Tag: god

At the time of this writing the National Guard is flooding Washington, DC and supplanting the authority of local law enforcement. This is happening at the direction of the occupant. There is so much wrong with this action that it is hard to know where to start.

First, a few facts. In 2024 violent crime was trending down in all areas. According to the statistics of the Washington, DC police department, violent crime saw a 35% decrease in 2024. The number of homicides also decreased from 64 to 48 in 2024. Carjackings have also seen a significant decline compared to six consecutive years of increases. The number of carjackings was 498, nearly half of the average of the preceding six years.

In other words, the facts don’t match the actions. This is nothing new for the occupant. He regularly disregards the facts and the constitution to continue his unlawful and outrageous power grabs. He invoked the Home Rule Act to take federal control of the city.

The Home Rule Act is different from Martial Law but is a stop on the same train. According to Time Magazine, “…the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, gives the President of the United States the authority to commandeer DC’s Police department in ‘conditions of an emergency nature.’ Attorney General Pam Bondi is now in charge of the Metropolitan Police Department, he said.” Now there is a truly terrifying fact. Pam Bondi would fail at being in charge of a one car funeral.

The Home Rule act grants a municipality a degree of self-governance and autonomy within the state’s legal framework. Martial law, on the other hand, is the imposition of military rule over a civilian population, typically in times of emergency or crisis, and involves the suspension of normal civil law and governance. It is unclear what the limits of the National Guard will be in DC and whether local law enforcement will retain any authority.  Under the Home Rule Act, local control is balanced with federal oversight. This does not match the rhetoric of the occupant.

As if this is not enough to cause outrage, the occupant is talking about expanding the National Guard (and perhaps military) to cities like Los Angeles, Baltimore and Oakland (Time Magazine). It appears to be only a matter of time before the occupant begins declaring Martial Law in specific locales with an eye toward expansion into significant geographic regions, if not the whole country.

Martial law replaces civilian authority with military authority. It is declared in times of war, rebellion or national disaster. Washington, DC does not meet the criteria. Martial Law is declared when civilian authority has ceased to function, is completely absent, or is completely ineffective (Office of Justice Programs, USDOJ). Again, Washington DC does not meet any of these criteria.  Martial Law cannot be used as long as civilian authority continues to function. The function and limit of authority of the National Guard in Washington, DC is unclear. It appears to be a smash up between Martial Law and the Home Rule Act.

In New Testament times, the issue of human rights was defined by whether or not someone was a Roman citizen. Roman citizens had special status and were protected from scourging, crucifixion, having their land seized or being sold into slavery. Jews had no such protection. They were largely left alone as long as they paid their taxes and knuckled under to the general agenda of Roman rule. They got into trouble, however, because they refused to bow to Ceaser as a God or worship any other Roman official. This was considered treason and Jews were punished by the forfeiture of their land, scourged, crucified or sold into slavery.

It is an example (one of many throughout history) of peoples being marginalized because they do not belong to an occupying force, or refused to obey an occupying force. The suspension or eradication of individual rights and personal autonomy are similar. The concept of human rights and social justice in our time, however, is not mirrored in biblical times. That said, it is important to note that only 5-10% of people in the Roman Empire were Roman Citizens. That means that the majority of the population was subject to the whims of Roman Rule and Roman Law, which clearly favored its own citizens. What is similar from Roman times to ours is the usurping of personal agency to an occupying force.

Jesus’ response to Roman authority often got him into trouble. He refused to bow to any Roman God. He regularly disobeyed Roman rule if it conflicted with the rule of Yahweh and held himself and his followers to higher standards. He was ultimately crucified under Pontius Pilate because he posed a threat to the Roman political system. Throughout the Roman empire the voices of dissent were silenced, often by brutal force or death. Still, Jesus and his followers held to the vision of the Realm of God. Jesus viewed Roman authority as second to the authority of God who desired peace, justice and shalom for all people.  

The time is now to make our ultimate loyalty known and to stand against the rising tide of fascism and the erosion of human rights.  

An excerpt from my sermon October 27, 2024. Preached at Ledyard Congregational Church, Ledyard CT

“A poor widow came and put in two small copper coins, wich are worth a penny. Then he called his disciples and said to them, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. For all of them have contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, all she had to live on.” Mark 12:42-44

Most of the time a sermon on this text goes something like this.  The temple is the equivalent of the church. Jesus notices the widow gives everything; we should be like the widow and be more generous, trusting that God will bless us and provide for us if we are more generous.    

Except, that is not what the text is really about. As Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza suggests, we need to approach the text with a hermeneutic of suspicion, meaning a willingness to question the assumptions we bring to the text.  Like assuming we know what it says and what it means based on previous hearing and teaching.

This text is so frequently used at church budget time that the interpretation that identifies the widow as a model of faithfulness for us is hard to get past, but let’s take a closer look.

First of all, it’s important to remember that the widow is New Testament code language for the poorest of the poor, those most marginalized by a patriarchal society. Second, there is NOTHING in the text, not one word that suggests that Jesus thinks it’s a good thing that this woman put her last two coins into the temple coffers and goes away destitute. Jesus describes her behavior and comments that she gave all she had, but he doesn’t praise her for her behavior.

