the answer was obvious: the American left was, by and large, against mixing religion with politics. For example, the American left has long argued that the religious right has no business injecting their faith into the machinery of government. Although there have always been liberal churches, the battle lines used to be pretty clear: left-wingers and secularists on one side, right-wingers and organized religion on the other.

Although there have always been liberal churches, the battle lines used to be pretty clear: left-wingers and secularists on one side, right-wingers and organized religion on the other.

Nowadays, however, the lines are becoming increasingly blurred. On one hand, white evangelicals were among Trump’s most reliable supporters. On the other hand, the mainline churches—Episcopalians, Methodists, and the like—have become increasingly (even notoriously) left-leaning over the years. Even some evangelical Christians are increasingly progressive on some issues, such as climate change and poverty. And let’s not forget the long tradition of liberation theology in Latin American Catholicism.

So to rephrase my first question: if you could persuade someone to support left-wing causes by using religious language or by appealing to faith-based values, would you? Should you? I don’t know the answer to this question, but this is a question that we should ask ourselves moving forward.

My second question isn’t really about religion. It’s about two phenomena that have historically been intertwined with religion and that have declined as religion has declined: tradition and community.

Historically, American liberals and leftists have largely dismissed tradition and community and have emphasized individual freedom. When it comes to economics, of course, the left has always argued that there should be regulation, that the economy should not be purely in the hands of individuals. But what’s the goal of this regulation? The goal is to level the playing field, to give the disadvantaged more freedom to participate. So in the end, the purpose of regulation is still to promote individual freedom.

“What’s wrong with that?” you might ask. What do I have against individual freedom? Well, I don’t have anything against individual freedom. I like having individual freedom. But I think that an overemphasis on individual freedom, and an overly dismissive attitude toward tradition and community, can be dangerous. I’ll give two examples.

The first example has to do with economics. Now, it’s perfectly possible to have a significantly left-wing economic system while still largely preserving individual freedom. Nonetheless, I think we can all agree that a libertarian individualism permeates American culture, including the socially liberal parts of that culture. Under these conditions, the message that individuals should do whatever they want, free from the constraints of tradition and community, may end up reinforcing free-market capitalism.

My second example has to do with foreign policy. I was in high school during the run-up to the Iraq war, and I remember watching as my beloved liberal values were used to justify a poorly executed and deeply misguided war. The neoconservatives might have been conservative on many domestic issues, but when it came to foreign policy, their defining feature was their militant liberalism. To put it crudely, the neocons’ dream was to go around the globe, bulldozing traditions, governments, cultures, and religions in the name of freedom and democracy.

Now let me be clear: I wholeheartedly support democracy and human rights, and I’m not saying that we need to respect societies and regimes that suppress individuality and squelch dissent. But I think that an overemphasis on individual liberty, and an overly dismissive attitude toward tradition and community, can lead to the kind of arrogance that got us into Iraq.

So here’s my second question: should American leftists be more critical of individualism and more aware of tradition and community? In fact, could a renewed respect for tradition and community—including religious traditions and religious communities—be an important step in combating the excesses of American capitalism and a possible resurgence of neocon foreign policy? Again, I don’t know the answer to this question, but I think it’s a question that the left should be asking.

Joseph Dowd

Joseph Dowd is an adjunct professor of philosophy at Cal State San Bernardino. He organizes THINK, a Meetup.com group where people with diverse perspectives come together over dinner to discuss issues related to philosophy, religion, science, and politics.

Organizing at Church: Some Legal, Theological and Ethical Issues

2018-09-20T22:38:00.001-07:00

Organizing at Church: Some Legal, Theological, and Ethical Issues

By

Rich Procida

What is the relationship between spirituality and activism? What is the role of faith in politics? In this article, I address a few legal, theological and ethical issues raised by spiritual and religious activism.
The first thing we need to recognize is that religion is political. It has always has been political. It is political now, and it will be political into the foreseeable future. The issue is not whether religion is or should be political. The question is what kind of politics will it be?

When I say political I'm not talking about politicians or parties. I'm speaking about addressing the issues we confront around the world, from poverty to war and every kind of injustice. These are the concerns of spiritually aware people.

Religion is not merely about our personal salvation and spiritual development. It's about the salvation of the world. We are to care about others, and this leads us to be concerned about the public policies and government actions that affect people.

