Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Unpacking a Beastly Metaphor (Genesis 41:1-13; Mark 13:14-23; Epiphany 3 (series); January 26, 2014)



Unpacking a Beastly Metaphor

Genesis 41:1-13; Mark 13:14-23   
Epiphany 3 (series)
January 26, 2014

Rev. John M. Caldwell, PhD
First United Methodist Church
Decorah, IA

Do you accept the freedom and power that God gives you to resist evil, injustice, and oppression in whatever forms they present themselves?

This was one of your baptismal promises.  Someone made this promise on your behalf if you were baptized as an infant.  You made it for yourself if you were baptized as a young person or adult.  You affirmed this promise if you were confirmed.  So it’s never a wrong thing to reaffirm this promise.  So I put it to you once again (And remember that the answer to a question that begins with “Do you?” is “I do” or “I don’t”): Do you accept the freedom and power that God gives you to resist evil, injustice, and oppression in whatever forms they present themselves?

I do.

That freedom and power are a privilege and a duty that we embrace as followers of Jesus.  The tricky part of the promise, though, is found in the words “in whatever forms they present themselves.” 

It would be great if “evil, injustice, and oppression” were obvious.  But they aren’t.  Cartoon characters might wake up one morning, stretch, yawn and say, “What a beautiful morning!  I think I’ll do something evil and unjust today.”  But real people don’t do that. 

Take Bashar al-Assad, for example.  He is in the news a lot these days.  He is the embattled President of Syria.  There is evidence that he has been involved in the use of chemical weapons against his own citizens.  By common international consent the use of these weapons is illegal and immoral.  And to use them against civilians makes it even worse.  And to use them against his own people is worse still.  But I doubt that he gets to his office in the morning and says to his aide, “Draw up some plans for something really oppressive.  I’m feeling especially evil today.”

I don’t know President Assad, but I’ll bet that he believes that he is acting in the best interests of Syria and that the destruction and death that the civil war has let loose pain him deeply.  But I’ll bet that he believes that they are necessary to prevent a future that is worse than the present.  I’m pretty sure that in his own mind he has justified even those acts that we rightly call atrocities.

What gives me that confidence?  Well, I’ve known a lot of people.  And I am one.  I know how we think.  I know what we do.  When we do something that we would know instantly was wrong if someone else were doing it, we come up with reasons—convincing reasons—why what we did wasn’t so wrong after all.  We justify it.  We redescribe it.  We wrap it up in pretty paper and tie it up with a bow.

When corporations or governments or churches or any other institution does this, it’s even worse.  People have consciences, but organizations do not.  Organizations will do almost anything to defend themselves when they are threatened.  And the higher the purpose of the organization, the lower they will descend to do it. 

A corporation trading in energy futures and needing to cover short-term losses, engages in shadier and shadier accounting practices until it is actively deceiving the public, its shareholders, and even itself.  When the house of cards collapses it takes down the future of thousands of employees, retirees and shareholders. 

A government that is trying to protect its citizens in a time of uncertainty gathers information to better know what to expect, but it doesn’t stop there.  It spies on its friends and its own citizens.  It gives itself permission to torture.  It gives itself permission to execute its own citizens without a trial.  When someone reveals the inner workings of this government because they love their country and believe that what it is doing is wrong, they are labeled as traitors.

A church denomination that is worried about its declining numbers will go pretty far to suppress dissent.  Pastors who extend the church’s ministry to same-sex couples seeking to marry and who do this because they are convinced that their vows require them to do so, are labeled as violators of the covenant and stripped of their ordinations.  Ending someone’s career and blocking them from fulfilling their calling are wrapped up and presented as “upholding a sacred covenant.” 

Evil, injustice and oppression do not present themselves as such.  They present themselves in the form of something else.  The freedom and power God gives us at baptism must in part have something to do with being able to see through those forms.

It is one thing to call these things “the beast,” as we did last week.  But it’s not as if they come wearing a beast mask like some errant Trick-or-Treat-er wearing a disguise.  No, they are beastly and they come wearing the mask of some good that we can recognize and seek.

