Author: Pat Liberty

This pandemic is getting old. Actually, it’s been old for a while. And it shows no sign of letting up any time soon. Angst, worry and uncertainty are the stock of this time. These are all expressions of grief.

The loss of normalcy is a source of grief. Everywhere we turn we are reminded that these are strange times and we are far from what normal looked like before March. When life is normal we can delude ourselves into thinking we are in control. We are permitted no such delusion in these days. Wearing a mask, not being able to gather with family and friends, working from home (if we have a job at all) are stark reminders that life is profoundly different–and not in a good way.

Part of the loss of normalcy is the uncertainty of it all. It’s unclear how long this is going to last. We don’t know when we will be able to live life without angst about getting ill or making someone we love ill.  It’s hard not to worry about an unknown future.

Grief in this pandemic asks the question, “how much more normal are we going to lose?” Not having an answer is hard.

Another part of grief is the loss of feeling safe in the world. It’s dangerous to go out and be with people. It’s dangerous to go shopping. It’s dangerous to be in groups. It’s dangerous to gather with our family. Thanksgiving is potentially lethal, and there’s no way we can make that okay.

Pandemic grief is a constant emotional whiplash. It is understandable why depression and anxiety rates are skyrocketing across age groups and other demographics.

While we may be on the fence about gathering for Thanksgiving, consider a few things. It is one day, twenty-four hours just like any other day. It is a Thursday; there are 52 of them every year. It is the fourth Thursday; there are 12 of them every year. The day, however, is imbued with such emotional baggage it’s hard to remember it’s just another day. Thanksgiving is the quintessential God, mom and apple pie holiday. Historically there is more travel on Thanksgiving than any other day of the year. It’s possible the loss of this day is a flash point for other losses related to the pandemic. If it seems your reaction to all this is a little out of whack, consider what part of it has to do with Thanksgiving and what part has to do with pandemic weariness and grief.

What’s important to remember is that feelings are neither right nor wrong; they simply are. You may be feeling anger, sadness, uncertainty or just some amorphous blob in the pit of your stomach that has no name. When it comes to feelings, the only way out is through.

Sit with your feelings; take time to feel them and name them. Validate your losses, fears, anxieties and sadness.  Remember that so far your track record at getting through difficult times is 100%. When you feel like you are coming unglued, remember you are stronger than you think and more resilient than your know. Think about what has helped you through hard times in the past. How can these things be helpful to you now? Remember that even if you are a weepy mess, you are fine just as you are and you are going to be fine going forward.

Remember that sheltering in place does not mean isolating in place. Reach out. Learn how to use FaceTime or Zoom so you can “see” your family and friends. Remember the telephone; it doesn’t transmit the virus even if you sneeze.

Work at creating a new normal in this COVID bubble of weirdness. Establish some kind of routine. Include the things you love to do and balance them with the stuff you have to do. Take up a new hobby. Read a book, learn to knit, organize a closet, or weed through clothes you haven’t worn since Ford was president. The options are endless. Allow some time each day to check in with yourself and see how you’re feeling. Don’t beat yourself up, just feel. Allow those feelings to be expressed in your body. If you are feeing angry or frustrated beat a pillow or go outside and scream. If you are feeling sad, allow yourself a good cry. If you are feeling uncertain, do something that brings stability in the midst of all that feels like shifting sand. Balance doing something productive with quiet time for reflection. Consider starting a pandemic journal where you write your thoughts and feelings from day to day. Focus on the small things you can do to control something in the moment. Sometimes deciding if you want milk or juice with a meal can give a little foothold in the shifting sand.

Limit how much news you watch. Enough said.

Don’t “should” on yourself. Some days you will not be able to get out of your own way. It’s okay to binge-watch Netflix and zone out. If you are feeling deeply depressed, consider reaching out to a therapist or your doctor. Telehealth and teletherapy appointments are pretty common these days.

 Remember that grief is at least one part love. Loving the life we live and the circle within which we live is about loving life. Missing the complex and wonderful life we share with others is missing what and whom we love. Be gentle with yourself.

