Monday, May 21, 2012
Publicly Praying in Jesus' Name
I came across this opinion article in the ChristianPost website called, "As a Chaplain, Must I Always Publicly Pray in Jesus' Name?" It addressed an issue that I've been thinking about for a while as pastor that gets invited to pray at public, non-Christian events. I think the issue is a lot more complicated than some of the common responses I hear and see suggest regarding this question.
I have heard some say that we shouldn't be ashamed and so we should pray in Jesus' name. If a pastor or chaplain stops to think about whether he or she should pray in Jesus' name or not, then that is interpreted as an act of shame or fear rather than one of a sincere pastor/chaplain and Christian. I would say that if a pastor doesn't at least stop to consider what praying "in Jesus' name" means and its ethical implications, then he or she would be an irresponsible pastor/chaplain and a poor or immature Christian.
I have also heard responses say something along the lines of, "If I have to hear a Muslim pray to Allah in public, then they should hear me pray in Jesus' name, because I have the free speech to do so." However, the issue of praying in Jesus' name in public is not about free speech or the right to public prayer. If one's point is that if Muslims can pray publicly, then they should have to listen to my prayers, too, I would say that such a view is a pretty shallow understanding of praying in Jesus' name. Jesus isn't trying to, nor needs to prove to another that he's better than Allah, by being louder or saying, "Hey, if I have to listen to you pray to your God, you have to listen to me pray to my God, because the American government gives me free speech." Is Jesus a petulant child that needs his voice to be heard by out-raising his voice over everybody else?
Finally, I have seen some claim that it's a form of persecution if we have to even ask whether we should pray in Jesus' name. According to that thinking, we are forced to mute ourselves because there is a pressure to silence those of us who are Christian, while others are supposedly more tolerated and less persecuted. However, to even think or act like this is persecution is, to put it bluntly, false and completely illogical. In fact, while religious persecution of any religion in the United States these days is probably, relatively speaking, far less common than most countries in the world, the reality is that, in the U.S., a Muslim praying to "Allah" is far more likely to receive persecution and dirty looks in the U.S. than praying "in Jesus' name." So, let's be real and honest and not have a false persecution complex. As Christians, we are at worst inconvenienced, and at worst (sorry, I just couldn't say "at best" in this context) seen as the ones in power. Besides, the reality is that Muslims are more likely to be on Christians' side in terms of this issue because, as the writer stated, it would be just as offensive to force Muslims pray to a generic God rather than "Allah." Again, it's much more complicated than saying, "Don't be ashamed of being Christian." Although, I'm sure there are those who might struggle with being ashamed of being Christian, that really isn't the central problem here, especially when it comes to pastors praying at secular, public events.
Unfortunately, I believe people (in our U.S. context) are missing the point of this discussion on whether we must pray in Jesus' name in these secular, public circumstances and why. Indeed, even the article misses an important point that we must take into consideration. The writer rightly states that he wouldn't "want a Muslim chaplain to be forced by the government to pray like an Episcopalian." However, as much as I agree with this statement, the reality is that Muslim chaplains are few and Muslims are rarely asked to pray in secular, public events. We must take this into consideration, because that very reality can be problematic for us as Christians. This is problematic, not because we are compelled to have every single religion under the sun be invited to pray at public events, but because the nature of the invitation and the almost exclusive invitation of Christians, rather than from other faiths, gives a false perception that either 1) the pastor/chaplain, as representative of the Church) can be called upon by the state, meaning government, to baptize whatever even they are doing or policy they are enacting "in Jesus' name, thus reducing the church and its pastors/chaplains as mere lackeys for the government, whether that is the intent or not; or that 2) we are operating under a Constantinian view of Christianity in which the government here in the U.S. is seen as a "Christian" government, which it clearly is not, nor should be. On the one hand, this second point confuses Christians to think that they can and should exert power over non-Christians through the government even in coercive ways (though they might not see themselves as being coercive). On the other hand, it can cause some confusion for non-Christians, especially outside of the United States, to think that the U.S. government is enacting Christian policies or that these state-related public functions are really just a Christian endorsed event reflecting a Christian country, when that is clearly not the case.
