Professional Christians

I love this quote, it's from a book by Frank Shaeffer.

I can’t prove this, but I think that any person who remains a “professional Christian” in the evangelical/fundamentalist world for a lifetime, especially any pastor, risks becoming an atheist and/or a liar. Such individuals put on an act of certainty. Sooner or later they become flakes faking it, or quit. Worse yet, some just stop asking questions. The very fact that a preacher can fool others when he or she has so many doubts makes the self-appointed mediator of faith the deepest cynic of all if, that is, he or she doesn’t embrace paradox.

You can find the context of it here. I couldn't say it any better myself. The world is not the black and white, flat world that many evangelicals paint it to be. It's complex, grey, and multi-textured. Either you find a way to live in tension with paradoxes and things that don't make sense, or you end up faking it and living a sham.

Immigration and Segregation

This post may be a little off the current hot political topic of the day (healthcare), but oh well. It's what has come up for me. The other day I was listening to a couple of journalists talk about when one of them interviewed Dean Smith, the famous former North Carolina basketball coach. Back in the late '50s, Smith went with a black man into a segregated restaurant as a protest against the laws and practices of segregation at the time. One of the journalists asked Smith about why he was not more forthcoming about that incident. Smith's reply was something like: "you shouldn't need to get patted on the back for doing the right thing, you should just do it."

Listening to that brought to mind current debates over immigration, and responses of some evangelicals about immigration issues. One favorite tactic of conservatives (religious and otherwise) is to make a big deal about the fact that illegal immigrants have broken the laws of the United States simply by being here, as if that fact pretty much settles the debate. They have broken U.S. laws, therefore they are criminals and deserve to be locked up or deported. Evangelicals often point to verses like Romans 13:1-5 (NIV) for justification for ideas like that:

Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.

It seems pretty clear: don't be a rebel. Do what the government tells you to do, because it has been established by God. Most evangelicals are smart enough to make some notable exceptions to this, but not when it comes to immigration.

Looking back on segregation, however, I'm sure many evangelicals would also recognize the injustice in those laws. Perhaps many would also recognize the courageous actions of people like Dean Smith, Rosa Parks, and Martin Luther King Jr. as well. Through their nonviolent protests and breaking of unjust laws, they played a crucial role in ending segregation and bringing greater justice for African Americans. Sometimes I wish I could have been born in that era. Looking back, it all seems so clear, and I could have been a part of protesting to bring change to clearly unjust practices. But I'm also pretty sure that's just my own ignorance talking. Back then it wasn't so clear, and I'm sure a lot of people pointed to verses like those in Romans 13 as reasons for why they would not break laws which seemed reasonable at they time, but now are clearly seen as unjust.

Immigration is like segregation in that it is a crime of geography, like sitting in the wrong place on the bus - or going into a restaurant reserved for those who are white. In essence, they are both trespassing, whether it is in a business, bus, or country. So what are some biblical resources for dealing with trespassers on someone's property? What should be done with lawbreakers like that?

Even though it can't be applied normatively to state practices, I think that Leviticus 23:22 (NIV) provides some resources for Christians on how they should act towards trespassers on their own property, and how they should advocate that the State treat its own trespassers:

" 'When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God.' "

There's really no other context to this verse, it kind of stands on its own, along with another couple that say essentially the same thing in Leviticus. In our culture, it seems pretty obvious what a person should do if they find poor people and immigrants on their field: put up a sign that says "no trespassing," and then do what you have to do to defend your property against the trespassers. Or, if you are the U.S. government, you could put up a gigantic wall for hundreds of miles.

But, we are given a different vision in the Hebrew scriptures for how to treat people who are in need and wander onto your field. It seems to me that there is a common theme in the Hebrew scriptures that advocates for generosity and openness to trespassers, especially those of the immigrant and impoverished varieties. So, what should be done with all of our immigrant trespassers in this country? Lock them up? Deport them? There are not easy answers to that question. But, I think Christians have a unique opportunity now to advocate for hospitality and generosity to these strangers just as Christians had an opportunity 40 or 50 years ago to advocate for ending segregation. Let's not miss the opportunity now and just pay attention to some scriptures while ignoring others.

Evangelical angst and navel-gazing

Today I visited a different church with my family, and I was reminded of the other side of evangelicalism. Not everybody concentrates solely on moralisms and staying on God's good side. People who grew up or became a part of different traditions than I did have other concerns too. Some of these people spend a lot of time worrying about their immediate experience of love for God and God's love for them. After escaping the wasteland of quasi-fundamentalism, this was the thinking that typified most churches I attended (save for the one I work in now).

We spent quite a few minutes this morning singing something to Jesus like, "you're all that I need" over and over again. I sat there and was a little conflicted, because it sounds so good on one level. Isn't it right to just need Jesus? That's what I wondered anyway. But, the whole thing just didn't sit right with me. I wondered, "could I imagine one of the psalmists repeating this over and over again?" Did they? I can't really remember. I know that the words of the psalms convey realities of a relationship with God that don't always reflect mine, and that sometimes are much more intimate. But I can't imagine anything as saccharine as "you're all that I need."

It probably sounds like I'm saying they are wrong in some way for doing what they do, but I don't really want to say that. It's just that that stuff doesn't really reflect my relationship with God anymore, and I'm trying to figure out why. Part of it is the emphasis of the worship service: you would have no idea that there was any kind of world outside of it. The focus was purely: "me and Jesus." Was he close to you? Are you close to him? That's the focus. The sermon was to an individual, oriented toward giving him or her the assurance of God's love, presence, and forgiveness. The songs were focused around the individual and Jesus. The prayer time at the end was an invitation for an individual to be prayed for by others. Could that individual have brought wider concerns to be prayed for? I suppose so. But that really wasn't the focus. Is the Earth being cared for? Are there people who are hungry or needy? How do people live with one another and get along as a community? Are people suffering from the ravages of war or corrupt governments around the world? Are there any needs in the community surrounding that church? Does God care about this stuff? You would never have known from the worship service.

In fairness to that church, maybe that stuff is covered every other Sunday, and I just came to the one where it wasn't. But somehow I don't think so. I've been to enough of those types of services to know the drill. What's most important is the person, his or her experience of God's love, and his or her personal love for God. All that other stuff is secondary.