Category: Politics

  • Ron Higdon: Can We Do Anything That Really Matters?

    Ron Higdon: Can We Do Anything That Really Matters?

    by Dr. Ronald Higdon, retired pastor and author of In Changing Times: A Guide for Reflection and Conversation and Surviving a Son’s Suicide.

    The sea is so great and my boat is so small.” When I first heard that many years ago I had no idea just how immense that sea would become and how much my tiny craft would seem to shrink. I also had concept of how stormy that sea could become. At the conclusion of a political campaign that, according to a recent poll, has greatly increased the anxiety level of over fifty percent of the population, the land of the free and the home of the brave seems to have become the abode of the fearful.

    One of my favorite biblical texts from childhood onward has been the question Mordecai sent to Queen Esther. For years the only translation I knew was (Esther 4:14): “Yet who knows whether you have come to the kingdom for such a time as this?” More modern translations (TNIV) give a slightly different twist: “And who knows but that you have come to royal position for such a time as this.” Either way, the meaning is clear: Your place in this crucial time provides you with the opportunity to do something significant.

    Of course, we lament, if we had some place of status or office of power we certainly would be in a position to have some significant influence over current events. But in this present global churning sea of difficulty how can we possibly do anything that really matters? It is easy to decide that since we can’t do anything great we won’t do anything at all.

    Recently, my devotional reading has surfaced two well-known pieces I think belong together. The First is The Practice of Self-Abandonment of Jean-Pierre de Caussade – widely known in its more popular version – The Sacrament of the Present Moment. The essence of its teaching is that God is present in this moment and it is the only one we have in which to live and do our “duty.” “De Caussade maintains that past thinking leads to discouragement and future thinking leads to anxiety and fear. De Caussade goes on to say that nothing is so small or trivial in God’s eyes. This moment holds the will of God for me.” (Mary Margaret Funk, Tools for Practicing the Spiritual life. New York: Continuum, 107-108).

    The second piece is the famous prayer used by AA: “Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.” Some things are “fixed.” But not everything is beyond changing – or at least moderating. And it does take real courage to tackle what I can change in myself and my small world of influence. The wisdom to know the difference between the two saves us from both frustration and discouragement.

    In this present moment, wherever I happen to be positioned, I have the opportunity to do what I can, with what I have, to the best of my ability. I can certainly refuse to add to the anger and rage that has gripped so many during this election campaign. I can refuse to participate in the dehumanizing of anyone. I can work on being a non-anxious presence with whomever and wherever I am. I can work on turning down the heat in a highly conflicted culture.

    I am always encouraged by the memorable words of Mother Teresa: “We are not called to do great things but small things with great love.” Her work among the nobodies of Calcutta has inspired countless people to give the best they can bring to the needs of those who are right at their doorstep. It encourages a one-on-one approach to living.

    I have no doubt that we are all here for such a time as this. We are meant to live today where we are with the gifts we have. We are meant to do what we feel we are capable of doing. What really matters is to begin each day with the simple prayer: “I know, Lord, that this is the day you have made and it is my only time to live. Help me to discover what I can do this day to make a difference – be it ever so small. What really matters after all is knowing I’m doing something and not simply observing life from the sidelines.”

    Featured image by Анастасия Тимонина from Pixabay

  • Bruce Epperly: First Do No Harm! (Job, Anne Graham Lotz …)

