The Rev. Chuck Currie (UCC)

Yesterday I posted an Open Letter to Beaverton, Oregon: Thank You For Celebrating Mexico's Bicentennial.

Washington State resident Lars Larson and FOX's Bill O'Reilly have been attacking the city and falsely claiming that Beaverton doesn't celebrate the 4th of July (regardless of the fact that America's Independence Day is a city, state and federal holiday with countless area celebrations).

My letter has prompted a few angry phone calls this morning.  Most have been polite, however.  But one woman from St. Louis, MO. called a short time ago.  There was nothing polite about her call - just a lot of yelling on her part.  I offered to talk with her but every time I started she cut me off (taking her communication lessons from O'Reilly and Larson, I suppose) and I finally hung up as her attacks became more personal.

She called back and left this message - with a promise to visit me in Oregon with her son: 

Download Upset St. Louis Caller

Larson and O'Reilly intentionally attempt to incite such anger by dividing our community among racial and cultural lines.  As a minister in the United Church of Christ, (a multicultural and multiracial denomination),I find their actions to be reprehensible.  They're more concerned with partisan politics than the common good of our state and nation.  We need to tone down the hateful rhetoric and seek to find reconciliation.   

(some browsers - like Firefox or Google Chrome - will allow you to simply click on the link and listen...otherwise click with the RIGHT mouse button on the hyperlink and choose “Save Target As” and save to your desktop or other folder – once downloaded click on the file to listen).

Now On ITunes

You can now subscribe to my podcasts on ITunes by clicking here. 

Compassion and Choices (a group I support) re-tweeted this tweet today (from their executive director):

BCoombsLee Good reason to ask ur doc to reveal religious views. http://smtp01.kaiserhealthnews.org/t/13476/421929/13051/0/

Here's the basic point of the article linked to:

"A doctor's own religious practice can become quite relevant to patient care, especially when end-of-life issues come into play. A new study finds that doctors who are not religious are more likely to take steps to help end a very sick patient's life, and to discuss these kinds of decisions, than doctors who are very religious. The study, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, surveyed more than 8,500 doctors in the United Kingdom across a wide range of specialties such as neurology, palliative care, and general practice" (Landau, 8/26)

But does this mean that I need to inquire about my doctor's religious beliefs?

I've never bothered to ask my primary care physician about this topic but I have talked with my endocrinologist.  The difference between my interactions with these two professionals is relational. Because I had a pheochromocytoma several years back I've spent a lot of time with my endocrinologist.  We've had many more opportunities to talk and know each other.

In the end, it isn't the religion or the politics of a physician that matters to me (the best primary care physician I ever had was a conservative Republican who worked for Vice-President Dan Quayle before leaving politics for medicine).  What I'm concerned with are values and understandings of medical ethics.  Religion may or may not inform that understanding.  Isn't that the conversation we should be having with our doctors?   

 

Dear Mayor Doyle and Councilor Bode:

I was pleased to hear that the city of Beaverton would be celebrating Mexico's bicentennial this month and disheartened to learn that Washington State resident Lars Larson has once again attacked an Oregon city. Actually, attacking Oregonians seems to be the full-time job for this Washingtonian.

As you know, Mexico is a great neighbor to America. With both share a history of being colonies that finally gained independence and freedom. We share a tradition of working generation to generation to improve on the dream of democracy. Oregon has been blessed to welcome people from Mexico and Mexican descendents as new citizens and neighbors. Like immigrants before them, they contribute to our state community.

Mr. Larson and his partner in crime Bill O'Reilly have unfairly attacked Beaverton (where I lived as a child and where I attended public school) for celebrating Mexican Independence Day and not the 4th of July. Hogwash. In middle school and high school a high point of every summer was celebrating America's Independence at the Oak Hills 4th of July parade and fireworks display. Neighborhoods, community groups and houses of worship throughout Beaverton celebrate the 4th of July proudly each year.

A city-sponsored celebration of the Mexican bicentennial simply acknowledges the deep relationship between our two nations and the rich diversity of the Beaverton community. I'm afraid that Mr. Larson and Mr. O'Reilly are less interested in the truth than in using immigration and race as partisan political issues during a campaign year.  As a minister in the United Church of Christ (a multicultural and multiracial denomination),I find their actions to be reprehensible.  They seek to divide Americans - to divide Oregonians - when our nation needs unity. The city of Beaverton should be commended for reaching out in ways that strengthen the common good of our state.

Thank you for your leadership and public service.

Sincerely,

The Rev. Chuck Currie

This past week I had an online conversation with Michael Brendan Dougherty of The American Conservative on Bloggingheads.tv regarding comprehensive immigration reform.  Part of that conversation is being featured today on The New York Times website. Check it out.

Tonight the president of the United States will address the American people and announce - as he promised during the 2008 campaign - that he has ended combat operations in Iraq. Over 90,000 U.S. troops have returned home. Another 50,000 troops remain to support the new Iraqi government. These remaining troops are scheduled to return next year. 

The Iraq War was one that never should have been fought. It was sold to the American people with elaborate lies from President Bush, Vice-President Cheney, and their Administration. Over 4,000 young American men and women and countless Iraqi civilians died in a conflict that could have been and should have been avoided. President Bush's false claims that Iraq was involved with 9/11 and had weapons of mass destruction brought about one of America's darkest foreign adventures. 