As a pastor, I am asked to do prayers in public events. In fact, I have been invited to do so on Memorial Day weekend. With all of that said, I'll still be praying in Jesus' name. I believe I have to as one that proclaims Jesus as my Lord.
However, because Jesus is my Lord, I won't be praying in Jesus' name to show how proud I am to be Christian, which is adolescent (if not more immature) if you think about it. I don't mean that condescendingly, but rather literally (that's the way I thought as an adolescent, before I matured in faith). This essentially makes Jesus out to be nothing better than your alma mater school, which you are "proud of." But, here's the thing... Jesus doesn't tell us to be proud of him. Instead, we are called to be humble like him. He lifted others up and he commanded us to love. Yes, we should not be ashamed, but when I hear Christians in the United States talk about not being ashamed of being Christian, especially in a culture where there is not much shame associated with being Christian, the tone is generally not filled with humility and a call to love. Instead, the tone is one of shouting "Rah, rah, sis boom bah, my Jesus beats up your Allah! In Jesus' name!" Jesus doesn't need cheerleaders or fans. Jesus demands that we be faithful to his Way and live out his Truth and Life in our own lives.
I won't be praying in Jesus' name because I think the United States is the greatest nation in the world. I won't be praying in Jesus' name because I think the U.S. is God's gift to the world and Jesus is on its side (in case you didn't know, Jesus is not). I will pray in Jesus' name for the United States to see the light of Christ, because the United States, like every nation with as much power and clout as ours is in need of repentace for and redemption from its self-justifying ways and this appalling tendency to think that might is right, and that there's nothing wrong with violence. Even from a Just War view, which is where I lean, a Christian can not deem violence as good, but rather sees it as the tragic lesser of two evils. I will pray in Jesus' name because my prayer will be one and is intended as one that subverts this tendency of many citizens in the United States to baptize whatever policies of the government that may go against the ways of our Lord Jesus Christ and call it Christian, so as not to confuse our brothers and sisters of other faiths who do not know Christ into believing that the nation's evils refect our Lord Jesus. I will pray in Jesus' name because I will pray for peace, and no peace, not even the one the U.S. tries to enforce with guns and tanks or free speech and laws is greater than the one Jesus gives, which is filled with and given to us with humility, healing, reconciliation, and most importantly, love. I can't guarantee people will hear my prayer in that way. I'm not naive enough to think that people might hear the very opposite of what I intend, because they want to hear what they want to hear. However, I will have been faithful to Jesus and his Way. This is how and why I pray in the name of our Lord Jesus. I hope I can get an Amen.
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Who is Lord?
This is my first post, but I will just dive right in with my thoughts.
I read an Op-Ed piece in the New York Times titled "Don't Fear Islamic Law in America." I appreciated the criticism of those who are perpetuating fear of and prejudice towards Islam and Muslims. I also agree that trying to pass laws born of hate and meant to ostracize Muslims is stupid. It is just common sense. The U.S. should learn from the mistakes of Europe. It only CREATES extremism.
However, one line really bothered me in this article. Stern writes, "Given time, American Muslims, like all other religious minorities before them, will adjust their legal and theological traditions, if necessary, to accord with American values." On the one hand, Stern is absolutely right about his history. Most religions have indeed conformed to "American" values, including Christianity rather than the other way around. But, while Stern advocates this view, should we as Christians? Is Jesus Christ our Lord? Or is the United States our Lord? This is an important question for us to always ask as Christians (I just spent an hour last week writing about what the Lordship of Jesus Christ means for my United Methodist ordination papers).
The problem I see with the Church in the United States regarding this matter of truly having Jesus as the only Lord of their lives is two-fold (Ok, there are actually a lot more, but I will focus on two). For some (for the lack of a better term) conservative or reactionary Christians in the U.S., they actually believe that we are a "Christian" nation and so have no problems with laws like the anti-Shariah laws that Stern writes about. For others (again for the lack of a better term) liberal Christians, there are those who basically sound like Stern and simply have no qualms about it. It is enough to celebrate the great diversity and tolerance of the United States brand, without taking seriously what it means to proclaim Jesus as Lord. Obviously, I don't mean anyone under the label of 'conservative' or 'liberal' Christians. Ok. If I wanted to put it more bluntly, I think the former are 'mean' Christians and the latter are 'nice' Christians--neither of whom seem to really understand why they have completely missed the boat on asking that question, what does it mean for Jesus to be Lord OF your life?
