Lord, forgive Father Groeschel

Father Benedict Groeschel provided a rare glimpse into the mindset that allowed the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church to go on for so many decades. He is a very high profile Franciscan Friar that has even counseled priests involved in the scandal. In an interview with the National Catholic Register, Father Groeschel discussed the scandal with considerable sympathy for the perpetrators while blaming the victims. (Note: After the interview attracted criticism and unwelcome attention, it was removed. Here is a link to the cached interview.)

When asked if he had been working with priests involved in the scandal, he suggested that the priests were vulnerable because of emotional problems and the victims seduced them.

People have this picture in their minds of a person planning to — a psychopath. But that’s not the case. Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 — is the seducer.

It is a difficult attitude to fathom. Never mind the fact that many of the cases were children under the age of 12. Whether the Father is more sympathetic to priests because he comes from their ranks or some misguided, immature idea about sexual behavior is hard to determine. Groeschel describes the sexual contact as something unplanned and almost accidental.

Well, it’s not so hard to see — a kid looking for a father and didn’t have his own — and they won’t be planning to get into heavy-duty sex, but almost romantic, embracing, kissing, perhaps sleeping but not having intercourse or anything like that.

So it was just affection gone awry and the poor priests succumbed to the wiles of young boys and girls.

Groeschel is even sympathetic to Jerry Sandusky.

Here’s this poor guy — [Penn State football coach Jerry] Sandusky — it went on for years. Interesting: Why didn’t anyone say anything? Apparently, a number of kids knew about it and didn’t break the ice. Well, you know, until recent years, people did not register in their minds that it was a crime. It was a moral failure, scandalous; but they didn’t think of it in terms of legal things.

If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties — except for rape or violence — it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way. Sometimes statutory rape would be — but only if the girl pushed her case. Parents wouldn’t touch it. People backed off, for years, on sexual cases. I’m not sure why.

That suggests that he views this as "moral" and cultural failures, but not pathological and criminal. In effect, he is saying that kids could not have been that seriously harmed because they did not come forward. He cannot imagine that the kids complained, but no one believed them. Remember that Sandusky targeted vulnerable and at-risk kids that came to his charitable camps. He also cannot imagine the shame and confusion that these kids experienced as they were betrayed by someone they looked up to and trusted. And in his mind, parents only worry about sexual activities of their children in the case of rape.

What Groeschel does not seem to grasp is that priests serve Christ and betrayed the Lord by abusing their authority and taking advantage of children. There is no revulsion and demand for accountability for the priests. He even suggests that the first offense should not be treated as a major felony.

And I’m inclined to think, on their first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime.

Whether these views of sexual abuse by priests are shared by other leaders of the Catholic Church is uncertain. However, the bishops moved abusive priests around rather than defrock them. If their only concern was to protect the Church from scandal, that would have been the most obvious and defensible action to take.

Also look at the action of the National Catholic Register in relation to the Groeschel interview. It was published without comment or question, but then quickly removed when it provoked a firestorm of criticism. It was replaced with the following editorial comment:

Editor’s Note:
Child sexual abuse is never excusable. The editors of the National Catholic Register apologize for publishing without clarification or challenge Father Benedict Groeschel's comments that seem to suggest that the child is somehow responsible for abuse. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our publication of that comment was an editorial mistake, for which we sincerely apologize. Given Father Benedict's stellar history over many years, we released his interview without our usual screening and oversight. We have removed the story. We have sought clarification from Father Benedict. 

Jeanette R. De Melo Editor in Chief

It is difficult to understand how the editor published the interview without reading it or understanding how the comments on sexual abuse would be perceived.

Today, they added comments from the Franciscan Friars (reminding readers of the many good works of Father Groeschel) and from Father Groeschel.

Statement from Fr Benedict:

I apologize for my comments. I did not intend to blame the victim. A priest (or anyone else) who abuses a minor is always wrong and is always responsible. My mind and my way of expressing myself are not as clear as they used to be. I have spent my life trying to help others the best that I could. I deeply regret any harm I have caused to anyone.

I do not think he expressed himself poorly. I think he spoke from the heart and said what he believed. It is a rare act of speaking freely that gives the world an indication of the mindset among the male hierarchy of the Church that fosters the abuse and protected the abusers for decades.

Even though Christian institutions are supposed to serve Christ, they often fail the sacred and protect the institution and even the profane. The powerful enjoy their privilege and power. Father Groeschel even alludes to the temptations of fame:

I wouldn’t want to say about any particular person, but people could be foolish enough to take themselves too seriously.

Sometimes we are tempted to believe that religious authorities encountered by Jesus were unique in their hypocrisy and corruption. In fact, they were no better or worse than the institutions that now bear Christ's name. Reform is difficult when institutions have great power. The powerful even try to silence critics by any means necessary.

Lord, forgive Father Groeschel for speaking freely, opening still fresh wounds, and then trying to pretend he merely expressed himself poorly.

Update: Some have suggested that Father Groeschel's comments had more to do with his age and infirmity rather than his attitudes about sexual abuse. Perhaps, but his responses to the interview did not seem vague or confused. There is other evidence that the Catholic hierarchy shrug off sexual misconduct by priests. Here is an example:

When the computer systems manager of the Kansas City-St. Joseph, Mo., diocese told her bishop, Robert Finn, that she had found lewd images of children on a priest's laptop, he replied, "Sometimes boys will be boys," according to sworn testimony that appears in court documents filed Thursday.

Bishop Finn now denies ever making the remark but cannot explain why he waited six months to report the child pornography after being told of its existence.

Perhaps without intending to do so, Father Groeschel gave us all a glimpse into the attitudes that allowed an abuse scandal to continue for many decades and eventually did major harm to the Church.

One word you will not hear in Tampa

There is a political convention going on in Tampa. One word that you will never hear during the flag-waving, chest-thumping orgy of machismo, money, and "morality" is poverty. The folks in Tampa do not believe poverty really exists and, if it does, is the fault of person who finds themselves with few resources in our capitalist paradise.

The crowd in Tampa can be forgiven for their beliefs about poverty. After all, their political, business, and religious leaders have spread that message far and wide. If you do not think that the poor are poor by choice or consequence of their own actions, then you have not been properly indoctrinated. You have also been told that the few "legitimate" poor people can be cared for by the church and charity. And if you are affluent, then your exposure to the real world of poverty is nonexistent unless you seek it out. Unless you leave the walls of your gated community or enclave of beautiful people, the poor will exist only in the occasional panhandler encountered on your travels for business or pleasure. Tampa has one of the largest homeless populations in America but the convention attendees will never look for them or see them.

Now that poverty has become a dirty word that sparks revulsion and anger among a major segment of the political spectrum, life for the poor is about to get harder even as more and more people join their ranks daily. The meanest streets in America are about to get even more brutal.