The National Council of Churches USA (NCC) and nearly every other Christian body in the United States - with the notable exception of the Southern Baptists - argued against ever invading Iraq. At the time, NCC endorsed a statement made by the U.S. Conference of Roman Catholic Bishops that read in part:

"... war against Iraq could have unpredictable consequences not only for Iraq, but for peace and stability elsewhere in the Middle East. The use of force might provoke the very kind of attacks that it is intended to prevent, could impose terrible new burdens on an already long-suffering civilian population, and could lead to wider conflict and instability in the region. War against Iraq could also detract from the responsibility to help build a just and stable order in Afghanistan and could undermine broader efforts to stop terrorism.” Our worst fears came true. We can be thankful that Barack Obama used his voice during that period to oppose the war and as president has now ended combat operations - and begun a process to bring all troops home. The future for Iraq, however, remains uncertain. Years of oppressive rule by Saddam Hussein have been followed by war that killed countless civilians and political unrest. The United States will have to retain a humanitarian responsibility to the people of Iraq for generations. 

Perhaps we can learn from this lesson that pre-emptive war should never be an option for this nation. As Christians, we must continue to speak out against war whenever possible but with the tragic recognition that sometimes there may be no other course in the most extreme circumstances. War in Iraq, however, was never a moral imperative. President Obama should be applauded for the steps he has taken. 

As we leave Iraq, it is also important that we re-examine our role in Afghanistan. The moral issues there are deeply complicated and a national conversation over our involvement is critical at this moment of history.

We have waited way too long for the war in Iraq to end.  It has been a long struggle.  I spoke about the war in Iraq and the Christian responsibility for addressing this conflict at Portland's First Congregational United Church of Christ in 2008:

I have a confession to make: I lack some discipline in my spiritual life (actually in many other parts of my life as well, but let's focus on just this one area for now). Prayer doesn't come naturally outside of a church setting and I'm haphazard in reading Scripture (though I tear through books on theology and history). Yes, every day at 4pm my IPhone beeps with a reminder about the coming day's lectionary readings and sometimes I actually read them. The Still Speaking Devotional, available from the United Church of Christ, is a great resource delivered each day right into your e-mail box. But I currently have over 42,000 e-mails in my inbox and I obviously don't have time to read everything. 

All of this has a point, if you're wondering. I'm enjoying Solo, Eugene Peterson's work billed as a "Uncommon Devotional." It is based on Peterson's modern translation of Scripture. Each day you read one piece of Scripture (Peterson provides the option of expanded reading in case you wonder about the context and I nearly always do so I keep my Harper Collins NRSV Study Bible handy) and asks you to reflect on what you read using the ancient practice of lectio divina (divine reading), a practice that I first became familiar with when taking homiletics at Aquinas Institute of Theology in St. Louis, MO. It is a meditative, prayerful reading of Scripture best described as a "slow, contemplative praying of the Scriptures."  This is the practice that I begin with when writing sermons.  Click here for an article from Beliefnet.com for additional information on lectio divina. 

I highly recommend the book. Pastors are not immune to neglecting their own spiritual development and this book has provided a much need boost for me. I will say, however, that I regret that the translation offered by Peterson doesn't use more inclusive language and there are times I find his meditative suggestions unhelpful. Nothing is perfect, however, and any faults are overcome by a useful and readable work the use of which has become a nightly ritual for me.

Glenn Beck keeps attacking the president's faith.  The Washington Post reports:

During an interview on "Fox News Sunday," which was filmed after Saturday's rally, Beck claimed that Obama "is a guy who understands the world through liberation theology, which is oppressor-and-victim." 

"People aren't recognizing his version of Christianity," Beck added... 

Beck, on his Fox News show last Tuesday, said that liberation theology is at the core of Obama's "belief structure." "You see, it's all about victims and victimhood; oppressors and the oppressed; reparations, not repentance; collectivism, not individual salvation. I don't know what that is, other than it's not Muslim, it's not Christian. It's a perversion of the gospel of Jesus Christ as most Christians know it," Beck said.

What his remarks show are that 1) he doesn't understand Liberation Theology 2) that Beck has no understanding of the president's faith and just makes up stuff as he goes along.

My UCC colleague The Rev. Dr. Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite writes today:

President Obama is a Christian, and a fairly typical United Church of Christ sort of Christian at that. On June 23, 2007, then candidate Obama spoke to the United Church of Christ General Synod in Hartford, CT. I was there at that church event, and his speech on a "Politics of Conscience" has resonated with me ever since. Obama's is uniquely a UCC kind of faith, where we say "to believe is care, to care is to do." It's also a somewhat intellectual faith, also typical of the UCC. Obama admits that he didn't "fall out" (i.e. topple over because one is moved by the Holy Spirit) when he walked down the church aisle to accept Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior. "I didn't fall out in church, as folks sometimes do. The questions I had didn't magically disappear. The skeptical bent of my mind didn't suddenly vanish. But kneeling beneath that cross on the South Side, I felt I heard God's spirit beckoning me. I submitted myself to His will, and dedicated myself to discovering His truth and carrying out His works. But my journey is part of a larger journey - one shared by all who've ever sought to apply the values of their faith to our society."

Faith and works together. This is Obama's Christian faith. President Obama's beliefs seem in the mainstream for a United Church of Christ member, though more in the Reformed tradition of the UCC than the Congregational. That's why he likes Reinhold Niebuhr so much.

David Brooks' column in the New York Times is still the best text for capturing why Obama likes Niebuhr so much, and indeed, why Obama is a Christian Realist like Niebuhr and not a follower of Liberation Theology. It's all about the approach to evil.

Brooks writes that "out of the blue I asked [Obama], 'Have you ever read Reinhold Niebuhr?'" The tired candidate disappeared and Obama became animated. "I love him."

Brooks wants to know why. What does Obama take away from Niebhur's writing? "'I take away,' Obama answered in a rush of words, 'the compelling idea that there's serious evil in the world, and hardship and pain. And we should be humble and modest in our belief we can elimiate those things. But we shouldn't use that as an excuse for cynicism and inaction. I take away...the sense we have to make these efforts knowing they are hard, and not swinging from naïve idealism to bitter realism."

