Posted by: madtheologian | 01/24/2012

The Post-Partisan Dream

President Obama is beginning his SOTU address tonight.  I’m remembering him talking about being a post-partisan President and building an excitement that maybe, just maybe the Congress can work together to solve problems.  Then, Sen Mitch McConnell loudly announced that his only job was making sure that President Obama was a one term President.  McConnell openly admitted that they, the Republicans, would do the very minimum and do their best to block anything.  Speaker of the House Boehner joined forces and together with the a few super rich folks sparked fears based on race rather than fact, fears based on defining the President as “other” rather than calling him black.  It is a new racism that no one will call out.  Remember, “you lie.”  Just a good ol’ Southern boy confused at how someone that was not white was voted to lead the country from the White House.  The President wants to pull people from to a post-partisan, post-racial vision that our white male power structures just cannot figure out how to embrace.  I contend that if they, those keeping our economy hostage to defeat the President, cannot allow someone other than a white male face be successful because this evolution of leadership, power and authority, requires an altering world view of what American is and can be.  If our nation does not evolve we will become the Roman empire of old.

Listening to President Obama speak tonight and having heard the Republican candidates for President last night I can only wonder if this election cycle is a vote to hold on to the dream of being a post-racial and post-partisan 21st century partner in the global community.  Does conservative mean a “lords and serfs” society where the free market moves money up rather than across the social classes.  Does it mean that ”big government” defines the beginning of  life, whom consenting adults can marry, that Christianity is the “privileged” national religion, and that we must rule the world with a military made up of the working poor?  That is what I hear every time I hear the current crop of Republican candidates speak of their economic plans and vision for America.

The New Yorker magazine offers a great, lengthy article about President Obama’s post-partisan operating reality that is still a dream.  It is probably why I will go and vote when I don’t believe voting matters given what our election process has become.  The Citizen’s United decision has made it easier to wade in the mud without any accountability, but that is a blog for another day.

The Obama Memos
The making of a post-post-partisan Presidency.
by  / The New Yorker / January 30, 2012

If there was a single unifying argument that defined Obamaism from his earliest days in politics to his Presidential campaign, it was the idea of post-partisanship. He was proposing himself as a transformative figure, the man who would spring the lock. In an essay published in The Atlantic, Andrew Sullivan, a self-proclaimed conservative, reflected on Obama’s heady appeal: “Unlike any of the other candidates, he could take America—finally—past the debilitating, self-perpetuating family quarrel of the Baby Boom generation that has long engulfed all of us.”

Two well-known Washington political analysts, Thomas Mann, of the bipartisan Brookings Institution, and Norman Ornstein, of the conservative American Enterprise Institute, agree. In a forthcoming book about Washington dysfunction, “It’s Even Worse Than It Looks,” they write, “One of our two major parties, the Republicans, has become an insurgent outlier—ideologically extreme, contemptuous of the inherited social and economic policy regime, scornful of compromise, unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science, and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.”

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/01/30/120130fa_fact_lizza#ixzz1kQzNqZpD

Posted by: madtheologian | 01/24/2012

Interesting Vision

So much talk of leadership and who is not doing what in local, state, and federal government.  David Brooks is one of the “conservative” opinion writers that I read in the New York Times.  He is one of the few voices on the “conservative” side that I read, listen to, and think is actually interested in solving problems rather than gaining political power.  He offers an interesting perspective in his latest column in NY Times.  A excerpt here and link to read more by clicking the title.

Free-Market Socialism
David Brooks / Jan 23, 2012 / The New York Times

I hope President Obama read about Maddie Parlier as he was working on his State of the Union address. Parlier is the subject of Adam Davidson’s illuminating article in the current issue of The Atlantic.

If President Obama is really serious about restoring American economic dynamism, he needs an aggressive two-pronged approach: More economic freedom combined with more social structure; more competition combined with more support.

Posted by: madtheologian | 01/23/2012

Missional Ministry with Children & Youth

One difference that I’ve observed as I have aged is that our country treats children and youth like “mini-adults” and that we train them to consume.  I recall “chores” as well as “play” as a kid.  But, there is no room for play, unstructured or structured, in the lives of children and youth anymore.  It is a problem that is effecting how children and youth learn to live in diversity, problem solve as a group, and develop skills that can help them as adults.  One important aspect of Christian community could be creating an environment where children and youth can be who they are, children and youth, by creating safe space for play, worship, conversations, and study.  This may be one of the most important “missional” ministries that the Church can offer children and youth.  I think youth group, whenever you have it, should be 60% fun and 40% learning opportunity, but that doesn’t mean that learning is not happening during the “fun” part of youth group.  I’m not advocating an edutainment style of ministry with children and youth.  There is much, too much of this happening in religious and secular life.  I’m advocating for allowing kids to be kids and respecting that age of development so that persons are ready to enter community at age 18, the age we consider someone an adult, equipped to participate in shaping their community rather than extending adolescence into their 20′s.  The Christian Science Monitor has an interesting article on the topic of play.  Here is an excerpt from the article.  Click the title to read more.

Toddlers to tweens: relearning how to play
By Stephanie Hanes, Correspondent / January 22, 2012 / The Christian Science Monitor

That has changed dramatically, she says. In the early 1980s, the federal government deregulated children’s advertising, allowing TV shows to essentially become half-hour-long advertisements for toys such as Power Rangers, My Little Ponies, and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Levin says that’s when children’s play changed. They wanted specific toys, to use them in the specific way that the toys appeared on TV.

