Paul Louis Metzger – Page 51 – New Wine, New Wineskins

March 3rd, 2013March 11th, 2013

The Sequester and Saturday Night Live

This piece was originally published at Patheos on March 3, 2013.

Upon reading news on the sequester, you might not know whether to laugh or cry. There have been so many predictions, so much name-calling and finger pointing. I am not sure who to believe.

Two items stood out to me in a CBS News article on the sequester. First, according to the article, “Most entitlement programs are exempt.” The article goes on to say, “During the negotiations that produced the sequester, Democrats successfully pushed to exempt most forms of politically sensitive entitlement spending from the automatic cuts. As a result, Social Security, Medicaid, veterans’ benefits, unemployment insurance, and food stamps will not see any reduction in funding. Medicare beneficiaries were also spared the axe, while Medicare providers will see only a 2 percent reduction in payments. Mr. Obama’s healthcare bill, some recall, also opted to slash payments to Medicare providers in lieu of targeting beneficiaries.” If correct, you might find this news to be a sign of relief, especially if you are one of the beneficiaries of these various programs.

Second, the article raises the question: does the sequester, as problematic as across the board cuts is, provide “an opportunity to target wasteful spending?” As stated in the article, some Republicans are grateful that, while problematic, the sequester “has begun a conversation” on what they take to be wasteful spending. Still, why couldn’t our federal government have engaged in constructive conversation earlier on what is wasteful as well as necessary spending and avoided the sequester in the first place?

It’s hard not to laugh and cry at the same time, when observing how our government is handling this crisis. It gets even worse, when you find that our nation’s leaders don’t necessarily know what to make of the sequester. According to NBC News, House speaker John Boehner has claimed that he doesn’t believe anyone quite knows how to resolve the sequester, if it’s going to hurt the economy, or how it will work.

Given that many people don’t know whether to laugh or cry over the sequester, is it any wonder that Saturday Night Live has gotten involved in the act? According to a Saturday Night Live skit, Mrs. Obama will only do four television appearances a week from now on (down from seventy-five); air traffic control and border control will be severely impacted in comic if not cosmic proportions; astronauts will no longer have glass shields in their space helmets; three monkeys will be fired from the national zoo in Washington, D. C. and let loose on the streets of the nation’s capitol where they will wreak havoc; the list goes on.

Comic relief may be in order. But there is no time for finger pointing and hand-wringing. Whatever direction the conversation takes, the Democrats and Republicans will need to resolve their internal conflicts and work together to move us out of this mess. Inaction never leads to good governance. For our part, we will all need to learn to work harder together as citizens. The worst thing that can happen is for us to sequester ourselves from our nation’s problems and look out only for ourselves or our kind of people. We will need to make sure that whichever direction the conversation takes, we will advocate for those most disadvantaged; for example, cuts in public education will likely affect the most vulnerable student populations the most. Though the sequester will likely impact public education broadly, those who are more well to do can adjust more readily and provide other educational opportunities for their children. The poor seldom if ever have lobbyists in large part because they lack the necessary resources. How equitable is that in a democracy?

There is nothing funny about a country, whose more well-to-do citizens care only for themselves and who leave the most vulnerable to fend for themselves. Not only is there nothing funny about such inaction and indifference, but also there is nothing smart about it either: if we want to reduce poverty and build the economy (which everyone should affirm), we need to invest in the poor to benefit them and also so that they can help build our economy and help heal our nation.

February 28th, 2013March 1st, 2013

Jesus, Darwin and Donald Trump, Part II

This piece was originally published at Patheos on February 28, 2013.

Listen to this piece.

In “Jesus, Darwin and Donald Trump” (Part I), I conclude by saying that Evangelicalism may have been far more successful in generating support for the evolutionary supremacy of the market system than in challenging Darwin’s Origin of Species. There I was referring to Gordon Bigelow’s Harper’s Magazine claim that Evangelicals don’t simply assume the market’s gospel truthfulness but also promote it. In Bigelow’s estimation, Evangelicals have been responsible for cultivating the sense of scientific certainty around markets. If Bigelow’s assertion is correct, why might it be the case that Evangelicals have been responsible for cultivating this sense of scientific certainty around markets?

Could it be that many Evangelicals have bitten the big apple lie that individual effort alone leads to prosperity and the lack of prosperity reflects a lack of effort? Bigelow says of Evangelical convictions during the late 18^th and 19^th centuries that while salvation comes by conversion and faith for Evangelicals, nonetheless the suffering and pain of this mortal life was the result of original sin and bound up with our salvation. Evangelicals “regarded poverty as part of a divine program. Evangelicals interpreted the mental anguish of poverty and debt, and the physical agony of hunger or cold, as natural spurs to prick the conscience of sinners. They believed that the suffering of the poor would provoke remorse, reflection, and ultimately the conversion that would change their fate. In other words, poor people were poor for a reason, and helping them out of poverty would endanger their mortal souls” (Bigelow, “Let There Be Markets”).