For those 'mean' Christians who think America is a Christian nation, they are clearly misguided in their understanding of history. Can we seriously argue that the United States was EVER a nation grounded in the Gospel? Of course not. It was grounded in pragmatism and selective tolerance, with an eye for due process just in case you wanted to change your mind without the whole government falling apart or rocking the status quo too much. Ultimately, these Christians are blinded to the reality that they have simply confomed to an Americanization of their faith, idolizing the nation over God rather "under God" as these same people often like to emphasize as a catchphrase for hate rather than to mean that Jesus is their Lord. The funnier/sadder aspect of this is that these people are often the most discriminatory and prejudiced against non-Christians, but they are the most inconsistent in perception of reality. Since it is really America that is God, they SHOULD be in the same camp as Stern. Let America be God and let THEM (Muslims, Buddhists, Jews) adjust their religion to America. After all, these "Christians" have, too. Of course, this only highlights the truth that what is really at stake for these supposed Christians is not about whether America is truly Christian and following Jesus, but what KIND of people can follow the Jesus made in their own image--usually White, blonde, blue-eyed, plays football, eats an ungodly amount of desserts, and of course wraps himself in a U.S. flag wherever he goes. Granted, I love playing football and, if my wife let me, I would seriously consider eating an ungodly amount of desserts. And to be fair, they don't necessarily require blonde or blue-eyed as part of the criteria. Regardless, these 'mean' Christians miss the whole point of the gospel about loving one's neighbors, because Jesus isn't Lord, while my turf and my kind of people is.
As for the 'nice' Christians, the truth is that it is not the nation itself that is God, but a form of bland idealism that has little to do with the lordship of Christ and everything to do with being pleasant. They understand the reality there are a lot mean people in this world. They want to know why people just can't get along. They know that Jesus taught them to love, so why can't we love everybody. I would probably say that nice Christians are a little closer to the Gospel to than mean ones, but I'm still not sure how Jesus is actually their Lord for 'nice' Christians.
These Christians tend to be affirming of everyone and everything, except meanness of course. They are likely to be uncritical of Stern's line that given time, THOSE people will adjust to America and conform their values. While mean Christians don't know that they have a faith conformed to 'America' rather than the reverse, the 'nice' Christians tend to be all for a faith conformed to 'America' rather than the reverse, because an America conformed to faith just causes friction, and of course, friction and conflict is bad. Let's not emphasize that we believe Jesus is God (do we even believe that?), because that 'offends' others. It is in a way a fear of scandal. Yet, shouldn't Jesus be scandalous in our society?
From what I've read, Jesus never said to be nice to everybody. Jesus said to LOVE everybody. By the way, Jesus never said to be mean to everybody either. Jesus was definitely not 'nice' to some of the Pharisees and was not 'nice' to Pontius Pilate, and wasn't even nice to that Caananite woman asking for her daughter to be healed. However, he did challenge, and he did love. He listened and he healed. He didn't say, "even though you sin, I want to make sure I don't hurt your feelings." He said, "Sin no more."
The problem with 'nice' Christians is perhaps not that they're pro-activley advocating Stern's form of religion that conforms to American ideals, but that it is SO weak that it has nothing to say to the nation. The nation can simply do a better job than Christians because America doesn't/shouldn't care about differences, while we Christians, try as we might to shed it, indeed have differences and distinctives. I believe that in the end this is so much more disrespectful to not only one's own faith but to other religions, because in their supposed niceness they completely ignore what it means to be Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, etc. I want to get along with and try to love everyone, admittedly with varying degrees of success. But, I know my faith conflicts with Hindus; I know it conflicts with Muslims; I know it conflicts with even other Christians. Is it more arrogant to say that I believe you are wrong, or to say what you believe is not important enough to disagree on, so let's just all be good Americans who look and act a little different, but who get along because we are really all the same. Honestly, I don't see that as too different from mean American Christianity, although I admit it would be more bearable to live in a nice Christian America. Besides, it would seem to me that such a position really derives itself from a position of privilege anyway! I noticed that these are usually the type of people who usually start talking about how great Korean culture is, that I should be proud of it, and if I ever go 'back' there. Thanks, I am proud to be Korean without you telling me to, and I go back 'home' to Chicago where I was born and raised, quite often, thank you very much.
