Needing to redefine our political vision of family

Catching up on news - and trashy news - yesterday I learned that the father of ex-Governor Sarah Palin's grandson is going to pose for Playgirl.  I don't blame Levi Johnston, like the family of his child, he just wants to ride his moment of fame and possibly get of Alaska by doing so.  I freely admit that I'm a politcal pramatist, leaning heavily to the liberal-side - yet ironically in this season becoming more seasoned by capitalism.

The irony of the whole situation is that here is a political family who based their whole political upswing, and continuing and emerging political machine upon the notion of "going rogue" in the sense of returning to the better days of yore when family meant everything, when we worked hard for what we earned, when America was great.  Curiously enough in those days stereotypically: women didn't work and stayed home, young men wouldn't pose nude in a girlie magazine and America was forward-looking instead of history-fantasizing.

Ranting & Raving: Y es Hora!

I learned today about a move for Latinos to boycott the upcoming census [Oak Tribune article: Latino Activists decry Census Boycott].  Some are calling for a boycott, refusing to participate in something that is deemed racist.  Unfortunately it seems to be Christian Clergy advocating this: National Coalition of Latino Clergy & Christian Leaders.

The worst part for me seems to be the continuing perspective, that I can only call radically ignorant and privileged, that "People who have no right to be in this country should not be counted."  What is it about us that encases us into privilege, wanting to protect what we deem as our own rights at the expense of the rights of others, or the worldview that if someone else is counted, represented or protected it necessarily means that we will be losing something, or losing out on our piece of the pie?

Arguing Prop 8 at the Supreme Court
Majority vs. Minority: is it about tolerance or more?

Tomorrow from 9:00am - 12:00pm the arguments regarding the constitutionality of Proposition 8 will be argued before the Supreme Court. I've had a flood of emails in the past days inviting me to participate - and to tell folks in our church how they can/should participate in making their voices heard. I've also learned (and I could be wrong) that Attorney General Jerry Brown will give the opening arguments speaking for 15 minutes each for both side of the argument. I wonder, from what I've experienced, and my own perspective on the issue of this constitutionality - can you be impartial and argue for both - can you speak - can we speak or even fathom - both the rights of the majority and the rights of the minority? Is it about tolerance of an agenda/perspective that is other? Or is it about all of us and the way in which inalienable rights are protected and articulated?

Watch the preecedings live at http://www.calchannel.com/

Here's a link to a facebook invitation to rally locally against Prop 8 tomorrow http://100000march.org/sfmarch.html

Here's a link sent to online pastors by a California church seeking to offer a webinar about how to be invovled http://www.skylinechurch.org/pastors_rapid_response.php

Faith & Politics

OK - am I harping on a living/dead horse?  I've been talking, preaching & blogging on this for the past 8 weeks.  And today the SF Chronicle Insight (editorial/opinion) section published a whole edition on faith and politics.

I think they're inseparable for me in terms of living as a person of faith.  Yet I also refuse to limit my faith perspective to focusing simply upon one issue: marriage, abortion, school vouchers, war, or stem-cell research.  I follow Jesus who was all about mercy, compassion, justice, inclusion and personal transformation and systemic salvation.  He didn't focus on only one issue, rather he opened all his action to a experiential reflection upon the breadth and depth of his perspective, faith and worldview.  I can only hope to do the same.  AND I don't want anyone else to force their religion upon me, whether Muslim, Buddhist, Atheistic, Catholic, Evangelical, or god forbid - Presbyterian! :)   What do you think?

Here's some great articles in today's Insight

Public Debate and The Quietly Religious (A different perspective on faith and politics other than the dominant evangelical/fundamentalist one).

Catholics shifting to Democrats this time

Same-sex marriage foe challenged from within

Why I'm Voting NO on 8

This past week I've witnessed, experienced and talked through half a dozen encounters, some verbally abusive and borderline violent in our neighborhood regarding Proposition 8. (See my last blog, Blogging Towards Sunday October 26th for more theologically reflective thoughts on that).

I'm voting NO on the proposition, which has come as a shock to a few people as I am both an unashamed follower of Jesus and a protestant pastor.

Here's why I'm voting NO:

1. I believe, theologically, philisophically, and politically that we each and all are created "good" in the image of God, are created equal, and should be neighborly loved as God loves us and as we oftentimes love ourselves.

2. I believe in the separation of church and state. There is a reason our founders and framers began the amendments to our Constitution with this precision [link]. I follow Jesus as teacher, prophet and Lord. Yet I don't want our government to try to legislate a particular interpretation of what that may or may not mean, in particular in a way that could become something like a legalistic Christian version of the worst of Sharia law. "Government should not endorse, promote or subsidize religious views - and particular religious views should not be the determining factor in public-policy decision making." I don't want the government telling me how to transmit my faith-philisophical & worldview values and perspectives to my children. The flip of ensuring that I'm protected that way, means that I have to ensure that no one is treated that way.

3. Some would say that I'm a laxist in my faith, a heretic in my interpretation of the Christian Scriptures and doomed to hell for my non-fundamentalist faith practice. This is a big discussion. I would assert that I do believe and assert the authority of Christian Scripture, which I read and interpret essentially through the lens of who Jesus was, what he taught, did and how he lived. For me the fundamentals in faith, of following Jesus come down to the Sermon on the Mount, living out the Beatitudes, Loving God with all of who I am, and loving my neighbors in the same way, a radical affirmation of the inherent beauty of dignity of all creation, the universal brokeness of the human condition and tendency to life-denying judgment, and the call to love the least and little in a christ-ic way.