This does not mean that churches should be involved in promoting candidates for public office. That is a question of whether churches want to maintain their tax status. IRS rules prohibit charities from promoting individual candidates for political office.

The free exercise and establishment clauses, on the other hand, prohibit only the State. Governments may not prohibit the free exercise of, or respect the establishment of, religion. Churches, on the other hand, are free to involve themselves in a wide array of social causes.

Some may say they focus on charity or do their work separate from their religious activities, but none of this outweighs the fact that as spiritual and religious people we are ethically called to take issue with the actions of our governments and be concerned about the effects of our nation’s domestic and foreign policy. To accept responsibility and to take action is what it means to be a spiritually mature person. This is central to our calling as religious and spiritual people, and it is also the mission of the church so that it makes sense that the church is involved.

When people think of Christians, they often think of evangelicals, but there is also a liberal tradition in the church. From abolition to the civil rights movement, liberation theology to the poor people’s campaign, religious and spiritual people have worked for social justice throughout history.

Evangelicals seem ignorant of the basic biblical message of the gospel, to care for the poor, bring down the powerful, and lift up the lowly. That’s why I believe this struggle is winnable. Everyone already knows the Bible commands us to provide for the needy, to welcome the stranger, and to love our neighbors. Conservative evangelicals should be hard-pressed to push their agenda when confronted with the true message of the gospel, of Jesus’ ministry, and the Bible.

So we are talking about “ethics,” particularly Christian ethics but also spiritual ethics and social ethics. What are we as human beings, as spiritual people, or as Christians morally obligated or called to do? Are we to be concerned about the welfare of others, to love our neighbors, and what does that mean when applied to our collective activities as a community, a people, or a nation?

Being spiritual is not about personal morality, purity, or experience without concern for the larger community. Being a spiritual person or being a Christian means loving one another. There’s plenty of biblical support for this, and the golden rule is an ethical principle of many religions.

Isaiah describes the heavens as belonging to God, and the earth as God’s footstool. According to the Bible, God created the nations, even setting their boundaries (Deuteronomy 32:8). God promised to make Israel a blessing to all the nations of the world (Genesis 12:2, 18:18, 22:18, 26:4, and 28:14), to be “a light to the nations” so that God’s “salvation might “reach the ends of the earth” (Isaiah 49:6; Acts 13;47). As such, God called the nation of Israel to be a model nation for people to look to for what it means to be ruled by God (Isaiah 49, Psalm 47 and 67).

Some of the worst and most horrendous atrocities in the world occur at the hands of governments and other corporate entities. The things we human beings do to each other in the name of God, or nation, or ideology, or profit are the demonic results of our collective political acts and failures to act.

The Bible is an ancient sacred blood-soaked book that is dangerous in the wrong hands. We must wrest it from those who misuse it. Progressive Christians can provide a counter-narrative to conservative evangelicalism.

The Church has a checkered history, but it’s not alone in its penchant for blood. History is full of bloodshed. Blood has also been shed over ideology, money, and power. The State is the biggest perpetrator of violence in the world.

The question is not “when will religion, and all such foolishness, go away?” The question is to what use will we put our faith? To what use will we put the Church? To what use will we put God?

The Church has a role to play, but it is not a social service agency. It doesn’t have beds, social workers, and doctors. Instead, churches have pulpits and pews.

The Church is an organizing institution charged to bring salvation to the ends of the earth. Like the State, religion isn’t evil, but it can be corrupted and put to evil ends. It’s up to us to resist its tendency toward evil and to lead it toward what is right.

Catholic Sex Scandal Requires Major Reform

2018-08-29T19:29:00.000-07:00

The days of an all male, “celibate” priesthood are over. Not only is the writing on the wall, it’s painted in big red letters. Fifty years after the sexual revolution, and in the midst of a new awareness of sexual abuse called the “Me Too” movement, the exclusion of women from the priesthood and the focus on chastity are relics of an age long past.

Sexual purity may have served a purpose when the male leader of the household held the power of life and death over the women, children and slaves beneath him. In a world where widespread slavery included sexual slavery, refusing to have intercourse with the designated male was an act of resistance and liberation. Today, the freedom to choose one’s lover and the terms of that relationship, whether gay, straight, bi or transgender, etc., is becoming more and more a fundamental right.