The poor are numerous, their suffering is real, and the resources to help them are scarce and drying up. If you want to help, then there are a few simple things you can do. First, educate yourself. The facts are out there. You will discover how many people in America are living in extreme or deep poverty, including those that satisfy the international definition of extreme poverty - living on less than $2 per day. Get engaged in programs that assist the poor. See, hear, smell, taste, and touch their lives. 

The real faces of poverty cover a broad spectrum. There are people that grew up in terrible schools, navigated the temptations and pitfalls of street gangs, and lack the means to migrate to hopefully greener pastures. There are the mentally ill that quickly find themselves living on the street. There are blue and white collar workers that lost their job and cannot find anything that pays them nearly as much as they once did. There are older people that have little in the way of life savings. There are the disabled from birth defects, trauma, or disease. They are all people life kicked in the teeth.

Part of your education should be to take the Food Stamp Challenge. Get the tool kit. Keep track of the time you spend trying to find cheap food, the nutrition quality of what you eat, and how you feel. Wimps do it for a week. Try it for a month to get the full effect to food pressures day in and day out. If you shop at a big box club store, be sure to take the pro-rated cost of membership off the top of your budget. 

Last but not least, think about how to define poverty. The folks meeting in Tampa define poverty as not having stuff. Carefully massaged numbers from all the right think tanks suggest that many people who have little money still have some nice stuff like a television, cell phone, and car. To be poor in their eyes, you have to be completely destitute with nothing to your name. 

It is more about a lack of resilience than stuff. This discussion gets to the heart of the matter:

but then he turned it on it’s head – he looked at each of us in the room and said to us, what happened if after this meeting [bit of a parry-phrase happening here, don't quota me by this] you got a couple of phone calls, telling you you had lost your job and there had been a fire at home which had burnt down the whole place including all your stuff and the bank called telling you that someone had gotten into your account and cleared out all your money and there is nothing you can do about it… and so within fifteen minutes of this meeting you had lost all your stuff..?

how long would it be before you had your next meal?

how long would it be before you found a place for you and your family to sleep for the night, or the next few weeks or months of nights?

how long before you found yourself a new job, whether back as a powerful executive in a company or serving coffee at the local Starbucks?

and the answer to each of those questions, and possibly some others, was not long at all…

so possibly the definition of POVERTY is not so much the LACK OF STUFF as it is the LACK OF FRIENDSHIP OR TOGETHERNESS

because that is how you would get your next meal, a place to stay, and your next job – through the people and network resources and connectivity you have…

To be resilient means to have the resources to get back on your feet. If you fall on hard times but have a social network of family, friends, and neighbors to help, then you will be in a much better position to find a new job, place to live, and the resources to stay afloat. If you are poor and everybody you know is also poor, then getting out of poverty is virtually impossible.

Natural disasters expose the vulnerability of a community. Hurricane Katrina hit those with the least the hardest because they could not get out of the city, take care of themselves on the road, or rebuild.  Ditto for economic disasters.

A poverty of resilience means no personal or social bootstraps to pull yourself up with.

The Tampa crowd have brainwashed themselves into thinking they do not need any help from other people and never will. Perhaps their personal resources are sufficient that they do not have to imagine having to rely on the kindness of others. It is not hard to be resilient when have much more than you need.

So poverty is about your physical and social environment. It is also about your psychological environment. Poverty is about few joys. Not having food or drink you enjoy to lift your spirits or share with friends. Not feeling safe in your home, neighborhood, and city. Not having the simple pleasures that we all take for granted. No variety of any kind. It is about an abundance of fear, anger, despair, and revulsion. You can find temporary relief from the psychological pain in drugs or alcohol, but those escapes will only increase your pain over time.

Poverty also means having no power and few advocates. We have politicians that are deliberately taking away the rights of the poor to vote. And since the political machine requires money to produce legislation, poverty means no influence. Too many of politicians even want to increase the vulnerability of the poor to predators, such as criminals, debt collectors, and abusive legal systems.

And poverty is spiritual. It is tough to feel God's love when too many, even religious people, are calling you worthless and a drain on society.

Poverty is common, becoming more common, and sucks. Jesus said the measure of your soul is whether you lift the cross of those in need. That sounds about right to me.

So much for walking humbly

Pastor turned political activist Mike Huckabee recently tossed out an interesting scriptural reference in the fight over a political candidate.

“This could be a Mount Carmel moment,” said the former Arkansas governor, referring to the holy battle between Elijah and the prophets of Baal in the book of Kings. “You know, you bring your gods. We’ll bring ours. We’ll see whose God answers the prayers and brings fire from heaven. That’s kind of where I’m praying: that there will be fire from heaven, and we’ll see it clearly, and everyone else will to.”

In Kings 18:16-45, Elijah is battling with a corrupt king for the soul of Israel. Almost everyone has turned away from God and worship gold and golden images. The king calls Elijah a trouble-maker. Elijah says that the king and his legion of idolators are the real trouble-makers. He challenges the high priests of false gods to a contest on Mount Carmel (Kings 18:18-19).

“I have not made trouble for Israel,” Elijah replied. “But you and your father’s family have. You have abandoned the Lord’s commands and have followed the Baals. Now summon the people from all over Israel to meet me on Mount Carmel. And bring the four hundred and fifty prophets of Baal and the four hundred prophets of Asherah, who eat at Jezebel’s table.”

So Mike Huckabee appears to be casting himself in the role of Elijah. If so, Mike has very, very large opinion of himself. And notice that his prayers are for God to shower favor on a politician. A politician, mind you, that claimed rape victims could not get pregnant. What a strange context to invoke God's name. Of course, that does not matter to Huckabee who fancies himself Elijah's equal. It sounds like this man's ego needs to go on a diet.

Huckabee the "prophet" used the name of God in a political battle in a publication (Politico) dedicated to politics as a means to sway public opinion. The name of God is sacred. Our silly political tribes serve the rich, not God.

The other troubling part of prophet Huckabee's reference to Elijah is the end of Mount Carmel fight (Kings 18:40).

Then Elijah commanded them, “Seize the prophets of Baal. Don’t let anyone get away!” They seized them, and Elijah had them brought down to the Kishon Valley and slaughtered there.

So, prophet Huckabee, since you are as grand and glorious as Elijah in the eyes of God, do you pray for the slaughter of prophets that serve other political tribes? Or was the reference to the Mount Carmel story just about asserting whose god was biggest and best? Or which self-proclaimed prophets have the ear of God?

Prophet Huckabee never lets facts get in the way of his prophesy. He claimed that the political establishment promised to heed his call to bless Todd Akin.

“Today, the rhetoric was dramatically dialed back,” he said. “You did not see the NRSC, the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee, coming out with the kind of harsh statements because they’ve dialed it back. They’ve assured me that they will no longer be threatening the business of some of the vendors in politics and telling them that if they do anything to help Todd, they’d be blackballed and not get any business.

Then prophet Huckabee had to admit that he never had any contact with the powers that be.