If we go back to the beginning of the passage, in most Bibles it is subtitled warnings about the Scribes, which suggests the focus is on the temple leaders and not on the widow.  Verse 38 begins with Jesus warning his followers to be aware of those who put on long robes, receive seats of honor, put on a good show of prayers and devour widows’ houses.” 

The role of scribe was important and honorable in the life of the temple. They were learned men whose job was to copy sacred texts, but they also served as lawyers. They had authority to negotiate contracts. They were also a part of the governing council called the Sanhedrin. They had tremendous power in the temple system. And, the religious rulers were in cahoots with Rome in an unholy alliance. Scribes were appointed to settle the estates of widows, who had no legal right to property, and were regularly exploited by these powerful men. Unscrupulous religious leaders and political officials exploited the vulnerability of widows and there was no place for them to go to seek justice, as they had no voice in religious or social structures. Hold that thought.

Jesus is instructing his followers. This is a field trip of sorts to the Temple, showing things not to do…Jesus would later send his followers out to preach to the people. He cautioned them against accumulating wealth, lest they be distracted from their primary role.  They were to trust in God’s Providence as they did God’s will. Any money they were given was to go to the poor. He also constantly warned his own disciples against seeking honor rather than serving others.  Pointing out the ostentatious clothing of the scribes was a way of illustrating that these religious leaders had ceased to care for God’s people.

The greater condemnation that comes to such leaders is calculated on a simple formula: greater knowledge means greater responsibility.  From the one to whom more is given more is expected.

That the scribes failed to be scandalized by the demands Temple worship made on one who had so little is what raised Jesus’ ire.  He neither praises nor condemns the widow; his judgment is on the injustice of the temple system and the lack of compassion for those in need.

Essentially Jesus takes the entire social, religious, economic and political system and goes “BOOM.” He  blows it right out of the water. In order to evaluate a social system we have to ask who benefits from it. In Jesus’ time it was the Scribes, the lawyers. Who is it in our time? The American oligarchs who don’t pay their fair share of taxes? Or is it the legislators we send to congress, who, for the most part, in the time of their tenure become millionaires? How does that happen? What kind of back-room deals do they need to make with the rich and powerful to line their pockets.

Who is victimized by the system? Single moms who work two jobs and have no health insurance. Single dads who fall behind on their child support payments because they don’t make enough to live on. Older Americans who live on Social Security alone and have to choose between paying their utility bill and buying groceries.

Again and again in the gospels we see that what makes a time, a place and a people holy is caring for the poor, the widow the orphan, and the stranger; those whom the world defines as the last the least and the lost.  And Jesus’ harshest words are reserved for the Scribes, whom he calls whited sepulchers. They look okay on the outside, but inside they are filled with death and destruction.

In the realm Jesus brings, everyone has a place at the table. Everyone is part of the community. All people stand on equal ground, because place is defined by God’s welcome and not having things the world deems important.  Jesus’ vision for the religious community and for the social order included understanding equality as something rooted in God and not in the trappings of the world. And for all of his faithfulness to God’s dream for the creation, Jesus was executed as an enemy of the state because he exposed the wickedness and collusion of religious and political leaders.

Jesus bore witness to a time and place where people would seek God and acknowledge God as the author of all that is. Out of that inner faith, that inner conviction, followers would live in faithful, joyful obedience.  It was not an act of volition, of willpower, of thinking the right way.  The in-breaking of God’s realm was rooted in passion for God’s way of being in the world, in faith that was life changing, a vision of success that was dramatically different from the world’s, nothing short of wholesale embrace of the upside-down values of God’s realm.

Jesus’ judgment on the social, religious, political and economic system of his time exposed the system for what it was: rigged by the rich for the sake of the rich. It was a morally and spiritually bankrupt system that failed those for whom God’s realm was most concerned.

Jesus calls attention to the empty prayers offered for the sake of appearance and balances this against the devouring of widows’ houses.  And this is the razor’s edge…Jesus sees their actions as indicative of their faith. Their failures of mission are an expression of their inner emptiness.

The big picture from this story is Jesus’ creating a social order that is committed to justice for the poor. In truth, Jesus talks more about the poor than he does about any other group.

The stewardship that is at issue here is how the system, the establishment, stewards its resources for the benefit of those it is called to serve. 

Gustavo Gutierrez, the founder of Liberation Theology wrote, “the poverty of the poor is not a call to generous relief action but a demand that we go and build a different social order.”

Our ability to be instruments of God bringing faith, hope, light, pardon and joy is about God in our lives and how we live that out in the world, not just through our charity, but through our social activism and political commitments. Faithful actions and deeds are not the source of our salvation but the fruit of it.   We often get the mphasis on the wrong syllABLE, thinking that our good works are the most important thing.  Don’t get me wrong they are important; they become holy when they are expressions of our faith in God and are followed with action in the social arena that works for justice on behalf of those who have no voice.

Beth Moore writes, “When our story is told a century from now-and it will be- how much of the American church ran after idols and delusions, false christs and conspiracies. History will not only fault the pastors for not confronting us with the truth but the congregations who forbade them to.”

This is a moment when our faith commitments need to inform our social, economic, political and religious actions.

Christ is either at the center of those actions, or not. Amen.

Resources:

Myers, Ched. Binding the Strong Man, a Political Reading of Mark’s Gospel

The New Interpreter’s Bible