Today, she says, children are “second generation deregulation,” and not only have more toys – mostly media-based – but also lots of screens. A Kaiser Family Foundation study recently found that 8-to-18-year-olds spend an average of 7.5 hours in front of a screen every day, with many of those hours involving multiscreen multitasking. Toys for younger children tend to have reaction-based operations, such as push-buttons and flashing lights.

Take away the gadgets and the media-based scripts, Levin and others say, and many children today simply don’t know what to do.

Posted by: madtheologian | 01/23/2012

DOC Character . . . Nailed

These careful, moderated theological approaches are increasingly important voices and advocates for Americans in times of cultural and political polarization, division and distance. Ministers graduating and serving churches across the country from Brite truly are, according to the hymn, “the tie that binds our hearts in Christian love.”(1)

For the past fifteen years my denomination, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), has been in a full-blown identity crisis.  I don’t know if we are “middle-aged”, but we have certainly lived that stereotypical struggle.  Many, in an attempt to woo the Church consumer, have moved away from education to edutainment and from covenant community to commercial consensus.  I think of my denomination as “pragmatic dabblers” which can be deadly without a well-formed identity.  A seminary professor reminded our class, Christian Theology of World Religions, that one cannot join a inter-religious dialogue without first knowing your own religious identity, heritage, and by checking your need to “convert” at the door.  Pragmatic dabbling is healthy when you know who you are and religious dialogue important when you have a clear sense of self and respect for the other participants.  In our world of polemics, economic, political, and religious, the Disciples identity and voice is needed more than ever before.

The quote above comes from Pearce Edwards writing for the Daily Skiff.  He is covering the opening of a new building at Brite Divinity School which is on the campus of Texas Christian University.  Near the end of his article, “Harrison Building Reflects Brite’s Importance”, he offers this short sentence that nails what I would call “classic” Disciples identity and work in our nation and world.  Disciples theology and practice will have to evolve rather than transform, reform, or conform to current consumer or corporate preferences if we are to remain a relevant voice of Gospel in our Regions, nation, and world.  The next fifteen years will define the kind of Christians and citizens of the kindom that our denomination will be.

________

Reference
1. Pearce Edwards, “Harrison Building Reflects Brite’s Importance”, TCU 360, contributor to the Daily Skiff, January 19, 2012.

Posted by: madtheologian | 01/16/2012

The Latest “Sightings”

Ministerial Exception
– Martin E. Marty

Those who observe United States Supreme Court decisions on “church and state” are dealing with what many call the most important “religious liberty” case in decades, at least since the 1940s. Like so many cases, this one had a parochial start. The details are familiar, and we need not rehearse them all. Let it come to focus on the fact that a Lutheran parochial school teacher had been dealt what to her was a manifest injustice. She countered by seeking to pursue her case in court. Doing so, claimed the church, was counter to church teachings, so it fired her. Had she been a simply secular employee in a simply secular post, the usual standards for administering justice would have applied. But the church named her a “minister,” and argued for a “ministerial exception” to secular standards. The Supreme Court decision left the teacher out in the judicial cold and left many citizen justice-advocates heated up.

So we add a “ministerial exception” to a national vocabulary and code which makes another exception in religious matters, alongside “tax exemption for the churches.” Such a tax exemption practice is so widely appreciated that few think of its rationales and practices. Try getting elected to Congress on a platform which would question and even abolish such tax exemption. Is exemption just? Clearly, it is privileging religion, and many court decisions recognize and affirm this. Once again: is it just? Is it just to the significant percentage of the population which disfavors religion, ignores or disdains its institutions, yet pays higher taxes than if church properties were taxed. Never mind. Without such an exception, religious institutions would not thrive or always survive. So it is regarded, not always with clear rationales, as a public good. Does this mean that the church, which is supposed to be prophetic, has to mute critical roles and support religious institutions even when they have, in the eyes of their critics, malign purposes and malignant practices. Yes. Being uncritical is a price religious institutions pay for the goods they derive for their prosperity in a free republic and letting the institutions go free from taxing is the price it pays when it can only wink at religions damaging the public good, as many of them do.

“With liberty and justice for all . . .” is an ascription in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag, one that sets up a difficult balancing act. The founders, among them James Madison and others who quoted Montesquieu, were nervous. They quoted him: granting privileges to religion, as America does, has many upsides, but it can also contribute to downsides. If you want to destroy religion, Montesquieu had advised, give it favor. By granting “tax exemption” and now “ministerial exceptions,” the citizenry and its courts (unanimously in this case of the Supreme Court) are giving favors unmatched by policies of European nations which have or until recently had “established churches.”

These years one hears from some cultural and political factions the gross generalization that religion in general and Christianity in particular are being discriminated against and are suffering from the actions, policies, and expressions of secular society. Cases like the current one counter evidences. There are many assaults on faiths, including Christianity, in the culture at large. But the generally free ride given religious institutions even in a “secular time” should inspire thought: With all its contradictions, the United States remains a wonderful place in which religions can prosper. They do well when they serve the common good freely and openly.

References

“Supreme Court Decision: Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. E.E.O.C.” New York Times, January 11, 2012.

A background item that provides some context for Sightings today on “rights” and “privileges” is this condensation of a lecture:

http://www.bjconline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3505

Older Posts »

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 126 other followers