    by Dr. Bruce G. Epperly, pastor, professor, and author of Finding God in Suffering: A Journey with JobProcess Theology: Embracing Adventure with GodHealing Marks: Healing and Spirituality in Mark’s Gospel, and more!
    9781631991073One of the first principles of medicine and ministry is “first do no harm.” This is sagely advice, since it is easier to say things that harm than cure, especially in sermons, interviews, and books. Words matter and this is especially true when we try to explain the tragedies of life. The Book of Job is a treatise aimed at exposing harmful theology. While the Book of Job may not give us the right answer – and in some ways the text suggests that humans can never fully fathom the intricacies of creation and providence- the Book of Job, like the (possibly) contemporary dialogues of Plato uncovers the wrong answers to the questions of “why the righteous suffer” or frankly “why do we suffer period?” since, for the most part, the morally ambiguous often receive greater suffering than they deserve, and the downright violent and greedy often to get away scot-free in this lifetime, which for the author of Job is the only one there is.
    Recently, Anne Graham Lotz, tried to explain the problem of evil as it relates to terrorism. She tied it to national infidelity. According to Ms. Lotz, when we turn from God’s way, “God abandons us and backs away, and takes his hand of favor away, [God’s] blessings. [God takes] his hand of protection away from us and abandons us…..We’re struggling with our own pride and self-sufficiency. I think that’s why God allows bad things to happen. I think that’s why he would allow 9/11 to happen, or the dreadful attack in San Bernardino, or some of those other places to show us that we need him. We’re desperate without him.” [link to Huffington Post report]
    Ms. Lotz claims to have an orthodox Christian position and to be able speak for the God of Universe, discerning clearly God’s thoughts and inclinations. Frankly, that’s above her pay grade and mine, as the author of the Book of Job confesses. Still, her comment is worth considering, especially since the Book of Job is a sustained critique of literal acts-consequences approaches to the problem of suffering. According to the text, Job is the best of persons, and yet he suffers almost beyond his ability to endure. He recognizes that there is no justice in his suffering. Job’s experience is proof that “righteousness leads to rewards” and “sin leads to punishment” approaches to suffering cannot not be theologically sustained, if it taken literally. The majestic dialogue that crowns that climaxes the text suggests that in this intricately connected and wonderful world there are pockets of chaos with which God must even contend. Such pockets of chaos insure that, as Jesus asserts, the sun shines and the rain falls on the righteous and unrighteous alike. Evil institutions and nations prosper, as do persons, and likewise faithful institutions, nations, and persons may also flounder. (Matthew 5:45)
    Acts do have consequences and a nation’s fidelity shapes its future, to a certain extent. A godly nation – if there is such a one – creates a social order of hospitality, economic justice, and earth care that leads to flourishing. The quest for the peaceable kingdom that inspired the prophets – fair business dealings, concern for the poor, affirmation of the needs of vulnerable persons – leads to less violence in the streets, healthier relationships between law enforcement and minorities, and happier homes, but does not insure complete security for the nation and its citizens. Ms. Lotz’s linear cause and effect understanding of divine blessings and curses does not square with reality, either individually or corporately. Job is clear that it is the wrong answer; and a harmful answer.
    Although the Book of Job struggles to find a compassionate God, the text leans toward a vision of God as creative, intimate, concerned with the details of creation, and caring for the world in all its diversity. This theological inclination renders Lotz’s pontifications problematic in terms of their characterization of God. While our actions may enhance or limit what God can do in the world, just as our behaviors place limits on the love others can manifest toward us, no good friend, parent, or grandparent “abandons” her or his child or friend because of her or his mistakes. The Good Shepherd seeks the lost one. The father runs out to greet his wanton (prodigal) son. Jesus is fully present on the cross, praying for the forgiveness of those who crucify him. My guess is that Ms. Lotz’s relationship to her own family is reflects a higher morality than she attributes to God.
    If Jesus said anything about God’s morality and love, it is that God is more moral and more loving than we are. This is God’s nature, not something God can arbitrarily withhold. A deity who withholds his care to allow terrorist acts in Orlando, San Bernardino, or on 9/11 can be feared but hardly loved, and in character is little better than abusive parent whom we would prosecute for child endangerment and manslaughter.
    The Book of Job reminds us to be careful about what we say about God. Our words about God can hurt or heal, can incite violence or promote love, can open the door to seekers or turn outsiders away. Popular religious leaders would do well to consult Job – and Jesus – before making pronouncements on the reality of evil.
     