Such a perspective may be bound up in part with a narrow reading of certain texts in Proverbs on such topics as laziness and sloth. While the Bible has nothing positive to say about sluggards, and exhorts people to work hard, the book of Proverbs provides us with general principles concerning how to live wisely, not statements of cause-effect relation for every situation. Proverbs 20:13 states, “Love not sleep, lest you come to poverty; open your eyes, and you will have plenty of bread” (ESV). How do you harmonize this type of exhortation with Scripture’s call to care for the poor? For example, Proverbs 29:7 says, “A righteous man knows the rights of the poor; a wicked man does not understand such knowledge” (ESV). Also, Proverbs 19:1 states, “Better is a poor person who walks in his integrity than one who is crooked in speech and is a fool” (ESV; see also Proverbs 14:31, 19:17, 21:13, and 22:2). One cannot be a sluggard and be a person of integrity; however, many poor people are people of integrity. Would the harmonization of Scripture’s various teachings on this subject of poverty suggest to you that not everyone who is poor is in poverty because of laziness? Why or why not? Moreover, in view of Scripture’s call to extend mercy to people (for example, God acts graciously and mercifully toward the lost, as illustrated by the father’s care for his prodigal son in Luke 15:11-32), how should followers of Christ care for those who make poor decisions and end up in poverty?

By the way, might there not be rich people who are lazy and/or who are unwise in their use of money? Concerning the matter of being unwise, consider Jesus’ parable of the old fool in Luke 12:13-21. Contrast him with Jesus’ disciples in the very next section of the chapter. Jesus’ disciples are holy fools. The difference between old fools and holy fools is that while old fools clutch their wealth with greedy fists, holy fools hold their resources with open hands. The latter do so because they are free to give their possessions to the poor because God’s kingdom belongs to them (Luke 12:32-34). How do we discern if we are old fools or holy fools today?

While we will return to such questions as these in future blog posts, one thing is for certain: we need to grow in wisdom in how we approach free market capitalism. No economic system can claim a monopoly on Scripture; however, Christian Scripture must be brought to bear on all economic systems. Otherwise, the Donald Trump fish of the survival of the economic fittest (and not the Darwin fish of the biological or genetic fittest) will end up devouring Christians.

February 25th, 2013July 9th, 2013

The Justice Conference, Part 5: Justice Isn’t Sexy, But It’s Beautiful

This piece was originally published at Patheos on February 25, 2013.

Listen to this piece.

Is justice the latest Evangelical church growth technique or tool? Do people find it sexy and cool to be associated with justice issues? Is the justice movement a fad or is it truly long-lasting? We need to guard against cynicism on the one hand and a superficial approach to justice on the other hand. I hold out hope for this new justice movement to the extent that we build on the shoulders of Jesus and righteous elders who have gone before us. Their just lives are not sexy, but they are beautiful.

One of the most memorable moments from The Justice Conference in Portland last year was the opening prayer given by my friend and mentor, African American pastor Dr. LeRoy Haynes, Jr. Dr. Haynes opened the conference with a prayer that opened the heavens and my heart. He has given his life to fighting injustices and for bearing witness to Jesus’ justice revolution, as he untiringly addresses systemic racism and poverty in our society today. His story may not be known in many Evangelical circles, but it is by no means a passing fad. He had marched with Dr. King and had been imprisoned during the civil rights movement. As a youth, he would go to jail for civil rights protests on Fridays and get out in time for classes on Mondays. Now an elderly man, he’s still engaged in the march for justice. It’s not a sprint; it’s a marathon race for him.

Dr. John M. Perkins has also given his life for justice. Years ago, I heard my friend and mentor share a significant snapshot of his life story of struggling for justice in the face of the demonic forces of racism and poverty to a very diverse audience at a secular university. After his talk, as people mingled in the lobby, I heard one young man say to a friend, “When Christianity is lived out that way, it’s better than sex.” A just life isn’t sexy, but it is beautiful.

At the close of this year’s Justice Conference in Philadelphia, Lynn Hybels exhorted all of us gathered for the event to build on the work of those who have gone before us, like Dr. Perkins. She graciously warned us to move forward with humility and fear and trembling, as we spend our lives in identifying with those on the margins. She asked Dr. Perkins to share closing words and then pray for everyone gathered at the conference. As the elderly African American saint prayed, he poured the love and passion of his deep soul into the auditorium. More than mere words, he prayed with his life blood that we would go forward and even lead the way. To do so, we will need to have the same perspective and live the same kind of life that he has lived: walking the talk and speaking and living with the authority of obeying Jesus in caring for those in the margins from the margins over many years. If we do, we can be assured that our just lives and justice movement will endure long after it has lost its seeming sex appeal. Only then will we experience how beautiful justice really is.