Reconciliation is one of those five dollar theological words that often seems like a mash-up between some skewed understanding of forgiveness and a win/lose that requires the “loser” to finally agree the other party is right. Then a few coats of varnish are slapped on to make it all look pretty and life goes on much as before; nothing changes.

In one form or another, reconciliation is a central concept in most of the world’s great religions. It is called by various names. Reconciliation is the language of the Judeo Christian tradition with which I am most familiar.

Let’s begin with what reconciliation is NOT. It is not a free pass for the wrong one party does to another. It is not a forgiveness freebie where one party agrees to “forgive,” often through clenched teeth and tight jaws. It is not leaving the status quo in place and going on as if nothing happened. Reconciliation is not forgive and forget (that is Shakespeare, not the Bible).

Reconciliation requires far more of us than cheap talk. The goal is a restoration of relationship in which both parties feel heard and a mutual agreement about how to move into the future is constructed. It asks that we be more concerned about the relationship than about being right. It asks us to move forward with mutual compassion and care. Reconciliation asks us to have enough humility to trust that something new is possible.  Reconciliation asks us to remember and honor the past and each other while seeking a common truth and a shared story that allows moving forward.

Differences are the not the problem. The problem is that we stop listening to each other. Layers of anger, hurt, feeling diminished and judged are piled on until the original issue is obscured and the ability to communicate is destroyed. In truth, differences can be a source of richness to our relationships, adding different perspectives and different views. Unity among people is never meant to be sameness.

The goal of reconciliation is healed relationship. There are multiple kinds of reconciliation: interpersonal, among groups, among regions/territories or countries, with creation and with the Divine (however one understands the Divine). Reconciliation takes a step toward Shalom, which means far more than the absence of war. Shalom is about deep well-being for people and creation. It is rooted in love, respect and compassion.

Reconciliation begins when one is ready to “lose oneself” and take ownership of the division and the reality of the pain it causes.  It is inherently risky, fully intentional and it takes time. It requires stepping across invisible lines of division in the hope of realizing a glimpse of the Holy One’s dream for all of creation. Reconciliation doesn’t ask who is right or wrong; it asks what is possible when honesty and desire come together for the sake of a shared future.

There are four steps to the reconciliation process, and it is a process not an event. These four steps are linear, but they are not a cookbook recipe to follow that guarantees an outcome.

The first step in the reconciliation process is some awareness that the relationship is broken. One individual or group reaches out to the individual or group with whom the relationship is broken. Both parties agree to show up for the process.

 Second, there must be a willingness to listen at a deep level, scraping away all the inflammatory rhetoric and hyperbolic language to create a different energy that allows understanding and empathy. Empathy does not require one’s cognitive assent to how the problem is stated. Running it through the brain to decide if it is a worthy position does not lead to reconciliation. Empathy is a response of the soul. It asks for genuine compassion toward a pain or hurt one may not understand.  

Third, there must be sufficient preparation on both parts. A commitment to respectful listening, making “I” statements, and moving away from blame are firm commitments each party can make ahead of time to ground the process. Each party needs to decide what they are prepared to do to be reconciled. There can be no persuasion or coercion in true reconciliation. Boundaries and limits must be respected.  

Finally, there must be a frank discussion of what actions are necessary (on both sides) for change going forward. Then the work of living into the new relationship begins.

It is painfully clear that a host of relationships are broken in our world, our country, our communities and our families. There is much talk about healing and surely healing is needed.  True healing is predicated on reconciliation. There is a temptation to rush toward some form of “healing” that is much like the mash-up on reconciliation referenced earlier. It doesn’t work and it adds another layer onto an already broken relationship. Let’s start the work of reconciliation with a vision of what it might look like and a willingness to listen deeply and lovingly to one another. 

At the time of this writing, it is likely the outcome of the election will be unclear. It is also possible this lack of clarity may continue for some time. What is clear is that there will be discontent. For some the very life of our democracy depends on the occupant not getting another four years. For others, the very life of our democracy depends on the opposite.  

If you did your civic duty and voted, there is little that can be done to further impact the outcome. If you did not vote, shut up. It’s as simple as that. If you don’t participate in the process, you don’t get to gripe about the outcome whenever it becomes known. 