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2461′]

  • Elgin Hushbeck, Jr.: The Least Bad Choice

    by Elgin Hushbeck, Jr., Engineer, Christian apologist, and author of Christianity and SecularismPreserving Democracy: What the Founding Fathers Knew, What We Have Forgotten, and How It Threatens Democracy  and What is Wrong with Social Justice?
    Many people have complained in the past about having undesirable choices when going to the ballot box, but never has the nation faced a choice between two less desirable candidates than this year. When asked, I portray the election as between two unelectable candidates except that they are running against each other.
    If you are Republican in a reliably blue state, or a Democrat in a reliably red state, you are blessedly freed from having to worry, for your vote will not affect the outcome. However those who live in swing states face a very difficult choice.
    9781893729827There are only 3 options: vote for Trump, Clinton, or sit this one out. Some will argue they will vote for a 3rd party candidate or write someone’s name in. Ok, but that has the same net effect as sitting it out, and to believe otherwise is to delude yourself. It may make you feel better, but it will have no effect on the outcome except possibly as a spoiler.
    For Trump, the problem is that he is a bombastic reality TV show star with a thin skin. Perhaps the best synopsis of Trump I have heard was from Hugh Hewitt, who likened him to the Roman leader Sulla whose epitaph was, “No friend ever served me, and no enemy every wronged me, whom I have not repaid in full.” Trump often seems more interested in settling scores than running for office.
    He has no discernable ideology and has been on both sides of many issues, allowing him to claim he was on whatever side seems best for him at the moment. Even now his positions often changes. While there is clearly an honesty problem here, it is one common to most politicians, akin to Kerry’s statement that he was for the bill before he was against it. The bigger issue is that he seems to have little knowledge of the position he is running for. Even when warned that a question about the nuclear triad might come up in the debates, he was still caught off guard and did not know what it was. In short he is completely unsuited for the job.
    This would seem to make Clinton an easy choice. Yet, up against Trump’s possible future incompetence we have Clinton’s track record of incompetence. On her watch as Secretary of State we have disaster after disaster that has left the world in a much worse state: the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt; the war and its aftermath in Libya; the Russian reset and the invasion of the Crimea, and now troops massing on the new boarder threatening another war; the failure to get a Status of Forces Agreement in Iraq that lead to the rise of ISIS; and the terrible mishandling of Syria, to name just a few.
    The real problem is that her issues with truth go far beyond the normal political aim of trying to present oneself in the best light. She is corrupt, and corruption is much harder to address than incompetence, particularly given the modern Democratic Party, as an arm of the Clinton machine which works feverishly to protect her and her husband and has done so for some time now.
    At least with Trump, I can point to the fact that there were 17 candidates who divided up the vote, a media who gave him an estimated $2 billion in free media coverage, party in-fighting that could not settle on an alternative, and open primaries that allowed non-Republicans to help pick the Republican nominee. I do not like it but I can at least see how he became the nominee.
    For Democrats, Clinton’s hold over the party was such that she was basically the only choice that was allowed. The only other semi-real candidate was Sanders, but the DNC rigged the game to make sure he could not win and this was clear to me even before the leak of DNC emails.
    The pattern is clear going back decades. When they are caught, the Clintons just lie. When it is shown that they are lying they simply change to new lies. When those are shown to be false, they change to yet more lies. At some point they begin to claim they have already fully answered all the questions and anyone who continues to pointing out their lies is simply playing politics, while the Clintons just want to move on and get back to the business of the American people. Yet many Democrats are either in denial or simply do not care that she is corrupt, and are immune to any evidence to the contrary.
    The most recent example of this was the discovery that she had a secret email server. As usual she told lie after lie after lie in an attempt to get around the issue. When the FBI director testified before Congress that she had lied repeatedly in her testimony, which is perjury, she even lied about that and claimed the FBI director had said she had been completely truthful.
    Even now, Democrats in the know are holding their breath. Not that her server was hacked by foreign powers, that is a given that has already seriously damaged the country and very likely led to at least one death, probably many more. No, they are afraid that the missing 33,000 emails will be released before the election. The handful that have already come out show, not wedding plans and yoga classes as she claimed, but a pattern of collusion between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation that have already raised serious questions about selling the foreign policy of the United States.
    The fact is the Clintons not only operate outside the laws the rest of us have to follow, but they consistently put their own interest ahead of the country. Nowhere was this clearer than while the fire fight in Benghazi was still raging and the lives of Doherty and Woods hung in the balance. The Action Points of a meeting held to deal with the situation showed that instead of focusing on getting them help, Clinton was focused on fabricating a cover story to protect herself and the administration. As for Doherty and Woods, help was never sent and hours later they were killed. At the arrival of the caskets, Clinton, being Clinton, lied to the families to further the false cover story.
    Based on the FBI investigation, there is now no doubt that she broke the law and endangered national security with her server. But it is also pretty clear that the fix was in, and she was never going to be prosecuted for her crime. The FBI, like the Justice Department, IRS, EPA, and many other branches of government have been corrupted into just another arm of the Democratic party, which is now little more than part of the Clinton machine, protecting and bestowing favors on friends and going after enemies.
    At least if Trump causes problems there is no doubt that Republicans will quickly join Democrats to block him. After all they are having trouble supporting him even now with an election in the balance. So the choice for me is easy and I will vote for Trump. Trump can and probably will cause problems, but the country will survive, and one can at least hope he will only be a 1-term President.
    The country cannot survive the corruption Clinton will bring, at least not in the democratic form of government where the people have a real say in who runs their government. She will bring to the country what she brought to the Democratic Party nomination process, a system where opposition is allowed to run, but the fix will be in and they will not be allowed to win.
    I don’t like it, and I wish I had a better choice, but wishing does not make it so and this is the choice I have.
     