“I have not had any direct contact with leaders or staff from the NRSC,” he said in the emailed statement.

Lies are part of politics. Politicians are liars and damn good ones. Invoking the name of God in petty political squabbles is a sure sign of an arrogant prophet or worse.

Unlike Elijah, prophet Huckabee has plenty of other prophets to keep him company.

David Baker, pastor of First Baptist of Church in Belton, Mo., chimed in to say that he met with 60 men earlier in the evening and the view was unanimous Akin should keep fighting.

“We have a responsibility as prophets to speak out,” he said. “One thing I know about Missouri Baptists is that we don’t like to be told what to do.”

So much for walking humbly with Christ. Maybe these prophets can duel in prayer to see which of them is greatest.

Huckabee's cabal of prophets on the conference call included David Barton.

Barton, who was once the co-chairman of the Texas Republican Party, decried “party bosses” for calling pastors, supporting Akin to pressure them to stop doing so.

Prophet Barton also has had some problems with fabricating facts to shill for political ideation. Historians at Christian colleges found an ungodly number of factual errors in Barton's work. The publisher of his latest book was even forced to take the remarkable step of discontinuing publication because of deceptive statements.

As Christians, we serve Christ. We do not bow down to wealth, power, and the things of this world. We do not amplify our importance in the eyes of God. We do not use the name of God to serve the rich and drape ourselves in the trappings of this world.

There is nothing wrong with being a political activist. Let them lobby and lie until their heart is content. Let them line their pockets with cash. Wallow in the muck, snort, rut, and squeal with delight, but don't drag the sacred into the mire.

Thinking about Judas

Judas is perhaps the penultimate New Testament villain. I cannot think of anyone treated with as much disdain as Judas from the moment of first mention to death.

On the list of the twelve core disciples, he was introduced as the one who would betray Jesus. Meet Judas. Goat. Traitor. Just saying the name nearly provokes the gag reflex by the time you hit the snake hiss at the end. You will soon learn that he was not only a two-faced liar, he was also a thief, embezzling money from Jesus and his crew. He even used a kiss to betray the Lord. It is tough to shed a tear or spare a kind thought for Judas by the time he takes his own life. Even the ground he was buried was labeled as godless and cursed.

Presumably Judas was placed there to teach us a lesson. If we betray Christ, we might find ourselves dead in body and spirit. However, would you ever be tempted to do that if you thought he was Messiah? Maybe. Evil happens. Good people give in to evil every day.

There are many nagging questions about Judas. He seems to add little to story of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. It would be just as powerful a narrative if none of the 12 hand-picked disciples betrayed Jesus to the political and religious authorities. The betrayal could have come from an outsider or the authorities could have caught Jesus away from his adoring followers. Nothing changes about the trial before Pilate or the sentence to die by crucifixion with the contribution of Judas. Or the empty tomb or the physical manifestations of Jesus to his loyal disciples after the crucifixion. Do we really need Judas to fully appreciate Jesus? The answer seems to be no.

A bigger question is why did Jesus pick Judas in the first place? The Lord is presented as being able to see through the motives of everyone he encounters. That would seem to indicate that Judas was picked in spite of or because of his corrupt heart. That would make Judas a pawn unless he was corrupted after joining the disciples. In other words, Jesus saw potential for great good in Judas but evil won out.

Jesus trusted Judas enough to make him treasurer for the group. It was a very big responsibility to be given since a lack of money would hamper travel throughout the region. Maybe Judas got tired of just skimming a little gold off the top. He was outed as thief before he betrayed Jesus (John 12:4-6).

But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected,“Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year’s wages.” He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.

That raises another question. If Judas was just a thief, why would he sell out the goose that laid the golden eggs? The other disciples did not have the charisma or ability to work miracles like Jesus did. This was the Jesus show and money always follows the star.

After witnessing the miracles of Jesus and the adoring masses, did Judas secretly hope the Lord would leaded an armed insurrection against the Romans and restore control of Judea to God's chosen people? If Moses could bring the Egyptian empire to its knees, think what God in human form could do to the Roman empire. It would restore the House of David to the throne of Israel. Jesus dashed those hopes by making it clear to all listening that the Kingdom of God was not of this world (John 18:36).

Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here.”

Or maybe Jesus threatened the gravy train of the religious authorities. Their coffers overflowed every time there was a religious holiday. Millions of pilgrims would venture to Jerusalem with every major celebration and spend a king's ransom on sacrifices in the Temple. A healthy chunk of that change wound up in the pockets of the High Priests. Along comes this Jesus talking trash about the priestly caste and turning over the tables of the money-changers, all while being hailed as a prophet greater in stature than John the Baptist. Something had to be done and infiltrating the inner circle of Jesus was critical. Judas to the rescue.

Satan also had a hand in turning Judas to the dark side (Luke 22:3-6):

Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve. And Judas went to the chief priests and the officers of the temple guard and discussed with them how he might betray Jesus. They were delighted and agreed to give him money. He consented, and watched for an opportunity to hand Jesus over to them when no crowd was present.

Jesus was the only one who could have saved Judas from the clutches of Satan. Instead, the Lord points out Judas as the sell-out to the other disciples on the night of that fateful last supper.

After Peter took charge of the disciples after Jesus returned in glory to the Kingdom of Heaven, the first order of business to name a replacement for Judas (Acts 1:15-19):

In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) and said, “Brothers and sisters, the Scripture had to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus. He was one of our number and shared in our ministry.”

(With the payment he received for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)

That just leaves one question. If Judas so filled with evil, then why was he overcome with remorse and guilt after betraying Jesus (Matthew 27:3-5)?

When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders. “I have sinned,” he said, “for I have betrayed innocent blood."

“What is that to us?” they replied. “That’s your responsibility.”

So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.

Judas was overwhelmed with the realization that he was responsible for a great injustice. The depth of his grief suggests a powerful love and devotion to Jesus. Remorse so powerful that it precipitates suicide. His core did not seem to be completely rotten.

Maybe Judas was necessary as an object lesson after all. Maybe we all have a little Judas in us. Maybe we are all tempted to use the name of Jesus for our own personal gain or to foster the interests of the powerful. Even those of us that truly love the Lord.

It is fair to ask

Many Christians are calling for an end to government support for those in need. That is an interesting idea. Before we do that, it is fair to ask a few questions.

Question 1: Are we to ignore this (Deuteronomy 15:11):

For there will never cease to be needy ones in your land, which is why I command you: open your hand to the poor and needy kinsman in your land."

and this (Matthew 25:44-46):

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ 

“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ 

“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life. ”

and too many other instructions to care for the poor in scripture. Are we not to interpret these passages literally?

If we don't care for the poor, we would be guilty of the sin of Sodom (Ezekiel 14:49-50):

“‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me."

If we do too little for those in need, Christ will count us with Sodomites. That would suck.

