The Battle Won

The following are some excerpts from "Following Jesus" by N. T. Wright. I wanted to include these quotations because they shape my thinking about my responsibility as a Christian to be salt and light in society (which includes political issues).

I highly encourage you to buy this book. It is a short 114 page book of reflections on Christian discipleship taken from scripture and applied to our modern historical context. The quotes below come from N. T. Wright's reflections on Colossians.

Paul wrote from prison a stunning short letter, in which the victory of Christ over the powers becomes and central and vital theme. But what are these 'powers'?... force, power, climate, entities bigger than the sum total of the human beings involved... All things were made in Christ, through Christ, and for Christ. All things - including the 'powers'! The world is not ultimately divided into bits that are irreducibly good and bits that are irreducibly bad. Everything - the invisible things as well as the visible - was made by the creator, through the agency of his eternal Son...

What happens to people who stand up to the powers? It looks fine for a while; and then the tanks roll in. Anyone looking at the crucified Jesus would draw the conclusion that that's what had happened. The powers killed him: that's what they do to people who challenge them. The powers nailed up above his head the charge of which he was guilty: he was a rebel... And he goes on his way, the way of the cross, the way which totally subverts all the earthly powers.

I would like to thank Nick Read Brown for helping me to understand that the way to prepare myself mentally for living out faith in light of the very powerful 'powers' of this earth is not to ignore them, but to defy them, subvert them. My intentions were on the right path, but Nick helped me to see that a battle plan for subversion and defiance is guaranteed more success than ignoring the strength of the 'powers'.

And so the third point that Paul makes about the powers, astonishingly, is that they have been reconciled to Christ. Having been defeated, they are not annihilated. God is in Christ making a new world; now, however, brought into new order under the authority of Christ. God intends the powers to serve him, and to serve and sustain his human creatures.

I wanted to reference "Christ & Culture" by H. Richard Niebuhr here. There are "types" of Christian ethics as defined by this book; 'Christ above culture' is one of those types. I recommend this book to anyone up for a challenge that stretches theological understanding and knowledge of the English language. Secondly, I want to point out N. T. Wright's subtle reference to the concept of a 'New World Order' that has been coined by 'powers' of this earth for their own motives.

Paul's vision of the Christian life is thus of a life lived between D-Day and VE-Day. We are called to thanksgiving, where we stand at last in the truly human relationship to the creator and the world; and we are called to thanksliving, where we behave as the free subjects of the true king, and owe the powers nothing at all.

How can we celebrate and put into practice this victory today? How can we follow this Jesus into the genuine victory? It is surprisingly simple. Every time you kneel down to pray, especially when you pray the prayer of the kingdom (which we call the Lord's Prayer), you are saying that Jesus is Lord and that the 'powers' aren't... And every time we celebrate the Eucharist, we celebrate the victory of Jesus Christ in a way which , by the power of its symbolic action, resonates out, into the city, into the country, into the world, into our homes, into our marriages, into our bank accounts... And if we grasped that vision and lived by it, we would be able at last to address some of the problems in the Church and the world that loom so large and seem so intractable. The battle has been won; let's get on and implement it.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales

For those of you who do not know a lot about the travesties going on in the Department of Justice (DOJ) I strongly encourage you to search for videos of Congressional hearings that have been held in the last months, and the one which was held today by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Sen. Patrick Leahy's opening statement was a good summary of the shocking things that threaten the things which make this country good like the separation of powers, the balance within the separation of powers that divides our government into three balances with checks and balances over the others. A system I know that you are aware was designed to keep the abuses of an absolute tyrant from oppressing free citizens of a republic, a public that governs the government by the absolute authority of law written down on paper. The very thing implied in the strength of this system is transparency, not secrecy. Abuses of power thrive on secrecy. The most threatening force to the DOJ is the influence from the White House to politicize decisions that should be made based upon the ideals of justice. It is after a very simply named department of justice. It has no other name. It's mission is evident in its name.

If you watch the footage from the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings from the Attorney General (AG) Alberto Gonzales of June 24, 2007 you will know of the closeness with which the White House and the DOJ have worked during the terms of President Bush. Previously, there was authorization that allowed for only a handful of people authorized to communicate from the offices of the Chief Executive of the United States and the offices of the Attorney General. Under Alberto Gonzales' predecessor's direction these safety valves were removed and now virtually anyone from the White House can communicate with anyone in the DOJ and assign any task or collect any information he or she many deem necessary.

In other words, corruption, and at the very least an imbalance in focus on issues of law enforcement. Justice, by nature is an impartial force, yet the executive branch is charged with the execution of the law. The DOJ then should be under the direction of the President, but operating on a daily basis with a degree of autonomy incorporating the broad directives, if any, from the White House into its constant an unwavering duty to the guiding principles of justice, not the selective ambitions and ideologies of one man or group of men in he executive.

The Office of the Attorney General does have the potential to be an autonomous office of government. And no new laws are necessary. We already require the position to be filled by appointment of the president and with the advice and consent of the Senate. This is the system of checks and balances working through its designed purposes. It the Senate could be persuaded to hire an AG only once they have been satisfied he or she has met certain requirements and passed their scrutiny then the deserving candidate should become AG.

The problem is that appointments are generally made because Congress is seeking favor with the White House, either with new presidents, or at other times when appointments are traded for vetoes and votes are traded for funding.