Liberation theology, as I have written, begins with critical consciousness, the insight into the way in which the exploitation of the vulnerable is hidden in pious and nationalistic rhetoric. It then moves to a compelling and indeed quite idealistic (though not naïve) vision of human justice that is not postponed until the next world, but realized, if only partially, in this world.

Obama is just more of a realist than the liberation theologians. He has a more critical view of human nature and its possibilities, both for good and for ill. He is, in a startling way, very much a Niebuhrian Christian realist. It matters that we know that about Barack Obama.

Click here for the full story.

Opponents of the president - who question not just his birthplace but also his faith - seem to be more overt today in their racism than during the 2008 campaign.

As I noted earlier this week, The American Spectator's loyal readers left a serious of racist remarks and other comments tinged with religious bigotry on on yet another article questioning the president's faith.  I've already published a few examples of those comments but here are some additional remarks concerning the president from The American Spectator's website left in the same ugly spirit:

• One thing I can say with 100% assurance; Obama is NOT a Christian. His actions speak loud; he is the anthesis of everything Christ taught. Obama is a disciple of Satan who is the "father of lies". Obama is wrapped up in black liberation theology, Marxism, Islam, deception, anti-Americanism, an advocate of murdering children through abortion, thuggery, criminality, immorality, corruption, and an extremely pathological liar.

• You do realize that if he is in fact Muslim it would be perfectly acceptable for him to lie about his faith and intentions by the doctrine of al-Taqiyya? Such has been used by Muslims since the seventh century to confuse, confound and divide their enemies.

• Everybody knows that all black people are perfect. Therefore, anyone who criticizes a black person about anything can only be a racist. What could be clearer?

• And when it comes to Our Lord and Savior Barack Hussein Obama - whose very existence is perfection itself - it is simply astonishing that some people don't see a god; they see an incompetent, ignorant, bigoted, angry, petulant, puerile, tyrannical piece of shit.

• Obama's genetics aside, his behavior invites a lot of questions and thus curiosity and scrutiny. His apologia to the Muslim ( and rest of the world ) his remarks about the GZ Mosque, his hostile policies towards Israel, and his background of connections with radical and even terrorist types make one feel suspicious. I don't know if Obama himself knows who he is. But on any given day he could grow beard like Karx Marx or perhaps wear full Imam regalia with Koran on his right and Das Kapital on the Left hand. The this is not a coincidental.

Like I said, there is just a lot of hate on the right.

Here's another example:  this time from an anti-gay blog that can now be fairly labeled as racist as well.

From the Gay Christian Movement Watch:

On Wednesday, an unusual gaggle of  “leaders across the ideological spectrum”  released an open letter type statement rebuking anyone who questions the so-called “faith” of the Saviour of the United States (SOTUS). The Democratic party aligned media agency hired by the “70 prominent religious leaders” contends that anyone who questions whether Barack Obama is a real Christian is misrepresenting his faith.  The letter wanted to make the point that [the president's] faith isn’t a political matter. I beg to differ.

What’s even more outrageous is the demand to prohibit the free speech rights of any American who may question Obama’s religious teleprompter faith.

“…we urge public officials, faith leaders, and the media to offer no further support or airtime to those who misrepresent and call into question the President’s Christian faith.”

Among the signatories: Bishop TD Jakes, Brian McLauren, Kirbyjon Caldwell and Rev. Chuck Currie...

People have a legitimate right to question any president’s public declarations of  the religious nature. Why is Obama exempt? Over and over he’s preached to the nation, lectured us on what the bible says ( from his progay-black liberation theology point of view), and couched his unpopular policies behind cherry picked scriptures.  He has, without question, done much more for the religion of death and violence (Islam) while sabotaging and deriding his own so called faith. And so, we are not supposed to question whether its right or wrong? We’re just supposed to shuffle our feet, give a big watermelon grin and pray for his continued success?

A "big watermelon grin..."  That's not even veiled racism. It's an obvious attempt to invoke a racist caricature of African-Americans.  Check out this doctored photo of the president available on the internet:

 

(Update:  It has been pointed out to me in an e-mail tonight that the author of the Gay Christian Movement is a man named DL Foster, an African-American who says that he experienced "deliverance from homosexual sin almost 20 years ago."  It is particularity tragic that a black man would seek to reinforce a caricature of African-Americans.  Furthermore, The American Psychological Association has noted you cannot turn gays into straights.  As Rev. Foster attacks gays and African-Americans, one can't help but be reminded of the recent news that Ken Mehlman, the chairman of George W. Bush's 2004 re-election campaign that played on anti-gay bigotry, came out this week as gay.  There were, of course, some African-Americans who opposed the civil rights movement.  We can only speculate on the motives of such people but I see no reason to do that here.  That fact remains that Rev. Foster pedals hateful rhetoric whatever his personal motivation might be.)          

Rhetoric like we're hearing today from those on the far right is meant to undermine the legitimacy of Barack Obama's presidency but also to divide Americans based on race and religion.  We've seen a lot of this and the Tea Party movement has been at the forefront of fostering such division.

Last summer, as the debate over health reform raged and town hall meetings deteriorated into near brawls, the National Council of Churches issued a statement urging civil discourse.  The statement speaks to today's national mood as well:

Individuals cannot express their best hopes and acknowledge their deepest fears within a climate of intimidation and character assassination, and all too often this climate is the product of racism and xenophobia.  Too much is at stake for the good of our society for us to continue down this dangerous path.  The essential nature of our national compact, to enfranchise the views of all, is imperiled in a hostile and suspicious environment. In this moment, then, we call the members of our churches, our political leaders, and all people of good will to somber reflection on the ways we might restore dignity and civility to our national discourse both as a matter of social ethics and to bolster the highest traditions of democratic process.

