Is Wright Wrong? Part 5

A busy life has prevented me from completing my series on Jeremiah Wright's public pronouncements. But maybe enough has already been said here on the topic. I've tried to be fair to Wright, who I believe has been a faithful Christian pastor for many decades, but who has also displayed a disturbing tendency toward antisemitism and what I regard as overpoliticization of the Gospel. I also find his willingness to embrace and applaud the bigoted Louis Farrakhan incomprehensible.

You might want to take a look at a few pieces that underscore these tendencies:
here
here
here

However, for the last word on Wright, I would point you to the fair-minded words of Pastor John Buchanan, editor of Christian Century. You'll find Buchanan's thoughts here.

Here are links to the first four installments in this series:
Is Wright Wrong? Part 1
Is Wright Wrong? Part 2
Is Wright Wrong? Part 3
Is Wright Wrong? Part 4

Is Wright Wrong? Part 4

I've generally made it my policy in the six years I have been doing this blog not to respond to anonymous comments. In fact, I usually delete such comments on the premise that if people are unwilling to publicly own what they say, what they say shouldn't be seen by the public. But I'm making an exception to that policy for this post.

A comment appeared on the third installment of this series, one which, to some extent provides a natural segue to the rest of this series. But that isn't the only reason for my decision to not only leave the anonymous commenter's words on this site, but to address the opinions expressed there.

Another big reason is that this commenter's words reflect such a misunderstanding of what I have been saying here, I can only conclude that I haven't been effectively communicating in the first three installments. In short, I have experienced no change of perspective on Jeremiah Wright's public pronouncements. My goal has been fairness throughout. More on that momentarily.

The commenter writes under the pseudonym of adept2u. Below are extracts from the comments, in green, followed by my responses:

Judge not lest ye be judged...

Good words! They're from Jesus, cited, among other places in Luke 6:37:

“Do not judge, and you will not be judged; do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven..."

It is absolutely wrong for Christians to apply standards to other Christians they would not apply to themselves. We know that all people are sinners who fall short of the glory of God. Christians believe that we are saved by God's grace and not because of moral superiority. So far as I know, I have not violated Jesus' directive against judging in my words about Pastor Wright's public communications. I have attempted to be fair and gracious, striving to do unto Pastor Wright what I would hope that he would do unto me.

But we members of "the one holy, catholic, apostolic Church," the body of Christ, also are called upon to make judgments about what is right and wrong, what will advance and what will harm the witness of Christ and the Church each and every day.

Let me be honest: I am imperfect. I am a sinner. I do things that displease my Lord. Each day, I approach the Lord with a list of my most recent sins and I repent for them, seeking God's forgiveness and the capacity to love God and neighbor more faithfully each day.

But that doesn't mean that when another Christian leader or layperson create what I think is a misconception of Christian faith, I should keep silent. When people like Pat Robertson (also here) and James Dobson have given the general public wrong ideas about Christ or the Church, I have spoken up. I imagine that Pastor Wright has done this as well. That's not judging; that's witnessing. In some cases, it's leadership. As Pastor Gerald Mann has noted, sometimes it seems that the primary job of Christians is cleaning up the bad reputation given to God by Christians. That's one of the purposes of this series, to analyze some of Jeremiah Wright's public pronouncements from the perspective of Christian faith, and not just as political statements, the way the news media and many bloggers were analyzing them.

Next, adept2u writes:

I'm glad you finally had took the opportunity to view the Rev. Wright through your lens, but do you remember the charactherizaitons you made before you were so kind to actually listen to the mans words. I believe you called his expressions hateful, anti semetic as well as several other things.

Actually, I had listened to the post-9/11 sermon even before I wrote the first installment of this series. In the first installment, I alluded to several things that Pastor Wright had said or promoted and wrote:

Earlier this evening, CNN gave heavy coverage to articles by Wright and by a Hamas functionary which appeared last year in Trinity's bulletin. Some of the comments were antisemitic. Others were anti-Israel and some anti-Italian, replete with racial and ethnic slurs. Let me hasten to say that talk like this has no place in Christian discourse. In the most famous passage in the New Testament, Jesus told Nicodemus that God so "love the world," that's everybody.

