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?