“In obedience to our Lord’s command, I baptize you … .”

For four centuries, this baptismal formula has echoed across creek banks and through Baptist sanctuaries around the globe. It reflects a central reason most Baptists practice believer’s baptism by immersion. Just before he ascended, Jesus proclaimed the Great Commission, telling his followers: “Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things I have commanded you …” (Matthew 28:19-20).

Jesus commanded baptism for new believers. If you follow the sequence of his verbs, salvation—“make disciples”—comes first, then comes baptism. Since at least 1641, Baptists have immersed new believers, because the specific New Testament word, baptizein, means to dip or immerse.

Today, increasing numbers of Baptists are discussing whether Baptist churches should continue to require baptism by immersion for membership. The majority still advocates the ancient practice, but some affirm open membership, or accepting members from other Christian traditions without requiring them to have been baptized by immersion after conversion. The Standard and our New Voice Media partners are presenting an extensive examination of baptism, which is featured in this edition .

Ironically, while Baptists are the denomination most overtly linked to the practice of baptism, we also are numbered among the Christians who do not claim baptism has sacramental power. We do not believe it is necessary for salvation. So, we would do well to respond with a generous spirit toward others who believe differently about baptism, particularly those who reserve baptism for believers but practice a different mode—sprinkling or pouring. Since we value baptism highly, it should be a topic for Christian discussion. But since we do not believe it is required for salvation, we should not denigrate others’ interpretations.

Still, I would suggest Baptist churches continue to practice and promote believer’s baptism by immersion for three reasons, marked by a caveat:

• Reason #1—obedience. Jesus commanded the church to lead people to faith in him and then to baptize them. Careful biblical research suggests John baptized Jesus by immersion. So, we should follow his example and obey his command. Some churches that tilt toward open membership cite prospective members’ reticence to submit to immersion. This is understandable, yet troubling. Why must everything be convenient, comfortable and suitable to personal preference? The surest criterion for Christian joy is submission and obedience to Christ in all things. So, bowing to individual resistance to sacred practice—because it seems redundant or might feel embarrassing—undermines the call to obey Christ.

• Reason #2—identification. Believer’s baptism by immersion provides the perfect metaphor for identifying with the dead, buried and resurrected Christ and with generations of saints who have gone before. The opportunity to identify with Jesus and with Baptists around the world is a blessed privilege.

• Reason #3—hope. Believer’s baptism by immersion symbolizes faith in two vital hopes. First is that we, as new Christians, have died to our old, sinful selves and have been raised spiritually to walk in a new life. Second is that we place our eternal hope in the Resurrection. Christ defeated death, and so we live—both now and forevermore—in the promise of eternal life with God.

• Caveat—respect local-church autonomy. In addition to our 400-year affiliation with baptism, Baptists also have championed the right and responsibility of each congregation to search the Scriptures and come to its own conclusions. Respect for this principle should mark our discussion.

Marv Knox is editor of the Baptist Standard. Visit his FaithWorks Blog.

Baptists lost one of our true giants when Cecil Sherman died April 17.

Cecil will go down in history as the first coordinator of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, advancing the movement of “free and faithful” Baptists. But that’s only part of his story.

He was a bastion of courage, integrity, wisdom and faithfulness. He embodied Baptist principles and distinctives, such as fervent belief in soul competency and the priesthood of all believers, and their corollary, the autonomy of the local church. He modeled authentic, respectful evangelism. He lived out a lifelong commitment to ministry and missions.

Several years ago, I heard Cecil speak on “true Baptists.” I wish every Baptist who bears the name could have heard him. He explained that true Baptists distrust church hierarchy, abhor forced religion, view experienced religion as their centerpiece, place confidence in ordinary people and tolerate dissent.

Cecil was a practical-yet-passionate pastor. I remember him talking about moving to Fort Worth to lead Broadway Baptist Church. The old downtown church was suffering the declines that have afflicted many congregations. Cecil knew and respected the church’s traditions for exemplary worship. He was an excellent preacher, and he contributed mightily as that church enjoined God. But he also understood the church would dwindle and die if it did not attract young families. And so he set out to do that. The hard-but-effective way. He got in his car and drove all over the city and sat in their living rooms and visited with the parents and joked with the children and loved them into the church. He would say you can’t cut corners on doing church right. And he never did.

