Praying (or not?), "O God of Our Many Understandings"
image by Dez Pain
Thanks to Mary and TellingSecrets, I paste below Bishop Gene Robinson’s prayer at the inaugural festivities yesterday. He did, as he said, and prayed to the “God of our many understandings.” I respect Bishop Robinson for many a personal trait and a theological stance, but I differ with him on this decision.
From my point of view, Bishop Robinson, an Episcopal priest, was asked to pray because of who is he is: a religious figure, yes, but one particularly of the Episcopal tradition. This tradition brings with it certain theological claims, like, um, “Jesus is Lord” and “God is Triune.” It’s a tradition that leaves plenty of room for the Spirit to reveal to us more knowledge of God and God’s work in the world, but it’s a tradition that has clear creeds, makes clear claims about God who we understand in a particular way.
I’m from the school of thought — and, I confess, at a seminary that tends to lean towards this school — that inter-religious dialogue is cheapened when we try to make God into a common denominator like “God of our many understandings.” Instead, coming to the inter-religious table knowing much about your own faith, making clear claims about the God in whom you believe, I think, leads to richer, deeper, more honest conversation. Instead of some fluffy unknown unrevealed God, we can address the God we know and understand, tell others about that God, and our faith may be deepened and our knowledge expanded by the conversations that follow.
On his blog, Robinson writes, “I have received a lot of critical email since announcing that my prayer would not be overtly or aggressively Christian, as most of the inaugural prayers of the last 30 years have been. My plan is to address this prayer to the “God of our many understandings,” acknowledging that no one Christian denomination nor no one faith tradition knows all there is to know about God. Each of us is privy to a piece of God, as experienced in our faith tradition. My hope is to pray a prayer that ALL people of faith can join me in.”
What if my “understanding of God” is that God only helps those who help themselves, or hates people with blue eyes, or damns those who fail to recycle? Did Bishop Robinson lead me in prayer too? I guess so.
I don’t understand how one can have such an open-ended address to God, and then pray for so many particular things. It seems to me that if one is consistent about such a stance one would need to just leave a time of silence for everyone to lift up their own particular understandings of what the prayer should include. As soon as you start to make everyone happy in a prayer, or invite all to join, you’re surely leaving out others by the very nature of that invitation in the first place.
I’ll put the full prayer up below. I’ll definitely give him props for the line, “our new president is a human being, not a messiah” and the two-fold nature of the prayer for big-picture justice and then for Obama in particular is nice. Inter-religious stuff is HARD to do with integrity and I’m totally not looking forward to my first experiences. But, when I have them, I’ll bring to the table who I am, what I believe in, and testify to the God in whom I trust.
Bishop Gene Robinson’s Prayer:
O God of our many understandings, we pray that you will…Bless us with tears – for a world in which over a billion people exist on less than a dollar a day, where young women from many lands are beaten and raped for wanting an education, and thousands die daily from malnutrition, malaria, and AIDS.
Bless us with anger – at discrimination, at home and abroad, against refugees and immigrants, women, people of color, gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.
Bless us with discomfort – at the easy, simplistic “answers” we’ve preferred to hear from our politicians, instead of the truth, about ourselves and the world, which we need to face if we are going to rise to the challenges of the future.
Bless us with patience – and the knowledge that none of what ails us will be “fixed” anytime soon, and the understanding that our new president is a human being, not a messiah.
Bless us with humility – open to understanding that our own needs must always be balanced with those of the world.
Bless us with freedom from mere tolerance – replacing it with a genuine respect and warm embrace of our differences, and an understanding that in our diversity, we are stronger.
Bless us with compassion and generosity – remembering that every religion’s God judges us by the way we care for the most vulnerable in the human community, whether across town or across the world.
And God, we give you thanks for your child Barack, as he assumes the office of President of the United States.
Give him wisdom beyond his years, and inspire him with Lincoln’s reconciling leadership style, President Kennedy’s ability to enlist our best efforts, and Dr. King’s dream of a nation for ALL the people.
Give him a quiet heart, for our Ship of State needs a steady, calm captain in these times.
Give him stirring words, for we will need to be inspired and motivated to make the personal and common sacrifices necessary to facing the challenges ahead.
Make him color-blind, reminding him of his own words that under his leadership, there will be neither red nor blue states, but the United States.
Help him remember his own oppression as a minority, drawing on that experience of discrimination, that he might seek to change the lives of those who are still its victims.
Give him the strength to find family time and privacy, and help him remember that even though he is president, a father only gets one shot at his daughters’ childhoods.
And please, God, keep him safe. We know we ask too much of our presidents, and we’re asking FAR too much of this one. We know the risk he and his wife are taking for all of us, and we implore you, O good and great God, to keep him safe. Hold him in the palm of your hand – that he might do the work we have called him to do, that he might find joy in this impossible calling, and that in the end, he might lead us as a nation to a place of integrity, prosperity and peace.
AMEN.