February 22nd, 2013July 9th, 2013

The Justice Conference, Part 4

I’m at The Justice Conference in Philadelphia this week. I wrote a series of posts several months ago reflecting on themes related to the pre-conference session “Sustaining a Justice Movement: how did John M. Perkins, Mother Teresa, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer do it?” which I will be leading on today at 9am. I’m going to reprint those pieces this week in hopes that we might all be thinking through these matters together. If you will be in Philly, I hope you’ll come to my session! If not, I would love to hear your thoughts in the comments, on Twitter, or on Facebook. Hope to see you at The Justice Conference!

How to Sustain Jesus’ Justice Movement, Part 4

Listen to this piece.

“We can’t do this alone.” These were the sentiments of my former student and her husband, who moved from Portland to Minneapolis/St. Paul to be involved in a community focused on addressing poverty while taking the vow of simplicty themselves.

How do you sustain a justice movement? Stay crazy. But it’s hard to stay crazy if you don’t live among beautifully crazy people who share the same values and who will inspire you and hold you accountable.

Hopefully, your accountability partners include some people who have been at it a while. My former student would let you know that you need crazy people who are also very wise. She and her husband knew they needed help. Rome wasn’t built in a day. Their justice movement would only last for a few days, if they didn’t connect with people with shared vision who had been at this work a lot longer than they had. Not those shock jocks and celebrities who talk a good talk, but people who had walked the walk a very long time, who had lived it out and had slugged it out with poverty, bearing wounds of loss and grief, while sharing life with and living among the poor.

You and I cannot do it alone. Whatever the justice initiative that we are aligned with, we need to make sure that we are aligned with other like-minded crazy people. Such people will include those who have been at it a good long while and who will help us put down solid foundations so as to build a house of justice that will withstand the storms of life that would beat us down and cause us to abandon the work.

A lot of people start out well and end poorly. They no longer care for the poor, the orphan, the widow, and the stranger in their distress. Disillusionment is one of the worst forms of poverty. People who end poorly often say that they used to be crazy and embraced the ideals my former student now embodies until they got wise and learned to play it safe. They thought they could do it alone. They should have known better. My former student knows better. She and her husband know that to conquer such foolish talk they must invest in a community that is rich in integrity and wisdom. Only then will they remain beautifully crazy through the years. Stay crazy and stay close to those who’ve gone before you. Finish strong.

February 21st, 2013July 9th, 2013

The Justice Conference, Part 3

I’m heading to The Justice Conference in Philadelphia this week. I wrote a series of posts several months ago reflecting on themes related to the pre-conference session “Sustaining a Justice Movement: how did John M. Perkins, Mother Teresa, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer do it?” which I will be leading on Friday, February 22 at 9am. I’m going to reprint those pieces this week in hopes that we might all be thinking through these matters together. If you will be in Philly, I hope you’ll come to my session! If not, I would love to hear your thoughts in the comments, on Twitter, or on Facebook. Hope to see you at The Justice Conference!

How to Sustain Jesus’ Justice Movement, Part 3

Listen to this piece.

Do you look at those you serve as the objects of your good will and charity or as subjects who shape you—even to the point of becoming your benefactors and friends? In discussing this subject with my colleague Beyth Hogue Greenetz, she said it is a lot more difficult to get burned out on serving people when they are your friends. It may very well have been the case that the same Mother Teresa who saw Jesus in those she served saw herself as the friend of those she served. Maybe this was one of the keys to the vitality of her work over the years.

One of Beyth’s and my ministry partners at New Wine, New Wineskins shared with a group of New Wine leaders of her encounter with a man asking for money at a traffic light. As she sat there in her car, she felt moved to give him some money. She told him “God bless you,” as she gave him the gift. The man smiled and thanked her. Seconds later, he came to the window a second time and said, “I have a box of pastries. Someone gave it to me, but I cannot finish it all. Would you like some?” My friend said that her eyes filled with tears, as she remembered the poor widow’s coin offering to God (Luke 21:1-4). All the man had to share was this box of pastries; he wanted to share it because he was thankful. My friend was blessed and thankful for this man whom she had blessed. It is such encounters as these at the traffic signals of life that lead to our own transformation and the sustaining of a justice movement. We meet Jesus in such encounters, as we are blessed by those we bless.

Such encounters at the intersections of life can be destabilizing if we want to stay in control, if we want to be the producers and charitable ambassadors who make everyone consume our good will. At some point, we will likely run out of good will and teeter and fall when we operate from this elevated position and posture. But what happens when we are open to making new friends along the way and are surprised by the blessings we receive from the seemingly least likely of benefactors? Our service becomes a grand adventure, as we experience the richness of the widow in the temple with her two coins and the man at the street corner with his remaining pastries. Our own coffers and cups and pastry boxes will run over as a result of the bounty of God’s relational grace.