October 2009 Archives

I've often wondered why progressive Christians don't typically celebrate All Saints Day on November 1 with more enthusiasm.  It is, next to Christmas and Easter, my favorite church holy day--I eagerly await reading the texts of our Christian ancestors and the communal singing, "For All the Saints," in my Episcopal church.

Earlier this year, I published a history of Christianity, A People's History of Christianity, a book focused on "saints" of the liberal and progressive tradition--people like Origen, Perpetua, Abelard and Heloise, Katarina Zell, Lazarus Spengler, Anne Askew, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Harry Emerson Fosdick, Maria Stewart, and Samuel Green.  The stories told therein are about generosity and justice, about prophetic preaching and speaking truth to power.   As a result, I've spent the better part of 2009 in mainline churches and with progressive Christian groups talking about history and why history is important to both our spiritual lives and to enacting social justice.

And I've listened to many mainline Christians share their reticence about engaging history, thinking about tradition, and the stories of our saints. 

Of all Christians, liberal and progressive ones have the most awkward relationship with history and tradition.  After all, liberal Christianity developed from "modernism," a way of looking at the world that privileged new ideas, philosophies, and sciences as part of God's revelation in human culture.  Modernists broke with tradition.  They looked to the human past and saw much wanting--superstition, violence, and repression--and willingly abandoned that past, especially the religious past, in favor of reason and enlightenment.  In the nineteenth century, many Christians accepted modernism and worked to adapt their faith to the new intellectual climate.  At its birth, progressive religion was the offspring of a certain sort of historical ambiguity.  In the last two centuries, western Christians willingly shattered memory because the past was too painful, too oppressive, and too morbid for modern sensibilities of tolerance and equality.  Better forget than remember. 

The other reason that progressive Christians don't engage history as eagerly as more conservative ones is that progressives are more critical and less given to hagiography.  Indeed, progressive Christians actually look for flaws in their "saints" (I once heard William Sloan Coffin make this point) instead of celebrating the contributions of the wise leaders in their community.  Indeed, we will often dismiss the insights of an otherwise good leader or role model by whispering, "Well, did you know that he wasn't very open about women?" or "She was really a racist..." Over the years, we've developed a bad habit of undermining the wisdom of the past on the basis of contemporary attitudes--thus displaying a spiritually unpleasant lack of historical humility.  Not a nice trait in people who claim to believe in human goodness.

On this All Saints Day, I'd like to call progressives back to history for two important reasons: 

First, progressive faith takes new ideas seriously and we try to bring the best of contemporary thought into our theology and congregations.  That's who we are and we will always be.  But--and this is important--western societies no longer suffer from too much history.  We are suffering from too little history.  Two hundred years ago, it was a very good idea to step away from the past's darkness.  Today, however, most people suffer from spiritual amnesia--that we have no idea what our history is, and have little idea who we are because we are disconnected from that past.   Younger generations of seekers are yearning to find their story--and to experience meaning that comes through belonging to a community that remembers. 

Second, one needn't engage in uncritical ancestor worship in order to celebrate our past.  Hagiography is one thing; a realistic view of history is another.  In our quest for realism, we've forgotten that people may do good as well as evil.  Every great leader in the history of Christianity had flaws--some had seriously misguided ideas and violent prejudices.  Our ancestors were both saints and were profoundly human at the same time.  To use the language of prayer, they did things they "ought not to have done."  They were, as we are, men and women of their own times--even sparkling insights of the divine were mixed with their own personal sins and the sins of their own cultures. We need to engage a practice of historical generosity when studying the past.  Indeed, one day, we too will be held accountable for what our great-great-grand children deem hypocritical, stupid, or wrong.  We hope they might be kind to us; we hope they will understand that we were doing our best. 

A few months ago, I heard Jon Meacham explain why he'd written about Andrew Jackson--a flawed historical character if ever there was one.  Meacham explained, "History is to a country what memory is to an individual."  Indeed.  History is to a religious movement, a tradition, a denomination, a church what memory is to an individual.  Loss of memory isn't funny.  Loss of memory can be fatal.  Progressive Christians have much to celebrate about the past.  We have much to learn from history.  And we have much to reclaim.  Progressive faith is a great Christian tradition--and we have many great saints.  

This All Saints Day, remember.  

Randall Terry is back with his after-life threats just in time for Halloween as reported by Associated Press:

WASHINGTON -- Anti-abortion activist Randall Terry is calling on people to burn effigies of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid this Halloween, as part of a "Burn in Hell" video contest to protest the health care legislation in Congress.

Terry, founder of Operation Rescue, said Tuesday that the contest serves as a political and spiritual statement that "gives people a chance to peacefully vent their rage."

"If Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid force us to pay for child killing and they die unrepentant, they will burn in hell for this," Terry said in a telephone interview.