Question 2: Since some Christians are convinced that government programs can be eliminated and the body of Christ will provide all the care for those in need, please show us your plan. You do have a plan, right? 

The poverty rate in America is nearly 16%. That means that one in six Americans are vulnerable to hunger, disease, homelessness, and hopelessness. That is about 50 million people. Where is your plan to systematically address those needs. If too many fall through the cracks, you are guilty of not doing enough to help the poor and needy, being haughty, and disobedient to the commandments to care for them as you are promising.

If you do not have a plan, then you seem to be telling God to figure it out. Your decisions will hurt people but you arrogantly assume you will not be held accountable for those very decisions. It would also be arrogant to promise what you know you cannot deliver. It would be callous to know that people in need would suffer from slashing the government safety net and barely lift a finger.

One reason I want to see a plan is because cutting government spending as being proposed will require every congregation come up with an additional $50,000 to pick up the slack.

Each church in the United States would have to find an extra $50,000 to replace the $133 billion in nutrition funding for the poor cut by the House of Representatives, according to Sister Margaret Mary Kimmins, a Franciscan Sister of Allegany, N.Y., and Bread for the World's associate for Catholic Church relations.

The House cut does not include an additional $33 billion proposed by the House Agriculture Committee, Sister Margaret Mary added during an April 26 conference call with reporters.

For some large and affluent congregations, that is pocket change. For small congregations, particularly those filled with people of limited means, it is going to be impossible. Those are the very congregations filled with those most in need of help. So what is your plan to get affluent congregations to help less fortunate congregations? If church and religious charities are going to pick up the slack, then there has to be plan get resources where are they needed most. And while you are at it, you might have to give those rich folks a pep talk because they give a smaller proportion of their income than the rest of us.

Question 3: Most of the charitable giving by religious people goes to their church and they only give about 1% of their income to other organizations. How are you going to increase that generosity? The religious are the only hope since the Ayn Rand worshippers are not going to cough up another dime for people they call the takers.

Question 4: Are you going to stop making disparaging comments about the poor? Those kind of comments fail to love others as Jesus commanded and make Christians less likely to be generous.

You have head the comments. The poor are lazy. The poor are not starving. The poor can get medical care if they really want to get it. They are not contributing to our society. And those comments come from politicians, pundits, political activists, and even people calling themselves Christians. So whom do you serve? God or the Mammon of wealth and power?

Question 5: Will you give generously to help those in need who are not Christians? Do you intend to neglect poor Muslims or atheists? I have a hard time believing that you are going to be doing outreach to poor homosexuals. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe you do really hate them as much as your hostile rhetoric suggests. Then again, when you blame innocent people for natural or man-made disasters, maybe you think scapegoating people is acceptable to Christ. Guess again.

Question 6: If politicians cut government programs for those in need and provide no replacement, are you as a citizen absolved of responsibility. I presume you trust politicians not to lie about waste in government programs. If they lie, do you think your hands are clean, especially when you voted for them and did not criticize their actions?

Here is an extra credit question. I am involved in programs to help those in need in my church and community. We are already stretched rather thin and not in any position to make up for massive cuts to the social safety net. So what should I tell the people we have to turn away because the shelter is full, the food bank shelves are empty, and there are no jobs to offer? Should I tell them that I have done everything in my power so my hands are clean? Should I tell them to go in peace and God will be with them?

What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

-- James 2:14-17

One final question. If you slash the safety net and people I care for and care about get hurt, do I have to forgive you? The Lord said I just have to call it to your attention and then I can wash my hands of you if you ignore me. That works for me.

Happiness is a Warm Gun

We are a gun-obsessed culture. In fact, we have become so obsessed with guns that every time we hear about people being gunned down in random acts of violence, we buy even more guns and demand the right to carry them with us at all times. It is harder to get a driver's license, get married, or vote than to arm yourself to the teeth. Ironically, one of the most rebellious things you can do in our culture is not own a gun. People think you are crazy.

Guns are now viewed as an essential tool and symbol in modern America. Patrik Jonsson described the mindset in a recent article in the Christian Science Monitor.

But the vast majority of the momentum on guns is on the side of people who want a .30-30 rifle in their cabinet at home and the right to carry a Ruger in their coat pocket – anywhere. It is being driven, in part, by what could be called a "militia of one" mentality. While 20 years ago many people were arming themselves as part of a nostalgic identification with citizen armies, many today see carrying a gun in public as an essential right and a legitimate, even necessary, tool to ease peculiar and particular American fears about personal protection.

That raises an interesting question. Is it consistent with the teachings of Christ? An acquaintance of mine was going on and on about gun ownership, so I asked that very question. His response was fascinating:

"Absolutely. In Luke 22, Jesus told His followers to buy a sword, even sell their coat if they did not have the money."

The passage in question comes at the end of a discussion Jesus was having with his disciples as their Passover celebration was winding down (Luke 22:14-38). He told them to break bread and drink wine in remembrance of the his soon to be broken body and soon to be spilled blood. Jesus then identifies the disciple that will betray him. The disciples have a childish argument over which of them was the greatest. After a quick lesson in humility, Peter proclaims his courage only to be told he will soon run away in fear after denying that he knows Jesus. The discussion ends with this exchange:

Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?”

“Nothing,” they answered.

He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors;' and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.”

The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.”

“That’s enough!” he replied.

One can argue about whether this is an instruction to pack heat or a warning that all hell is about to break loose. The intent is not clear, but the consequences of wielding a warm sword become clear in the events that capped that fateful night (Luke 22:49-51):

When Jesus’ followers saw what was going to happen, they said, “Lord, should we strike with our swords?” And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear.

But Jesus answered, “No more of this!” And he touched the man’s ear and healed him.

Some translations describe Jesus as saying to permit even this (injustice). Jesus then healed the victim of violence, a gesture very much in line with the idea of not fighting evil with evil.

Consider the bigger picture. There are Christians out there so motivated to justify their desire to carry a gun that they have identified an ambiguous passage in the Gospels to claim it is consistent with the teachings of Christ. Cognitive dissonance does that to you. However, the larger issue is what it says about your priorities. If you are so desperate to hold on to the things of this world that you are riddled with fear and spoiling for a fight, what does that say about you and your faith? Jesus said not to hold on tightly to person or possessions. Fear betrays what you value most.

Patrik Jonsson highlights the perception of security as the driving factor in our love of guns.

Most don't look to sterile statistics to validate whether they should tote a sidearm or not. It's about what makes them feel safe.

No one mature in their faith thinks their material possessions are worth hurting or even killing someone to hold on to them. No one mature in their faith is tempted to believe that a gun will spare them suffering and loss. We live in a society riddled with greed, fear, and hatred. Guns are very much a part of that culture. Those are not the marks of mature faith.

My gun-loving friend went on to say, "Look. I take the safety of others seriously. I have taken courses in gun safety and routinely practice using my weapon."