What we can do and what we must do is not lose heart. Paul’s second letter to the church in Corinth says, “So we do not lose heart…because we look not at what can be seen, for what can be seen is temporary, but what cannot be seen is eternal (2 Cor. 4:16,17). We stay the course of what we know to be right. We continue to advocate for the poor and dispossessed. We continue to participate in civic life in ways that reflect our values. We continue to speak truth to power. We continue to bear witness to the light, love of justice and mercy in the midst of darkness that will not abate no matter who wins the election. The divisions at work in our country will not be magically healed after the election. This is what makes our work so very important.

The truth is that our world is a deeply broken place. Greed and power conspire to hold some up while pounding others down. Every “ism” that defines us is one more layer that separates what ultimately should not be separated. History repeats itself. In the time Jesus lived, the Romans exploited and extorted money from the poor. Exorbitant taxes that no one could pay caused people to lose their land. Antiquated religious laws embodied in corrupt religious leaders colluded with corrupt political leaders to place social and religious burdens on the poorest of the poor. It was to these people that Jesus spoke the Good News. It is to these same people in our time that we are to speak that same Good News.

Our loudest petitions and prayers are spoken in action and deed. St. Francis said, “Preach the Gospel at all times. If necessary, use words.” Every act of love, every bit of kindness and every deed of justice no matter how small engages the inherent goodness of the universe. The Holy is everywhere and we both embody it and bear witness to it when we live from our deepest center where the Holy lives in us. By whatever name the Holy is known: God, Buddha, Yahweh, HaShem, Allah, Ik Onkar, Vishnu or one of the other hundreds of names for God in the great religions of the world, at the very heart of it all is love.

Each day let us live life to the fullest, making choices that bear witness to the Holy. Every day let us live for the best of life and the integrity of creation. Every day let us dream for others the same dreams we dream for ourselves. We need one another because we cannot do these things in a vacuum. We need encouragement to show up for love in a world that is not always loving. We need affirmation that we are on the right track when it feels like we are all alone in doing what is good and right and just. We need voices around us that speak the same language, so we can hang on to hope when hope seems hard to find. 

The race for a world where there is enough for all and love is the law will not be to the swiftest or the loudest. It will be to those who persevere and do not lose heart. The world needs you to be loving, gracious, passionate witnesses to the best of what it means to be human, for therein lies the hope of the world. You are not alone.

It seems the loudest voice in the Judeo-Christian tradition is the white “evangelical christian” voice.  The problem is that this voice is not evangelical in the true sense of spreading the life giving word of God.  Neither are they Christian in their following of Jesus’ words and teachings.  They are a socio-political block with a conservative political agenda designed to roll back human rights (especially women’s rights), reproductive rights, care for the poor and disadvantaged and stewardship of the environment while catering to the richest members of society.

As we go to the polls next week, here are some thoughts to ponder:

• “The arc of the universe bends toward justice.” (William Sloane Coffin)
• Love is the essence of every major religious tradition in the world.
• Spirit is the holy in all of us and in creation.
• Creation reveals God.
• We are God’s agents of love, peace and justice in the world.
• The teachings of Jesus are our guide and guard.
• Jesus was a Middle Eastern Jew.  There is no room for anti-Semitism in the Christian faith.
• Jesus was a person of color.  There is no room for racism in the Christian faith.
• Mere tolerance is a low bar for people of faith.
• The first and second testaments stand on equal ground.
• The Bible inherently favors the poor and disadvantaged.
• Jesus’ harshest judgements were focused on the wealthy and the religious leaders who colluded with them.
• The Christian life is a life of dissent against the injustice of the world.
• All paths to God are equally valid; those who claim the name of Christian choose one path among many.
• We are called to preach the gospel at all times and, if necessary, to use words (St. Francis of Assisi).
• Healthcare is a right not a privilege.
• Those working full time should earn enough to support their family.
• There is enough for everyone’s need, not everyone’s greed.
• The world would be a better place if humans practiced what they preach when they claim the name of Christian.
• The gospel agenda is non-partisan.
• We cannot give into the politics of despair, fear and powerlessness. 

Vote the values of the gospel.