For years, he wrote Sunday school lessons. They were simple and approachable by all laity, and yet they were deep and profound. He wrote simple, direct sentences so well, he would make Hemingway jealous.

Early in his recent bout with cancer, the Associated Baptist Press board of directors presented its Religious Freedom Award to Cecil. At the time, he could not move among crowds, and so I was privileged to visit his room in M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, where I stood with his daughter, Eugenia, and his brother, Bill, to present the award. We talked about how many people love and admire him. About how we have taken strength from his courage and guidance from his integrity. Standing in his presence, talking about values that have provided Baptists with backbone for four centuries, was one of the holiest moments of my life.

Cecil rallied then and returned to a productive life in Richmond, Va., where friends and colleagues from ABP later presented that award publicly. He served and encouraged folks up until the end, when he was felled by a heart attack.

We will not know another like him.

James Workman has written a book, Heart of Dryness: How the Last Bushmen Can Help Us Endure the Coming Age of Permanent Drought. Is this another example of the paradoxical nature of simplified living, only applied on a global scale?

Yes. In 2002, the Botswanian government sought to evict Bushmen who lived in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve by eliminating their water supply. Bushmen were forced to return to time-honored practices of simple living to survive their hostile environment. One band, under the leadership of Qoroxloo Duxee, resisted until 2005, when the government intensified its siege. The Bushmen’s struggle mirrored that of Botswana as drought conditions spread across the entire region between 2002 and 2006.

Workman intertwines the story of the conflict between the Botswanian government and the Bushmen with his reminder that water supplies are diminishing around the world, including the United States. Dwindling water supplies are bad enough, but the use of water as a weapon by governments and its sale to those with money further complicates the situation.

Much of the book centers on Qoroxloo’s efforts to squeeze out from her dry environment all possible water. Imitating her practices provides strategies for surviving a hotter and drier world. Workman captures the paradoxical nature of the situation as he affirms that “Africa’s hunter-gatherers were not to be pitied but glorified, for they offered us our last shot at salvation.” The world’s need for water continues to increase. Societies usually work to increase the amount of water to meet demand. The Bushmen offer an alternative—“organize human behavior and society around constraints imposed by diminishing physical resources.”

The Bushmen teach the importance of cooperation in finding and using water as they uphold every person’s right to water needed for survival. They exemplify where, when and how to use water by such examples as resting under trees during the hottest parts of the day. They recognize and understand full utilization of all resources and how each can best be used. They use resources that were remarkably adept at surviving in the Kalahari Desert.

What may have been the most inspiring section of the book was the account of the last few days of Qoroxloo’s life. What some might call a harsh and subhuman existence did not destroy her spirit. Actually, it offered a vivid illustration of losing your life in order to save it. As the government tightened the net and the outcome was certain, she rose one night before a fire and began to sing and dance. The next morning, defying soldiers sent by the government, she walked out of the camp to gather food and water for herself and her people. Searchers found on her body several days later a bag of food that she could have eaten to save herself but apparently was saving for others.

David Morgan, pastor

Trinity Baptist Church, Harker Heights

“It is the very fact that I cannot manipulate, coerce or control God that makes me able to trust God, for if I could overpower the Almighty, so could someone else. If I could make God conform to my laundry list of things I think God should do, would that really be God? My small ideas about God don’t actually have the power to shrink God down into manageable bites, and my little fantasies about life don’t have the power to diminish life, except in my mind.”

Jeanie Miley

Author, lecturer, teacher and blogger (jeaniemiley.com)

“The story of evangelical theology is not so much getting someone saved and getting them to heaven, but it is Christ redeeming not only the individual person but all creation as well. You’re seeing a transformation of, or a maturity of, interpreting Scripture to do with God’s broader agenda of redemption to things, beyond just the personal, individual salvation.”

Joel Hunter

Pastor of Northland Church in Orlando, Fla., on why increasing numbers of Christians are concerned about the environment (RNS)

“Whoever controls the words that are used in translation ultimately controls how we are able to think about theological issues. The words open or close doors for our understanding of God. And ultimately, the words determine who has status in the church, and who does not.”