The prophet Isaiah (1:18) declares God’s message to the people to “Come let us reason together”. This injunction might serve us well in the present moment.  Reason, (yakah), in this passage does not refer to a dispassionate meeting of the minds but, rather calls for convincing, persuading and presenting a case for a point of view. Vigorous, principled debate advances our thinking and clarifies the challenges before us. Respect for neighbor strengthens the fabric of our communities.

Let us then, as a people, draw from our deepest traditions of faith and heritage to gain a renewed sense of community marked by honesty and mutual respect. Let our moments of rigorous debate be tempered with a profound sense of the dignity and worth of each person. Let us debate ideas on their merits and exercise restraint in expression of our own best conceptions. Such a disciplined dialogue holds great promise, honoring our differences and confirming our perception that we are a people joined in our mutual aspiration to live the lives for which we were created. 

Let us as member churches and brothers and sisters of other living faiths model the civility to which our sacred texts command.  Throughout its history, the conciliar ecumenical movement has provided a common venue for persons to express and debate differing viewpoints in an atmosphere of mutual respect. Let us make clear to ourselves and others those marks of civility that represent the best of our faiths and that can serve as foundational to rigorous, honest public discourse for the common good.

Obviously, we must speak out against racism and against those who would seek to use race or religion to divide the American people.  Such means to achieve political ends cannot be tolerated.

The test that we face in the face of such hatred and racism is how we respond.  Christians must always we concerned not just with justice but also for the need for reconciliation because justice is just a far off dream if we remain divided.   

Katherine and Frances with Governor Kitzhaber 

This afternoon Liz and I were among several co-hosts for an event benefiting John Kitzhaber's return to the Governor's office. 

Related Post: Why I'm Supporting John Kitzhaber 

The turnout was great (particularly for late August when so many other events were planned).  Governor Kitzhaber spoke in some detail about his positions on economic development, education and poverty (when prompted to do so by a certain UCC minister in attendance).  You can see why his opponent - a nice guy who has never held office or created a single job - doesn't want to debate.  John Kitzhaber knows his stuff.

We want to thank our many friends who attended today. Please show your support for his campaign by clicking here.

Check out the photos:   

I had the chance this week to talk with Michael B. Dougherty of The American Conservative, a publication started by Pat Buchanan, about comprehensive immigration reform and other issues on Bloggingheads.tv.  Take a look. 

Five years after Hurricane Katrina, 100,000 New Orleanians have yet to return

On the fifth anniversary of Katrina, survivors and advocates praise work of humanitarian agencies

Reprinted from Church World Service

NEW YORK and NEW ORLEANS -- Five years after hurricanes Katrina and Rita, survivors and those working on their behalf say work is far from finished in New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. But they are emphatic that what progress has been made is in great part due to the support, funding and labor of the U.S. faith community and of humanitarian agencies like Church World Service. 

"If it weren't for the volunteers and agencies who assisted me, I don't know where I would be," said Gloria Mouton, 62, a retired government employee, whose home in New Orleans East was among those repaired by volunteers from across the U.S. during the 2009 CWS Neighborhood New Orleans ecumenical project.

While saying that the city "is nowhere where it should be five years later," with many areas still dotted by empty or overgrown lots, Mouton praised the efforts that allowed her to return to her home after two years of living in Georgia with family as she waited to return to New Orleans. "This is home, where I want to be," she said, adding that the work of volunteers "came out real nice."
 
In restoring Mouton’s and other homes, CWS worked in partnership with the local New Orleans long-term recovery organization the Crescent Alliance Recovery Effort, and with volunteer teams coordinated by 10 of CWS U.S. member denominations providing the labor.  "I never realized there were that many people such big hearts," she said.

Another survivor, Christopher Weaver, 48, a self-employed cook, agreed, and praised the efforts that allowed him to return to his home in New Orleans East.

"There are people who showed me a new way of life," he said of the work of volunteers and CWS-supported agencies that repaired his residence. "It was powerful to see these things happening."

"The faith community was remarkable. Absolutely remarkable in every way they could be," said Ellenor Simmons, who helps oversee long-term recovery projects for the United Way of the Greater New Orleans Area.
 
From individual churches who opened their doors to shelter survivors to faith-based humanitarian agencies and regional long-term recovery organizations, the faith response saved lives, say those who have worked tirelessly in the five years since Katrina and Rita hit the region.

"Absolutely," said Jessica Vermilyea, the Louisiana-based state director for Lutheran Disaster Response and Lutheran Social Services Disaster Response. "It saved families. If it hadn't have been for that response, I don't know what would have happened."
 
Church World Service’s multi-tiered response has continued over the long haul. Initial emergency relief included shipments of CWS Blankets, Hygiene and School Kits; organizing for long-term recovery work; and focusing on spiritual and emotional care.
 
Thousands of people received CWS kits in the days following the disaster. Later, thanks to a collaborative effort between CWS and Habitat for Humanity International, nearly 700 families were able to return to their repaired or rebuilt homes – an accomplishment that won Church World Service and HFHI the Award for Excellence in Long-Term Recovery Partnership from the National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster.
 
Since the 2005 disaster, Church World service has administered three major international grants, helped schools and youth programs in Louisiana and Mississippi recover, and helped establish and train dozens of long-term recovery groups in readiness for the next disaster. 
 
Not all the hurricane recovery work is done. There are still people in the region living in temporary housing. While there is still a sense of remarkable rebuilding overall, life is not what it was. "There is a 'new normal,'" Simmons said.
 
