Saturday Night Theologian
21 September 2008

Jonah 3:10-4:11

In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks on the U.S., many Americans reacted angrily and viscerally. "If it was Muslims who attacked us" (most Americans have a hard time distinguishing Muslim from Arab), "then let's kill as many Muslims as we can in retaliation." And of course, that's exactly what we did. Our leaders figured that if they couldn't find Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, then pretty much any Muslim would do, so we invaded Iraq. Today, hundreds of thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars later, our national hatred is still not spent, though it has been tempered somewhat. There are rumors that troops may come home from Iraq (more likely under Obama than McCain). Or maybe they'll just be transferred to Afghanistan, where violence is once again escalating. The desire to see harm come to our enemies--or our imagined enemies--is as old as the human race itself. The book of Jonah is a parable, or maybe better a parody, about human hatred, the mercy of God, and the very human disposition to consider our enemies to be God's enemies. When God refuses to destroy Nineveh as Jonah had so fervently desired, the prophet sits on a hill and pouts. He is angry that God has shown mercy to the city, and he is equally angry that God has caused the plant that was giving him shade to die. How ridiculous is it to equate the life of a human being with the life of a plant? Yet that is exactly what Jonah seems to do. In actuality, though, I don't think Jonah is equating the two. What he's doing is saying that his comfort, and his alone, is all that should matter to God, and what happens to other people--especially those of a hated nationality--shouldn't matter in the least to God. When we read the story from that perspective, maybe we can see how ridiculous it is for us to imagine that God condones dropping bombs on innocent men, women, and children, just because they're Muslims or Arabs. The war in Iraq was wrong, and the continued U.S. presence in Afghanistan is wrong as well (unless, arguably, in a purely peacekeeping role). Crossing the border into Pakistan is wrong, as is shooting missiles at villages in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. Maybe some of the people killed were actual terrorists, but many, many more were innocent civilians, including many children. The fact that we don't mourn the loss of Afghanis and Pakistanis the same we mourned Americans who died on 9/11 says a lot about us as people of God. It says that we think of the God we worship as a tribal god, not God of all humankind. It says that we think Americans are more valuable than any other people on earth. It says that we think that what we consider to be American interests should supersede the interests of any other people on the planet. Most of all, it says that we are not truly people of God, and we never will be, until we learn to have a universal perspective and show the same grace and mercy that God shows to all.

Psalm 145:1-8

It has become fashionable to praise the generation of Americans that fought World War II as "The Greatest Generation." Tom Brokaw even wrote a book with that title. That generation of men and women is honored as "the greatest" because of its efforts to stem the tide of fascism and its willingness to risk their very lives to fight for their country. Now, more than sixty years after the end of the war, the present generation praises the efforts of a past generation to the future generation, because we feel that that group of people are praiseworthy and have something to teach us and our descendants. The psalmist says of God, "One generation shall laud your works to another, and shall declare your mighty acts." When the ancient Israelites thought of the mighty acts of God, they probably thought first and foremost of the exodus, the foundational event/story of their birth as a nation. They may also have thought of various victories in battle, and in a later period, they would have considered God's restoration of the Jews to the land of their ancestors following the Babylonian exile as a great event as well. For Christians, the greatest work of God was the Christ-event, the impact of the living Jesus on his followers and his continuing post-Easter impact on the world. But what kind of an impact was it? Many today still think of God as a warrior god who leads the faithful to victory over their enemies in battle, but Jesus painted a completely different picture of God. For Jesus, one's enemies are eliminated only by eliminating the animosity that exists among people, with the ultimate goal of turning enemies into friends. Many today, even those who call themselves Christians, mock those who suggest that transforming enemies into friends, at least on the international stage, is what Jesus called us to do. They revert to images taken from the Old Testament of a God who acts violently against Israel's enemies, although they conveniently skip over other passages, particularly in the prophets, that describe the ideal future as one in which the instruments of war and transformed into implements of peace. For Christians, at any rate, such an appropriation of selected images of God is illegitimate. If being a Christian means anything, surely it means that Jesus is for us the definitive interpreter of the Hebrew Bible. What will we tell future generations about God? That God helped us defeat our enemies in battle, or that God taught us how to love our enemies so well that they were no longer our enemies?