What am I trying to say? American Christians need to care about being faithful disciples of Jesus Christ. We need to give up this hatred for people who are different because they are somehow not matching with what the American ideal is. Jesus is more important Jesus tells us to love ALL people. We also need to give up also trying to make everyone feel the same or give up our own faith Truth all for the sake of trying to get along. That is either condescending or self-hating respectively. Let's give up being mean, and let's give up being nice. Let's be faithful to our Lord. Let's take seriously his commandmant to love our neighbors and let's take seriously that Caesar/America isn't Lord, but God alone. Let's take seriously that every person, culture, religion isn't Lord, but Jesus alone. Let's give up conforming to American values, and start conforming to Christ.
Is Jesus your Lord? What does that mean?
I read an Op-Ed piece in the New York Times titled "Don't Fear Islamic Law in America." I appreciated the criticism of those who are perpetuating fear of and prejudice towards Islam and Muslims. I also agree that trying to pass laws born of hate and meant to ostracize Muslims is stupid. It is just common sense. The U.S. should learn from the mistakes of Europe. It only CREATES extremism.
However, one line really bothered me in this article. Stern writes, "Given time, American Muslims, like all other religious minorities before them, will adjust their legal and theological traditions, if necessary, to accord with American values." On the one hand, Stern is absolutely right about his history. Most religions have indeed conformed to "American" values, including Christianity rather than the other way around. But, while Stern advocates this view, should we as Christians? Is Jesus Christ our Lord? Or is the United States our Lord? This is an important question for us to always ask as Christians (I just spent an hour last week writing about what the Lordship of Jesus Christ means for my United Methodist ordination papers).
The problem I see with the Church in the United States regarding this matter of truly having Jesus as the only Lord of their lives is two-fold (Ok, there are actually a lot more, but I will focus on two). For some (for the lack of a better term) conservative or reactionary Christians in the U.S., they actually believe that we are a "Christian" nation and so have no problems with laws like the anti-Shariah laws that Stern writes about. For others (again for the lack of a better term) liberal Christians, there are those who basically sound like Stern and simply have no qualms about it. It is enough to celebrate the great diversity and tolerance of the United States brand, without taking seriously what it means to proclaim Jesus as Lord. Obviously, I don't mean anyone under the label of 'conservative' or 'liberal' Christians. Ok. If I wanted to put it more bluntly, I think the former are 'mean' Christians and the latter are 'nice' Christians--neither of whom seem to really understand why they have completely missed the boat on asking that question, what does it mean for Jesus to be Lord OF your life?
For those 'mean' Christians who think America is a Christian nation, they are clearly misguided in their understanding of history. Can we seriously argue that the United States was EVER a nation grounded in the Gospel? Of course not. It was grounded in pragmatism and selective tolerance, with an eye for due process just in case you wanted to change your mind without the whole government falling apart or rocking the status quo too much. Ultimately, these Christians are blinded to the reality that they have simply confomed to an Americanization of their faith, idolizing the nation over God rather "under God" as these same people often like to emphasize as a catchphrase for hate rather than to mean that Jesus is their Lord. The funnier/sadder aspect of this is that these people are often the most discriminatory and prejudiced against non-Christians, but they are the most inconsistent in perception of reality. Since it is really America that is God, they SHOULD be in the same camp as Stern. Let America be God and let THEM (Muslims, Buddhists, Jews) adjust their religion to America. After all, these "Christians" have, too. Of course, this only highlights the truth that what is really at stake for these supposed Christians is not about whether America is truly Christian and following Jesus, but what KIND of people can follow the Jesus made in their own image--usually White, blonde, blue-eyed, plays football, eats an ungodly amount of desserts, and of course wraps himself in a U.S. flag wherever he goes. Granted, I love playing football and, if my wife let me, I would seriously consider eating an ungodly amount of desserts. And to be fair, they don't necessarily require blonde or blue-eyed as part of the criteria. Regardless, these 'mean' Christians miss the whole point of the gospel about loving one's neighbors, because Jesus isn't Lord, while my turf and my kind of people is.