Still, enough are back in homes for Simmons' United Way colleague, Benita Corley, to praise the combined efforts of local, regional and national organizations.
 
"We could not have done it without y'all," she said. "Church World Service was a real blessing for us. The clients didn't know who gave us the money to do our work, but we do."
 
Bonnie Vollmering, CWS associate director for domestic response, returned the compliment. 
 
"Five years later, long-term recovery groups continue to assist people with unmet needs," she said. "If it was not for the collaboration of those local, regional and national long-term recovery organizations, many individuals would not be living in safe, sanitary and secure housing. It’s been our pleasure to work with local partners in helping people return to their homes.”
 
Other highlights of the CWS response:

• CWS partnered with Terrebone Readiness Assistance Coalition to help build five of the first-ever Louisiana Lift Houses, a sustainable housing solution for living on coastal land. Built for economy, ecology and to withstand hurricane-force winds, the Lift Houses handily survived the real-world test of Hurricane Gustav in 2008.
• The agency supported more than 30 new community recovery organizations to manage cases and coordinate volunteer and skilled labor for home rebuilding.
• CWS sponsored Interfaith Trauma Response Trainings workshops to assist clergy and other caregivers who responded to the disaster.

How to help

Contributions to support the life-saving work of Church World Service may be made online or by phone (800.297.1516), or may be sent to your denomination or to Church World Service, P.O. Box 968, Elkhart, IN 46515, Attention: Pakistan floods. 

NCC presents an NBC special on August 29;
'Coming home' five years after Katrina struck

Today The American Spectator, a conservative publication, posted an article that again questioned the president's faith:

Why does a significant chunk of the American electorate think Obama is a Muslim? Let's count some of the reasons: he speaks of his "Muslim roots," says he hails from "generations of Muslims," was born to a line of Muslim males and given by them an Arabic name, went to a Muslim school in Islamic Indonesia, speaks glowingly of Islam whenever he gets the chance, holds a Ramadan dinner in the White House, tells his NASA head to turn the space agency into a Muslim outreach program, and last but not least insults doctrinal Christians routinely. Of course, these charges are either outright false or taken out of context. I went over and posted as a comment on The American Spectator's article the letter issued yesterday by over 70 religious leaders - conservative, moderate and progressive - defending the president's faith as a Christian. Take a look at some of the responses that came in from readers of The American Spectator to that letter:

• That President Bozo is "clearly a committed Christian" is simply not in evidence.

• How can a narcissist like Obama worship any Higher Power other than himself? His words and deeds speak louder than any third party's attempt to rehabilitate an obvious Secular Humanist with a deep and abiding love for Islamic culture and values.

• I noticed the top name on the list was T.D. Jakes. I believe he is a well known "black" minister so I would assume without checking that many more on the list are as well. I suppose they're just protecting "the brother".

• The man whose water you are carrying is the most radically pro-abortion president, ever. In the Illinois legislature, he usually voted "Present," except for abortion--when he always voted in favor. I fail to see how any of so-called "social conservative" clergyman could support this ignoble, untruthful, untrustworthy man.His religion is a matter of debate because he and his media sycophants have made it so.

• His name is Muslim, he grew up in a Muslim church and with Muslim fathers and still thinks the call to prayers is one of the most beautiful sounds in the world. He supports Islam against Christianity whenever there is a conflict. Please don't believe you are so important that you know what his faith is because he says its Christian. I will bet not one of the people who signed this letter ever ministered a sermon to this President.

• Dear Rev. Chuck: You and the rest of obama's spitoon-carriers are working overtime these days aren't you?

• Just like the lame stream media, you and your social justice posse are a bunch of hacks. Words are cheap, especially from this administration; his actions speak volumes. Wake up preachers! Stop enabling this fraud who definitely does not have America's or Christians values as a top priority!

• I would remind you Rev. Currie that a horde of so called “Christian” theologians flocked to Adolf Hitler because of his overt “good deeds” while turning a blind eye to how those “good deeds” were ultimately paid for and by whom. You strike me as one of those “fools” that couldn’t see the Forrest for the trees in the 1930s. Whatever Barrack Obama’s faith is, if any at all, it has not substance to what the teachings of Christ are. Not a bit. The last time I looked Rev. Currie the teachings of Marx and any flavor of Fascism aren’t compatible with Christianity and those that defend such have no legitimacy in such matters. It wouldn’t be the first time a charlatan has taken members of the “church” leadership for gain. It wouldn’t be the first time the “church” leadership has been the doorman for the devil’s work either. Which is Rev. Currie, are you blind or just deaf?

I could list more comments but you get the idea.  For some on the far Right the president is either a communist, a socialist, a radical Muslim, or Hitler.  Take your pick.

In the end, it is hate.  Pure hate.  Fueled by racism and religious bigotry.

What will be the ultimate outcome as those on the right stoke the fires of hatred?  Pray for reconciliation and understanding in our great nation.    

Beck Has Urged Followers To Quit "Social Justice" Churches; Dr. King Was A Social Justice Preacher

Glenn Beck will be holding a rally this week at the Lincoln Memorial - on the anniversary of The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech - with headline speaker Sarah Palin.

The Washington Post reports:

Beck said in a recent broadcast that he did not intentionally choose the "I Have a Dream" anniversary for his rally - but that he believes the coincidence is "divine providence."

"Whites don't own Abraham Lincoln," he said. "Blacks don't own Martin Luther King. Those are American icons, American ideas, and we should just talk about character, and that's really what this event is about. It's about honoring character."

The event will be filled with irony as Beck and Palin stand against so many of the values Dr. King preached about.  Beck told his radio program listeners on March 2nd:

“I beg you, look for the words ‘social justice’ or ‘economic justice’ on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words.”