For John of the Revelation, the figure of the beast was a reality in the world, a reality that he and his readers knew well as the Roman Empire.  What John does in the Revelation is to strip away the mask of the Empire of his day to reveal the beastly reality behind the mask of culture, prosperity and order.

One of the great contributions of scholarship in the last quarter century or so has been to show us just how much the reality of the Empire is to be found in the New Testament.  Jesus, it is clear, both opposed the Empire and its local collaborators and was convinced that God opposed it, too.  Paul mocked the claims of the Empire.  Revelation was openly hostile to the Empire.  The author of Luke and Acts, while unwilling to see it simply as doing God’s work, was willing to see and to use the good that the Empire had done.

Empire is always a mixed bag.  It’s hard to condemn it out of hand.  In a wonderful sketch in Monte Python’s Life of Brian, a band of Judean revolutionaries, the Judean Peoples Front, gathers to write a manifesto condemning the Romans.  The Romans have bled the people dry, their leader complains, “And what have they ever given us in return?!”  He means that as a rhetorical question, but the members of his group, none of them terribly bright, begin to offer answers: The aqueduct?  The sanitation?  Roads?  The list goes on and on.  Finally, their leader summarizes their progress: “All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, |a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?”[1]

But behind whatever good the Empire does—and it does quite a bit—Empire is always about a single thing:  It’s about more.  Empire never has enough.  Of anything.  Not enough stuff.  Not enough power.  Not enough space.  Empire is always seeking to expand. 

Empire always sees itself as an exception: “Before us there was chaos, lack of freedom, poverty, immorality.”  Outside of Empire there is darkness and disorder.  Empire sees it as its duty to expand, to bring light and order.  Empire always believes that it is ordained by God to fulfill a role in history.  Empire cannot understand why anyone would not want to be a part of it.  Empire regards hostility toward it as a character flaw.  Empire says of those who resist it, “They are barbarians who do not understand civilization and order” or “They are fanatics who hate our freedoms.”  

In theological terms, Empire sets itself up as divine.  Its laws must be obeyed.  Its virtues must be celebrated.  Its vices must be ignored.  Its myths must be believed and professed.  Its rituals must be observed.  Its symbols must be worshiped.  In the end Empire can tolerate nothing outside of itself.  It will answer to nothing above itself.  This is why Empire and “evil, injustice and oppression” are so closely tied together.  This is why our call to resist evil, injustice and oppression is also a call to resist Empire and imperial thinking wherever it is found.

In the New Testament era, in the days of Jesus and Paul and the next generation or two, Empire was a Roman Empire.  By unpacking the theology of the Roman Empire, early Christians were able to see the forms of evil, injustice and oppression that were part of their day.  They also recognized that Empire isn’t just out there.

Empire is a principle more than a form of government.  When we live in this world, dominated as it is by imperial thinking, we breathe in Empire with every breath.  When Empire becomes a part of us, we, too, seek more.  We want more power, more stuff, more of everything.  We begin to regard getting these things as a mandate, something God wants and expects for us to do.  We start justifying whatever it takes to get them.  When what I’m calling Empire becomes a part of us, it is what the Christian tradition calls sin. 

And seeing this, early Jesus followers mounted their resistance.  They refused to worship the emperor as divine.  They shunned the games and gladiatorial contests.  They refused the meat that had been offered to the symbols of the Empire.  They refused violence.  They formed alternative assemblies.  But they also recognized that the resistance would have to be internal as well.  They embraced an ethic of love, justice and peace.  They resisted sin in themselves and they looked to each other for help.  In short, they accepted “the freedom and power God [gave] them to resist evil, injustice and oppression in whatever forms they [presented] themselves.”

Since then, Empire has taken many forms.  Along the way, in a story that begins even before the New Testament was written, Jesus’ followers found it hard to keep from being swallowed by Empire.   Increasingly, they gave up resisting Empire in its external forms and limited themselves to resisting sin.  They even rejoiced that they lived in a Christian Empire.  But a Christian Empire is still Empire.