As for the 'nice' Christians, the truth is that it is not the nation itself that is God, but a form of bland idealism that has little to do with the lordship of Christ and everything to do with being pleasant. They understand the reality there are a lot mean people in this world. They want to know why people just can't get along. They know that Jesus taught them to love, so why can't we love everybody. I would probably say that nice Christians are a little closer to the Gospel to than mean ones, but I'm still not sure how Jesus is actually their Lord for 'nice' Christians.
These Christians tend to be affirming of everyone and everything, except meanness of course. They are likely to be uncritical of Stern's line that given time, THOSE people will adjust to America and conform their values. While mean Christians don't know that they have a faith conformed to 'America' rather than the reverse, the 'nice' Christians tend to be all for a faith conformed to 'America' rather than the reverse, because an America conformed to faith just causes friction, and of course, friction and conflict is bad. Let's not emphasize that we believe Jesus is God (do we even believe that?), because that 'offends' others. It is in a way a fear of scandal. Yet, shouldn't Jesus be scandalous in our society?
From what I've read, Jesus never said to be nice to everybody. Jesus said to LOVE everybody. By the way, Jesus never said to be mean to everybody either. Jesus was definitely not 'nice' to some of the Pharisees and was not 'nice' to Pontius Pilate, and wasn't even nice to that Caananite woman asking for her daughter to be healed. However, he did challenge, and he did love. He listened and he healed. He didn't say, "even though you sin, I want to make sure I don't hurt your feelings." He said, "Sin no more."
The problem with 'nice' Christians is perhaps not that they're pro-activley advocating Stern's form of religion that conforms to American ideals, but that it is SO weak that it has nothing to say to the nation. The nation can simply do a better job than Christians because America doesn't/shouldn't care about differences, while we Christians, try as we might to shed it, indeed have differences and distinctives. I believe that in the end this is so much more disrespectful to not only one's own faith but to other religions, because in their supposed niceness they completely ignore what it means to be Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, etc. I want to get along with and try to love everyone, admittedly with varying degrees of success. But, I know my faith conflicts with Hindus; I know it conflicts with Muslims; I know it conflicts with even other Christians. Is it more arrogant to say that I believe you are wrong, or to say what you believe is not important enough to disagree on, so let's just all be good Americans who look and act a little different, but who get along because we are really all the same. Honestly, I don't see that as too different from mean American Christianity, although I admit it would be more bearable to live in a nice Christian America. Besides, it would seem to me that such a position really derives itself from a position of privilege anyway! I noticed that these are usually the type of people who usually start talking about how great Korean culture is, that I should be proud of it, and if I ever go 'back' there. Thanks, I am proud to be Korean without you telling me to, and I go back 'home' to Chicago where I was born and raised, quite often, thank you very much.
What am I trying to say? American Christians need to care about being faithful disciples of Jesus Christ. We need to give up this hatred for people who are different because they are somehow not matching with what the American ideal is. Jesus is more important Jesus tells us to love ALL people. We also need to give up also trying to make everyone feel the same or give up our own faith Truth all for the sake of trying to get along. That is either condescending or self-hating respectively. Let's give up being mean, and let's give up being nice. Let's be faithful to our Lord. Let's take seriously his commandmant to love our neighbors and let's take seriously that Caesar/America isn't Lord, but God alone. Let's take seriously that every person, culture, religion isn't Lord, but Jesus alone. Let's give up conforming to American values, and start conforming to Christ.
Is Jesus your Lord? What does that mean?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)