“Am I advising people to leave their church? Yes! If I am going to Jeremiah Wright’s church,” he said, referring to President Obama’s former pastor in Chicago. “If you have a priest that is pushing social justice, go find another parish. Go alert your bishop.”

Beck would have hated Dr. King, who preached in 1966 a sermon entitled Guidelines for a Constructive Church:

This morning I would like to submit to you that we who are followers of Jesus Christ, and we who must keep his church going and keep it alive, also have certain basic guidelines to follow. Somewhere behind the dim mist of eternity, God set forth his guidelines. And through his prophets, and above all through his son Jesus Christ, he said that, "There are some things that my church must do. There are some guidelines that my church must follow." And if we in the church don't want the funds of grace cut off from the divine treasury, we've got to follow the guidelines. (That’s right) The guidelines are clearly set forth for us in some words uttered by our Lord and Master as he went in the temple one day, and he went back to Isaiah and quoted from him. And he said, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me (Yes, sir) to preach the gospel to the poor, (Yes, sir) he hath sent me to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, (Yes) to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord." These are the guidelines...

...the church, if it is true to its guidelines, must preach the acceptable year of the Lord. (Yes, sir, Make it plain) You know the acceptable year of the Lord is the year that is acceptable to God because it fulfills the demands of his kingdom. Some people reading this passage feel that it’s talking about some period beyond history, (Make it plain) but I say to you this morning that the acceptable year of the Lord can be this year. (Yes) And the church is called to preach it.

The acceptable year of the Lord is any year (Amen) when men decide to do right.

The acceptable year of the Lord is any year when men will stop lying and cheating. (Amen, Make it plain)

The acceptable year of the Lord is that year when women will start using the telephone for constructive purposes (Yes) and not to spread malicious gossip and false rumors on their neighbors. (Right)

The acceptable year of the Lord is any year (Any year) when men will stop throwing away the precious lives that God has given them in riotous living. (Make it plain)

The acceptable year of the Lord (Yes) is that year when people in Alabama (Make it plain) will stop killing civil rights workers and people who are simply engaged in the process of seeking their constitutional rights. (Make it plain)

The acceptable year of the Lord (Yes) is that year when men will learn to live together as brothers. (Yes, sir)

The acceptable year of the Lord (Yes) is that year when men will keep their theology abreast with their technology.

The acceptable year of the Lord is that year when men will keep the ends for which they live abreast with the means by which they live. (Yes)

The acceptable year of the Lord is that year (That year) when men will keep their morality abreast with their mentality.

The acceptable year of the Lord is that year (Yes) when all of the leaders of the world will sit down at the conference table (Make it plain) and realize that unless mankind puts an end to war, war will put an end to mankind. (Yes)

The acceptable year of the Lord [clap] is that year when men will beat their swords into plowshares, (Yes) and their spears into pruning hooks: and nations will not rise up against nations, neither will they study war anymore. (Yes)

The acceptable year of the Lord is that year (That year) when men will allow justice to roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream. (Yes)

The acceptable year of the Lord is that year when we will send to Congress and to state houses of our nation (Yes, sir) men who will do justly, (Yes) who will love mercy, (Yes) and who will walk humbly with their God. (Yes)

The acceptable year of the Lord is that year (Yes, sir) when every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain will be made low; the rough places would be made plain, and the crooked places straight; and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.

The acceptable year of the Lord is that year when men will do unto others as they will have others do unto themselves. (Yes)

The acceptable year of the Lord is that year when men will love their enemies, (Yes) bless them that curse them, pray for them that despitefully use them.

The acceptable year of the Lord is that year when men discover that out of one blood God made all men to dwell upon the face of the earth. (Yes)

The acceptable year of the Lord is that year when every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess the name of Jesus. And everywhere men will cry out, "Hallelujah, hallelujah! The kingdom of this world has become the kingdom of our Lord and His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever. Hallelujah, hallelujah!"

The acceptable year of the Lord is God’s year. (Yes)

These are our guidelines, and if we will only follow the guidelines, we will be ready for God’s kingdom, (Yes) we will be doing what God’s church is called to do. We won’t be a little social club. (Make it plain) We won’t be a little entertainment center. But we’ll be about the serious business (Yes) of bringing God’s kingdom to this earth.

It seems that I can hear the God of the universe smiling and speaking to this church, saying, "You are a great church (Glory to God) because I was hungry and ye fed me. You are a great church because I was naked and ye clothed me. You are a great church because I was sick and ye visited me. You are a great church because I was in prison and ye gave me consolation by visiting me." (Yes, sir) And this is the church that’s going to save this world. "The spirit of the Lord is upon me (Yes) because he has anointed me to heal the broken-hearted, to set at liberty them that are captive, (Amen) and to preach the acceptable year of the Lord."

Beck and Palin would term such preaching as "communism" or "socialism."  Beck would have told people to leave Dr. King's church because he preached "social justice".  

Martin Luther King III wrote today in The Washington Post about his father:

Throughout his life he advocated compassion for the poor, nonviolence, respect for the dignity of all people and peace for humanity.

Although he was a profoundly religious man, my father did not claim to have an exclusionary "plan" that laid out God's word for only one group or ideology. He marched side by side with members of every religious faith. Like Abraham Lincoln, my father did not claim that God was on his side; he prayed humbly that he was on God's side.

He did, however, wholeheartedly embrace the "social gospel." His spiritual and intellectual mentors included the great theologians of the social gospel Walter Rauschenbush and Howard Thurman. He said that any religion that is not concerned about the poor and disadvantaged, "the slums that damn them, the economic conditions that strangle them and the social conditions that cripple them[,] is a spiritually moribund religion awaiting burial." In his "Dream" speech, my father paraphrased the prophet Amos, saying, "We will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream."