Occasionally there were groups of Jesus followers who saw the need to resist Empire in both its internal and external forms.  Men and women formed communities of monastics to set the ethics of Empire aside and to put into practice the ethic they learned from Jesus.  Benedict—for whom our neighbor to the north is named—is the most famous among them, but there were tens of thousands of them.  In the high middle ages, Francis of Assisi renewed a call to this kind of resistance.

But for the most part, we Christians have limited our notion of sin to the attitudes, thoughts, and motives of individual Christians and the actions that spring from them.  We have confined religion to matters of belief.  We have invented private life so that Christianity could be safe from Empire and, perhaps more importantly, so Empire could be safe from Christianity.

In our day Empire’s form has changed.  Today Empire takes the form of a globalized, militarized, financialized capitalism.  It is no longer a place that we can leave.  It is now a single system in which we all participate.  Empire is more alive than ever.  And while it has brought great benefits to some of us, it is still the author of evil, injustice and oppression.

If I were in your place, I might remain unconvinced.  In the next four weeks, I will offer some of the ways in which Empire weighs upon us, some of what it is costing us.  I hope also to offer some strategies of resistance.  In the meantime, here is the first: the invitation not to take the form of our world as natural, the invitation to see it differently, the invitation to see through it, in short, the invitation to accept the freedom and power that God gives us.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA.



[1] Life of Brian, scene 10, “What have the Romans ever done for us?”

Tuesday, January 21, 2014

A Beastly Reality (Daniel 7:1-7, 13-15; Revelation 13:1-4; 15:1-4; January 19, 2014)




A Beastly Reality

Daniel 7:1-7, 13-15; Revelation 13:1-4; 15:1-4
Epiphany 2 (Series)
January 19, 2014


Rev. John M. Caldwell, PhD
First United Methodist Church
Decorah, IA

It is no secret that the United Methodist Church has its struggles.  We’re not alone.  All the mainline churches are dealing with one thing or another.  Being a member of a church hasn’t been fashionable in several decades and membership numbers are declining.  Even the Southern Baptist Church, the one that we used to envy for their numbers, is dealing with an actual decline.

Denominations are coming up with various approaches to turning the numbers around.  There will Bold New Plans and Visionary Strategies.  Words like “vital” and “dynamic” will be thrown around.  Although we are nearly as far from the Bishop’s office as you can get and still be in Iowa, I suspect that even we will be invited to join in the fun.

I believe a more fruitful response to our place in a changing world is to ask the question: What does it mean to be a follower of Jesus?  Or, to frame the question a little differently, “What does it mean to be a part of the community of the baptized?”  For me the most useful way to begin to answer either version of that question, but especially the latter, is to turn to the baptismal covenant and especially to the questions that are labeled “Renunciation of Sin and Profession of Faith.”

In the Christian tradition, becoming a follower of Jesus has always involved a radical reorientation of life, a turning away from one thing and toward another, a shifting of fundamental allegiances from one set to another.  In our tradition this is called, “repentance.”  The word “repentance” translates the Greek word metanoia that means a change of mind which for the ancients was that part of us where we not only do our thinking, but also our valuing and our deciding.  Repentance doesn’t just mean changing our mind, like changing an answer on a multiple choice test from “a” to “c.”  It means some very big changes in the ways that we think in the deepest part of us.

Repentance has always meant a turning away as well as a turning toward.  And our baptismal covenant has always included some question that gets at what is being turned away from.  We have always had to renounce something in order to be baptized.  In the late fourth century in a document called the Apostolic Constitutions, those being baptized were required to say, “I renounce Satan, and his works, and his pomps, and his worships, and his angels, and his inventions, and all things that are under him.”[1]  I’m not sure what a “pomp” is, but this list is pretty comprehensive. 

When John Wesley revised and abridged the Anglican Book of Common Prayer so that newly-formed Methodist Episcopal Church would have a prayer book to use, he included these questions: “Dost thou renounce the devil and all his works, the vain pomp and glory of the world, with all covetous desires of the same, and the carnal desires of the flesh, so that thou wilt not follow, or be led by them?”[2] 

We Methodists apparently got a little squeamish about this kind of language, because we dropped almost all of it for a while.  In 1964 The Methodist Hymnal had whittled the renunciation down to part of a question: “Do you truly and earnestly repent of your sins…?”