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2411′]

  • Bruce Epperly: The Book of Ruth, Gleaning, and the Social Safety Net

    by Dr. Bruce Epperly
    Leviticus 19:9-10 proclaims:

    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. Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the foreigner. I am the Lord your God.

    The God of Israel recognized the reality of poverty. God was well aware that poverty is more often the result of accident and misfortune than laziness. As the Hebraic scriptures, or Old Testament, constantly asserts, God hears the cries of the poor. Abraham Joshua Heschel described God’s relationship to the world in terms of “pathos,” God’s passionate care for the vulnerable, grounded in God’s experience of their pain.
    God is not aloof, but our companion every step of the way. Passionate for justice, the details of life matter to God, as can be seen from Hebraic laws and prophetic critiques. God is concerned that the scales for weighing be exact, that farms be maintained by owners and not foreclosed, that lending be a matter of ethics and not profit, and that every child be fed.
    Gleaning, or what we would describe as the “social safety net,” was not optional nor was it a matter of generosity. It was law! God’s law, and it was required of landowners and institutions. The divine passion inspired prophets to cry out against the injustice of economic inequality and the dissonance of poverty in the midst of plenty. Everything is personal to God, and this means business and government as well as individual relationships.
    Ruth and Esther CoverThe Book of Ruth is more than a pretty love story. Now, I must confess that I like the happy endings of Hallmark movies. I delight in performing weddings and celebrating at wedding receptions. The Book of Ruth is often invoked in weddings and the relationship of Ruth and Boaz is often seen as purely romantic. But, it was also a matter of economic survival and the welcoming of a foreign women into the Jewish community.
    Ruth can be read as immigration story, as a reminder that strangers have a place in our communities because they are God’s children, too! Ruth can also be read as an argument for a strong social net provided by government and business as well as personal generosity. Worried about their survival, Ruth goes to the wheat fields to gather food, the leftovers at the edges, and perhaps to catch the eye Boaz, who will provide economic security for this mixed race family. As scripture notes: “And Ruth the Moabite said to Naomi, ‘Let me go to the fields and pick up the leftover grain behind anyone in whose eyes I find favor.’”
    Ruth had a right to glean in the fields. She was poor and she was a foreigner and God’s law mandated that Boaz provide out of his largesse for the well-being of the power. All’s well that ends well. Ruth marries Boaz, bears a child, and becomes the great-grandmother of King David, Israel’s greatest king. Dig deeper, the greatest king was the descendant of a foreigner, an immigrant, and a welfare recipient. Although she was single and childless at the time, Ruth’s experience is similar to today’s single parents, the working poor, doing their best to support a family on a minimum wage job. Ruth’s experiences is also mirrored in the couple, both of whom work in the service industry, perhaps serving our lunches or cleaning our rooms, who barely scrape by, who receive no sick leave from their employers and must go to work or not be paid or lose their job, and who live from paycheck to paycheck and must depend on government services for health care and child care. (For more on Ruth, see Ruth and Esther: Women of Agency and Adventure.)
    In the midst of the election cycle, the Book of Ruth challenges any form of “dog whistle” politics that asserts that the poor are lazy and undeserving, and highlights “welfare queens” (with the implication that these are people of color) while neglecting our nation’s subsidies of corporations, many of whose employees must receive their health care from the government, our tax dollars, because wealthy corporates often fail to give benefits or a living wage to their employees.
    In today’s world, the practice of gleaning was a tax. It was God’s requirement, codified in Hebraic law. Generosity was encouraged in Israel, but generosity is always optional and arbitrary. Law is a requirement. Those who call themselves Christians would do well to look at the principle of gleaning, as well as the sabbatical and jubilee years, as a reminder that we have a social responsibility for the poor and vulnerable and that governmental support for vulnerable people is a necessity and not a luxury in securing the protection and the common good of the nation. This means fair taxes for the wealthy and corporations, who gain the most from our economic and governmental systems. Christians would do well to challenge candidates for whom lower taxes are an idol and who want to “starve the beast” and in so doing, starve our families and children.
    To God, it’s never just business or public policy or profit, its people and their joy and pain. God rejoices when the city streets are safe, children are laughing, everyone has enough to eat, and families are secure. God delights in just such public policies and governments that care for the least of these.