I stand by what I wrote there. But I hope that what I have presented here thus far will contribute to a fuller picture of Reverend Wright. He appears to be one who strives to be faithful to Christ, but who has expressed some really hateful notions, notions contrary to the character and will of Christ. He appears to be, like me, saint and sinner. But he seems not to perceive the hatefulness or the prejudices of some of the ideas he embraces. (More on that in the next installment of this series, I hope.)

Skipping ahead, adept2u writes:

I hope you will now endeavor to correct people when the call the Rev. Wright hateful etc, and I believe you further owe him an apology.

I agree with Martin Luther's understanding of what we Lutherans render as the Eighth Commandment (You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor):

We should fear and love God that we may not deceitfully belie, betray, slander, or defame our neighbor, but defend him, [think and] speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything.

Part of what I have tried to do in this series is to fairly understand Jeremiah Wright. I do this in part, in response to Senator Obama's call for building bridges of understanding across the racial divide in this country. But mostly I do it out of simple Christian duty. It is my responsibility as a Christian to attempt to understand my neighbor and to put the most charitable construction on what my neighbor thinks, says, and does.

But I have a higher duty to Christ, the Lord Who saved me. I must speak the truth about Christ as a loving Savior Who doesn't like ethnic stereotyping, for example.

Near the end of adept2u's comments, we read:

I also feel I must let you know that no one and especially the Trinity UCC is going to cry one tear if you would not grace that church with your presense. The days of black people having to cow tow and beg for the acceptance of the likes of you is blessedly passed.

I don't know what my "likes" are, but I can assure you that nobody has to kowtow to me. I want no one to do so.

But I also hope that our churches can be places where all we recovering sinners come to wrestle with the reality of our own sin and be empowered to live with love, confidence, and hope because, through the Savior Jesus Christ, repentant sinners are transformed by God from His enemies to His friends. Based on what I have learned about Trinity United Church of Christ, I'm confident that I would receive a warm and loving welcome if I showed up for worship there.

Onto that analysis of some of Jeremiah Wright's more disturbing public communications in the next post, I hope.

[The first three installments of this series can be found here, here, and here.]

Is Wright Wrong? Part 3

For now at least, the mainstream media and the blogging world have, for the most part, left the Jeremiah Wright controversy behind. That's too bad in a way and it showcases the problem with what has become not a twenty-four hour news cycle, but a constant assault of headlines, sound bites, video clips, and rapid fire stereotyping often devoid of context or real analysis.

Before 1980, when TV network news was established as part of a pantheon of journalistic outlets, joining newspapers and radio, supplanting the latter and in some ways, supplementing the former, there was time to develop stories responsibly, covering multiple aspects. There was even a place for a dispassionate analyst to give nightly commentary, as was true of Eric Sevareid five nights a week on CBS News, his wise words treated almost like wisdom from Mount Sinai.

I'm grateful for the Internet. It allows for an increased public dialog and has made it possible for even someone like me, a preacher in a small Ohio town, to reach an audience I could not have otherwise reached. (And every writer wants people to read what they have written, no matter what other motives they may have.)

But the Internet of today is a bit like the media landscape of Europe in the 1500s, after Gutenberg's presses had started to make their presence and potential apparent, or of the young united colonies, then United States, immediately before and after the Revolution. In both contexts, pamphleteering, those eras' equivalents of blogs and YouTube videos, became major sources of information and ideas.

In the case of early-16th.-century Europe, the printing press and the wide distribution of his essays made Martin Luther, the Reformer of whose movement I am a part today, the very first media superstar, as others have pointed out. (That was also an era when copyright laws and royalties did not exist, proof that Luther cared not a fig about wealth, but simply wanted people to know that we are made right with God not by what we do, but by who we know.)

The Internet is a wild and woolly world. The conventional media, which includes the cable TV networks, feel a need to respond to and carry items making the news on the web in order to keep up.

But at times, this causes all of the media players--conventional and otherwise--to express opinions and pass judgments before facts have been established.