Sadly and oddly, there is only mention of our own sins, as if all that is required of us is that we stop doing bad things or maybe that we stop being bad people.  How can this be enough after all the wars of our history, after the Holocaust, after racism, after sexism, after imperialism, after heterosexism, and all the other ways we have of being perfectly good people who because we are part of a broken system manage unintentionally and unconsciously to inflict untold suffering on our fellow human beings all without having done anything bad?  A notion of sin that stretches no further than individuals doing bad things is hopelessly undersized.

So, our current hymnal asks two questions that get at the question of renunciation: “Do you renounce the spiritual forces of wickedness, reject the evil powers of this world and repent of your sin?... [and] Do you accept the freedom and power God gives you to resist evil, injustice and oppression in whatever forms they present themselves?” [3]  That second question, I think, really gets at the issue of what we are turning from in order to turn toward Jesus and his God.

I’ve been ruminating on that question for the better part of a quarter of a century, now.  It comes back to me at odd times, during a newscast, say, or a session of the Annual Conference.  But it took on a new sense of urgency three years ago when I was a Sister Parish delegate to El Salvador.

It was only the second or third day of our visit.  We were still in San Salvador, El Salvador’s capital.  We had been joined by three or four of the members of the Potrerillos community.  Beto Monge, known affectionately as Don Beto, was one of them.  We had a schedule of visits to local sites of interest and meetings with people who could help us understand El Salvador’s situation and struggle. 

One briefing in particular stuck with me.  It was given by William Castillo, a young man with an organization whose English name would be the Center for the Investigation of Investment and Commerce, abbreviated CEICOM in Spanish.  He talked with us about the Salvadoran government’s struggle with Pacific RIM, the US subsidiary of a Canadian mining company that has requested and been denied permits to extract the gold and other precious metals in El Salvador’s northern mountains.

There are an estimated fifteen million ounces of recoverable gold in El Salvador.  Gold is selling at about $1250 an ounce these days and would cost about $175 an ounce to recover.  That adds up to about $16 billion dollars of profit for Pacific RIM and its partners.[4]

Mining gold, though, is not simply a matter of picking up nuggets that are lying around on the ground.  The gold in El Salvador is found in ore that has to be dug out, crushed and chemically processed in order to produce the gold itself.  A reaction between the air and the ore produces sulfuric acid as soon as the ore is mined and crushed.  The chemicals that are used to extract the gold—sodium, potassium and calcium cyanide among them—are highly toxic.  The process uses a lot of water and leaves a lot of polluted water behind.  This toxic waste would be stored—presumably forever—in artificial lagoons.

Water is scarce in El Salvador and widespread shortages are predicted by 2030 or so.  Water-intensive industries are not a useful addition to El Salvador’s economy.  The toxic waste would have to be stored virtually forever, but Pacific RIM will only be there for a few years.  When the gold is gone, they’ll be gone, too, leaving their toxic waste behind in artificial lagoons.  El Salvador is seismically active.  It is only a matter of time before the lagoons fail and a toxic stew is released into El Salvador’s only significant source of drinkable water.

Pacific RIM calls its process “Green” mining.  That sounds good, but they’ve mined gold in Guatemala and the environmental damage has been serious.

In return for this damage and the risk of environmental catastrophe, Pacific RIM promises jobs for Salvadorans.  Of course, on closer inspection, in turns out that the good jobs will go to people who are brought in from the outside and the jobs that are given to local Salvadorans will be dangerous, low-paying and short-term.

As I listened to this report it occurred to me that the story was a familiar one.  I had heard it in Decorah from those who struggled to keep Wal-Mart out of Decorah and then more recently to prevent them building a “supercenter.”  Wal-Mart wanted to have access to consumer dollars.  It proposed to build or expand its store.  The damage to the environment would be non-existent or minimal.  And there would be jobs.  No or little damage.  And jobs. 