A second century Christian text tells the story of Thecla, a chaste woman who is said to have preached alongside Paul. One day they came upon a man who desired her and offered Paul money for her. When Paul denied knowing her, the man attempted to rape her. She fought him off and injured him, so he brought her before the governor on charges of assaulting a nobleman. The governor sentenced her to be mauled by wild animals, but when they threw her to the lions, a lioness turned and fought off the male lions.

In the context of antiquity, the focus on chastity may have served a purpose.Today, sexual purity may actually reinforce male domination. At a minimum, personal piety diverts us from our true calling to do good works (Ephesians 2:10).

Abstinence does little to make the world a better place. It’s unrealistic to expect human beings to be sexually holy and pure. Sexual purity doesn’t even make sense and isn’t even desirable.

Sex cannot be described as a pure loving act where we float above the bed in spiritual ecstasy while rose petals rain down from above. Human sexuality is more rough and tumble than that. The church has lost all credibility in this area, and it never really offered a healthy, well-rounded approach to human sexuality anyway. It should get out people’s bedrooms and refocus on the common good.

Pursuing moral purity, self-flagellation, and the other types of penitence many Catholics are calling for in response to the scandal are ways of doing nothing. Calling for Bishops to resign in mass regardless of their individual culpability is a way for the Church and churchgoers to avoid changing themselves. The changes that are required will be both structural and theological.

The focus on purity has always been a luxury of rich churches and those comfortable with the status quo. Churches in poorer regions of the world have, like Jesus, tended to focus on economic and social justice issues. Pope Francis has already moved in this direction, but he needs to do more. He needs to deemphasize the Church’s teaching on sexuality and prioritize justice advocacy instead.

Allowing women to become priests, removing the requirement of celibacy, and pruning the Church’s outdated teaching on sexuality will not by themselves solve the problem of predator priests. There is a question about whether the requirement of celibacy attracts persons who are uncomfortable with their sexuality? Many institutions from schools and police departments to corporations and the media all have to enact policies and procedures to deal with the misuse of authority and other unlawful conduct.

There are many people who when given the opportunity will abuse their power. The church has over the last few decades taken actions and enacted procedures to identify and respond appropriately to these situations now and in the future. The underlying problem is the culture of a male rule.

Sexual abuse is at the heart of patriarchy. Male domination has always engendered sexual exploitation. Patriarchy, and thereby sexual domination, is embedded in the foundation of our culture from ancient times to the present.The ancient focus on chastity, the sexual revolution, and the Me Too movement were all ways to resist oppression.

Today we are becoming aware of how male domination has lead to systems of sexual subordination and the inability of our institutions to cope with the shameful truth of sexual abuse. It’s not just the Church. Hollywood moguls, universities, and other institutions have seen scandals. It’s often the victims of abuse who feel ashamed, and people who come into contact with that abuse can also feel shame.

This shame is what leads to silence. Shame is a feature of sexual abuse. It operates to shield the perpetrator from prosecution, especially when victims think they won’t be believed or that the system will be turned against them.

Shame may be part of the reason some survivors become abusers. Abuse can be confusing and people have conflicted feelings about the abuse and the abuser. The cycle of abuse ultimately perpetuates the domination system that supports the current social order and the privileges of being white, male, wealthy or powerful.

The solution to the Catholic Church’s continued crisis is to move away from a celibate, all male priesthood, personal salvation, moral purity, and orthodoxy and refocus instead on doing social justice work. This will include not only charity work but also justice advocacy and spiritual activism.

Congregations should advocate on behalf of the poor, marginalized, and oppressed. Churchgoers should attend marches and demonstrations together, write letters to and lobby lawmakers, attend public meetings, and educate the people about issues of social justice and public welfare. This will restore the Church to its original mission: To bring God’s salvation “to the ends of the earth” (Isaiah 49:6; Acts 13:47)

Richard Procida is an attorney and co-author of Social Issues in Global Perspective: Pornography (Lexington books, 2003). He writes biblical commentary for clergy, pastors and lay leaders and produces a podcast called “Bible Study for Progressives.” He is also a survivor of sexual abuse.