So when you practice using your weapon, do you imagine a face on your target? Perhaps someone you dislike or fear. Jesus said imagining killing someone is almost as bad as actually doing it. Those fantasies of violence show hatred.

Jesus admonishes his disciple for going off half-cocked and chopping the ear off of a hapless servant with this warning (Matthew 26:52):

"Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.

Happiness is not a warm gun or a heart filled with fear or hatred. Sometimes that warm gun even gives you a false sense of power and righteousness that tempts you to do something that cannot be undone.

Fear not, gun lovers. There is no political will to stop you from owning a private arsenal and carrying your prized possessions everywhere you go. Wear your guns proudly. After all, they are the perfect symbol for our increasingly ugly society.

Ho hum

A study by sociologists suggests that the megachurch experience produces feelings of euphoria. This does not break new ground as much as extend what is already known about the neurochemical changes  associated with large social events to the megachurch experience. The researchers argue that those chemical changes in the context of the religious content evokes strong feelings of spiritual transcendence, which is interpreted as feeling the presence of God.

One congregant reported, “God’s love becomes ... such a drug that you can’t wait to come get your next hit. ... You can’t wait to get involved to get the high from God.”

Another said “you can look up to the balcony and see the Holy Spirit go over the crowd like a wave in a football game,” Corcoran said

It is all part of a carefully choreographed appeal to sensation and emotion. State-of-the-art audio and visual displays increase the sensory and emotional experience of the audience. The pastor is the charismatic "energy star" that connects with the audience on an emotional rather than intellectual level.

“The upbeat modern music, cameras that scan the audience and project smiling, dancing, singing, or crying worshippers on large screens, and an extremely charismatic leader whose sermons touch individuals on an emotional level ... serve to create these strong positive emotional experiences,” Corcoran said.

The megachurch formula produces an emotional "high" that keeps people coming back week after week for more. There is no question that is entertaining, exciting, and even gives you a sense of divine presence. The real question is how often it produces mature disciples for Christ.

The hard part about following Christ is loving others, particularly those that are not like us and even those we do not even like. It is tricky balancing the teachings of Christ that run contrary to our human instincts with the sensory and emotional high that is central to the megachurch experience. Jesus can be such a buzzkill with all that stuff about love, mercy, compassion, forgiveness, and God-centered living over materialism and the idolatry of individualism.

Without a doubt, disciples can grow from megachurches. The problem with any "high" is that it is synthetic, dependent on external stimuli, and transitory. The challenge is going beyond the high to new heights in Christ.

Blasphemy in the Russian Orthodox Church

You probably heard of that outrageous incident in Russia where a punk rock band violated the sanctity of the Russian Orthodox cathedral just outside the Kremlin walls. The band Pussy Riot went into the cathedral when it was open for prayer and played a song asking the Virgin Marry to rid them of Vladimir Putin.

The Church leadership was outraged, calling for "divine retribution" against the members of Pussy Riot. Their calls were answered as the band members were prosecuted as "hooligans" that committed a "hate crime" against the Church. Just writing those words is so ludicrous that it is almost amusing until you consider that the Russian court just sentenced the women of Pussy Riot to two years in a "prison colony" for playing their song in the cathedral.

Keep in mind that they did not damage anything in the cathedral; they just played a song that asks the blessed Virgin to "drive away Putin." And they mentioned that the Church's chief saint is the "head of the KGB." All in the aftermath of an election that many accused Putin of stealing. You can watch Pussy Riot's crime here.

Church leaders were very successful in generating outrage among parishioners. About 40,000 turned out for a day of prayer organized by Patriarch Kirill. He told every media outlet he could find that the Church is being persecuted by evil segments of Russian society.

"It's disgusting what they did. Our priests can talk about forgiveness, but I don't have to," said Lyudmila Tarasova, visiting Moscow from the city of Murmansk in the Arctic Circle.

"They should be sent out of Russia. They spat on us. They're not Russians, they're swine."

Something about this case just doesn't pass the smell test. We are supposed to believe that it is outrageous to invoke the name of a sacred figure in making a baldly political statement. That is interesting, particularly in light of the fact that Patriarch Kirill had called Putin "a miracle of God" just before the sensitive election. To recap: band invoking the Virgin Mary to criticize Putin is very bad but Patriarch Kirill invoking the name of God to praise Putin is very, very good.

While the members of Pussy Riot can be accused of being less than ideally reverent in a house of worship (they used a vulgar word for fecal matter), Kirill was guilty of blasphemy. The name of God is sacred and any claim of blessing on Putin comes from Kirill, not God. Putin is an authoritarian leader that once headed the KGB and had the Church on his hit list. So the miracle must be that Putin now sings the praises of Church leaders. Hallelujah!!

Kirill has not only been criticized for his cozy relationship with Vlad Putin, but the man of God has been living lavishly on someone's dime.

He has been accused in the media of leading a lavish lifestyle, and the Church apologised in April for doctoring a photograph of him to remove what bloggers said was a luxury wristwatch.

He has also come under scrutiny over a dispute linked to a Moscow apartment he owns, although he denies any wrongdoing and dismisses talk of a lavish lifestyle.

"I wasn't as offended by those girls as much as I am by some of our Church officials, who drive around in fancy cars and drop $1,000 for dinner at a fancy restaurant next to Christ the Saviour," said Dmitry Zykov, 45, outside of the Kazan Cathedral.

It looks to me like the person mocking God was the head of the Russian Orthodox Church. He reeks of Mammon and serves Putin and the powerful with all his heart. And yet the women that called attention to his blasphemy, not to mention the less than miraculous nature of Putin's treatment of political opponents, are being sent to a gulag.

Patriarch Kirill is dividing the body of Christ along political lines. The believers in the Church are divided over whether Pussy Riot or Putin represents the true evil in Russia. It looks to me like Kirill is the punk responsible for blasphemy in the Church.

Isn't it ironic whenever there is an ethical issue swirling around some religious leader, a scapegoat is suddenly found to deflect attention away from the leadership? And isn't it fascinating how quickly religious leaders claim that religion and religious freedom are under attack. Religious liberty has become the new favorite buzzword among religious leaders these days. The best way to rally the faithful is to claim persecution by "secularists," "atheists," "homosexuals," and "Islamic extremists."

At least Christian leaders in America stick to public policy issues and avoid invoking the name of God in ways to favor a political party or leader. Otherwise, the body of Christ would be divided along political lines. In other words, God would be asked to serve Mammon in ways that weaken the body of Christ.

I never doubt the reality of evil. I am just surprised where I find it. Of course, Jesus warned us about false teachers and prophets. He wasn't kidding.

Strange attack on the shepherd of a poor flock

Migrant workers in Mexico have a guardian angel. His name is Alejandro Solalinde. Rev. Solalinde runs a shelter for migrant workers, who have to run a deadly gauntlet of drug gangs and corrupt police. He has achieved considerable notoriety for his willingness to call out publicly the drug lords and corrupt cops.