Jim Evans

Pastor of First Baptist Church in Auburn, Ala., commenting on Bible translations (Sightings/RNS)

“I can no longer justify spending my short time in this world participating in or supporting war. … I must try to save souls, not help take them.”

Michael Barnes

Granted conscientious objector status by a federal judge (Associated Press/RNS)

Disappointed in bias

I am so disappointed the Baptist Standard would allow political bias and untruths to grace its pages, such as “Being upset is now all the rage” by Tom Ehrich (April 12).

Ehrich suggests Tea Party members are unpatriotic radicals. I assume Ehrich would have sided with the British rather than the original tea party members. He rants against Sarah Palin, using the word “cross-hairs,” suggesting inciting violence. Has Ehrich ever heard the political terms “battleground” and “in their sights” and the television news program Crossfire?

Ehrich states as fact that a black congressman was spat upon, but still no evidence has surfaced to support the accusation. I suggest Ehrich come up with the evidence he must have and collect the $100,000 reward offered for any such evidence.

Yet Ehrich fails to mention eggs and insults hurled at Tea Party members at a recent rally in Sen. Harry Reid’s hometown. By the way, there is documentation of such incidents.

Where was Ehrich when President Bush was called a liar and hung in effigy? Where was Ehrich in 1998, when actor Alec Baldwin talked about stoning U.S. Rep. Henry Hyde?

I would suggest Ehrich spend his energy exposing the members of Westboro Baptist Church and who they really are, but I’m sure he probably believes they are expressing their freedom of speech and doing the work of the Lord.

F.A. Taylor

Kempner

Disgusted with actions

As a reader and a youth pastor, the subject of homosexuality within the church seems to be getting more and more exposure. After reading the article on Royal Lane Baptist Church (March 29), I have have become disgusted with the way our Christian brothers and sisters are acting.

I agree that homosexuality is a sin and that those who are knowingly living in sin—any sin—should not be in leadership positions. My concern is the recent actions by the Baptist General Convention of Texas and the Southern Baptist Convention hammering churches for the slightest notion of homosexuality.

The 1996 charter that was quoted in the article spoke of all sexual sin, but yet as churches, we turn the other way when the issue is an affair within the ranks or premarital sex. If we as churches do decide to take action, it is left up to the church to handle.

If we are going to go around and ask churches to stop using or associating with the BGCT or SBC because of homosexuality, then we should ask every church that has people living in sin to do the same. Somehow, I do not feel many churches would be left.

We are all broken people. We all need the grace of God to fall upon us. If we want to change people’s lives, we must let them in and teach them. I just don’t want us Christians to pick and choose which sin is “worthy” of discipline. If we continue to do this, we will lose contact with those who really need to hear and see Jesus’ teachings lived out.

Seth Pitman

Bangs

What do you think? Because we affirm the Baptist principle of the priesthood of all believers, we value hearing from our readers. Send letters to Editor Marv Knox by mail: P.O. Box 660267, Dallas 75266-0267; or by e-mail: marvknox@baptiststandard.com. Due to space considerations, limit letters to 250 words, and only one letter per writer is accepted per quarter.

William Ellis began his response at his recent inauguration as president of Howard Payne University by quoting from his interim pastor, Charlie Johnson. Johnson said his stories hold him together. This resonated with Ellis, who has a background in literature. Most of the comments he made and the things others mentioned about the new president related to stories of common interest.

I realize that in the same way, our stories hold Texas Baptists together. We share common commitments, values and vision. Yet many Christ-followers share the same. What makes us unique?

The journey we travel together is what binds us to each other. I listened to conversations of Howard Payne students and alumni as they talked about their traditions, professors, campus pranks, renewal experiences, friendships, even disappointments. Even though I never have been a student there, I didn’t feel like an outsider, because I knew I was a part of an extended Texas Baptist family—almost like an in-law who shares experiences vicariously.

Texas Baptists have wonderful stories of our past that continue to inspire and inform us. J.W.D. Creath died crying, “On to El Paso,” which communicated his passion to take the hope of Christ to the western frontier of Texas. I never tire of hearing about Sam Houston being baptized in Independence with his wallet in his pocket.