Breaking Down Walls and Abolishing the Law: Welcoming Foreigners and Not Oppressing Them (Ephesians 2:11-22)(Proper 11B/Ordinary 16B/Pentecost 9)

2018-07-20T17:29:00.000-07:00

Ephesians 2:11-22

11 So then, remember that at one time you Gentiles by birth, called “the uncircumcision” by those who are called “the circumcision” —a physical circumcision made in the flesh by human hands— 12 remember that you were at that time without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

14 For he is our peace; in his flesh he has made both groups into one and has broken down the dividing wall, that is, the hostility between us. 15 He has abolished the law with its commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new humanity in place of the two, thus making peace, 16 and might reconcile both groups to God in one body through the cross, thus putting to death that hostility through it. 17 So he came and proclaimed peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near; 18 for through him both of us have access in one Spirit to the Father. 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God, 20 built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone. 21 In him the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; 22 in whom you also are built together spiritually into a dwelling place for God.

Breaking Down Walls and Abolishing the Law: Welcoming Foreigners and not Oppressing Them (Ephesians 2:11-22)
By
Rich Procida

We are a new humanity. By his sacrifice on the cross, Jesus overcame the hostility between us. Now if we can only learn to live as citizens of the kingdom of God.

Citizenship was highly valued in the ancient world. Not everyone could be a citizen. Women, slaves, and resident aliens could not become citizens.

The Ephesians were without God, because they were foreigners. Forced from their homes, they had no place to worship their ancestors. Ancestor worship was common in the ancient world, and every household operated as a place of worship (Larry Siedentop, Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism (2016).

Having left their homeland, they had no place to worship their national gods. Ancient gods resided in their temples and could only be worshiped there. If a nation were conquered and the temple destroyed, the national gods were defeated.

In the ancient world, things that happened in the heavenly realm had profound effects on earth. The two realms were intertwined. The fate of nations and the authority of rulers came from above.

“Caesar owned all things” (Seneca, Ben. 7.5.3). “Whatever exists beneath Jupiter on high, Caesar possesses” (Ovid, Fast. 2.138) “for the emperor is the state” (Ovid, Tris. 4.15). We human beings have a tendency to worship our leaders and institutions.

In the empire, people were expected to worship the emperor as well as the state and city gods. Today, autocratic leaders and despotic regimes require absolute loyalty, encourage devotion to their leaders, indoctrinate their people, and suppress dissent. Even in Western democracies, devotion to the State takes the form of nationalism and imperialism.

Yet now we have a new identity as citizens of the kingdom of God. We are citizens of a new body politic, one governed by the rule of love. As Nijay K. Gupta and Fredrick J. Long, in their article “ The Politics of Ephesians and the Empire: Accommodation or Resistance?,” point out that the author of Ephesians uses language of resistance in establishing an alternative political identity around Jesus Christ as the one Lord.

Gentile audiences would have been aware of the emperors’ co-identification with the gods. They would have recognized the veiled reference in Ephesians 2:2 as referring to the ruling emperor. Behind the emperor lay a spiritual force.

In Ephesians chapter 6, the author tells us that “our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (6:12). What we have here is “a contrast of significance.” The author is saying that our enemies are not merely flesh and blood, but more importantly, they are spiritual as well.

The point of Ephesians 6:12 is that we do not ‘wrestle’ individually, or merely against human beings, or even in human terms. Instead, we are engaged in ideological and spiritual conflict with human rulers and authorities who are in league with the evil spirits of this world. Walter Wink describes these spiritual powers, whether they be angelic or demonic, as “supranatural,” meaning that they arise naturally from our social, cultural, and political institutions, like corporations, the church and the state. While ancient people thought in terms of a supernatural realm, their experience of “the powers and authorities” was real and tangible.

Ancient people experienced these spiritual powers as the cultural, social and political forces embodied in their institutions, leaders, and the state. Walter Wink, in his trilogy on the powers, tells us that for ancient people, “everything visible had an invisible or heavenly dimension. Spirit was at the core of everything. . . the whole universe was a spirit-matter event, and the self was coextensive with the universe.”

The armor of God is different from the armor of Roman soldiers. Truth, justice, peace, faith, salvation and spirit are the tools of nonviolence (6:10-18). In doing battle against the powers and authorities, we are to fight back in nonviolent yet powerful ways.

The author of Ephesians uses the image of the “dividing wall,” which was the wall in the Temple beyond which Gentiles were not allowed under penalty of death. The “law” which Jesus abolished by his martyrdom refers to Jewish cultural customs and practices, like circumcision and dietary rules. Christ has put an end to the culture wars that divide us from those of other faiths, cultures, and lifestyles.

In abolishing the law, Jesus broke down the hostility between us. These divisions include things like citizenship, race, national origin, religion, and ideology. As Paul writes in Galatians, there is no longer Jew nor Gentile, slave nor free, or male and female, for we are all one in Christ (3:28).