The government is screwed up, but there are ways to improve it. Should the Senate design a list of questions, an examination process, to be built upon by successive classes of the Senate - after which the successful candidate will be the appointed AG? As I understand it the President places an ad for applicants to vacant positions. Whether or not the president wishes to appoint friends and neighbors, or only the most qualified people to offices of government it should be the final decision of the Senate to accept or deny the nominations of the president. All candidates for the position of AG should be subject to the same scrutiny. What makes such a public list or written job description so important is that the Senate conducts the interviewing process and they are subject to our public pressure.

What then can we do to make ourselves active in this process and attempt to bring more salt and light to the Department of Justice?

Link to C-SPAN video of Gonzales hearings: http://www.c-span.org/

For Fun

I thought that there should be some designated space for fun in this blog, so this post will be devoted to quotes. Please comment and add your favorite quotes.

To start us out, and I think most appropriate for embodying a Christian value, and thus one embraced by truth and this blog:

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."—Edmund Burke

The Ideals of Rep. Ron Paul (R)

Corruption and Government

There are many issues that we can focus in on when we talk about bad government. There is everything from celebrity justice for the powerful, pork barrelling, partisanship, congressional seniority, preemptive war, the quest for the soundbite, propaganda, etc. etc.

What I would like to do with this post is try to understand corruption's nature, which includes putting it into a historical perspective. I'd also like to put government, and the American government specifically into that same perspective and understanding. In doing so I hope that it can be determined how to reduce the causes and effects of corruption. This is not a crusade for the idealist. Instead I hope that some real truth will come out of this exploration and a plan of action to follow.

In order to put corruption and government into perspective we must first begin with God's making of a good creation. That is the beginning of a story, the story, that defines truth for the world we live in. Following the creation we fell and messed everything up. Therefore I believe and I think it is safe to assume that government is/was good, and just like everything else it has been corrupted by the Fall (Genesis 1:26, 31; and chapter 3). Jesus also calls his followers to be salt and light in Matthew 5:13-20. Logically, there is a degree to which something can be salty, and how bright a light can be. There is a spectrum. Obviously the government could use more salt and more light. Which is why I say this is not an idealist's crusade. But there is another truth I want to point out, it is also mentioned in Matthew 5:17-20 when Jesus talks about salt and light. He calls us to be purifiers and illuminators in this world as the governors of this world, a responsibility since creation, and in the very next sentences reminds us that only God is capable of bringing about the end of the earth - fulfilling the consummation he began in the redemptive work of the cross. So, I also do not believe we Christians can speed up or usher in the New Creation by making sure all our government employees are Christians, and our whole society revolves around Christ's teachings. I don't think God ever told us to do that, he said he would do it. For example, the 1st century church was too small to have done anything about the military dictatorship of the Roman Empire and all the evils of its society. Rome continued as a civilization and a world power for another several hundred years.

Now I am not trying to preach the American gospel here, but Christians, because of the saltiness and luminescence of Christians throughout history who challenged tyranny and injustice, preserved the written word, invented and used the printing press, asserted their rights to worship God freely. All of that began to change Western civilization for the better. America is but one step along that evolutionary process. We have the formations of a good nation in our Constitution. Now 218 years after its passage we can be improving on that government and the society that chooses to live according to its principles. There are degrees to which we can brighten and season this country and society. How can we do that by focusing on the government specifically?

I am hoping to challenge you to think in such a way that we do not just think of things to combat partisanship specifically, but rather what is an area(s) that needs salt and light that once seasoned and illumined will begin to change many things. I can think of three off the top of my head: public schools and colleges, print and television media, and families (raising children with certain values and habits). This kind of saltiness could be described as adding salt to the soup, since it affects the flavor of all the vegetables, meat, and broth.

It is also good to apply salt directly to the meat however, so I also want to focus on how to do that. This kind of saltiness could be called salting a ham (for those who are not from the American South or ever ordered a ham breakfast from Cracker Barrel, I assure its good).

So maybe we should start by identifying things that need direct salt application and what that really translates into with our actions, and then identify things that we can do to add salt to the soup.

Here are some things that interest me: (We can think of ways to apply salt later)

1. The fact that the presidency has become more important and powerful than Congress in a country that is stated to be a republic and supposedly values the separation of powers.
2. The fact that every two years only a small portion of Congress members are voted out, creating Congressional Stagnation, with several disadvantages and advantages, however the advantages could be addressed/preserved by several of the solutions to the fundamental disadvantages of this problem.
3. Preemptive War doctrine and the growing acceptance of warfare as the reflexive first choice to solving our nation's problems.
4. Partisanship and the belief that two political parties, or rather political parties in general are "the way to do things."
5. Campaign finance - since when did giving money to a politician become an act of free speech? Can the same be said about freedom of the press? If I purchase a newspaper, watch a news channel, or have news articles emailed to me is it considered an act on my part of exercising my right of un-infringed press? Therefore, if campaign finance is a major source of a candidate's strength for remaining in office, and this prolonged incumbency is a source of low voter turnout and feelings of dissatisfaction from the public about Congressional job approval would it not make sense to fairly regulate the financing of campaigns? My suggestion is that every single person wishing to run for office (naturally, meeting the Constitutional requirements of office) should be given federal funding in equal proportion to all other persons running for that same office. In such a system the incumbent, as well as all others contending for the numbered district of any given state would each receive an equal share of all funds donated to a specified bank account.

Well, I have added enough food for thought to this post. Please comment with any thoughts of your own, and if you wish to add to list of things that need to be addressed in regards to corruption in America.