One of my favorite stories was the train incident between two prominent Texas Baptist leaders, J.B. Cranfill and Samuel Hayden. Hayden had filed a lawsuit against the convention and about 30 of its leaders, including Cranfill. They happened to be on the same train headed for the Southern Baptist Convention. They got into a scuffle, and Cranfill fired his revolver. Some thought Cranfill should have been disciplined for this action; not for firing a gun, but for missing Hayden.

All who love Baylor University should know the story of the young George W. Truett who traveled all over Texas for 23 months urging Texas Baptists to save Baylor. He raised more than $92,000, including $500 of his own money, which was all he had saved for his own education.

Our zeal for missions is nurtured by recollections of Anne Luther, who later married William Bagby and became the first of five generations of Bagbys who served as missionaries in Brazil. Contributions for their ministry came from the 345 Anne Luther societies in Texas churches.

As new churches and new affinity groups are added to the Texas Baptist family, we need them to bring their stories with them as our heritage is expanded into a world view. We already are collecting wonderful stories from our Texas Hope 2010 experiences.

Our greatest stories obviously are those we know from the Bible. The seasons of the Christian year remind us of stories that transform us. I never get tired of telling a good story, especially the one about the One who went to the cross to bring life to all who believe.

Randel Everett is executive director of the Baptist General Convention of Texas Executive Board.

Early this year, Fox News commentator Brit Hume suggested Tiger Woods, a Buddhist, should turn to Christianity. The reactions were swift and severe. Jon Stewart was merciless on The Daily Show. In the Washington Post, Tom Shales predicted Hume’s statement “will probably rank … as one of the most ridiculous of the year.” John Farrell of US News said Hume’s comment was “creepy.”

What can this whole tempest-in-a-teapot teach Christians who believe our faith is to be shared and who care about rhetoric and how messages are received?

• Sincerity passes muster for many. Because of genuine belief that “all ways lead to God” and genuine confusion about whether any religion is worthwhile, it is impolitic to suggest another’s sincerely held belief is wrong. This view often masquerades as “tolerance,” but since the offended are not “tolerant” of the vocal Christian, surely another explanation lurks beneath the surface. Some of the challenge comes not from those who disbelieve our faith per se but from those who insist we should not argue that our beliefs are superior to theirs.

• “Proselytizing” has become a dirty word. It should not imply intolerance, meanness, underhanded dealings or rudeness. It merely means attempting to persuade with regard to faith. Assuming it is done with respect and without forcing the listener to participate unwillingly, why is that bad?

• The public failures of high-profile Christians and well-known disputes among Christians have left many thinking they have no use for our faith. If you type “Brit Hume Tiger Woods” in an Internet search engine, you will see how Christianity is, in many circles, nothing more than a punch line.

Still, Christians have something good to share. We know someone who offers—to anyone, regardless of what s/he has done—forgiveness, love and literal salvation. We are commanded to “teach all nations” and “always to be ready with an answer.” If our friends were in a burning house, and we knew the way out, we would tell them. To us, this is the same thing.

Style must be a concern. Hitting people over the head, shoving a tract into their hand, shouting them down, playing on guilt (real or manufactured), or otherwise forcing our point of view on someone who does not want to hear it or is not ready for it is fruitless and silly. No matter how good the news is, if we don’t package it appropriately and present it with respect and proper timing, we—and thus Christ—will not be well-received. If we are most eloquent but do not act with love, then we are no more than resounding gongs and clanging cymbals.

The reason “proselytizing” has gotten a bad name is related to how it has been done, not to its substance.

Those who reject Christ on the merits—and the number who actually hear and consider our faith on the merits and still reject it is pretty low in comparison to those who reject our message out of hand without considering the substance—make their decision for a variety of reasons. But almost never is it because they believe we should not have talked to them. The secret, then, is to get the conversation direc-ted to the merits of our faith without offending.

I don’t find Hume’s comments offensive, rude or mean. But they were a stumbling block to many. The New Testament predicts this. Many in the world hate any mention of Christ.

Our response must be to recognize how our message often is received and the prejudices that are in place. Many of those stumbling blocks and prejudices are the fault of the church and of those who call themselves Christians. We have, in many ways, created a monster, and we must deal with that.

But if we agree that those who “turn to Jesus Christ” can “make a total recovery,” we have no alternative but to share what we know. We must, then, exercise sense in how we do it. And we must always do so in love.