The Rev. Alejandro Solalinde has become well known in Mexico after enduring death threats for publicly denouncing drug gangs and police who rob and kidnap Central American migrants crossing Mexico to reach the United States.

Solalinde is disobeying corrupt authorities and powerfully demonstrating the love of God for marginalized people. You might think he would be a hero in the Catholic Church. He is engaged in nonviolent struggle against violent people to protect poor farm workers that have to risk their lives to earn a living. He is even willing to risk his own life to show the strength of God's love. Given the murderous rampage by the drug cartels, death threats are promises rather than idle threats.

But Solalinde's diocese said he is simply being asked to start operating within the normal parish structure, and run his migrant shelter more like a church ministry and less like a lone activist's non-governmental organization.

Thou shall not offend the powerful. Thou shall not risk retaliation against the people and property of the Church. Thou shall not get involved in political controversies (unless you are a bishop and the controversy involves sex rather than violence). Thou shall not attract too much attention.

He also said the bishop had said he was grabbing too much attention; Solalinde has practically become the public face of Mexico's migrant protection movement.

Interesting doctrine. Not Christ-like, but interesting none the less.

The diocese is reassigning Solalinde to parish ministry. He is being given a new flock, kept out of the public eye, and under tight control by the bishop.

"I know how to fight against the drug cartels, and corrupt officials and police, I know how to fight all of them, but I can't fight the church," Solalinde said. "If the church asks me to do this, the church is going to achieve what all the other forces haven't, which is to get me to leave, to leave the flock defenseless so they do what they want with them."

The question becomes who do we serve. Are we guided by the Holy Spirit or religious bureaucracy? Do we speak truth to power or wait for religious authorities to decide which powers to follow without question?

The bishop argues that Solalinde serves the diocese and can only continue to serve migrant workers if he does it quietly, within the confines of the parish facilities, and also handles a mountain of administrative tasks.

It is interesting that liberation theology was deemed unfit because it advocated Marxism, political solutions to social justice, and violence against oppressive governments. Solalinde is not promoting Marxism, political ideology, or violence against anyone. He was only guilty of challenging the corrupt authority and making the Church a potential target of retribution. Maybe we should call that obedient theology. Obedience to religious authorities is the same as obedience to God according to this theology.

Obedient theology sounds like cowering to authority in the name of Christ. The Holy Spirit does not fraternize with the riffraff. The chain of command is Christ to the Holy Spirit to specially anointed church leaders then down to pastors, then lay leaders, and finally the washed and chosen. Disobedience to church authority will get you publicly rebuked and forced to complete re-education in the fine points of orthodox doctrine.

Jesus said obey God and did not obey the religious authorities of His day. He also spent his time among the marginalized. Obedient theology did not come from the Christ. It came from men with an inflated sense of their own importance in the eyes of God.

Religious belief on the decline

Jesus described the foundations for faith as loving God and loving others. It is clear that at least one of those pillars is crumbling across the world. A recent Gallup survey found a sharp decline in belief in God in many countries, with one of the biggest declines found in Ireland.

Catholicism was once so all-pervading in Irish life that it seemed a definition of Irishness: but now, according to a survey by the pollsters Red C, the Irish are losing their faith quicker than most: seven years ago, 69% of Irish people described themselves as "religious": this has now fallen more than 20 points to 47%.

The decline in Ireland was attributed to the sexual abuse scandal by priests and greater prosperity. The publication of the Ryan Commission report in 2009 laid bare the scope of sexual misconduct in the Catholic Church in Ireland. No doubt, it left a nasty taste in the mouths of the faithful, particularly since the Church did little to stop the abuse before it became public knowledge. As for prosperity, Ireland's gains were wiped out in the global recession in 2008 and yet to recover. The youth of the nation have been particularly hard hit by the recession. Perhaps the survey results should be broken down by age group since the youth were victimized by the priests and the economic collapse.

Ireland was far from alone in losing its religion. There was a 9% drop in religious belief across world between surveys in 2005 and 2012. Religiosity, at least in 2012, was inversely correlated with wealth.

RELIGIOSITY IS HIGHER AMONG THE POOR: People in bottom income groups are 17% more religious than those in top income groups. It is interesting that Religiosity declines as worldly prosperity of individuals rises. While the results for nations as a whole are mixed, individual respondents within a country show a revealing pattern. If citizens of each of the 57 countries are grouped into five groups, from the relatively poor to relatively rich in their own countries, the richer you get, the less religious you define yourself.

What was it Jesus said about worshipping God and Mammon? Perhaps the rich fall prey to the idolatry of individualism. They overlook the fact that privilege begets more privilege. Their ego starts believing that they are gods, never mind all the poor sods they trampled on the way to the top.

Political grand pundit Ross Douthat has decided that anyone deviating from religious orthodoxy is a heretic. That is odd since the dominant religion in Ireland is Roman Catholicism. So much for the intelligence of political pundits.

Perhaps the real problem is people who claim to believe in God but treat others badly. In other words, they say they love God but fail to love other people. No one can claim to understand God. God defies our senses and our comprehension. Yet no one claim not to understand the suffering of other people. We all have suffered a few slings and arrows in our lives. The suffering of others is all too visible if we are willing to open our eyes, ears, and hearts. The hypocrisy of professing faith in God while failing to love others as Jesus instructed is true heresy. And maybe that is why more people are having trouble seeing faith in God as a force for good in a crowded world.

As Christians, we are called to witness God's love. That means reflecting the love of God in how we treat others. No one will take our faith seriously otherwise.

Texas loves vengeance

Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (Romans 12:19-21)

Many politicians in Texas profess their faith in Christ and call themselves "pro-life." Perhaps their reading of scripture is faulty. Jesus explicitly rejected the idea of an "eye for an eye" for His followers (Matthew 5:38-42). Perhaps their faith is not strong enough to overcome their lust for punishment and revenge. How else can one explain the state executing a mentally challenged man with an IQ of 61? It is even harder to call it justice when his accomplice was given life and there was no independent evidence that definitely established which of the two was responsible for murder.

His accomplice in the crime, Terry Lewis, was given life in prison with the possibility of parole, after Lewis's wife testified that Wilson confessed to pulling the trigger. No forensic evidence or eyewitness testimony established the identity of the shooter.

Texas needed to a life for life. And they had to work exceptionally hard for their vengeance in this case.

In 2002, the Supreme Court prohibited the execution of the mentally retarded, declaring it cruel and unusual punishment forbidden under the Constitution's 8th Amendment. Those with diminished mental capacity, the court ruled, are less culpable for their crimes than those with normal intellects. The reasoning was nearly identical to the legal argument the court embraced in forbidding the execution of juvenile offenders.

Yes, they exercised their rights to take a life of a man that sucked his thumb into his 20s and never held a job. It is interesting how so many people claim to interpret scripture literally and then do the exact opposite of the New Testament foundation of their faith.

