The Mighty and the Almighty

Richard Olson

July 23, 2006

First Universalist Unitarian Church of Wausau, WI

 

 

 

And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him.

                                                                                      (Genesis 12:7)

 

Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war,
With the cross of Jesus going on before.
Christ, the royal Master, leads against the foe;
Forward into battle see His banners go!

                                                                                      Sabine Baring-Gould (hymn)

 

Fight against such as those to whom the Scriptures were given [Jews and Christians]...until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued."      (Surah 9:27) (Quran)

 

And all the cities of those kings, and all the kings of them, did Joshua take, and smote them with the edge of the sword, and he utterly destroyed them, as Moses the servant of the LORD commanded.

                                                                                   (Joshua 11:12)

 

 

Opening words: By Kenneth R. Warren:

May we come into this building hallowed by generations of thoughtful

worship. May we come into the company of this congregation, enlightened by reason and moved by concern. May we come with open minds and warm hearts.

May we here cultivate a confidence that human intelligence and human affection can temper and ultimately overcome cruel circumstance and misguided malice, with faith in the power of good over evil. So may we find both our social responsibilities and our individual salvation.

 

Chalice: Words by Eric Heller-Wagner

Let us now light the chalice: Blessed is the fire that burns deep in the soul. It is the flame of the human spirit touched into being by the mystery of life. It is the fire of reason; the fire of compassion; the fire of community; the fire of justice; the fire of faith. It is the fire of love burning deep in the human heart; the divine glow of every life.

 

Announcements:

 

Responsive reading:      #466

 

Silent Meditation

 

Message:

Boy, was I wrong. Not that I had never been wrong before, or since, for that matter. But it’s one thing to be wrong in front of a couple of people. Or to a small group. But to be wrong in the witness of thousands of people is another story.

It happened well over ten years ago. Someone had written a letter to the editor in opposition to gay rights. The Bible was the writer’s chief source. I responded to the letter, pointing out that many of prohibitions in the Bible were written 3000 years ago and that modern society no longer endorses most of them. I ended the letter with the claim that the Bible is irrelevant.

 

Boy was I wrong. Making a sweeping statement that the entire Bible is irrelevant just because some of it laws and admonitions are no longer enforced was indeed a stretch on my part.

 

How could I have said that the Bible, which was written and compiled with considerable debate over many years, and translated into so many languages, is irrelevant? How could I have dismissed the sacred authority for two significant religious faiths of our times?

 

And would I have been so flip as to the say that the Quran is irrelevant? Or that the Tao, the Upanishads or the Popul Vuh are irrelevant?

 

Several months ago I read The End of Faith by Sam Harris. Harris has a graduate degree in philosophy from Stanford University and has studied both Eastern and Western religious traditions.

 

His book reminded me just how relevant religious faith and scriptures are. In fact, they are so relevant that we continue to kill each other off because of them. While this truly is not a revelation, it is something we need to consider again in the light of last weeks escalating violence in the Middle East, of which religion is either a contributing factor or the impetus.

 

While Harris reminds us that mighty Christian and Jewish nations are also guilty of playing the “Almighty God” card, he is especially harsh on Islam. In fact, he claims that we are at war with Islam, not just at war with the extremist element of it, but all of Islam. According to Harris, the only scenario that devout Muslims can envision is one where all the infidels have converted to Islam, or have been subjugated or killed.

 

Harris writes about the two types of Jihad, a word that has entered our language since 9/11. One type of jihad is the inner, or greater Jihad and involves a struggle against one’s own sinfulness. It is noble, more personal jihad. But Harris warns that the nobility of this inner, greater jihad is no mask for the outer or lesser jihad, which consists of waging war against the infidels in defense of Islam.

 

To support his indictment of Islam, Harris quotes many verses from the Quran that promote violence, religious intolerance and martyrism. For the gentler and benevolent side of Islam you will need to find a source other than Harris.

 

Another book I have read recently is The Tent of Abraham. It is a collection of essays by Muslim, Christian and Jewish clergy.

Many of these essays center around the story of Abram, or Abraham, the patriarch of both Islam and Judaism, as well as a key figure in Christianity. Interpretations of Abraham and his journey differ between these three faiths, as you might imagine. One essayist explains this in the context of a family.

