|
March 14, 2008
Pastor Jeremiah
Wright has unleashed devilish forces. In this country, at a
particularly sensitive time, when we Americans are balancing our many
hopes for the world, he has heaped fury onto the scales and thrown us
out of balance.
The People’s
Press, modern media outlets, free…and willing…to explore subjects not
sanctioned by the more liberal press, has brought Rev. Wright into the
center ring…and held him there. All lights have been shining on his
act this week, revealing an uncomfortable truth. Prejudice is not
restricted to the color black.
I married into a
Hispanic family, a mixture of Mexico, Venezuela and Colombia. By
nationality and marriage, our hues of brown range from rich espresso
to pale café-au-lait. In the security of family love that permits
acknowledging truth uncommon in the common press, we have witnessed
the rare and uncomfortable situation where it is suspected that a
family member is favored based on their position on the color wheel.
In this
presidential election cycle, we had nationally prided ourselves that
we could rise above the divisions of race and evaluate the caliber of
presidential candidates on qualities more than skin deep. Rev. Wright
has ended this false pride…and our silence on race.
Everyone has
something to say. And most of it needs to be said. Silence about
race has allowed us to pretend that it doesn’t factor into the
judgments people will be making when they pull the lever at the
polls.
But the wider
discussion in the media has missed the deeper implications of Rev.
Wright’s passionate sermons. We treat his statements as public
speeches delivered from the podium to an audience. Not so.
These were
sermons delivered from the pulpit by one who has presumed to be a
teacher, for which he will be more strictly judged. The
scriptures are full of fire and brimstone. And we humans must
sometimes be startled into righteousness by a sermon that comes from
the belly. But in our righteous anger, we must sin not. If
vengeance comes, it must come from the Lord.
If the media
walks fearfully around issues of race, it is even less capable of
reporting on issues that involve religion. For the most part,
hampered by lack of intimate scriptural experience and biased by
caustic suspicion of people of faith, reporters are missing the core
meaning of Rev. Wright’s sermons and Obama’s presence in the pew.
The essence of
Christian faith is the essence of Rev. Wright’s folly. Reporting on
this story outside the meaning of the Christian faith is like
reporting on race relations in America while denying the presence of
slavery in America.
Christianity…the
life of Christ…is a response to sin, that unavoidable part of our
human nature. Why do we sin? And how do we deal with sin…all of
it…racial prejudice…and lust, idolatry and witchcraft;
hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition,
dissensions, factions and envy…how do we deal with our human
nature?
As a Christian,
Rev. Wright had assumed the privilege and responsibility of preaching
the good news from Christ, sharing the words of Christ, a
message which came from the Father.
He brought to the
members of his church the eternal message of hope. But the hope of
Christ does not rest on blaming others for our sins. Even less
does it
rely on threatening other sinners with damnation.
It’s a hard Gospel
of love. We are not given shortcuts. Love is the reward at the end
of a straight path. Peter spoke for us, asking Jesus, "Lord, how
many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to
seven times?"
It was a question
back then, just as it is today, with an unwanted answer. Not seven
times, but seventy times seven. If our jacket is stolen, do
not stop him from taking your tunic. The hope for humanity does
not end in brotherly love until we get rid of all bitterness, rage
and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice.
This is religious
truth that is the essence of why Rev. Wright’s words should matter to
Obama, and why they should matter to us. One chooses a church very
carefully. We may continue to attend, even when we wish they sang
different songs and had pews instead of chairs. But we dare not
embrace the message of a church that refuses to deliver the message of
Christ.
Beware, fellow
Americans. We were called to be free. But do not use your freedom
to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. The
entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as
yourself." If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out
or you will be destroyed by each other.
[Gal 5:13-15, NIV]
Rev. Wright is not
a wayward uncle to be humored so as not to disrupt the annual family
picnic on the Fourth of July. He is the spiritual leader of the
flock, tending His sheep.
A flock that cheers
a message of hate will never be a flock that delivers a message of
hope to our nation…no matter how pretty the speech.
In his Christian
responsibility, Obama might have used his influence over the years to
redirect Rev. Wright’s heart to spiritual truth. But if this had been
his course for twenty years, resulting in an intransigent refusal of
Rev. Wright to rewrite his sermons, Obama should have sought out a new
church...he would not have founded a national political movement
“inspired” by this particular “spiritual mentor.”
Sitting in silence
for twenty years, surrounded by the joyful jeers of parishioners
cheering on a message of hate, is more the sign of one more sheep in
the flock than of a shepherd who can deliver on inspiring promises of
worldly hope. For the time will come when men will not put up with
sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather
around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears
want to hear.
Obama claims a
Christian faith. His claim to faith is about so much more than the
color of our skin. It is why the words of Rev. Wright matter. It is
the real story that should run in The New York Times.
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by
International Bible Society
**********
August 6, 2007
A Christian Nation
See Archives
for past editorials.
_____________________ |