It all boils down to consensus for capital punishment.

In 2004, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, in a 21-page effort to establish guidelines for determining mental retardation in capital cases, alluded to Small as a character most Texans would be unlikely to execute. "But," the court reasoned, "does a consensus of Texas citizens agree that all persons who might legitimately qualify for assistance under the social services definition of mental retardation be exempt from an otherwise constitutional penalty?"

Just to be on the safe side, Texas used an expert that argues for adding a few points to intelligence scores to blacks to correct for "ethnic environment." Viola. That pesky 61 now exceeds the state cut-off for mental retardation with the ethnic correction.

Apparently, Christians in Texas are not troubled by the state's frequent use of capital punishment, including cases of intellectually limited or mentally ill offenders. The only opposition to this execution I could find in searching news sites in Texas was from human rights organizations.

A man stood up and pleaded for help

It was a typical Sunday worship service. We sang, listened, prayed, and shared communion together. However, something strange happened during the public call for prayer requests. A man stood up in the back of the church. A stranger. 

The man began his story by saying that he had just been released from prison and was trying to put his life in order. He admitted that substance abuse and theft to support his habits had gotten him into trouble. During his most recent incarceration, he decided to change his life. He became a Christian, worked hard to free himself from addiction, and was released on parole early for good behavior.

"What I need most is a job. No one seems to want to hire me and I am desperate. I done some bad things, but I want to put that behind me. Just I am not sure what to do now. Please, I will do anything. It does not matter what." 

As I listened to his request, my heart sank. There are very few small business owners in the congregation and none that I knew of that were looking to hire. As desperate as this man was for help, I was doubtful that anyone in the audience was in a position to give him what he needed most. 

I was planning to at least introduce myself and tell him I much I appreciated his courage in sharing his story. Unfortunately, before I could reach him, I was trapped in the aisle greeting friends in the congregation. As I scanned the back of the church, he was nowhere to be seen. He was also not in the fellowship hall. He was simply gone. 

That was weeks ago, but I cannot get the man out of my mind. I felt as powerless to help him as he did to help himself. There have always been folks at the margins of our society, but their numbers are growing and many are determined to eliminate what little government safety net exists for them. Yet, our congregation and many others as well lack the resources to pick up the slack. 

The fact that this man still haunts my thoughts is a pretty good indication that I was meant to be touched by his circumstances. As much as I hear the Lord urging me to do something to help, the unanswered question is what. His face and story will no doubt continue to haunt me until I can answer that question.

Hey, did you get your fill of crappy chicken?

Let me get this straight. Christians came out in large numbers to support a fast food chain and its billionaire owners over whether same-sex couples should be allowed to get married. What a truly remarkable feat! Nothing short of a miracle!!

Former Baptist minister, former Arkansas governor, and now millionaire Fox News commentator Mike Huckabee used the power of his overpaid megaphone to run the successful impromptu public relations campaign. He sure knows how to whip people into a frenzy.

“People are outraged that someone who expresses a view that is shared by most of the country is being bullied by hate speech and intolerance from the militant gay groups that are trying to disenfranchise his right to a personal opinion,” Huckabee told Religion News Service in an email.

Yeeeehaw! Militant homosexuals. Bullying. Hate speech. Intolerance. Way to go, Mike. You completely flipped the script on those gays. Fox News does not pay you the big bucks for nothing.

Seminaries, culture war celebrities like Sarah Palin, and more than a few big name evangelists got into the act. And the circus was a huge success.

"While we don't release exact sales numbers, we can confirm reports that it was a record-setting day," Steve Robinson, Chick-fil-A's executive vice president of marketing, said in a statement.

At least one location had to close early after nearly selling out of chicken. At others, lines snaked around buildings and patrons waited upwards of two hours to snag their chicken sandwiches and show their support for Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy's comments supporting traditional marriage.

While y'all were eating junk food for culture war and billionaires, you blissfully ignored the fact that food pantries across the country cannot keep up with demand. With nearly 16% of Americans living in poverty, food pantries have been struggling to help people in need. Here is a smattering of stories that appeared on the same day as the Huckabee outrage-a-thon.

Arizona:

The shelves at United Food Bank are not stocked like they used to be.

With kids out of school, higher utility bills and donors away on vacation, the Mesa food bank has trouble filling the high demand for food in the summer.

Pennsylvania:

Pastor James Roth said there is not enough food to go around at the Manheim Food Bank at Zion Evangelical Church. About half the shelves are empty.

"It's a sad day," Roth said. "You can see the holes that are here. All we can give is basically an emergency supply. It gets awful tough."

Florida:

The Food Bank of Manatee County is asking for the public's help.

Donations are down and due to large cuts in federal funding, many of the foodbank shelves are bare.

South Carolina:

Facing five more weeks of high demand before the end of summer, Harvest Hope is experiencing drastic food shortages and is looking for means to increase food inventory.

In June the food bank saw an average of 325 families a day at the Emergency Food Pantries on Shop Road and on 12th Street in Cayce and provided food for over 6,820 families during the month. This is an increase of more than 800 families over June of 2011.

And the good news stories related to the growing ranks of the hungry in America come from grocery stores, restaurants, farmers, and other links in the food chain stepping up their donations. Volunteers at our local food bank spends many hours each week picking up donations from local stores for distribution. Even with all those food donations, we cannot keep with the need in the community.

I do have a few less charitable thoughts. First, I cannot help but wonder what we could do if all the energy, emotion, and **money** that went into Huckabee's ridiculous hullabaloo went into helping those in real need. Second, there are Christians that are persecuted in other parts of the world, but what passes for persecution in America is a joke. Lord, forgive me for what I am thinking about the people caught up in the culture war feeding frenzy.

Destroying mountains and streams

Too many in America think God is stupid. Out of one side of their mouth, they pretend to revere God as creator. Out of the other side, they allow that creation to be destroyed for greed. But if your heart is truly guided by the Holy Spirit, you know with certainty that the Lord is never ever fooled with double talk.

The nations were angry, and your wrath has come. The time has come for judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophets and your people who revere your name, both great and small — and for destroying those who destroy the earth.” Revelation 11:18

Nowhere is the flagrant hypocrisy better seen than in Appalachia. The most profitable form of coal mining (mountaintop removal) is to dynamite mountain tops, dump the rock into valleys, and use massive dragline cranes to extract coal seams a few feet thick. So far, 550 mountains have been reduced to rubble, more than one million acres of forest have been destroyed, and more than 2000 miles of streams have been buried. People living near these destroyed mountains are poor and suffer from high rates of cancer.



A new study from researchers at Duke and Baylor adds more to our understanding of the damage being done to God's creation to service greed. They took water samples from over 233 streams and correlated levels of minerals and metals with proximity to mountaintop removal sites. While all coal formations contain these potential toxic substances, surface mines dump the rock waste into streams, allowing for much greater contamination than from underground mines.