Not belonging to one of the thousand hate groups active in the United States does not let us off the white supremacy hook. Hate groups are active throughout the United States. The Southern Poverty Law Center has an interactive map you can access here. https://www.google.com/search?q=SPLC+hate+groups+map&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS803US803&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj7s4Pct8PsAhUvhXIEHbQYDnIQ_AUoA3oECAoQBQ&biw=1536&bih=754#imgrc=MlL3oj79aDeSOM

In order for hate groups to survive and proliferate, an entire cultural substructure is needed. Each level of the pyramid depends on the level below it (see pyramid here https://www.google.com/search?q=White+supremacy+pyramid&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS803US803&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjD6vfRtsPsAhXvlHIEHTHXDDwQ_AUoAXoECAcQAw&biw=1536&bih=754. ). It’s easy to think that telling an off-color joke or letting a racist relative’s comment pass unchallenged has nothing to do with white supremacy. Such behaviors are, however, a lower level of the cultural substructure that contributes to white supremacy.

It may seem like an overstatement, but after reading Layla F. Saad’s New York Times best-selling book, Me and White Supremacy, it will become painfully clear. This is not an easy book to read, it leaves no place to hide. With deft skill she exposes attitudes from the most blatant forms of white supremacy to the most subtle. Her words are a profound invitation to explore our attitudes, prejudices and internalized privilege.

Beginning with a language correction she expands the phrase “People of Color” to Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC). One of the first lessons is that by collapsing all groups of people into one group, individual cultures and unique traditions are flattened. The traditions of Indigenous Peoples in our land are very different from the experience of Blacks who were brought here as slaves over four hundred years ago. “People of Color,” according to Damon Young in a GQ article in August 2020 says, “People of Color has become a linguistic gesture, trade jargon related to a market tested veneer of inclusivity…it is a white people thing.” Acknowledging that there are many different groups of people with skin colors other than white is a way to begin honoring their unique histories and traditions.

Saad defines white supremacy as a “racist ideology that is based on the belief that white people are superior in many ways to people of other races and that therefore, white people should dominate over other races.”  (p.12)

This is a journaling book. Engaging the reflection questions at a deep level is the beginning of inner transformation that is the foundation of changing the world. She explores the deepest recesses of the human heart and spirit where racism and privilege hide and exposes them for what they are. Over the course of thirty days Saad systematically peels back each layer.

In Week One she explores white privilege, white fragility, tone policing, silence, superiority and exceptionalism. In Week Two she exposes the topics of antiblackness in general, antiblackness against black women, men and children, and stereotypes, as well as cultural appropriation and color blindness.

Week Three tackles apathy, tokenism, optical allyship, white saviorism and white centering. Week Four explores power relationships and commitments and further breaks the topics into white feminist leaders, how we relate to our own families and friends, what deep values are held and the fears that exist around losing privilege.

Each chapter is a masterful exploration of each strand of thought, perception and feeling that together make up the strong cord of racism and white supremacy in our nation. Lest we delude ourselves into thinking white supremacy is really not a problem, something not endemic to our culture, review where we are as a nation in the white supremacy pyramid. We are frighteningly close to the apex. While we may not participate in violent actions, those actions are contingent on our complicity as articulated in lower levels of the pyramid.

As necessary as it is to protest police officers shooting unarmed black men, it is equally necessary to deal with our own privilege. As troubling as systematic discrimination against BIPOC is in our society, it is equally troubling to explore the attitudes we harbor deep within when we are honest with ourselves.

Saad’s book is one to read over and over again, engaging the questions at a deeper level each time. If attitudes are the first level of the white supremacy pyramid, then changing the pyramid begins with changing our attitudes. Changing our attitudes begins with changing our hearts.

Being “politically correct” has fallen into disfavor. Since the occupant has made inflammatory language acceptable again, people all over the country are asserting their right to “free speech” as a thin veil for judgement and hate speech. The occupant cited political correctness as a “big problem” in the United States. He further posited that he does not have time for being “politically correct” and neither does the country.

The pushback against being “politically correct” was captured in a poll by the Pew Research Center in which the majority of Americans thought people were too easily offended. Fewer than 40% of Americans thought people needed to be more careful about the language they use to avoid offending people.