Lyn Robbins is a member of Broadway Baptist Church in Fort Worth and senior general attorney for Burlington Northern Sante Fe.

Have you heard about the study that reveals people who spend more of their day engaging in deep, meaningful discussions are happier than people who mainly make small talk? Maybe you talked about these findings and the discussion made you, well, happy.

Here’s what happened: A team of researchers headed by Matthias Mehl, a psychologist at the University of Arizona, analyzed the conversations of 79 students across a four-day period. The students wore tiny microphones that recorded 30 seconds of sound every 12.5 minutes. Then the researchers analyzed what they heard and categorized all the discussions into “small talk,” “substantive conversations” and other talk that fell into neither category. They also asked the participants to rate how happy they are and cross-referenced those self-assessments with the opinions of three friends each.

Turns out, happy people are ones who talk regularly, and the happiest people are those who engage in a higher percentage of meaningful conversations. “The present findings demonstrate that the happy life is social rather than solitary, and conversationally deep rather than superficial,” Mehl reported in the latest edition of Psychological Science. As you might guess, he acknowledges a chicken-or-the-egg quandary: “On the one hand, well-being may be causally antecedent to having substantive interactions; happy people may be ‘social attractors’ who facilitate deep social encounters. On the other hand, deep conversations may actually make people happier. Just as self-disclosure can instill a sense of intimacy in a relationship, deep conversations may instill a sense of meaning.” Don’t you imagine talking about those possibilities made Mehl and his colleagues happy?

I hope you find research like this fascinating. It counters conventional wisdom that dictates safe, sterile conversations. It blows up the myth that people shouldn’t talk about religion and politics in polite company. From experience, I sense the research is true. For all our adult lives, my wife and I have been blessed by the friendship of a couple who live not too far from us. The husband lived down the hall from me in college. Through the years, we have enjoyed delightful evenings of profound conversations—about faith and family, politics and power, community and culture, and a host of other topics. We don’t always agree, but we’re always agreeable. Our discussions have drawn us closer as friends, and the combination of meaningful conversation and deep friendship has made us not only happy, but joyful.

Mehl’s research on substantive conversations provides fodder for discussion as we talk about how we do church:

• Our worship services and Bible studies should inspire participants to discuss the big issues of life—salvation and eternity, to be sure, but also how our faith and beliefs shape the way we live in the world, the way we face issues in the community, the way we interact with society. These public gatherings can and should provide the theological, moral and social framework for what we talk about and how we talk about it.

• Our church conferences, committee meetings and other interactive gatherings should model how we talk about important issues. Our culture has become combative, fractious and verbally abusive. Church should be showing people how we can talk civilly and graciously, even when we hold profound disagreements. In order to engage in substantive conversations, we need to understand how to do that without shouting and ruining relationships.

• We also need to provide space and opportunity for these conversations in very small groups and one-on-one. We can’t do it all in Sunday school or worship. Far from it. We need to establish a culture of togetherness and fellowship—the New Testament word is koinonia—that enables people who care for each other to talk about what really matters.

Marv Knox is editor of the Baptist Standard. Visit his FaithWorks blog.

Topanga looked at me with her huge brown eyes and said, “Don’t leave me here.”

You wouldn’t have heard her say that. Neither did the woman holding her leash. But Topanga and I knew what she said. And so I bent down and scratched her behind the ears, told her I loved her and assured her she would be all right.

Is it OK to lie to your dog?

The part about loving her is absolutely true. But I wasn’t so sure she would be all right.

Topanga had a bad week. The Saturday before, Joanna and I drove down to Mexia to visit Lindsay, our older daughter, and her husband, Aaron. They live out in the country, and skunks have been crawling under their house and spraying randomly. We decided bringing a dog who never had smelled skunk spray wouldn’t make for a pleasant weekend.

So, we decided to kill three birds with one stone—boarding our dog at the veterinarian’s office, where she also could receive her annual shots and get a haircut. (OK, I apologize for employing the “kill three birds …” metaphor when talking about a vet’s office.)

Topanga doesn’t mind the grooming. But when she turned 1, a nurse hurt her foreleg trying to apply a tourniquet to take a blood sample, and so she absolutely hates her annual checkup. That was Trauma 1.