 

Just as family members might remember or interpret their family history in different ways, so too do Muslims, Jews and Christians have different interpretation of Abraham’s journey.

 

In both the Islamic and Jewish interpretations, God promises land to Abraham's descendents, namely through his sons Isaac, through whom the Jews claim the land, and Ishmael, through whom Muslims claim the land. And so, just as heirs might fight over an inheritance, so do the Muslims and Jews, -except in this case the disagreement results in bloody global violence. The Biblical and Quranic accounts of the same land being promised to two different faiths are certainly relevant in today’s political scene.

 

One of the most well know stories of Abraham’s journey deals with his obedience to God and his willingness to sacrifice his son at God’s request. Just as Abraham is about to sacrifice his son, however, a messenger angel appears to tell him God has changed his mind. I wonder what the effect of this story has had over the years, when we confuse God with country and parents stand by, sometimes willingly, as their children’s lives are sacrificed.

 

I also wonder what our planet would be like if perverse religious faith were left out of the mix of world politics and diplomacy. Would Christians, some of whom blame the Jews for the death of Christ, not have stood by as Jews were exterminated in Europe? Would the bloodshed of the Crusades never have occurred? Would the Muslims and Jews no longer fight to control the rock where Abraham came close to sacrificing his own son Isaac?

 

Many of you know that I am a high school Spanish teacher. But I do not only teach the Spanish language, I also teach my students about the cultures that speak that language. I often ask my students to brain storm and make a list of the elements that define or identify a culture. While they tend start with things like music, art, and food, they generally include religion toward the beginning of the list. Teaching the culture of Spanish speaking people without discussing the fervor of Holy Week in Spain, or the meaning of the Day of the Dead in Mexico or the impact of the African-based religious practice of Santeria in the Caribbean, would be depriving my students of insight into those cultures.

 

To some degree or another, religion has been, and is, a significant element in the culture of most nations, and it intertwines with art, music, food, traditions, celebrations and politics. And I can accept this cultural interplay of religion and politics. What I can not accept, however, is the dominance of one over the other or when they are in collusion for power and dominion.

 

There is much polemic these days about the role of religion in politics and diplomacy. Some, including myself, are concerned that the United States is moving in the direction of becoming a theocracy, which is what many terrorists want. When our president openly claims that he answers to a higher “father”, when in his State of the Union address he quotes an evangelical hymn that refers to the power of Jesus, when he uses words such as “crusade” to describe our mission in the Middle East, when he demonizes those who are against him, or when his administration draws on language from the rapture to tout its “no child left behind” agenda, then there is no doubt that the power of religion is being exercised.

 

But our current president is not the first to make public his religious beliefs.

 

President McKinley, who was a devout Christian during a time of religious revivals at the turn of the 20th century, told missionaries that he often “fell to his knees and prayed to the Almighty God for light and guidance.”

 

Here is the guidance he got from God as to whether or not the U. S. should invade the Philippines. “One night it came to me, there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos and uplift them and Christianize them, and by God’s grace do the very best we could for them as our fellow men for whom Christ also died.” These could have been the words of Queen Isabella of Spain in the mid 16th century, justifying the conquest of the pagan indigenous peoples of the Americas and the Philippines. What McKinley neglected to remind the American public was that the Spaniards had already converted most of the Filipinos to Christianity.

McKinley’s call to a higher purpose was echoed by many. Senator Knute Nelson of Minnesota, also speaking of the invasion of the Philippines, said “We come as ministering angels, not as despots”. Forty thousand deaths later, the Filipinos were “saved”.

 

President Lincoln, resisting pressure to pray for God to be on the side of the Union, instead prayed for the Union to be on the side of God. Following the Civil War, President Lincoln appealed to what he called “the better angels of our nature”, in an attempt to minimize the hatred and bring our nation together.

 

President Carter came to Washington with a strong sense of religious faith. But after a good deal of criticism he learned to curb his public expression of it. Yet it was his personal religious conviction that emboldened his fight for global human rights. Also, when he brought Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin together at Camp David his faith helped him muster the strength to keep pushing for peace. After seven days of what at times was aggressive accusatory debate, the Camp David Peace Accords were signed.