The divisions of who thinks what are predictable. Among Republicans 78% say people are too easily offended and only 21% say people should be more careful to avoid offending others. Among Democrats, 61% think people should choose language more carefully and 37% say people are too easily offended. The occupant, in his penchant for dividing the country, has sharpened the lines by his use of inflammatory rhetoric and judgmental actions.

It reflects a growing lack of civility in public discourse. When the example set by the leader is judgmental and lacks compassion, it is only a matter of time before people follow the path set out.

It appears that the tide began to turn in the 1960’s when what Ruth Perry calls the “New Left Movement” used politically incorrect to describe people who were out of step with more inclusive and embracing language as a way of honoring diversity. Conservatives across the country leveled criticism at being “politically correct.” Instead of an invitation to be more open, it became a source of derision toward those advocated a more compassionate language about others.

Nowhere is the argument about inclusivity and honoring differences more obvious than in the shift away from Columbus Day to International Indigenous People’s Day. Cities and towns are re moving statues of Christopher Columbus and teaching a more balanced history of colonization. It is a hot topic and widely supported on both sides of the conversation.

Persistent in the midst of it all is the notion that Columbus “discovered” America. This assertion ignores the fact that what is now the United States was filled with tens of thousands Native peoples. They were systematically slaughtered, imprisoned and removed from their land. The history of how Native Americans were treated during the colonial period is appalling. It is a small thing to shift the focus from the colonizer to the people who were victimized by colonization.

Being “politically correct” is about intentionally choosing language that honors people who are different from you. It is a way of showing respect and decency, something that is in short supply in these days of the occupant’s verbal rampage through all that is compassionate and just.

There is much to be celebrated in being “politically correct.” It simply means to embody words and actions that avoid disparaging, insulting or offending people who belong to oppressed groups. There are many groups subject to discrimination, disrespect or prejudice; age, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, physical or mental disability and every “ism” used to describe another.

Holding political correctness as a goal for individual speech and behavior forces us to think about our own often unconscious oppressive attitudes and prejudices. We do well to call out those who use disparaging language and engage in hateful actions toward others. We can help to reclaim a public ethic of compassionate language without ever saying the words “politically correct.” It is simply decent language and caring behavior.

Others may deride or make fun of you, stand proud. Remind them that being “politically correct” is simply a way of not being hateful.

It’s no secret that the Black community has disproportionately less access to good medical care compared with whites. One aspect of this lack of quality care is in maternal child health. Here the double whammy of racism and sexism are painfully at work, yet it is a little known problem outside the Black community.

Unfortunately, it is nothing new. The United States began keeping infant mortality records in 1850. At that time infant mortality in the Black community was 340/1000 as compared to 217/1000 in the white community. Infant mortality dropped among all groups in the early 1900’s. By 1960 the United States had the 12th highest rate of infant mortality among developed countries. Currently the United States is 32/35 among developed countries. The most common factor cited in high infant mortality rates in the Black community is low birth weight. Black infants are more than twice as likely to die as white infants.

Among Black mothers, mortality (defined as death within a year of giving birth) is higher than it was 25 years ago. This translates to 50,000 preventable deaths every year–an increase of 200% from 1993-2014.  Black women are 3-4 times more likely to die from pregnancy related causes than their white counterparts. A recent New York Times article cites pre-eclampsia (gestational high blood pressure) and eclampsia related seizures as the leading cause of birth complications and maternal death. Black women are more than 60% more likely to experience pre-eclampsia and eclampsia than white women.

Sadly, none of this is news in the global community. In 2014 the United Nations Commission for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination called on the United States to “…eliminate racial disparities in the field of reproductive health and standardize data collection on maternal and infant mortality rates….” To date, no progress has been made toward this end.

The societal and systemic racism in the United States creates conditions that lead to higher mortality rates for mothers and infants in the Black community. Racial bias means that the concerns of pregnant black women are more likely to be dismissed by their (often white) doctors. Societal bias blamed black women by claiming they were less educated; however, several studies have demonstrated that black women with college degrees are twice as likely to die as white women with less education. Further, such social bias led to blaming black women for the deaths of their infants, when the actual causes of death were due to the larger issue of racism.