Philippians 1:21-30 (first published 18 September 2005)

In an address at a prayer service at the National Cathedral on Friday, President Bush made many promises regarding the federal government's intent to help rebuild the city of New Orleans. These remarks were certainly welcome. However, his pledge not to raise taxes to pay for the rebuilding efforts was puzzling at least, frightening at most. If the rebuilding of the city will indeed cost $200 billion, as many pundits are estimating, there is no way that the money can be raised from cuts in "unnecessary spending," as Bush promises (unless he is ready to slash the military budget, which he's not). One of three things, or perhaps all three, will happen. Either the president will renege on his pledge to provide federal funds to rebuild New Orleans, or the federal government will simply borrow the money and further increase the national debt, or federal programs that support the poor and elderly will be cut even further than they already have been. The president is right to pledge federal government support to rebuild the city and other areas damaged by the hurricane. He is wrong to pay for it on the backs of the poor or of future generations of Americans. Great leaders of the past have understood that in times of national crisis, it is necessary to call on citizens of the country to make sacrifices to meet pressing needs. Franklin Roosevelt called on Americans to support those who lost their jobs in the Great Depression, then he asked people to cut back on luxury items like sugar and steel to support the war effort. John Kennedy told his fellow citizens, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." Lyndon Johnson asked Americans to build the Great Society. Bush has shown himself to be pathologically unable to ask for sacrifice, either when the nation plunged into a serious recession, or when terrorists attacked our nation, or now that a hurricane has destroyed one of our greatest cities. Even worse, most of those Christians who reflexively support anything that comes out of his mouth have so far refused to call for sacrifice. Paul tells the Philippians church that God has graciously granted them the privilege of suffering for Christ. This statement is diametrically opposed to the health and wealth gospel, which teaches that those who are faithful to God will be blessed with riches and good health. No one wants to suffer--or if they do, they have a serious problem--but Christians should be willing to suffer for the sake of Christ. How is paying a few extra dollars in taxes to pay for the rebuilding of New Orleans suffering for Christ? Isn't it instead suffering for people who lost their homes and businesses, and in many cases loved ones as well? Actually, it's both. Jesus said, "Whatever you've done for the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you've also done to me." When we suffer a little for the sake of others, our suffering is also for the sake of Jesus and his gospel. To apply this truth further, Christians need to realize that giving up a little bit for the sake of one city is just the tip of the iceberg, for poverty is rampant throughout America and around the world. Those who preach that government should be slimmed down to the bare bones and that care for the poor and sick should be left to individuals and nongovernmental organizations are preaching a decidedly unbiblical doctrine. The Bible, both Old Testament and New Testament, calls on the people of God to care for the poor, not throw them to the wolves. Yes, individual Christians should do all they can, but our efforts can be much more effective at reaching people if the government will play its part as well. Christ calls us to suffer for his sake, that is, for the sake of those least able to care for themselves. We must challenge our fellow believers and our fellow citizens to do the same on the largest possible scale, so that we can alleviate, or at least ameliorate, the poverty, preventable disease, and unnecessary suffering of others.

Matthew 20:1-16 (first published 18 September 2005)

Several years ago I heard a famous biblical scholar speak on today's reading from Matthew, the parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard. The point I remember him making was that the workers who had worked all day really did have the right to complain about getting paid the same as those who had only put in an hour's work. In today's world it is common for one group of people in a company to be paid an hourly rate that is twelve times that of the lowest paid worker in the same company. In fact, according to the "12th Annual CEO Compensation Survey" just released by the Institute for Policy Studies and United for a Fair Economy, the average CEO at one of 367 leading companies in America makes 431 times that of the average worker in the same company. The pay differential between CEOs and ordinary workers is indeed unjustified. More than that, it's just plain wrong. Skyrocketing CEO salaries is a byproduct of a society that has committed itself to the path of wanton riches without thought for those millions of people who get left behind. In many ways in America today, the Rapture has already occurred (I actually believe the doctrine of the Rapture to be unbiblical, but I use it here to make a point). A few (the rich and powerful) have been chosen and taken up to heaven to meet a God who blesses the faithful with unbelievable wealth, while the vast majority (the poor and middle class) have been left behind on earth to struggle with the evils of the Great Tribulation. The biblical scholar I mentioned made a good point about the problem of unjust wages in today's world, but I want to flip his application on its head and emphasize what I believe to be the point that Jesus was trying to make with this parable, namely, that none of us is a deserving recipient of God's grace. Whether we've been following God for decades or we've just begun, God's gracious gift to us is the same: an abundant, meaningful life in God's presence. Sometimes it's not a matter of time served but of social class or lifestyle that really bothers people. Surely the same God who called me to work in the vineyard wouldn't also call a person like that! For all our talk about the ground being level at the foot of the cross, we continue to gaze up in admiration at certain people and look down our noses at others. If there's anything this parable tells us, though, it's that the rules of the kingdom aren't the same as the rules of the world. The world discriminates, divides people into social classes, holds some people up for admiration and others for derision, and generally erects arbitrary barriers between groups of people. The kingdom of God is different, for in God's kingdom everyone is equal: rich and poor, black and white, male and female, gay and straight, intelligent and mentally challenged, sick and whole. It's our job to make the kingdoms of this world become more and more like the kingdom of God.