  • Politics Moment: Rejecting the Liberal and Conservative Labels

    Energion owner Henry Neufeld interviews Allan R. Bevere, author of The Politics of Witness and the just released Colossians & Philemon: A Participatory Study Guide on the U. S. election and our response to it. This was recorded on Friday, July 15, 2016, before the coup attempt in Turkey, but the attack in Nice and relations between law enforcement and members of the community in the United States were included. Allan served for some time as a police chaplain.
     

  • Politics Moment: Chris Eyre on the Rapid Change of Prime Ministers in the UK

    Chris Eyre answers a few questions on British politics asked from an American perspective.

  • Politics Moment: Elgin Hushbeck, Jr. on the Status of the U. S. Election

    Energion owner Henry Neufeld interviewed Elgin Hushbeck, Jr. and asked him about the Clinton email scandal, the chances of the Republicans replacing Donald Trump at the last moment, and what is likely to happen next in general. Enjoy!
     

  • D. Kevin Brown: We Don't Know History

    Credit: OpenClipart.org
    Credit: OpenClipart.org

    Kevin Brown suggests we, as Americans, don’t know history. He also believes this has an impact on how we live in society as Christians:

    Many Christians have been duped into believing that we must somehow compartmentalize our faith.  Therefore, we have a compartmentalized view that allows us to express faith and values in church but then divorces that same faith and values from the civil arena.  The teachings of the Bible reject this compartmentalized approach to life.  We are called to be salt and light in all areas of life.  We must not hide our light under a bowl.  And what we are seeing today is that indeed, our history demonstrates that for generations Christians embraced a viewpoint that we must assert the principles of Christ in all facets of life.

    Kevin Brown is author of Rite of Passage for the Home and Church and To Date or Not to Date.


     

    [ncsoc_items product_list=’1631990039,1893729958′ width=’100′ height=’150′ type=’h’]
  • Politics Moment: British Labour Party

    This is the second politics moment for this week, in which I ask Chris Eyre about the nature and logistics of the leadership turmoil in the British Labour party.
     

  • Politics Moment: Brexit for Americans

    Global Christian Perspectives will be on break for the next 3-4 weeks, so during that time I will be posting some short interviews of political interest with the various participants in the GCP discussions.
    On Friday, July 1, 2016, I interviewed Chris Eyre in two parts, the first on understanding Brexit and the referendum and political process involved, the second on the current leadership turmoil in the British Labour party. The first part, on Brexit, is embedded below.

Energion Direct
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.