Dr. Arline Geronimus of the University of Michigan School of Public Health linked the stress of living in socially and culturally based racism as a central cause of poor pregnancy outcomes. Her research showed that racism (and sexism) creates toxic stress for Black women and this in turn leads to low birth weight, increased strain on mothers and more pregnancy/birth complications.

While much of the occupant’s base is hollering about being pro-life, their “commitment” to being pro-life seems to have more to do with white lives than Black lives. Sadly, this should broker no surprise.

Pro-life is a much larger issue than being “pro birth.” Benedictine sister Joan Chittister cites the difference between being pro-life and pro-birth. Being pro-life means every child is a wanted child and every child and mother has equal access to pre-natal and post-natal care. Every child and mother has equal access to food, affordable housing, healthcare, education and child care. Being pro-life means black and white mothers and their children are valued equally. In her 2004 interview with Bill Moyers, Chittister spoke passionately about being more broadly pro-life than just being opposed to abortion. Sadly, many Americans are much more articulate about what they are against than what they are for.

Just when we think the pain of racism cannot go any deeper, we see yet another facet to America’s Original Sin.

Many of us who were raised in the church were taught that anger is wrong, a sin or some kind of moral failure.  I was taught that “forgiveness” is the response to being wronged and, to make things worse, it was not “ladylike” to be angry. 

It creates baggage.

Jesus, however, got angry.  In the same day he cursed a fig tree, even though it wasn’t the season for figs, he turned over the tables of the money changers in the temple (Mark 11:12-25).  Guess Jesus was having a bad day.  Hey, it happens.

Jesus’ anger is encouraging because it validates that anger is a human emotion, part of what it means to be created in God’s image. So, how do we reconcile the whole “be nice” thing with the reality of being angry?

Simple:  be angry but do not sin (Ephesians 4:26). Yes, there is a difference between being angry and sinning.  There are some things that should make us angry: injustice, abuse, prejudice, all the “isms”, oppression and a host of others.

The larger context of the verse is important.  It’s about stepping out from behind what is false and speaking the truth in love.  We know all too well how anger stews and festers and then comes out sideways in a hurtful and inappropriate way. I’m guessing we all have some experience in that wheelhouse.

Speaking the truth in love is the base for healthy interpersonal relationships. It is also the foundation of a public theology of anger.  It is troubling to see an increase in the kind of vile talk, name calling and vitriol that dominates public conversation.  The occupant has set a low bar for human interaction. As a consequence, we are pretty good at rage, not so good at anger.

If we read our bibles and are paying attention, the values we espouse as followers of Jesus are seriously in jeopardy. But just getting mad and going off on a rant is not helpful, as fun as it may be.

More importantly it shows a lack of understanding of the issues and an unwillingness to engage them in a meaningful way. Genuine anger about an issue is very different than unarticulated vitriol.

Anger harnessed for righteousness changes things.  Anger harnessed for ego destroys things.

There is plenty to be angry about in these days. The feelings of powerlessness can be overwhelming. If we focus on our powerlessness, we remain immobilized. Being immobilized means our egos are leading the dance. We are silent because we are afraid, because it may not make a difference, because we worry about what others may think. These are maladies of the ego, and the ego has no place in the work of righteous anger toward what is wrong. If we allow our egos to win and remain silent, the dominant narrative wins. All that we think is wrong in our society will win. All that we grouse and gripe about will not change.

A public theology of anger is rooted in speaking the truth in love: articulating what is wrong, why it is wrong, and having a sense of righteous indignation that leads to action. Righteous indignation is not self-righteous indignation; it is a spiritually rooted pain for the pain of another.  It has roots in compassion.  It speaks with power and with love and not with vitriol. 

Creating a public theology of anger requires deep righteous indignation at the wrongs perpetrated against those who have the fewest resources to fight back.  It requires harnessing the human emotion of anger to work on behalf of others. So, “be angry, but do not sin.”

