Saturday Night Theologian
18 December 2011

2 Samuel 7:1-11, 16

Early in the presidency of George H. W. Bush, the Iron Curtain came crashing down, and many of the countries of Eastern Europe emerged as fledgling democracies. Shortly thereafter the Soviet Union, which for decades had held those countries in its thrall, itself disintegrated, and former Soviet republics became new countries like Latvia, Moldova, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and of course Russia. Back in the U.S. people excitedly talked about the end of the Cold War and the peace dividend that would result. The country would be able to redirect much of its military spending toward improving the lives of Americans, either by investing in infrastructure and new technologies or by cutting taxes and putting more money in the pockets of average Americans. Of course it didn't happen. In early 1991 President Bush launched the first Iraq War, codenamed Operation Desert Storm. The brief period of actual conflict was followed by years of continued military operations in the Persian Gulf region. During this period, which extended through the presidency of Bill Clinton as well, terrorist attacks on U.S. interests increased, and more and more money was spent on the military and on other budgetary items designed to support national security. Conflict escalated, culminating in the terrorist attacks of 9/11, which in turn led to a decade of conflict from which we have yet to fully extricate ourselves. Today's reading from 2 Samuel describes a period of relative peace in which King David finds himself after years of war. He tells the prophet Nathan of his intentions to build a temple, and though Nathan agrees at first with his plan, he soon returns to warn him against undertaking such an enterprise. Rather than David building a house for God, Nathan said, God would build a house for David, figuratively speaking. What David didn't know as he was planning to spend his peace dividend on building a temple was that more conflict lay ahead. In the biblical narrative, 2 Samuel 7 lies in the small interlude between the History of David's Rise--which began with David's anointing as king and continued through his accession to the thrones of both Judah and Israel, his capture of Jerusalem, and his subduing of his enemies--and the Throne Succession Narrative--which describes the internal conflicts David faced within his kingdom as various people, including several sons, vied to succeed or supplant David on the throne. The problem with a peace divided, as both David and a series of U.S. presidents were to discover, is that history is full of conflict, and periods of peace are always succeeded by challenges to that peace and the temptation to go to war. In the case of the U.S., the first President Bush thought that the conflict in the Gulf would be short-lived and relatively inexpensive, but he failed to calculate the long-term consequences of his actions, which continue today. Yes, U.S. troops are, thankfully, finally coming home from a long, ill-conceived and unjustified war in Iraq, but other troops remain in Afghanistan ten years after their initial entry into the country. Some would analyze the situation and draw the conclusion that war is inevitable and therefore the nation must prepare for it, pouring more and more money into the budgets of the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security. I analyze the situation differently. I look at the long history of warfare around the world and conclude that war is a losing proposition for all concerned. Wars often fail to achieve their objectives, they are always expensive, they result in tremendous and tragic loss of life, and there are always unintended consequences (see Charlie Wilson's War). The only way forward in the modern world is the way of peace. If the U.S. put as much money and effort into waging peace as it has in waging war, the world would be a radically different place. This is not a pipe dream or an idealistic delusion, it is a conclusion that many people around the world from different countries, faith-traditions, and ideological perspectives have come to believe is the only way forward. At the time of the year when Christians celebrate the birth of the one they call the Prince of Peace, a recommitment to the principle of peace is more timely than ever.

Psalm 89:1-4, 19-26 (first published 18 December 2005)

What is it that makes a nation great? For some people, a nation is great when it controls a large amount of territory. For others, a nation is great when it possesses great wealth. For still others, a nation is great when it produces men and women of great intellect and ability. The psalmist describes a nation led by a Davidic king. He describes the king's honor among his contemporaries, the nation's strength relative to surrounding kingdoms, and the king's ingenuity in foreign affairs. What is the source of this greatness? It is the king's relationship with God: "He shall cry to me, 'You are my Father, my God, and the Rock of my salvation!'" The United States is looked upon by many as a great nation, and in some ways it is indisputably great. The U.S. has the most powerful armed forces in the world, with a military budget that is roughly equivalent to the total military spending of the rest of the world's nations combined. The U.S. is by far the richest nation on earth, and our citizens, on average, enjoy high standards of living. The U.S. produces more Nobel Prize winning scientists and economists that any other nation on the planet. We are the only nation that has been to the moon, and we have sequenced the human genome. Yet despite these aspects of greatness, many today question whether the U.S. can truly be described as a great nation. In recent days our nation's leaders have debated publicly whether or not torture should be permissible. The state of California has executed a man who, after an earlier life of crime, had spent the past several years writing books to encourage children to stay away from gangs. Despite acknowledging that all the pretenses we used for waging war on Iraq turned out to be false, the president and others still say that going to war was the right thing to do. The government refuses to negotiate with the world's other nations about cutting the greenhouse gases that are rapidly heating the planet, despite the fact that the U.S. is by far the world's largest producer of such gases. The U.S. refuses to join the International Criminal Court, making its soldiers and military leaders above the international law that applies to everyone else. Most recently, the New York Times has revealed that the nation's biggest intelligence organization, the NSA, has been spying on U.S. citizens without obtaining warrants. These are not the indicators of a great nation. Instead, they point to fundamental weaknesses of character that can only lead to the nation's downfall, if they are not corrected. The key to correcting the situation we Americans find ourselves in--and the same applies to other countries as well, small or large--is found in the words of this psalm. When we deviate from divine principles such as love, mercy, honesty, and trustworthiness, we are setting ourselves up for a fall. Citizens of all countries need to turn to God, the Rock of our salvation, for guidance and strength, instead of relying on our own resources or alternative moral codes. In the end, a nation's greatness is not based on its own self-evaluation but on the opinions of neighboring countries. The world right now needs a superpower whose moral compass is firm and that has a vision of a future in which the whole world prospers, not a superpower whose chief claim to the name is excessive military spending and an excess of wealth that is disproportionately distributed to the top 5% of the population. It's time for Christians of all nations to work to make their native countries great in the best sense of the word.