But House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., called the contest "unfortunate."

"I don't think appealing to people's anger and in effect inciting them to acts which either display or in any way project violent acts is consistent with rational discussion of very critical issues," Hoyer told reporters.

A YouTube video of the contest instructions shows how to print a poster of Reid and Pelosi and construct a stand for it. The clip shows a person dousing the Democratic leaders' images with flammable liquid. The next scene shows their picture going up in flames. People are then encouraged to take pictures, record and submit online the footage of their Oct. 31 protests.

"No, this is not a threat to their body," an unidentified man says in the instructional video, "but it is a threat to their soul."

While this is a pretty spooky ploy I think most pro-lifers are embarrassed by these tactics finding them counter-productive as well as opposed to the American spirit of civil debate and disagreement.  Rev. Jim Wallis of Sojourners, whom I know to be personally opposed to abortion, responded to Terry's Burn in Hell proposal with this statment:

Hey Christians!  Stop putting a camel hair rope around Halloween on October 31^st, and instead take advantage of what happens on Nov. 1^st - All Saints Day.

It seems like we used to hear more from Christians who decried Halloween as a time to glamorize demons and the devil.   If observed at all, some Christians decided to create their own versions of haunted houses called "Hell Houses"  with the purpose of scaring people into belief by showing regretted abortions, gay people with AIDS, and addicted prostitutes.   In 2009 a more accurate Hell House might be a family that has lost their home to foreclosure, a baby starving for lack of food, or a polluted water supply.  But maybe Hell Houses should just die its ghoulish death in 2009.

I say let kids have fun on Halloween.  I mean, how bad can God be offended with kids dressing up as cowboys, princesses, matadors, hobos and even as ghosts (Charlie Brown anyone?).   The only real sin here is gluttony as kids pack candy into their faces.  But that has its own immediate punishment offered by nature - the stomachache. 

Instead of worrying about Halloween, take advantage of it as the springboard for Nov. 1, which is known as All Saints Day and Dia de los Muertos (Day of the Dead).   All those faux scary spirit world reminders of Halloween can be used as a springboard for a conversation about the real 'life beyond life.'   All Saints Day is a great time to talk about what happens when we die, to commune with our loved ones who have died, and celebrate their life and their presence with God in heaven. 

For Latin cultures this generally means going to a cemetery and having a party around the graves of family members.    This might sound spooky for those who have not grown up with the practice, but it isn't experienced that way.   It is a family celebration that reinforces the ties of commitment and love that continue even after the death of a loved one and an encouragement that there will be a similar party for us once we have died.

All Saints Day, like Ash Wednesday, can be a time of reflection on our own mortality.  The line between the living and the dead is very thin and we will all cross it some day. On Ash Wednesday as I impose ashes I say to congregants the powerful words:  "Remember that you are made from dust and to dust you shall return."  But then I add in a whisper just for the individual: "So care for your soul, which is eternal."  

All Saints Day is a celebration of those who cared for their soul by fulfilling Jesus' commandments of Love of God and Love of Neighbor.  It is a reminder of that one true task that Jesus has set before us.    Instead of cordoning yourself off this weekend, embrace this opportunity to reflect on the reality of death and celebrate the Saints who now live in God's eternal embrace. 

By John Gehring
Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good

Just in time for Halloween, Bill Donohue of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights is once again spooked about all those "radical secularists" lurking ominously behind ever corner. In case you didn't notice, these godless heathens are "waging war" against American culture and plotting to "smash the last vestiges of Christianity in America." So argues the irrepressible cultural warrior in a recent On Faith commentary and in his new book, "Secular Sabatoge: How Liberals Are Destroying Religion and Culture in America."

You have to hand it to the guy. Donohue makes righteous indignation and throwing rhetorical bombs into an art form. He is about as subtle as a fist in your face. If you are looking for reasoned and sensible analysis turn on PBS, Donohue seems to snarl. His latest depiction of cultural doom probably elicits a yawn from most religious Americans who are not obsessed with the bogeymen of multiculturalism, secularism, homosexuality and Hollywood hedonism that Donohue rails against with a bullying style.

Everyday in our churches, mosques and synagogues people of faith gather humbly to pray for wisdom, compassion and justice. We give public expression to this faith by comforting the sick, welcoming the strangers among us and seeking peace in a world torn by violence. We lobby Congress to pass health-care reform, fix a broken immigration system and address global climate change as profound moral issues. Even on difficult issues, we reject culture-war showdowns by encouraging pro-choice and pro-life elected officials to find common ground and reduce abortions by increasing support for pregnant women, expanding adoption opportunities and preventing unintended pregnancies.