An open letter to Hillary Clinton
Dear Senator Clinton,
I’m twenty-five years-old and an avid follower of politics. In state or national elections, I’ve never voted republican. I am a firm believer in the democratic process, and–contrary to many my age–do truly think most politicians have the country’s best interest in mind. But I’m writing you because, for the first time in my life, I’m beginning to lose hope in our political system. And I’m very sorry to say, it’s of my most humble opinion, that your campaign is dragging the country down.
Until only a few months ago, I expected to vote for you. After defending you against many a Republican friend, after deriding the sexist political system in many a feminist theology course, I thought you were the answer to the travesties brought on by the current administration. But as the campaign progressed, I began to be put-off by the tenor of your campaign. Still, though, I heard the candidates out and did my research.
In early days, I considered voting for Governor Richardson–he seemed truly to be the best qualified, though his gun policy scares me a bit. Later, I was sad to see John Edwards go, for I share his vision for tackling America’s poverty. But then I started reading more on Barack Obama, read a few speeches, watched videos, and began to be inspired. Still, though, part of me mourned the possibility of not having a female president, and I tried to stay open–my heart favored Obama, but my head said Hillary.
So it pains me that we have come to this juncture in the campaign, but here we are. For a time I thought an Obama-Clinton ticket would be ideal, but the more I see your end game, your me-or-nobody attitude, your just plain meanness, the “dream ticket” now seems scarred, even dirty.
What finally made me completely turn, what made me now even root against you, is your dealing with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright furor. What have we come to when John McCain and Mike Huckabee show their basic decency and,if anything, lend Obama their support, while you and your campaign pull out all the punches. I know politics is messy, but that’s just not right.
It’s really a shame Obama came along when he did. He’s got skills–reminds me of another Clinton. He’s got policy–reminds me of you. But he’s also got something extra, something intangible, that makes me believe in this country’s future like I didn’t even think I could.
But now I look to the future, and I just get discouraged. I don’t see you conceding, rather I see you pulling the party apart, angering those who once respected you, and disenchanting the young enthusiastic base of the party. And I’m beginning to give the conspiracy theorists more thought: are you trying to kill the Democrats’ chance of beating McCain so you can run again in 2012? I don’t want to go there, but considering your crazy-slim chance of winning the nomination at this point, don’t you think it’s time, for the sake of the party, to step aside?
I’m sorry it’s come to this. Genuinely very sorry, but here we are. I think it was your husband who said with regret in his voice, “Democrats fall in love; Republicans fall in line.” No matter what happens in the new few weeks, the party will need huge healing. We’ll meet McCain bruised and battered. With you in the race till August, we’ll neither fall in love nor in line. Senator Clinton, for a stronger America, please concede.
Sincerely yours,
Adam Copeland
image by glwilson
Obama's Speech: My British Pub Take
In Britain, there’s a great phrase that describes how a complicated issue is boiled down and discussed in public life: people in the pub. When politicians make long speeches or detailed arguments, political commentators wonder, “But
how will this be discussed or understood by people in the pub?” In the pub, you see, heart wins out over head, alcohol limits conversation, and old prejudices win out.
I don’t know how Obama’s speech will go over by “people in the pub.” The transcript is the most emailed article from today’s NY Times, but on CNN.com the speech article was viewed less than the Spitzer call-girl Girls Gone Wild revelation. As John Stewart suggested last night, Obama’s speech spoke to Americans as if they were adults. But are we a nation that’s ready to reason as adults? I’d wager more adults watched Stewart’s show than saw Obama’s full 37-minute speech or read the transcript.
Around the blogosphere, talk is rampant, but I’m not sure–even in the web 2.0 world–if the number of Americans who read blogs is really that high. Sure, folks will see clips on the evening news, or read portions in newspapers, but Obama’s speech deals with issues that cannot be compressed into sound-bytes. America’s problematic approach to race and religion is lived out every day, and won’t be solved in my lifetime, but dumbing the questions down to exit poll demographics and You Tube clips does not serve the public good. I wish I could be as optimistic as Jim Wallis in his take here, and believe families would actually sit down to watch and discuss the speech together, but when it comes to politics I’m a cynic.
Maureen Dowd, whose column I don’t generally enjoy, describes Obama’s speech as embracing the gray. Dowd writes, “But then, the most intriguing thing about the speech in the National Constitution Center here, near the statues of the founding fathers who signed the document declaring that “all men are created equal,” was not even the part about black and white. It was the new color that Obama unexpectedly wore: gray.”
It’s a gray area–when your white grandmother reveals her prejudices against black people. It’s a gray area–when you respect your pastor but deeply disagree with him. It’s a gray area–when sermons are given in a particular congregation for a particular time. It’s a gray area–when we are all racist in some ways but to admit our condition would be the height of silliness. It’s a gray area.
So the questions remain: Is America open to a politician willing to embrace the gray? If we don’t, it’s not that our world will suddenly change back to easy black and white dichotomies. Rather, the world will continue to pass us by, and we’ll deserve every black mark we get.
image by woodsy
Over ten years ago, Barack Obama was in a bar…
I’m not of the school of thought that considers politicians any more corrupt than the general population. Surely, there’s a dud here and there, but I believe most politicians–though perhaps more ambitious than your average joe–are of strong enough character. Barack Obama is example a politician of particularly strong and noteworthy character.