The title of the 1963 demonstration, "The Great March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom," reflected his belief that the right to sit at a lunch counter would be hollow if African Americans could not afford the meal. The need for jobs and shared economic prosperity remains as urgent and compelling as it was 47 years ago. My father's vision would include putting millions of unemployed Americans to work, rebuilding our tattered infrastructure and reforms to reduce pollution and better care for the environment.

Palin and Beck dishonor Dr. King's memory and the Christian faith with their rhetoric and their rally.

Related Post: Listen to my sermon from January 2010 - If You're Out There: A Sermon Honoring The Life and Ministry of The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. - here:

Download FUMC 1-17-10

(some browsers - like Firefox or Google Chrome - will allow you to simply click on the link and listen...otherwise click with the RIGHT mouse button on the hyperlink and choose “Save Target As” and save to your desktop or other folder – once downloaded click on the file to listen).

Now On ITunes

You can now subscribe to my podcasts on ITunes by clicking here. 

Photo credit:  Life, Paul Schutzer.  Portrait of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. speaking at 'prayer pilgramage for freedom' at Lincoln Memorial, 1957.

Maybe so.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10cThe Parent Company Trapwww.thedailyshow.comDaily Show Full EpisodesPolitical HumorTea Party

Faith is not a political issue

As Christian leaders— whose primary responsibility is sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ with our congregations, our communities, and our world— we are deeply troubled by the recent questioning of President Obama’s faith. We understand that these are contentious times, but the personal faith of our leaders should not be up for public debate.

President Obama has been unwavering in confessing Christ as Lord and has spoken often about the importance of his Christian faith.  Many of the signees on this letter have prayed and worshipped with this President.  We believe that questioning, and especially misrepresenting, the faith of a confessing believer goes too far.

This is not a political issue. The signers of this letter come from different political and ideological backgrounds, but we are unified in our belief in Jesus Christ.  As Christian pastors and leaders, we believe that fellow Christians need to be an encouragement to those who call Christ their savior, not question the veracity of their faith.

Therefore, we urge public officials, faith leaders, and the media to offer no further support or airtime to those who misrepresent and call into question the President’s Christian faith.  And we join with the President in praying that God will continue to bless the United States of America.

Signed,

Bishop T.D. Jakes
Pastor and CEO
Potters House

Ronald J. Sider
President
Evangelicals for Social Action

Rev. Sam Rodriguez
President
National Hispanic Leadership Conference

Dr. Joel Hunter
Senior Pastor, Northland: A Church Distributed

Jim Wallis
President and CEO
Sojourners

Luis Cortes
President
Esperanza

Stephen Monsma
Paul Henry Institute for the Study of Christianity and Politics
Calvin College

Miroslav Volf
Director, Center for Faith and Culture
Yale Divinity School

Donald Miller
Author

Brian McLaren
Author/Pastor

Bishop Vashti Murphy McKenzie
Thirteenth Episcopal District
African Methodist Episcopal Church

Kirbyjon Caldwell
Senior Pastor
Windsor Village United Methodist Church

Wesley Granberg-Michaelson
General Secretary
Reformed Church in America

Rev. Peg Chemberlin
President
National Council of Churches

Rev. Dr. Sharon Watkins
General Minister and President
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)

Dr. David P. Gushee
Distinguished University Professor of Christian Ethics
Director, Center for Theology and Public Life
Mercer University

Dr. William Shaw
President
National Baptist Convention USA

Dr. Richard Hamm 
Executive Director
Christian Churches Together in the USA

Cynthia Bolbach
Moderator, 219th General Assembly
Presbyterian Church (USA)

Gradye Parsons
Stated Clerk

Office of the General Assembly
Presbyterian Church (USA)

Linda Valentine
Executive Director
General Assembly Mission Council
Presbyterian Church (USA)

Dr. James C. Perkins
First Vice President
The Progressive National Baptist Convention

Rev. Gabriel A. Salguero
Lead Pastor, The Lamb’s Church of the Nazarene
Executive, The Latino Leadership Circle

Noel Castellanos
CEO, Christian Community Development Association

Vincent J. Miller
Gudorf Chair in Catholic Theology and Culture
Department of Religious Studies
University of Dayton

Terrence W. Tilley
Avery Cardinal Dulles, S.J., Professor of Catholic Theology
Chair, Theology Department
Fordham University, Bronx NY

Nicholas P. Cafardi
Dean Emeritus and Professor of Law
Duquesne University School of Law

T. Michael McNulty, SJ
Justice and Peace Director
Conference of Major Superiors of Men (CMSM)

Steve Schneck
Director
Institute for Policy Research & Catholic Studies
The Catholic University of America

David Baak
United Church of Wayland, MI

George B. Telford
Committee on Ecumenical and Interfaith Relations
Presbyterian Church (USA)

Rev. Chuck Currie

Rev. Jeff Johnston

There has been much moaning and groaning in Oregon from business leaders about taxes recently - particularly since the passage of Measures 66 and 67.  But as Rich Rodgers notes (via Steve Duin) a group of business leaders have issued a report showing that Oregon's business taxes are the "lowest in the West."  Duin reports:  

"As an investment advisor, I see clients move to Washington to save on the income tax," Tony Arnerich said. "You're an Oregonian all your life and suddenly taxes become a philosophical burden and you run to Washington. That's a good example of how my generation morphed from 'We the people' to 'Me the people.'"

Even Oregon's so-called "moderate" business leaders at the Oregon Business Association seem to have taken a dive off the reality cliff.  

"5 Myths About Homeless Schools" Reinforces Real Myths; Ignores Evidence, Studies

The progressive website Change.org - a great site that lifts up important issues - went way off course this week when they published an article entitled "5 Myths About Homeless Schools" that defended separate schools for students experiencing homelessness. 