Keeping track of Donohue's latest offensive comment keeps the watchdogs at Media Matters for America busy. Here's a few of his signature gems:

▪ "Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular...Hollywood likes anal sex." MSNBC, Scarborough Country, 12/8/04

▪ "A lot of these people are gold diggers looking to get money from the Catholic Church."  -Speaking about the clergy sex abuse scandal. The Last Word with Matt Cooper 5/29/2009

At least when he gets to feeling down about things, Donohue raises his chin and cheers himself up with this comforting thought:

▪ "The culture war is up for grabs. The good news is that religious conservatives continue to breed like rabbits, while secular saboteurs have shut down: they're too busy walking their dogs, going to bathhouses and aborting their kids. Time, it seems, is on the side of the angels."  On Faith, Washington Post, 10/19/09

It's sad, if unsurprising, that the media regularly turns to Donohue for a "Catholic view" on issues. While Donohue's bluster makes for sensational television, he rarely raises his voice to speak about issues at the heart of Catholic social teaching. While the U.S. Catholic bishops' 2008 election-year statement on political responsibility emphasized a consistent ethic of life tradition that recognizes torture, unjust war, the death penalty, genocide, racism and poverty as "direct assaults on innocent human life," Donohue is uncharacteristically mute on these points. Abortion is not the only "life issue" for Catholics. As Auxiliary Bishop Gabino Zavala of Los Angeles told the Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne, Jr. last year: "We are not a one-issue Church...but that's not what always comes out."

We live in an age where the shrillest voices often drown out sober debate and thoughtful insights. Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh watch their ratings soar with every outrageous remark. Bill Donohue gets invited on TV because he bellows and bloviates with the best of them. While some enjoy the antics, most of us are tired of the noise machine. Faith and reason are not enemies, but together help illuminate our path through the dark forests of fear, ignorance and injustice. Sometimes we just need to turn down the volume and tune out the shouters to find our way.

This week, the Vatican announced that it would make it easier for conservative Anglicans and Episcopalians--those uncomfortable with women priests and accepting gay people--to join the Roman Catholic Church.  The move surprised Anglican leaders who, evidently, had no idea that the Vatican planned a massive sheep-stealing campaign.  The news sparked lively--and sometimes mean-spirited--debate in both print and online media. 

Most stories pointed to the historic nature of the Vatican's action.  Evidently, not since the Protestant Reformation has Rome invited so many of its former children to come home.  There have been many remarkable individual "returns" of Anglicans to the Roman Catholic Church--most notably the English theologian John Henry Newman or the American bishop Levi S. Ives in the nineteenth century.  But historians strain to remember a mass invitation like this one.

Reporters, however, have missed something important.  While it might be unusual for Rome to formally invite Protestant to return to Mother Church, it is in no way odd for Roman Catholics--especially those in Europe, North America, and Australia--to abandon Rome for Protestant denominations.  For decades, cradle Roman Catholics have been leaving their church in favor of finding congregations that are open to divorce, practice birth control, support women in the ministry, and respect the dignity of gay and lesbian people.  Indeed, according to a 2008 Pew survey, one in ten adult Americans is an ex-Roman Catholic--with the Roman Catholic Church showing intense decline among Anglo- and African-American populations (Hispanic immigration is helping RC membership hold steady). 

A Catholic News service story from 2005 noted that the change was a "constant trickle," saying:

Among those changing denominations, the Roman Catholics generally say they long to breathe the "free air" of the Anglican Communion, with Catholic priests usually saying they plan to marry, the bishop said. The Anglicans usually say they have had enough of the "woolly thinking" of their leadership, he added.  "Anglicans who become Roman Catholic generally become very conservative Roman Catholics, while Roman Catholics who become Anglican tend to become very liberal Anglicans," he said.

These observations have been backed up in a number of academic studies--including my own work.  From 2002-2006, I conducted a Lilly Endowment funded research project on vital mainline churches (findings may be found in Christianity for the Rest of Us) and found that successful mainline congregations had large populations of former Roman Catholics, sometimes as many as a fifth of the members would have once been Catholic (in two Hispanic congregations, every member was a former Catholic). Several of the project pastors had also been Catholic.  In every case, the former Catholics praised the intellectual and spiritual openness of the mainline church as the major reason for switching. And the mainline congregations had accommodated many Roman Catholic faith practices--everything from centering prayer to Marian devotion--to help converts be more comfortable in the new Protestant setting.  

In western Christianity, religious switching is a way of life.  That the Vatican has just figured that out only proves they read polls.  That's it.  This isn't really news.  Churchgoers are a migrant lot--and they are voting for their favorite theologies with their feet.  Sometimes they vote liberal (as in the case of RC's leaving their church) and sometimes they vote conservative (as in the case of Protestants becoming Catholic).  But that they do it--and that their denominations engage in sheep-stealing to boast sagging membership rolls--should surprise no one.  When liberal Anglicans join the Roman Catholic Church en masse or conservative Catholics chose to become Episcopalians....well, that would be news.