A story I first heard on BBC radio and written-up here (though the radio version is better), describes Obama’s behavior in 1997 when he attended his sister-in-law’s wedding in London. As is the custom here, before the wedding the men went out for a bachelor party (called “stag party” in Britain). Obama went along. All was going well enough, drinks flowing, until a stripper showed up. At this point the party relocated to a more secluded area of the bar and Obama made his exit. As the stripper began whatever strippers do, Obama left, went downstairs for a drink at the public bar and then returned to his hotel room.
Over ten years ago, in another country, before you tube and digital pictures, before out-of-control 24/7 news sites, Barack Obama made a decision to leave a party that had gone too far. By doing so, he surely alienated himself from the crowd–can you not imagine what those stag party attenders might have said to him as he left. But he left, had a drink by himself in a foreign bar. And he showed his strong and upright character.
No politician is perfect because none of us is perfect. Certainly, Obama has his flaws. But as this story shows, Obama stands up his values even at the risk of public embarrassment. He is of sound moral judgement. For that, and many other reasons, Obama has my vote.
photo from Obama’s flickr stream under CC license
Vote Obama for Eschatology
I voted for President today. Since I’ll be in Scotland for Georgia’s February 5th primary election, I filled out my Dekalb County absentee ballot today. Leave it to a seminary student to choose a candidate on the basis of a theological doctrine, but that’s the best explanation for my decision.
Barack Obama is the candidate who embodies eschatology; his campaign is one of eschatological hope.
Now I could describe how Obama’s policy positions most clearly match mine, but that’d be boring and folks everywhere will be blogging about such things. Instead, here’s why Obama is the eschatological candidate.
I know this might seem a bit of a stretch. Obama doesn’t talk about the end times. He’s made no indication as to when he considers Christ to be returning. He hasn’t weighed in on how he reads the book of Revelation. But, in my estimation, Obama does function with a clear eschatological underpinnings.
To understand we must separate the strict definition of eschatology from how Christians live eschatologically. My working definition of eschatology is something like, “a theological doctrine having to do with end things; end things as both, 1) the actual final ending of the world and its inhabitants, and 2) final goal or purpose of all things” (credit to George Stroup for that definition).
In mainline churches at least, recent times have seen a dearth of eschatological consideration. We don’t want to be construed as those evangelicals who might read the Left Behind series a bit too carefully. We don’t want to be seen as preparing for a specific time or place of Christ’s return. So, for fear of mislabeling, we don’t talk about Christ’s return enough.
Eschatology is important because it focuses on hope–hope for Christ’s return, hope for the salvation of our individual selves and the renewal of all creation, hope for the fulfillment of God’s prophesies of peace and justice.
Now this hope doesn’t mean we throw up our hands and simply wait for all to be peaches and puppy dogs. Rather, we must work, with this hopeful perspective, for justice here and now. As Cullmann wrote years ago, we at the same time focus on the already as well as the not yet of Christ’s coming. We celebrate that Christ has already come, and we wait in hope as the final redemption has not yet arrived. Now we must focus on hopeful active participation for Christ’s return.
Enter Obama. A republican strategist recently described him as “a walking, talking, hope machine.” His logo looks like a rainbow which, for Christians, reminds us of God’s covenant to Noah (or perhaps suggests Obama is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow). His website sells a shirt reading, “Got Hope?” and a bracelet decorated with the word “HOPE” and the rainbow logo. His grand book is entitled, “The Audacity of Hope” and Obama’s Iowa caucus victory speech contained the word “hope” fourteen times.
In this speech, Obama claimed that his Iowa victory will be remembered as the time when Americans remembered again what hope is. He then described hope in several ways, concluding,
Hope-hope-is what led me here today – with a father from Kenya; a mother from Kansas; and a story that could only happen in the United States of America. Hope is the bedrock of this nation; the belief that our destiny will not be written for us, but by us; by all those men and women who are not content to settle for the world as it is; who have the courage to remake the world as it should be.
Now for slightly more fancy analysis. In his chapter on eschatology in his introduction to Christian theology entitled Faith Seeking Understanding, Dan Migliore goes to great lengths to show how the “doctrine of the last things” functions in every aspect of Christian theology. Eschatology is not a peripheral doctrine, but one so central that it connects every doctrine together. Hope, then, is integral to every Christian doctrine. For this white mainline contemporary theologian, hope is key.
Interestingly, the black theologian James Cone wrote over 30 years ago in a different but not discordant tone. Cone largely concurs with Bosch who affirms, “eschatology is related to action and change.” For Cone, writing in a time of overt oppression of his community, eschatological hope moves him to trumpet against accepting the present as acceptable. For this black theology writing 30+ years ago, hope necessitates action.
Barack Obama’s message is an inspiring and prophetic combination of Migliore and Cone–establishment and near-militant theologians–that skillfully mixes the message of Christianity with an American political platform.
So I voted for Obama, the eschatological candidate, for his message of hope affirms what I believe as a Christian.
Connect Online