 

On the other hand, and on the other side of the planet, Kemal Ataturk, president of the first Turkish Republic took a different approach, advocating a diminished role for religion. Unlike some of his post-World War One neighbors, he envisioned a state where Islamic law would not dominate politics. In fact, he described religion as “a poisonous dagger directed at the heart of my people”.

 

Ataturk abolished the Islamic caliphate and closed religious schools. The many other reforms he initiated brought Turkey into the modern world.

In her recent book titled The Mighty and the Almighty, Former Secretary of State and Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Madeleine Albright reflects on America, God and World Affairs.

 

Albright claims that respect for the rights and well-being of each individual is the place where religious faith and a commitment to political liberty have their closest connection.

 

She goes on to say that this philosophy has the most potential to bring people from opposing viewpoints together because it excludes no one and yet demands from everyone full consideration of the ideas and needs of others.

 

I want to believe her philosophy to be true. It sounds great in theory. But religious faith and political liberty are not always compatible. In fact, harsh theocracies tend to allow for limited, if any, political liberty. In our own country, it is religious faith that drives the politics that denies gays and lesbians the liberty to marry.

 

Another caution I have about for Albright’s philosophy is that sometimes religious faith turns to extremism, the kind we not only see in the Middle East but in the U.S. as well.

Religious extremism, on any continent, rarely translates to a respect for the rights and well-being of each individual.

 

A good deal of Albright’s book deals with the extremist element of Islam. But Albright disagrees with Harris, writing that we are not at war with all of Islam. Her concern is only with that version of Islam that is distorted by politics and fueled by leaders who “feed these extremists with out of context quotations from the Koran.” Religion for these disaffected young Muslims is a way to find something meaningful to do, according to Albright.

Albright points out that, while most Arabs are Muslims, most Muslims aren’t Arabs. These Muslims live in Indonesia, India, Bangladesh, Malaysia and Turkey and they live under elected governments. Instead of being militant extremists they tend to be more moderate in their faith. We need to resist the temptation to lump all Muslims together and portray them in a negative way.

(pause)

 

When a president uses religious faith to help heal a divided nation, or when different religious denominations come together to fight to abolish slavery or to ensure civil rights, or when churches in central Wisconsin come together to staff a soup kitchen, then the mighty and the almighty have come together to alleviate misery and suffering. And humanity, and not a religion, is served.

 

However, when Zionist jingoism incites Jews to kill Palestinians for land that they believe God promised them three thousand years ago, or when Muslims engage in lesser jihad in the defense of Islam, or when Spanish Christian soldiers carry the cross to war in the New World, then humanity is not served. Instead, the mighty and the almighty have joined forces under the “My God is right” banner. And the result is bloodshed. (pause)

 

Trying to scrub religious faith from the social and political fabric of society is generally an unachievable goal and not worth pursuing. What is worth pursuing, on the other hand, is a desire to mediate the force that religion has on politics and that politics has on religion. These two forces can exist in harmony. Not where one is necessarily central to the other but where the two meet as a centrist force to improve our stay on this planet.

 

Religious faith and its scriptures are relevant. But we all need to be aware that no one faith or scripture holds full title to the truth. We need to be reminded that the scriptures upon which today’s religions are based are colored with historical, cultural and political bias. And we need to remember, that when these biased scriptures are forced onto our diverse and eclectic modern world, then faith does become a poisonous dagger.

 

And that is why we, as religious liberals, must strive to appeal to the better angels of human nature, angels who intervene in time to prevent the sacrifice of human life in the name of a God, authentic ministering angels who pitch a tent, a tent where descendants of the same humanity can come together in hospitality, generosity, equanimity and magnanimity, a tent where hopes and dreams unite in a sincere and common agenda for peace, a tent where, instead of pointing out the evil in others, we search for the good, and we continue that search until we find it.

 

Hymn:           #159 This Is My Song.

 

Benediction: Words by Jim Wickman

May our faith sustain us,
our hope inspire us,
and our love surround us
as we go our separate ways,
knowing that we will gather again
in this beloved community. Amen.

 

Discussion followed.