Event Horizon

Falwell's Zeal

Jerry Falwell, who died today (CNN - Rev. Jerry Falwell dies at age 73), has been credited with mobilizing Christians in the United States to promote political change through electioneering and social activism. Christianity has a long history of such activism, from the Civil Rights movement to the abolitionists and the underground railroad of the Civil War Era. One can even say that such political and social activism was present at the dawn of Christianity. The "zealots" were a group that opposed the Roman occupation of Israel and saw in Jesus a symbol they could use to rally anti-Roman sentiment. The basic idea was to get people to rise up and overthrow the Romans and install Jesus as king. Jesus rejected these notions and did nothing to encourage this group. In fact, when the Roman governor asked Jesus if he was a king, he said yes, but that his kingdom was not of this world (John 18:28-40). The idea of Jesus as an otherworldly king and of Christianity as an otherworldly religion seems to have been lost on Falwell and his followers. I wonder if Falwell had ever considered the idea that had he been alive during Jesus' time he would have been a zealot rather than a disciple? The bottom line is that Jesus never told his followers to take over the state and impose Judeo-Christian values. And even when such social and political movements do succeed, do they really represent those values? When an entire generation of activists motivated by Falwell won elective office and began to wield political power, what did they do? Did they represent the values of their religion as the previous generations did? Did their policies demonstrate love, mercy and compassion? Did they feed the hungry, clothe the naked, help the poor, free the prisoners? I'm not sure who Falwell or his followers were really serving, but it wasn't Jesus. Falwell and his "Moral Majority" movement represented the politicization of Christianity in America and his death provides an opportunity for Christians to reflect on that legacy and  to ponder what it really means to follow an otherworldly king.

On Being Happy

Isn't it great to live in an time when people are paid to study happiness? Sure, every generation thinks about happiness, how to achieve it, and how to keep it, but we may be close to some definitive answers (Fox News - Key to Happiness Lies in Attitude). Modern scholars have distilled thousands of years of wisdom and a few academic studies to produce the following advice on how to be happy: Make lists of things for which you're grateful in your life, practice random acts of kindness, forgive your enemies, notice life's small pleasures, take care of your health, practice positive thinking and invest time and energy into friendships and family. Have a happpy day!

New Pope

I guess I should say something about the election of the new pope (Times Online - Mixed reviews for new Pope). I’ve held off because I’m not all that enthused. Let’s just say that I see no hope for this new pope to address those issues which prompted me to leave the church in the first place. I also have great misgivings about a pope who was once a member of the Hitler Youth (Wikipedia - Hitler Youth). Of course, I’m sure he was not a “good Nazi” but I can only imagine how experiences like that would shape his consciousness.

Pope John Paul II

I have been moved by the spectacle of the Pope's death. Of course, I never met him, but I was raised as a Catholic and I had the good fortune to visit the Vatican when I lived in Italy. Just being there is impressive and the sense of history is palpable. For me the greatest accomplishment of John Paul II was breaking through that sense of history (the church as a relic of the past) to make the Catholic Church a vital force for change in the modern world. He projected a new image for a spiritual leader, not just a man of contemplation and prayer, but also a man of action. He rescued Jews from Nazi persecution during World War II, he defied Soviet Communism, and he crusaded for the poor and the marginalized, seeing in both communism and capitalism the seeds of oppression. While considered a conservative by doctrinal standards, he nevertheless championed a Christianity that did not forget the poor, the disenfranchised, those living on the margins of progress and development. Though I am no longer a Catholic, I mourn the passing of this great leader and wish the cardinals well in choosing the first new pope of the 21st Century.

Meager Muslim Charity

Peter Bergen of the New York Times (Brothers in Alms) takes a look at why the richest Muslim countries have had such an anemic response to tsunami victims. I wonder why the U.N. has not criticized Arab states as being stingy? Note that NYT hides their content behind a registration barrier, you will have to register with them to view the article. Sad, isn't it.

The Passion of the Christ

The Mel Gibson film, The Passion of the Christ opens today. I have not seen it yet, but I plan to, and will offer some comments at that time. I've viewed the trailers that are available on the official movie website, and I'm impressed with the realism that Gibson has brought to this screen adaptation of the greatest story ever told. Of course, part of the controversy is that the realism and the violence are too graphic, but I'm sure that an honest depiction of these events would have to be. The way the Romans practiced executions, particularly with scourging and crucifixion, these were acts of torture designed to humiliate the victim and remind the people of the power and brutality of Roman rule. Torture is never an easy thing to witness. Thanks to modern technology and the faith of one man, we are all about to witness just how horrible and brutal such a death could be. We all must confront the Christ, either to deny him or to accept him, but you cannot ignore him. The crucifixion is the central act in the great human drama, and scene that returns to center stage in some shape or form in every generation. Our "reality TV" generation now has a chance to view a Reality Gospel that will challenge and inspire, and yes even offend viewers, just like the original.

One Nation Under [insert preferred deity or amorphous concept here]

I have grown more than a bit weary with culture wars and generally stay out of it, but the Pledge of Allegiance and the Establishment Clause are issues I feel strongly about. AP reports that, "The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will decide whether the Pledge of Allegiance recited by generations of American schoolchildren is an unconstitutional blending of church and state." When you look into the history of the Establishment Clause you discover that the Framers wanted to do something very specific, they wanted to prevent the formation of an official state religion, a Church of America. Their own experience in England well acquainted them with how the cloak of official religion can taint public life. They wanted an American where all would be free to worship as they chose, where people could run for office without being a member of a specific denomination. They did not mean to deny the public role of religion in general or the existence of God in particular. The existence of God is assumed and explicitly recognized in many of the founding documents as well as the private letters of the Founders. Because America was designed to be a free country, you are free as an individual to disbelieve in God, but America was and is officially a country and a people who collectively profess faith in God. This is our heritage and our history. How you interpret this on a spiritual level is up to you, but the "founding facts" cannot be denied. God bless America...and America, bless God.