Writer Natalie Wendt says in the piece that she speaks on "behalf of teachers in low-income public schools everywhere." But that isn't true. The National Education Association has opposed separate schools. That position is shared by the NAACP, the National Coalition for the Homeless, and the National Association for the Education of Homeless Youth and Children. 

In her article, Ms. Wendt ignores the facts, the studies and civil rights law related to education in her piece.  I assume based on her postings that Ms. Wendt is a good person with a big heart.  But she clearly doesn't have a grasp on good practices in education or public policy as it relates to this area.

Why are separate schools bad? The National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty has noted:

"These “schools" are usually located in shelters or churches, and resemble the one-room schoolhouse of early rural America. They typically fail to provide the same curricular and extra-curricular activities as regular public schools; they may not be staffed by certified teachers; they often group children together in multi-age, multi-grade classrooms; they usually fail to provide the same services and resources as regular public schools; and they may violate health and safety codes. Because most separate schools cannot provide the same educational services as are provided in regular public schools, homeless children risk falling behind their peers academically. When these children return to regular public schools, they may not receive credit for their work in a separate school, thus forcing them to repeat a grade or take additional classes in order to graduate." Barbara Duffield, the policy director of the National Association for the Education of Homeless Youth and Children, has said: "No separate school is a model for homeless children. In fact, federal law strictly prohibits school segregation by housing status because separate schools are considered a harmful educational practice. Segregation deprives children of the resources, structure, and stability of a mainstream school environment. Furthermore, we have learned over the years that model homeless education programs are those that keep children stable in their schools of origin, remove barriers to enrollment, attendance, and success, and afford homeless children and youth every opportunity to participate in school activities. We also have learned from those communities who had separate programs and then transitioned to an integrated model; these communities report being able to provide more comprehensive services to more children in an integrated setting." Educators, civil rights organizations and advocates for children experiencing homelessness have all come to the conclusion that separate schools are ineffective based on study after study that show that children in separate schools suffer and don't, well, learn. The most recent studies, conducted on the well-known homeless-only Pappas School in Phoenix, AZ, compared test scores among students there with students who were homeless that had been mainstreamed into Phoenix's public schools. At every grade level and in every subject the students at the Pappas School scored substantially lower than homeless kids in public schools.  In her article, Ms. Wendt seems to minimize the importance of a formal education for children experiencing homelessness.  But as President Obama has noted, a solid education is one of the best anti-poverty tools we have.      

We have one of these separate schools right here in Portland - the Community Transitional School. Multnomah County, ignoring the wisdom of federal law, helps fund the program but the school, since it is private, is not required to meet state standards and Multnomah County, tragically, does not hold the school accountable for how well students are educated. (Unless there have been recent radical changes in their contract with Multnomah County) there are no real measurable goals the school is required to meet. In effect, there is no real accountability for how public dollars are being spent on this program.

These separate schools could play a valuable role if instead of trying to provide the primary education for children - a goal they clearly cannot meet - they instead used their passion, energy and good intentions to provide after school programs and other supportive services that supplement the work being done by public schools.   

In the end, Change.org has done a great disservice by promoting the old failed idea that separate is equal in education.  We've known since before Brown vs. Education that such an argument is morally flawed.     

Rev. Chuck Currie - Oregon Coalition on Housing and Homelessness from The Rev. Chuck Currie on Vimeo.

The decision by a U.S. district judge to grant a preliminary injunction that prohibits the use of federal funding on embryonic stem cell research is unfortunate. Support for such research has divided some in the faith community but many believe the research to be consistent with Christian ethics. The United Church of Christ adopted a resolution in 2001 in favor of federal funding of embryonic stem cell research under the rational that “Jesus set an example, by his ministry of healing and caring for the sick and disabled, challenging us to follow his example by supporting the healing and caring ministry in our own day.” President Obama last year overturned a ban on such research imposed by then-President George W. Bush early in his first term. Embryonic stem cell research has the potential to unlock cures for conditions like “diabetes, spinal cord paralysis, heart disease, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease, cancer, MS [multiple sclerosis], Lou Gehrig's disease and other fatal, debilitating diseases," said Jim Ramstad, a Minnesota Republican U.S. House member during Bush's tenure. Many conservative "pro-life" leaders in Congress, such as Orrin Hatch, support embryonic stem cell research. It is important that the research move forward and that the legal challenges be dispensed with quickly.

 

Join people of faith in support of the freedom to worship.  Stop the War on Prayer.

Religious bigotry is simply un-American. But we are seeing it today. 

  

CBS News reports on this video:

In the video, posted by "lefthandedart," members of the crowd can be heard chanting "no mosque here," partially in the direction of an African-American man walking through the crowd. The man is wearing a white Under Armour cap that appears to given some members of the crowd the impression that he is Muslim. The man becomes frustrated, asking why the protesters are yelling at him and complaining that they don't know his opinion on the issue. Another man can be heard yelling something like "run away, coward." "I'm not even Muslim, but I've got my beliefs about this mosque," the African-American man tells a man who seems to be trying to calm him down. At that point, a protester in a blue hardhat confronts the man; other protesters quickly step in to separate the two. The "no mosque here" chant begins again. Later in the video, a man can be heard yelling, "he must have voted for Obama," while another appears to be complaining about media coverage. At another point, someone can also be heard yelling "Mohammed's a pig, Mohhamed's a pig" as the African-American man talks, after which a woman can be heard saying, "you don't need to say that."  We are a better people than this.

Related Link: Critics Of President’s Remarks On NYC #Mosque Ignore Cherished American Values Of Religious Freedom and Tolerance