4. There are a lot of things said, repeated and proliferated that are diabolical twistings of the truth in order to scare people and motivate radical de-humanizing polarization through fear: Equality under the law and the right to marriage will not result in:

a. the restriction of the rights of religious communities. I already decline to marry people, and have the right to do so at my own discertion (which isn't racially, or orientiationally biased). The government won't force any religious community or clergy-type-person to perform weddings that they don't want to. Besides who would want to have someone officiate over your wedding that doesn't approve?

b. the state will not mandate and force public schools to advocate, legislate or dictate same-sex marriage to our children. This is ludicrous. My children attend a school where possibly half of the teachers are gay or lesbian. It is the more openly loving and deeply respecting learning community I have ever encountered and experienced, for the kids and the families.

c. there are some ridiculously silly fundamentalist, quasi-facist, propoganda being distributed these days that evoke the Judeo-Christian and claim to represent it with unquestionable authority and unassailable deniability. I received in the mail yesterday a letter addressed to protest clergy asserting that there is a direct link and connection between Same-Sex Unions and Child Sacrifice. (Bad Bible study by the folks at the Judeo-ChristianView: the Canaanites didn't do child sacrifices to Moloch because they were gay. They did so because that was the twisted god that they worshipped). [Here's their letter which also ties this into support of Barack Obama]. This is just one example of fundamentalist perspectives that claim to take the high moral ground, possess authoritative moral practices and definitive interpretations of the Jewish/Christian Scriptures - which have always been know to profess a unique faith with different perspectives and approaches to faith praxis. It's just not true. And it's not good Bible reading.

d. that legalizing same-sex unions will destroy traditional marriage (in particular in a Christian sense). This is ironic, the tradition of marriage in the Bible begins with polygamy, and historically inaccurate. Marraige was highy legislated and encouraged in medeival Europe by the royalty because it created a new way to tax subjects (maybe this would solve our current budget problems!?). I have yet to encounter troubles in my marriage because of gay and lesbian couples that are in our family, in our relational communities or in my neighborhood. Ther 50% failure rate of "traditional hetero-sexual" marriages in the USA has nothing to do with the presence of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters. It's called human nature, selfishness and our brokeness. I think for myself, that I'd rather focus on the log in my own eye rather than upon the splinter in another's eye.

5. I read yesterday on a neighborhood discussion board that we are being fooled when we equate equality of marriage today with the legal/religious/sociological battles for equality in terms of inter-racial dating/marriage in the past. I would disagree. How is it different. Rights are rights.

Of course I'm subjective and biased (we all are). Here's some links (trying to be fair and balanced) if you want to think some more about the issue.

"A Line in the Sand for Same-Sex Marriage Foes" [NYTimes]
Conservative Christians lead Prop. 8 Push (with good Bible Explanation Table) [SFGate]
No on Prop 8 Site
Yes on Prop 8 Site
Covenant Network [Presbyterian Christian Association Against Prop 8]
James Dobson's Focus on the Family and various broadcasts / print documents Supporting Prop 8

How are you going to vote? Why? What are your motivations for doing so? What do you hope your vote will help our nation/state move towards?

Bathtism

Make a Decision 2008

I've been talking a lot about politics and faith the past weeks, how all faith is necessarily political, faith is meant to be visible, not just a question of private morality, or intellectual doctrines, but a life orientation, a foundational world-view that shapes our discernment, decisions and commitments. So I thought between now and the election I'd blog a bit on some of the decisions that are coming up.

I was struck by this thought this past weekend during and after a baptism in the church community I serve. The person who was baptized is highly involved and greatly visible within the context of our faith community. Gentle, kind, compassionate, helpful, thoughtful and engaged, it's a person who is recognized across the diversity of our community members as a leader. After worship 3 things happened to remind me of the power of baptism and the active integrative connection between faith and politics.

1) I was cleaning up the church and happened to be bent over picking up some papers when I turned and looked up through the baptism font water towards the light streaming through a stained glass window (Here's my best photo attempt to recreate the moment). The waters of baptism oriented what I saw, (re)shaped my experience of my context, and invited me to a different point-of-view, with a perspective on the margins of the majority view of the font (and life itself). That's what baptism is, more than an invitation to a new experience of life, it's a re-orientation of how we live, make our priorities, see ourselves, relate with one another, and understand the ultimate power of the universe: that death is transformed into new life by the power of God - all the little (and big) deaths that we experience in life.

2) I was reading Jesus for President, prepping for our ongoing series and read this great section on baptism. (Jesus for President, pp. 144-147. Click on the images to make them bigger and easier to read. If you enjoy it buy the book!)

3) In talking with kiddo #2 about the day, she told me that the bath-tism was really cool. Traditionally, at least in some parts of the church community, we understand baptism as a bath, a cleansing of evil, a renouncing of the power of the devil or forces of systemic evil in our world and life. Many folks I've known struggled with that, in particular regarding infants, wondering what evil they have to renounce. I think #2 is onto something, in particular in light of the JFP interpretation, it is a bath-tism: an invitation to a new life-orientation based upon the kingdom of God and its priorities as opposed to those of the nations of the earth, multinational corporations and other empires that seek at all expense to preserve their own power. I'd down for that sort of bath-tism which is more about action than information, more about participation than observation, more about activism than spiritualism. Faith is policital, that's what we've been bath-tized into.