"Our analysis suggests that mining only five percent of the land surface is degrading between 22 percent and 32 percent of the region's rivers."

My family comes in part from Pikeville in the heart of the eastern Kentucky coal fields. To give you a sense of the scope of how mountaintop removal is creating wanton destruction throughout Appalachia, put Pikeville, Kentucky in Google and click on the Google map. Now zoom out three clicks. You will see many grey and brown scars all over the green. Those are mountaintop removal mining sites.

The growth of one malignant mountaintop removal mine site over 20 years can be seen in this series of NASA satellite photos. Now imagine that same destruction over 550 sites and you can get a sense of the scope across the region.

Some say this destruction creates jobs. This is mostly a lie. You can get as much coal from a few hundred workers using explosives and massive machines as you can get from 50,000 miners underground. It is about profit margin, not job creation. It is about greed.

Some say this destruction benefits the surrounding communities. This is another lie. Poverty is just as great in the areas around these mines as before they arrived. The profits do not trickle down, only the poisons, filth, and rock. The pittance these companies pay in taxes makes little difference in the lives of people living nearby.

Some say the destruction is necessary for lower energy costs. Another lie. More and more of the coal from these sites is exported to China and India. This is high BTU coal, also known as metallurgic grade coal. It is most valuable for manufacturing steel. The same coal can be mined underground with far less damage to the environment, but it is cheaper to destroy mountains and forests where people are too poor to stop it.

Some say the sites will be reclaimed and restored. Another lie. When mining sites are no longer profitable, the companies pack up and leave the mess. There are tens of thousands of abandoned mining sites all over the country that have not been restored over the past century. Most of those are much smaller in scope than the destruction created by mountaintop removal mines. Throwing a little dirt and grass seed on scarred earth does not restore mountains, forests, and streams.

And never mind the pollution that comes from burning coal, whether for electricity or manufacturing. Never mind the piles of toxic coal ash. Forget about greenhouse gases, mercury, soot, and sulfurous compounds released in the air. Keep your eyes on the profit and all will be well say the ones that claim control over God's creation.

But people love lies. My God, they love lies. Just remember, the father of all lies is Satan.

“The earth dries up and withers, the world languishes and withers, the exalted of the earth languish. The earth is defiled by its people; they have disobeyed the laws, violated the statutes and broken the everlasting covenant. Therefore a curse consumes the earth; its people must bear their guilt. Therefore earth’s inhabitants are burned up, and very few are left.”  Isaiah 24: 4-6

It is amazing the damage a few corrupt politicians and corporations can do to God's creation. Their evil is plain to see. They are well-dressed vipers and experts liars. Death, destruction, and disease follows in their wake. Only a fool would be blinded to their evil.

Less obvious are the forked tongue people of faith that claim to revere God as creator but do nothing to protect that creation. The Lord is not blind.

It is interesting that the destruction of forests, mountains, and rivers is featured so prominently in the apocalyptic images found in Revelation 8: 7-11.

The first angel sounded his trumpet, and there came hail and fire mixed with blood, and it was hurled down on the earth. A third of the earth was burned up, a third of the trees were burned up, and all the green grass was burned up.

The second angel sounded his trumpet, and something like a huge mountain, all ablaze, was thrown into the sea. A third of the sea turned into blood, a third of the living creatures in the sea died, and a third of the ships were destroyed.

The third angel sounded his trumpet, and a great star, blazing like a torch, fell from the sky on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water — the name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had become bitter.

Explosions. Hail of rock. Forests destroyed. Mountains destroyed and pushed into waters below. Poisoned streams. Seems a little too familiar.

The appeal of ritual

It is hard to deny the appeal of rituals. They are an integral part of worship practices of many religions. The longer we participate in a particular set of rituals, the more comfort and strength we seem to derive from them. Athletes often develop personal rituals before a big game that they believe enhances their performance while breaking the ritual risks disaster on the field.

It turns out that our response to rituals is very much a part of our cognitive plumbing, so to speak. A series of studies by University of Texas psychologists delve into how we perceive rituals.

Rituals pose a cognitive paradox: although widely used to treat problems, rituals are causally opaque (i.e., they lack a causal explanation for their effects). How is the efficacy of ritual action evaluated in the absence of causal information? To examine this question using ecologically valid content, three studies (N = 162) were conducted in Brazil, a cultural context in which rituals called simpatias are used to treat a great variety of problems ranging from asthma to infidelity. Using content from existing simpatias, experimental simpatias were designed to manipulate the kinds of information that influences perceptions of efficacy. A fourth study (N = 68) with identical stimuli was conducted with a US sample to assess the generalizability of the findings across two different cultural contexts. The results provide evidence that information reflecting intuitive causal principles (i.e., repetition of procedures, number of procedural steps) and transcendental influence (i.e., presence of religious icons) affects how people evaluate ritual efficacy.

What is intriguing about this research is that it shows a clear cognitive bias for rituals that have many steps and are repeated regularly over a long period of time. The researchers also found that rituals performed in a religious context with icons enhance feelings of meaning and efficacy.

I am sure our agnostic or atheist friends will gladly lump all ritualist practices together as superstitious behavior. However, these rituals serve far more complex purposes than some false sense of controlling the world. It is more about meaning, but discussing liturgy with people antagonistic to faith is difficult, to say the very least.

This study gives me a better appreciation of why people have such strong feelings of affinity for the liturgical practices they have grown up with or practiced for many years. Any change in the rituals is likely to produce discomfort and even disorientation, particularly for complex practices repeated frequently over time.

The importance of rituals to religious observance makes sense in light of the research. Since the presence of God defies our five senses, rituals performed in the context of icons helps foster a sense of personal connection to the sacred. Sharing rituals with others also creates a bond and sense of community.

One problem with liturgical rituals is that we are prone to feel that ours are superior to those practiced by others. The impulse is understandable. If we find something meaningful and emotionally gratifying, then people who do not follow the exact same practices must be doing it incorrectly. Even if our core beliefs are essentially the same, the temptation to engage in tribal identification based on practice is considerable.

The scriptures provide potent warnings about the relative importance of ritual. Rituals are accorded much less value than treatment of others and mindfulness of God in Hosea 6:6:

For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.

Jesus picks up those same themes. He rebukes the Pharisees for questioning why He is socializing with outcasts in Matthew 9:13:

But go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

Jesus uses the same words to rebuke the Pharisees for condemning the disciples for picking grain on the Sabbath in Matthew 12:1-7. And in response to religious teacher that asks Jesus about the most important commandments in Mark 12:28-33, He closes with a contrast with ritual.

To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices."

Christ did not dismiss rituals and there is no denying the psychological rewards that can come from their practice. The moral of the story, however, is that it is our common bond in Christ that carries more weight than any differences in our liturgy and practice. Rituals are good, but loving God and each other are far more important.