As I have delved into some of Jeremiah's Wright's thinking, my first impressions have been somewhat changed. I still think that Wright is a polarizing figure and that some of his opinions are indefensible. But, as I think my sharing of the actual content of his post-September 11, 2001 sermon demonstrates, that sermon, in any case, no matter what one thinks of the data he marshalls or the conclusions he draws, is well within the mainstream of Christian thinking, with no hint prejudices of any kind.

Even in saying that the 9/11 attacks exemplified our country's chickens coming home to roost, the military veteran who volunteered for several tours of duty in Vietnam, was not disparaging the United States, as he clearly was elsewhere.

In his comments on the first installment of this series, my colleague, Pastor Jeff, provides links to several communiques from Jeremiah Wright. They are disturbing and I will take a look at those in the next installment. As will become apparent, I abhor some of the things Wright said there and in other places. So much do I abhor them, in fact, that I cannot imagine being a member of any church pastored by Wright.

But I do hope that what I've written and will write about him, about preaching, and about the Biblical tradition of prophetic preaching, will serve as a reminder, at least to anyone who shows up here, that the best thing we can do when an Internet tempest cranks up, it's best to bide our time, bit our tongues, pray, research, and reflect.

The Internet gives us access to all sorts of information and ideas. It also gives an unprecedented capacity to put in our own two-cents' worth. But we shouldn't allow the low cost of admission to cheapen our discourse. Even Jeremiah Wright deserves a fair shake.

Is Wright Wrong? Part 2

In the first installment of this series, I dealt with antisemitic and hateful remarks made or supported by Jeremiah Wright, one-time pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, for twenty years the pastor of Senator Barack Obama. I said that antisemitism particularly, and any prejudicial slur invoked against ethnic or religious groups generally, is not Christian discourse.

But, based on the affirmations of at least some of Wright's ministry made by people I respect, I also wanted to examine other of his pronouncements. I specifically wanted to listen to or read his entire post-9/11 sermon. It has, ostensibly, been the objectof intense debate and, I would say, vilification of Wright. Many have pointed to that sermon and called him unpatriotic. (I say ostensibly, because on YouTube and in other media, some of his other pronouncements have been presented as though they were part of this particular sermon. He did not, for example, speak of the "US od KKK A" in the post-9/11 sermon. Nor did he speak of the crazy notion that the US government had infected African-Americans with the AIDS virus. Those suggestions from him came in other contexts.)

In short, as revolted as I am by the prejudices and the dangerous silliness Wright has uttered or to which he has given credence, I also wanted to be fair. Growing up, I had extended family members who said silly, stupid, prejudiced things. One relative was absolutely convinced, for example, that Franklin Roosevelt put a pistol to his own head at Warm Springs, rather than dying from a cerebral hemorrhage and palmed off this nutty theory as gospel truth. Some family members canceled reservations at a state park lodge in Ohio after they learned that an NAACP gathering was scheduled the week before their scheduled stay. One member of my extended family was convinced that some medical problems I experienced resulted from my being assaulted by some of my African-American friends, an assault that only happened in his bigoted imagination. Yet, for all their faults, prejudices, and lunacies, I experienced these family members as loving people, in much the same way that Senator Obama experienced Jeremiah Wright.

In my own theological tradition--I'm a Lutheran Christian, there is a heavy emphasis on the fact that sin is a condition, an inborn rebellion against God which causes even followers of the God of the Bible to sin. "In sin did my mother conceive me," Israel's greatest king, David, wrote in repenting for murder and adultery (Psalm 51). "Wretched man that I am!" Paul writes in the New Testament, "Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, with my mind I am a slave to the law of God, but with my flesh I am a slave to the law of sin" (Romans 7:24-25) We Christians confess that we are sinners deserving of death, but saints because of what Christ has done for all who are willing to follow Him.

As a saint saved by God's grace, I have no bragging rights, no call for gloating or spiritual superiority. Jeremiah Wright's pronouncements are, at times, reprehensible. But they may not always be wrong or signify that he isn't part of the family of God. Indeed, there may be much that's commendable in him and in his ministry. I thank God every day that a preacher doesn't have to be morally perfect or devoid of blind spots to be accounted faithful. Truth to tell, I am deeply mindful of my sins, which is why one of the prayers I utter every single day is, "Thank You, God, for not killing me for my sins as I deserve!"