There comes a moment in righteous indignation when you can do nothing BUT act, when silence is no longer an option, when the wrong is stronger than fear of failure, when ego takes second place to the inner moral compass. If we focus our righteous indignation at the situation that is wrong, we will be energized to act. These days are filled with rampant injustice. The voice of righteous indignation is urgently needed.

In a well-timed diplomatic announcement, the occupant nearly broke his arm patting himself on the back. Israel, the United States, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain have entered into full diplomatic relations. It is hailed as an historic “peace” agreement, except none of the parties are in conflict with one another which is a pre-requisite for a “peace” deal. It is a business deal and a strategic arms initiative. Coming just weeks before the election, this accord is a strategic political move.  

By announcing this “historic peace agreement”, dubbed the Abraham Accord, the occupant is hoping to boost his failing numbers among the fundamentalist white evangelical voting bloc. The connection between Israel and fundamentalist white evangelicals is rooted in a weird biblical perspective. In the first testament, the Israelites were given the “Promised Land.” Fundamentalist white evangelicals claim to take the bible literally, hence they support Israel’s claim to all the land known as the Promised Land. This includes the West Bank that is currently occupied by Israel over and against the Palestinians.

The fate of the West Bank lies at the heart of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Abraham Accord puts off Israel’s dealings with Palestine. This means the annexation of the West Bank remains an option in the accord. Much of the global community is in agreement that lasting peace in the region is contingent on resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This means a two state solution.

The Abraham Accord is not so much a peace deal as it is a business deal and an arms deal. The accord was made public by announcing the first direct flight between the UAE and Israel. That is strictly about economics. The UAE hopes to access technical knowledge from Israel. In return, Israel hopes some of the riches of the UAE may come its way. In light of this, the claim that the accord is about peace holds little water. 

The accord is also a strategic geopolitical move as it allows the UAE to buy F35 fighter planes and other high tech military equipment from the United States. The UAE is in a much better geographic position to deal with the instability of Iran than Israel. The strategic military angle dealing with Iranian instability cannot be overlooked. Iran condemned the accord in harsh statements as soon as it was announced. Turkey vowed to cut off diplomatic relations with Israel. While this accord claims to be about peace, there is a likelihood that it will result in long term geopolitical instability.

What is stunning in all of this political wrangling is the absence of the Palestinians. In addition to furthering the divisions regarding who owns the West Bank, there is also a shift in political alliances that is troubling. For many years there has been an unspoken alliance between Palestine and the Arab countries. The essence of the alliance is that Arab countries will not enter into diplomatic relations with Israel until they account for their crimes against the Palestinians and until the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is solved. The Arab countries have been mostly silent about the announcement of the Abraham Accord.

The reason any of this matters to us is simple. For years the United States has had a symbiotic relationship with Israel. One can say nothing negative about Israel without sounding un-American. Yet there needs to be a voice that supports the Palestinians and ends their suffering at the hands of the Israelis.

Relying on the promise of scripture that the Promised Land belongs to Israel is a cherry picking festival of biblical interpretation. Though the Promised Land is a central theme of the first testament, there is much more to Israel’s relationship with Yahweh. The central message of the first testament (and the second testament as well) is God’s everlasting love affair with all of creation and all of the world’s people. As the chosen ones Israel has special responsibilities in living into this eternal love affair. When Israel lives in sync with the love of God the conflict will solve itself. When people come before land the solution comes into clear focus.

The central prayer of the Jewish liturgy comes from Deuteronomy 6:

“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. Take to heart these instructions with which I charge you this day. Impress them upon your children. Recite them when you stay at home and when you are away, when you lie down and when you get up. Bind them as a sign on your hand and let them serve as a symbol on your forehead, inscribe them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.”

Love and not land is the overarching message of scripture. Trotting out an economic and military deal and calling it a peace accord is a sham. For the occupant it is part of making America great, but there is not greatness to be found in alliances that cause others pain. For the UAE, Israel and Bahrain there may be increased military security, but it brokers no true peace. Driving a wedge into the Arab countries holds no long term advantage. Icing out the Palestinians in talks about the future postpones the ultimate conflict that needs to be resolved. Peace in the Middle East is about peace between Israel and Palestine.