Archive for March, 2010

But just watch …

March 25, 2010

If members of a faith tradition are being excluded (see article in NCRonline and those following) because of a particular teaching within that tradition, one has to wonder: Upon what authority is the teaching based? I’m trying to think of an instance where the one whom the Christian tradition claims to follow excluded anyone. Maybe that’s expecting too much of church leaders.

Headlines throughout the day reported threats of violence and death against Democratic members of congress following the passage of the overall of health care  legislation. It would be a stretch to say that the threats are against both parties. A stray bullet hit an unmarked building holding an office of Eric Cantor R-VA, hardly the same.

Over the weekend, Congressman John Lewis and others were given a trip down memory lane courtesy of some tea partyers. Anyone who thinks our nation is in a post-racial era, causes me to wonder what they read (assuming they do), who they listen to on the radio (one can only imagine), what network they watch on TV (surely not FOX News), where they live, who they hang out with, how well they know people of color.

I do have to apologize for not assigning many good intentions to our conservative friends in government and their base. November’s election will be an exercise in measuring how fearful and misinformed our nation’s electorate can be. For the life of me, I can’t understand how a party, guilty of such inept governance and leaving our country in such an incredible mess, would ever be voted back into positions of power. But just watch …

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in politics, racism, Social Justice | Leave a Comment »

Goodness among the distastefulness

March 22, 2010

Over this past weekend we watched “Longford” starring Jim Broadbent as Frank Pakenham, the 7th Earl of Longford. Lord Longford spent several decades trying to secure the release of Myra Hindley, one of the two notorious serial killers convicted of  the Moors Murders in the mid 60s.

I haven’t seen Broadbent in any movie where he wasn’t superb. This portrayal was particularly riveting. The movie’s content, based on true events, was completely unknown to us.

On the surface, Lord Longford appears to have been obsessed, driven, and easily taken for a fool in his quest for the parole of Ms Hindley. Upon further reflection, however, it would seem he was merely acting on his moral convictions as we are all called to do.

His unconditional willingness to engage, embrace, and forgive those on the fringe of society, even those who have done great evil, and to find some goodness in everyone, was a strong expression of his Christian faith. The fact that this appears to be foolish behavior is, perhaps, a commentary on our secular culture’s frequent indifference toward and avoidance of those who are down-trodden, society’s throwaways.

He goes back to the cause for Hindley’s release again and again following instances of personal abuse, derision, and deception. Hopes rise, are dashed, and rise again. I don’t know what he was feeling in those moments, but I have a pretty good idea.

When I began my prison ministry, I was told my role was to be a non-judgmental, non-critical, loving presence. That presents a never-ending challenge. I’m not always that successful in any given moment, some of the men I see are quite distasteful and unlikeable, but I do keep going back to the same people. And I have found over the weeks, months, and years, that any distaste and dislike can – with persistence and repetition – gradually transform into the beginnings of affection, affection in brotherhood and solidarity with a child of God.

It is liking them in their unlikableness, finding a fragment of goodness among the distastefulness. Of course, it’s also realizing/remembering that my finding someone to be unlikable doesn’t mean they aren’t likable. My perceptions are usually what need the work rather than anything to be done by an offender or by anyone else. Trying to recast someone as I would like them to be is always a hopeless adventure no matter how great the temptation.

I do recommend the movie, especially for those involved in prison ministry.

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Criminal Justice, Ministry, Social Justice | 1 Comment »

I’m just asking …

March 18, 2010

As I reflect on all that is going on in our government, I’m trying to make sense of why only one party is on the playing field trying to get something done  while the other party jeers from the stands. Perhaps things can be explained:

If you don’t believe that such a person as Obama could/should ever reside in The White House, why would you want to help him be successful?

If your party controlled congress for 12 years (and The White House for 8 years) and nothing was done other than screw up the country’s foreign policy and economic health, why wouldn’t you be upset if the mess couldn’t be straightened out in year?

If a major piece of legislation (prescription drug plan) was completely unfunded and locked in a deficit-building entitlement for our children and grandchildren to pay for, doesn’t the party who introduced and passed such legislation have every right to block new legislation that is really needed and helps people? Especially if it reduces the deficit?

If you have a government health care plan for you and your family, isn’t it obvious that such an opportunity would be disastrous for the rest of the country? Wouldn’t that be socialism?

If your party successfully nominated and elected for two terms as president a candidate who was completely uniformed and could barely voice a coherent thought, wouldn’t such a candidate seem attractive again? Maybe the tea party folks are onto something.

If your party had a vice president who made little sense and was guilty of numerous wrong-headed, unpatriotic decisions and policies, shouldn’t he be the main critic of someone who actually thinks things through before acting?

If your party in congress has no ideas to help solve an ever-growing fiscal crisis, doesn’t it make sense to stand in the way of those who have ideas and are trying to respond to that crisis?

If your party’s administration fostered the rampant growth of terrorists world-wide through reckless and thoughtless foreign policy, shouldn’t the next administration who tries to be part of the global community through healing divisions and international cooperation be labeled as “soft” on terror?

I’m just asking …

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in politics | Leave a Comment »