Romans 16:25-27 (first published 18 December 2005)

One of the innovations of the Protestant Reformation was to move the pulpit from the side of the clergy's portion of the sanctuary to the center. This move symbolized that the proclamation of the gospel had become the central feature of the worship service. Twentieth century theologians, particularly those of a neo-Orthodox bent, emphasized the two-fold message of the church, which consisted of the didache, or teaching, and the kerygma, or preaching. The term that is translated "proclamation" in Romans 16:25 is the word kerygma. It signifies the totality of Paul's message about Jesus Christ. For Paul, the message about Christ was a source of power for the church, not only in the sense of providing direction and encouragement but, even more, of providing a direct link to the being of God. Paul uses two other words in this short blessing to refer to the overall message of the church. The first is the word "gospel," which is the translation of a Greek word meaning "good news." The Greek word is also the root found in words like "evangelist" and "evangelism." The other word that Paul uses to describe the Christian message is the word "mystery." Paul says that the gospel that he proclaims was formerly a mystery, even though it was present in the prophets, but now it has been revealed, so it is a mystery no longer. This comment doesn't mean that the Christian message contains no enduring mystery. On the contrary, God's divine dealings with humanity are shrouded with mystery. What Paul is saying is that, in Christ, a major portion of God's divine plan has been revealed. This plan is particularly significant for the Gentiles, for it reveals that the God of the Jews is the God of the Gentiles as well. Unlike religions that focus either exclusively or primarily on one ethnic or national group, Christianity is a religion that is open to all. Early Christian leaders from Europe, Asia, and Africa intermingled with one another freely and without prejudice. It is unfortunately true that large numbers of Christians have frequently slipped into one form of prejudice or another--against blacks, against Native Americans, against Aboriginal Australians, and especially against Jews--but at the same time it is true that the overarching Christian message, the kerygma, continually calls Christians out of their narrow-minded bigotry into a grand and glorious inclusivity, one that encompasses all the people of the world in the love of God. This is a mystery that is still unfolding.

Luke 1:26-38 (first published 18 December 2005)

How do Christians treat unwed mothers, especially unwed teenaged mothers? Although our gospels don't indicate Mary's age explicitly, Jewish custom in the first century suggests that Mary was probably a teenager when she was betrothed to Joseph. (The apocryphal Infancy Gospel of James, which dates to the late second century, says that Mary was sixteen at the time.) In some churches unwed teenaged mothers are ostracized, having committed the "unpardonable sin" of having sex. Rarely, however, are the teenaged boys who got them pregnant similarly ostracized. In other churches the girls are comforted and supported through a difficult, life-changing experience. Clearly the latter is the proper Christian model, and it reflects the experience of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Today's Gospel reading tells of the angel Gabriel visiting Mary and announcing to her that she had been chosen to bear the Son of God. The gospel of Luke shows only the positive side of Mary's situation: her divine selection is announced by an angel, she is blessed by her aunt Elizabeth, she is accompanied to Bethlehem by her husband Joseph (with no mention of his considering divorcing her), and so forth. The whole experience is profound and awe-inspiring. The same cannot be said for most unwed teenagers today. Since almost none of the pregnancies are either planned or desired, the prospective mother's first conflict is with herself. She often feels guilty, used, stupid, or unlucky. The next conflict is normally with the father of the baby, who all too often is unwilling to take responsibility or commit to support the girl and their baby. Even when the boy is willing to take responsibility, rarely is he able to provide much financial support, and emotional support is often lacking as well. The next conflict is with the girl's parents. Pregnant girls are usually afraid to tell their parents, for fear of anger, rejection, or worse. In many cases, perhaps most, after the initial shock wears off, the parents prove to be the most supportive people in the young mother's life. If not the parents, then grandparents, aunts, or close friends can sometimes fill the role. At least two other conflicts await many pregnant teenagers: school and church. The problem with school is primarily one of embarrassment, which is relatively quickly overcome, as most teachers and school administrators are trained to deal with such situations, and besides, they have probably dealt with pregnant teens before. The conflict with the church is often not so easily overcome, particularly in churches whose view of the church's position in the world is of an island of piety in a sea of sin. In churches like these, a pregnant teen often encounters people who are far more ready to condemn than to comfort and encourage. How welcoming are our churches for unwed mothers? Do we allow them entry, only to lay a guilt trip on them, or do we sincerely welcome them to seek the face of God with us. Do we piously judge them as sinners, or do we stand beside them as fellow sinner in need of God's grace? Do unwed mothers feel welcome in our churches today? Would Mary feel welcome?