Paul’s position was radical. In a world where people worshiped the emperor and the national and city gods, Paul builds a new nation, a new Temple, a new dwelling place for God. In this new nation, foreigners, slaves and women can all be citizens.

In this new nation we welcome the foreigner and treat the resident alien as one native born. (Matthew 25:35, Exodus 23:9,Leviticus 19:34). We do this not only as individuals and as the Church, but as a people, a community, and a nation. We are to welcome the stranger, treat the asylum seeker justly, and lift up migrants and refugees; because we were once foreigners in a strange land, leaving our homes and fleeing oppression, without hope, with no place to worship or to live in peace.

Questions for Discussion

1. Using the theme, rather than individual proof texts, running through the Old Testament and into the New of welcoming the foreigner, discuss current issues about accepting refugees and migrants and treating the resident alien justly. How should we respond to oppressive or restrictive government policies on immigration and the treatment of refugees?

2. How do the themes of welcoming the stranger, loving our neighbors, and even loving our enemies inform our views on race, women’s equality, and sexual orientation? How should we respond to discrimination and structural violence against minorities, women, and the LGBTQ community?

3. Jesus set aside the ordinances and restrictions of the law and focused instead on welcoming sinners and outcasts into the kingdom. How does the author’s focus on abolishing the law and breaking down the hostility between those of different cultural practices and nationalities speak to us today about the culture wars and racial division?

4. Talk about the division within the country today. Consider the division between the Right and the Left, as well as the division within the Left or the Right. How does our system contribute to the division? How do political parties and ideologies cause division and hostility? What about religion? What role does the media and other sources of division, including foreign interference and espionage, play in stoking conflict? How do we contribute to the problem?

MODERN LECTIONARIES

Is Monogamy a Goal or a Byproduct?

The Resurrection and the Great Commission

Are States "Laboratories of Autocracy?" with author David Pepper

NATO Should Establish a No-Fly Zone in Ukraine

Congresswoman Linda Sanchez recalls traumatic moments of Jan. 6 U.S. Cap...

Breaking Down Walls and Abolishing the Law (Ephesians 2:11-22)

The Noahic Covenant: God Establishes Government (Genesis 9:1-17)

How People of Faith Can Heal the Nation

Do you Believe in Belief? | Atheist vs Christian Debate with Rich Procida

Arrest Trump! Biden’s First Crisis

Interfaith Solidarity March Speech 2020

Propaganda Awareness Training

Reject the Republican Cover-up!

When Trump Supporters Attack: One Hero's Reflection on the Bear Mace Attack on Nonviolent Protesters

Fighting against Tyranny

Know What the Times Call For: Impeachment and the Anointing of Jesus at Bethany (Mark 14:1-11; Ecclesiastes 3:1-8).

Understanding Progressive Christianity: A Historial Approach (Galatians 3:23-29)

The Future of Christianity in America and the World

x

"Irruption of the Real:" The Resurrecton of Jesus of Nazareth

Welcoming Americans and Their New Age Beliefs Back into Church Again

What Can Jesus Do but Die for You? The Healing of Blind Bart and The Way of The Cross (Mark 10:45:52)(Proper 25B, Ordinary 30B, Pentecost 23)

What Can Jesus Do but Die for You?

The Healing of Blind Bart and The Way of The Cross

By

Rich Procida

Organizing at Church: Two Philosophical and Ethical Questions

Organizing at Church: Two Philosophical and Ethical Questions

By

Joseph Dowd, Ph'd

Although there have always been liberal churches, the battle lines used to be pretty clear: left-wingers and secularists on one side, right-wingers and organized religion on the other.

Organizing at Church: Some Legal, Theological and Ethical Issues

Organizing at Church: Some Legal, Theological, and Ethical Issues

By

Rich Procida

Catholic Sex Scandal Requires Major Reform

Breaking Down Walls and Abolishing the Law: Welcoming Foreigners and Not Oppressing Them (Ephesians 2:11-22)(Proper 11B/Ordinary 16B/Pentecost 9)

Breaking Down Walls and Abolishing the Law: Welcoming Foreigners and not Oppressing Them (Ephesians 2:11-22)ByRich Procida

Breaking Down Walls and Abolishing the Law: Welcoming Foreigners and not Oppressing Them (Ephesians 2:11-22)
By
Rich Procida