In the midst of all this, the vet checked Topanga’s teeth and suggested they should be cleaned. So, a day or so later, she went back to the vet’s for a little canine dentistry. Trauma 2. When Jo picked her up, they recommended new, harder food, which would keep her teeth cleaner.

Topanga loved the new food. But when we bought some, the kernels were much larger than the sample the vet gave us. Turns out, Topanga had been eating cat food, which is much richer and, apparently, tastier. If she stayed on a cat-food diet, sooner or later, she would start to look like a furry footstool with a tail.

So, we quickly switched back to dog food, which Topanga refused to eat for, oh, probably 36 hours. Then she ate a half a bowlful of her original dog food. And that’s when Trauma 3 started. I would give you too much information if I described what happened next, but let’s just say Topanga got really puny and took lots of baths for several days.

Which brings us back to the morning when I left her crying in the vet’s office. As I turned to leave, I wondered if she were really sick and if I would ever see her again. And I got out of there, because I’ve cried in a vet’s office before, and even though they all understand, it’s still embarrassing.

Turns out, her only problem was all that food switching. Her tummy healed, and she’s OK. Now, I’m reminded that, with all the meanness and animosity in the world, the unconditional love of a dog is one of God’s great blessings.

“People are getting totally fed up with the rule-book mentality in society as a whole. Character is what counts, not being able to check boxes on forms. … Creating more and more rules is never the way to live a fully human life.”

N.T. Wright

Author and Anglican bishop of Durham, England, on persuading people to embrace virtue (RNS)

“Today, (Washington) has been totally corrupted by money. If God has his judgment on us, it is because of special-interest money, which determines how Congress acts. The political system is sick, and we have to clean up our act.”

Chuck Colson

Commentator and prison activist (nytimes.com)

“We must communicate clearly to Muslims around the world that al-Qaida offers nothing except a bankrupt vision of misery and death—including the murder of fellow Muslims—while the United States stands with those who seek justice and progress.”

President Obama

During a White House speech on aviation security (RNS)

“I have heard it said that sex offenders are modern-day lepers. That is probably pretty accurate. And we know that Jesus didn’t shun lepers. He loved them and healed them. He expects us to do the same.”

Pat Nolan

Vice president of Prison Fellowship, on challenges churches face in accepting or limiting sex offenders in their sanctuaries (Christianity Today/RNS)

“The Bible is not a club to bludgeon people into submission. It is a living document that commands reverence and demands analysis from its readers.”

James Rudin

Senior interreligious adviser for the American Jewish Committee (RNS)

Cowboys & niches

I’ve followed the discussion of “cowboy churches” with interest. Most recently, Joe Dacus defends the phenomenon in a letter to the editor (March 29).

The day before I read his letter, I led my Introduction to Christian Theology class in a discussion of “niche churches” or “special-interest churches.” I showed them an attractive promotional film clip of a cowboy church.

Our question—mine and most of the students’—is whether a church should exist around a special interest (e.g., “Western heritage”), culture, hobby or whatever divides people. Yes, these things also can unite people, but shouldn’t church unity be solely in the gospel and the Holy Spirit, who binds us together in spite of diversity?

I also showed my students a promotional video of a “church for men.” There are also churches that exist solely in cyberspace. I saw a billboard advertising a church for people older than 55. Where does it end?

We concluded that cowboy churches have their value as ministries and outreaches. In my younger years, we called these “parachurch organizations.” In our humble opinion—most of my students’ and mine—“church” should be the body of Christ, as united as possible and as diverse as possible.

On the other hand, this theological word of caution probably is too late; the cat of “anything goes” in church life is out of the bag and probably can’t be put back in. I would caution “niche churches” to be as inclusive as possible.

Roger E. Olson

Waco

Integrate singles

I have to applaud “Single adults: An army waiting for God’s service” (March 29).

As someone who has been single all my life for a variety of reasons, I noticed the “gentle push back” when I was in my late 20s and certainly now as a middle-aged adult. It was obvious churches were focusing on married couples with kids or those interested in marriage.

I have even had people ask me, “Is something wrong with you?” I now respond, “Yes,” pause for effect and then say: “But don’t get too uppity. Something is wrong with you, too. That is what the gospel is all about!”