This is the pattern that I had heard before and was hearing again 1900 miles away from home.  It won’t cost anything (or at least not very much) and there will be jobs.  But the costs are always higher than promised and the jobs are never as good.  Change the names and a few of details, and there is the pattern.  It was immediately clear to me that the struggle of Salvadorans to protect their water supply from Pacific RIM and the struggle of Decorans to protect their community from Wal-Mart were two pieces of a much bigger reality.  I felt this with the force of revelation.

I shared this epiphany with the group of North Americans and Salvadorans and, as what I was saying was translated bit by bit, I saw Don Beto nodding his head.

In the next week, this pattern, this correspondence between their experience and ours, continued to haunt me.  I could see the similarity, but I could not seem to grasp what that larger reality was of which these two episodes, if you will, were a part.  What is the bigger picture, maybe even the biggest picture?

The writers of the New Testament spent some time struggling with this question.  They came up with names for this bigger or biggest picture.  John sometimes calls it “the world,” but I have a hard time thinking of “the world” as a bad thing.  I see too much of God’s lovingly creative hand at work in the natural world, especially, to imagine “the world” as a destructive force.  Paul calls it “the world” sometimes and at other times he uses terms like “powers and principalities.”  That’s helpful, I think, because it suggests that there is a spiritual reality behind what might appear on the surface to be merely about corporations and governments. 

But there was another metaphor, drawn from an unlikely source, that seemed to come closer to capturing the voracious and often vicious character of a Pacific RIM or a Wal-Mart.  The image came to me during the farewell party on our last evening in Potrerillos.  I called Julieta Borja, one of our guides and translators, to come with me and we found Don Beto.  I didn’t want to trust this to my own meager Spanish. 

“Don Beto,” I began, “I have heard about your struggle.  I have seen it.  You struggle against a beast.  We struggle, too.  And we struggle against a beast.  But I now see that there is only one beast that you and I are resisting.  Your struggle is my struggle, and my struggle is yours, because we are both struggling against the same beast.  I will stand with you and I will not forget.  This is my promise to you.”  Julieta had tears in her eyes.  Beto smiled.

Yes, I am convinced of it.  Behind many of our troubles, our struggles, our pains and our suffering lies a single enormous beastly reality.  It is hungry, insatiable even.  The language that Daniel and the Revelation use, language that I have often found off-putting and bizarre, I now find useful.  It gives us a way to talk about the opposition that we meet as we try to live as Jesus’ followers for one thing.  Next week we will try to describe it more scientifically, but the image of a beast gives us a way to speak about it even when our science fails us.  It gives us a handle on it.  A name, even a strange one like “the beast,” gives us a little of that “freedom and power to resist” that our baptism talks about.

But there is another and rather practical advantage that this image gives us.  If like me you want to claim that “freedom and power…to resist evil, injustice and oppression,” you may find the sheer size of the task overwhelming.  Where do we begin?  Which are the greater evils, injustices and oppressions that call for our resistance?  Sensing that there is one beastly reality that lies behind all of them changes things.  If there is only one beast against which Beto and I and all of us are struggling, then it doesn’t matter where we begin.  Anywhere is as good as anywhere else.  Like a colony of ants resisting the invasion of its hill by a predatory beetle, we can all of us bite the part that’s right in front of us, knowing that we’re all in this together. 

Whatever you are struggling against, whatever evil you are confronting, whatever injustice you are suffering, whatever structures are oppressing you, know this: our baptism gives us the freedom and power to resist it.  Know this, too: Your struggle is my struggle, and my struggle is yours, because we are both struggling against the same beast.  I will stand with you and I will not forget.  This is my promise to you.  ¡Su lucha es mi lucha y la lucha sigue! / Your struggle is my struggle and the struggle goes on!

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA.


[1] Apostolic Constitutions, 41.
[2] John Wesley, Sunday Service of the Methodists, With Other Occasional Services, 1784.
[3] The United Methodist Hymnal, 1989.
[4] Conversation with William Castillo, San Salvador, El Salvador, March 19, 2011.