Nor does a preacher have to be an unblinking patriot. A story. Some months ago, I was in a meeting involving other clergy from my own faith tradition. We were talking about the war in Iraq and there were strong feelings around the table. The discussion widened beyond mere consideration of the war itself to the more general subject of patriotism.

Anybody who has read this blog very much knows that I am an unabashed patriot. I freely acknowledge the faults of this country and that things like slavery, racial prejudice, and the subjugation of Native Americans are sins, the effects of which continue to pollute our national soul.

But I also believe that there is something exceptional in the US character: the first nation to decide itself into being has, by fits, starts, and convulsions, been on a two-plus century-journey toward fulfilling the promise of its founding documents, to be a nation of liberty (as enunciated in the Declaration of Independence) and of mutual responsibility (embodied in the Constitution).

America does, in fact suffer, as Martin Luther King, Jr. said, from "a schizophrenic personality." But were it not for these public pronouncements about a very specific national identity, about the vision we are pursuing, that description would be inapt. We can be described as schizophrenic quite simply because we fail to meet the very standards to which we are supposedly committed.

In our conversation about patriotism, my colleague said, with an ironic laugh, "I used to be a patriot. I really did." He said it as though patriotism was unworthy of a Christian.

Other Christians I know put patriotic fervor for the United States on a par with faith in God.

I disagree with both camps.

I think that as a Christian, it's possible to love one's country. But the God we meet in Jesus Christ demands that we always put God first. Above personal desires. Above family and friends. Above career. Above country. Above everything.

The first commandment tells us, "You shall have no other gods before me." A god is whatever we give highest priority in our lives. If forced to choose between the God I love and the country I love, I hope that God will win every single time. It should really be no contest.

And sometimes, my faith in God and my love for my country will compel me to say things that are critical of my country. I feel no hesitation about condemning our materialism and our racism, for example. I am bothered by those whose patriotism is xenophobia, rather than an honest, historically-attuned appreciation for America, flaws and all.

For any preacher of the Gospel, be it Jeremiah Wright or Mark Daniels, there are two great strands that must appear in preaching: the pastoral and the prophetic. The pastoral declares the love of Jesus by pointing to His gracious handling of sinners. Jesus, God in the flesh, promises life to all who turn from sin and believe in Him.

The prophetic declares the love of Jesus by pointing to the sins that demonstrate our need of forgiveness, both as individuals and as societies. The prophet says, "You have wandered far from God and here are the ways that can be seen."

We tend to like preachers when they're speaking pastorally. But those who speak prophetically are, shall we say, less appreciated.

In his classic overview of the Old Testament portion of the Bible, Bernhard Anderson, onetime professor at Princeton University, calls his chapter on the Old Testament prophets, "Prophetic Troublers of Israel." Anderson explains that prophets believed that God had sent them to deliver messages to God's people, ancient Israel.

The prophets weren't sent by God to make predictions about the future, although that's how some stereotypically see them. Rather, they were sent to tell God's people, "This injustice, that sin, this forgetfulness of God...is not pleasing to God. You are severing your relationship with God and that has its consequences."

To put it in more modern terms, the prophets were sent to tell God's people that if they kept rebelling against God, those "chickens would come home to roost." God, they would tell Israel, is patient. He is slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love. But if you keep flouting the will of God--God's will that we love God and neighbor, there will be consequences. Paul talked about this in the New Testament. "Do not be deceived," Paul writes in Galatians 6:7, "God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."

The preacher who isn't both pastoral and prophetic, who fails to display both sides of God's love, who fails to call people both to repentance for sin and to confidence in God's grace, and who doesn't preach both Law and Gospel fails to fulfill the preacher's call.

Now, with all of that in the background, take a listen to Jeremiah Wright's post-9/11 sermon. I'll come back in a day or two to give my reflections on it.

Wright's text is Psalm 137, here.



powered by ODEO