Sometimes, I think it would be better to figure out a way to simply “integrate” singles into the life of the church so they can become “included” and not isolated.

I believe 1 is a whole number, too!

Robert Whitfield

Dallas

Obama’s war

I like and voted for Barack Obama but am disappointed that he seemingly wants the war in Afghanistan to be “his war.” Like the Vietnam War, which Martin Luther King Jr. spoke out against 43 years ago, the war in Afghanistan is wrong, unwinnable and costly in terms of human lives and money spent.

No one who has won a Nobel Peace Prize deserved it more than King. His lasting legacy as a peacemaker was ensured even before the prophetic “Beyond Vietnam” speech he delivered April 4, 1967, at New York City’s famous Riverside Church, a speech that sealed his fateful assassination, exactly a year later.

He professed his love of America, but like true prophets do, he fearlessly spoke truth to power in a spirit of Godlike love, much like his biblical predecessors, Amos and Micah. The truths King proclaimed about Vietnam in the late 1960s are as relevant today as they were then.

Today, greed and lust for economic-political power continue to keep America from hearing King’s conscience-inspired call for peace and justice. Greed keeps us from seeing the negative, intertwined effects that militarism, racism and poverty inflict on our country.

Paul L. Whiteley Sr.

Louisville, Ky.

From 33,000 feet, America seems a peaceful land.

All this room, all these people growing crops and working in factories and offices, trying their best to build families and to make their brief spans worthwhile. But at ground level, we encounter a more disturbing picture.

At the airport in Corpus Christi, I listened to a young Tea Party activist explain why she felt trivialized by mainstream politicians. Citizens of all persuasions could identify with that sentiment. But then she launched into a warmed-over 1950s Red Scare and voiced a nostalgic vision of an America without color, complexity or disagreement.

At Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, news reports had former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin placing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in the crosshairs of a rifle scope. Another described the posting of Democratic lawmakers’ home addresses on a website, along with an implied suggestion that someone ought to use their Second Amendment rights against these apostates.

A leading congressman suggested targets of bigoted assaults deserved what they got. He seemed unconcerned by the menacing leap from opposing health care reform to spitting on blacks, gays and Jews.

Meanwhile, centrists go into hiding, lest they, too, become targets of rage, and leaders who could chart a path forward are competing for podium time at the next anti-everything rally.

This is serious business. This isn’t just another odd phase in America’s experiment with democracy. The forces being unleashed could paralyze democracy with constant bullying and refusal to compromise, and they could encourage nuts with guns to fire at will.

It is dangerous for the entire nation when the forces of hatred and bigotry are told they are the true patriots.

Some centrists hope the economy will improve quickly enough to ease the worry we see expressed in rituals of rage. They hope the actual benefits of health care reform and financial reform will expose misinformation.

Personally, I don’t think this rage is about health care, taxes, unemployment or Wall Street greed.

It is about a world that has become too complex to be easily understood. It is about European-heritage whites on the brink of becoming a minority. It is about feelings of inadequacy that arise in a service economy when people don’t make things with their hands but take small, poorly paid roles in complex processes that make someone else rich. It’s the new feudalism. It is about nostalgia for the 1950s, without studying that tumultuous decade and how bigotry and demagoguery almost won. It is about an uneasy sense that America’s moment has passed, without studying how our economic and political leaders’ refusal to accept change and complexity undermined our economic and political vitality.

Many Americans, probably a majority, have cause to feel dismay, dislocation and unease. While conservatives rally to Tea Party groups, equally alienated liberals form Coffee Parties. In a rational moment, Tea and Coffee folks would join forces against entrenched do-nothings and lobbyists’ lapdogs.

The more likely scenario, sad to say, is that dismay will turn to rage, dislocation to bigotry and unease to violence. The cowardly act of spitting on a black congressman could seem minor compared to what comes next.

Like business leaders who manage quarter-to-quarter and sacrifice everything for stock prices, political leaders take a short-sighted gamble on rituals of rage and fail to imagine the danger they are unleashing.

Tom Ehrich is the author of Just Wondering, Jesus, and founder of the Church Wellness Project, www.churchwellness.com. His column is distributed by Religion News Service.