No direction from pluralism.

I caught a glimpse of a fellow busrider reading the Bible and instead of feeling the usual kinship, I felt distant and even suspect of him: Is he an ill-mannered fundamentalist? Is he devout? Does he swear or drink? Does he fancy Palin? Does he hate the ACLU? Is he suspicious of mainstream media? Is he trying to get attention?

Such a change in perspective is no small thing for me. It is a thunderclap that hit years ago and has finally made it to this definitive point of dissociating from those whom I previously felt closest to. Odd. The roots are far-reaching: travel, mission work, getting burned by the Bush Administration, gracious and dear friends who challenged me on the heart of theological or political  issues. One friend in particular is a spiritual-but-not-religious-agnostickish-former-Buddhist-labels-are-clearly-not-befitting man who was interested in my story/beliefs and willing to share his own story/beliefs. As it went, my greatest fear was that he would throttle my pedestrian takes on economic policy, abortion, certainty, or my reading of the Creation account and I’d be left looking like a fool. Really, Vegan Yale graduates such as he are near the top of my threatening species list. Well, such a moment never came, and to the best of my knowledge it was not his experience of me either. We had deep and rich discussions, affirming and crushing stereotypes willy-nilly; discussing matters of meditation, intelligent faith, drugs, the trendy Christ, the abhorrent TBN, Daily Kos, to name a few. I love it. We recently formalized our discussions and meet monthly with people of other faiths. Tables are overturned, conches are passed around.

Ever so incrementally, I see the world as others see it. I read the paper and news differently, I defend different ideologies, I hold my dogma loosely, and admit to being wrong with minimal loss of ego. It feels a bit like insecurity at times and I am often bogged down in a pathetic pluralism that doubts meaning or the relevance of experience (see existentialist drift). There is no direction to head when you don’t believe in the certainty of where you are. When you’ve swung so hard from one side to the other you wonder about the validity of all your most devout beliefs. This wonder feels like a crumbling rock cliff sometimes. You imagine you are wrong about the whole lot of things. Dangerous space to dwell as a person of faith and yet, essential to faith.

The thing with pagans, heathens, socialists, commies, nudists, and other such fantastic beings is, they aren’t nearly as horrible as I’ve dreamed them up to be.

Filed under: Uncategorized

God is not Republican… or Democrat.

Is big government counter to the Gospel? Should the government be involved in works of mercy or just stick to justice? A dear Christian/missionary/Republican friend sent me a well-thought argument on the matter (here) and I penned the following response.

—

I guess I don’t see the role of government, market, church, individuals, NGOs in such black and white categories anymore. Each of them have budgets to steward and account for; they must submit to the vote of the people/parishioners/stockholders/board; all have primary and secondary objectives that involve mercy, justice, relationship building; and all have motives and values that can work for good or ill. To say the government should only serve justice, the church–mercy, and the market–trade, is just not viable in such a complicated world. Ideally, they share functions and values in different, integrated ways. I want all three realms to value the plight of the individual; to be compassionate and personal in their dealings. I want corporations to have CSR departments, I want the church to fight for civil rights, I want the government to provide equal education for all its citizens, or drop aid in war-zones. I am a fan of both World Vision and UNICEF. And I’m not worried about “sending a message”–as you put it–that the church is not THE place for mercy. Such concern sounds a bit arrogant to be honest. When Christians espouse small government, I wonder if they are simply jealous of the government encroaching on the mercy market. Frankly, I think the competition is healthy. I am sure you’ve witnessed dehumanizing church missions that turn the sick into souls to save, or a Third World village into a degrading compassion project. We aren’t as well-intentioned as we always like to believe; nor is the government as inhumane as we like to believe. Your consummating point: opposing the notion of “forced care” doesn’t seem to be the real issue as much as your disdain for people taking advantage of the system, its efficacy, ability to show care, and the passivity of the church and her believers–issues we both agree require great wisdom and action. (And really, isn’t one of the church’s greatest gifts, providing care for those who do not deserve it?) Why are we so enraged at the welfare system serving those who do not deserve it? Is it because we don’t get to offer the sinner’s prayer to the single Mom? I hope not. I don’t see the solution in further dividing up the work and roles but better integration and attention to humanity in everything.

The Right believes in and champions the freedom and liberty of the individual, which errs towards greed and individualism; the Left believes in and champions the collective well-being and justice for all, which errs towards indolence or collectivism. Neither system or party is perfect, but I would rather support a system that attempts to provide for everyone, knowing that a few will unjustly pay more and a few receive what they do not deserve, than a system that provides for those who work/inherit/deserve their position and unjustly abandons those who cannot provide for themselves. I see the gospel tipping more towards grace and community than justice and liberty.

Filed under: Uncategorized