This particular post is immediately inspired by a recent FaceBook discussion generated when I posted a video posting of Reverend Wiley Drake discussing why he is praying for the death of President Barack Obama. When I posted this video, I was under the assumption, if any subsequent conversation took place, it would be focused on the current social, racial, cultural climate in America. We must all admit, these are some interesting times. Economists are reporting that the day the "US Dollar" led the world is over. Countries around the world are having to realign and repostion themselves in the new world order. These global economists then make the logical argument that awareness to new social, political, and cultural relationships will be necessary as the economic situation evolves and changes. Simultaneously, America has its 1st Black President; and as a result, it has to navigate through new cultural, racial, and social issues domestically. Most Americans, and other global citizens, know the American track record on these issues isn't the best, hence, the "Pastors of Imprecatory Prayer."
I was made familiar with Pastor Steven Andersen's prayers for President Obama's death a few weeks ago, and now I am of learning of Rev. Wiley Drake and his prayers for the death of the President. I am in awe at the audacity of these preachers, "Men of God," using their pulpits to pray for the President's death. (Well, honestly, I'm not too surprised; but you get my point.) Throughout the interview I posted on my FaceBook page, Rev. Wiley Drake suggests that imprecatory prayers (prayers for a person's demise) are all throughout the scriptures. He never gives us a scripture, though. A pro-Bush placard, with the scripture 2 Chronicles 7:14, is shown in one of the visuals that are being shown as he is speaking. When I went to reference this scripture, it, like many others, COULD POSSIBLY be used to support his theory of imprecatory prayer; but is DEFINITELY NOT specific about the characteristics of the leader in question.
In short, Rev. Wiley Drake is doing nothing innovative or new. He is doing other religious leaders are doing. He is using his social position (and his personal perspective) to influence his congregation and other like-minded individuals. He should probably be commended for going a step further than most other churches, who have a tradition of being insular, and actually attempting to affect social change in the world. (I actually wish more churches in the African-American community would take bold, unpopular action when African-American interests are being threatened.) And though I disagree with Rev. Wiley's position, if given the chance to speak with him, I would offer him a suggestion to sharpen his message rhetorically; for the sake of clarity. My suggestion to the Rev. would be that "wicked" is too broad/vague a word to describe the President. He needs to choose a more simple/clear explanation for his opposition. ---something that would be easy for his constituents to rally around. ---something as "American as apple pie."
This post is written with no adherence to organization. It is more a collection of thoughts. It is random. But, it is here for you anyway.
The subsequent FaceBook conversation did not address these issues, but instead, took a decidely "energetic" conversation on the essence, purpose, utility, value of religion. Due to the nature of the discussion, and the participants who were involved, I have decided to write on the topic. Because Religion and Spirituality are issues just as central to ghettoLIFE as pre-marital sex, high school drop-out rates, hard-core drug use, spread of sexually transmitted diseases, high unemployment rates, teenage pregnancy, gun violence, and the like; but not typically addressed in the context of ghettoLIFE, is yet another reason I wanted to address this issue. In fact, religion and spirituality are MORE central to ghettoLIFE than the more widely discussed factors simply because a strong spiritual foundation has a huge impact on the ways in which a person understands themselves AND their environment. Do you see the implications??
Now, we all are aware of how heated conversations of this nature can be. [For the record, this particular conversation remained civil.] Nevertheless, as the discussion took shape, the typical questions began to surface in my own mental space.
Why is it the case that religious conversations engender so much emotion which can lead to anger, angst, dispute, mis-communication, non-communication, and in many cases, war?
Why is it that religion and spiritualty, which are constitutionally filled with Love, when discussed in the "public sphere" [outside of our own sanctuaries, mosques, synagogues, etc.] can spark so much Hate?
If there is ONE God, then why should it matter if I choose to communicate with Him through Jesus Christ and my neighbor chooses to communicate to Him through Muhammad?
During my time in Korea, I've learned more about Buddism, Confucianism, the I-Ching, and other Eastern philosphies; and as a result, can't make direct comparisions to Christianity or Islam. What does that say about the relationship between Christianity and Islam?
...and of course, the more we explore, the more questions we will have. So, I will offer my 3-tier position on the issue as follows:
(1.) I do not believe that Faith and Intellect must be Divorced. I don't it's reasonable, or appropriate, to expect people to refrain from thinking and asking questions when it comes to issues of Religion.
(2.) It is my belief that Religion and Spirtuality is best practiced with a strong concentration on the Individual/Intrapersonal understanding FIRST. In fact, spirtuality and belief systems are LARGELY individual. If we have a secure understanding of what God means to us PERSONALLY, then we are able to interact with others in ways consistent with our understanding of God. (I actually came to this understanding through my work at a Jesuit institution; St. Ignaciaus de Loyola.)
(3.) People will continue see God in different ways. History has shown us there has been little corporations between Religions. But, borrowing from our President, if we choose to focus on what we AGREED on versus what we DISAGREE on, then we may at least be able to move the conversation forward. On on the subject of Religion, that should be easy to do. LOVE is a central theme of many religions.
The PATHOS of the church is what I have appreciated most about the church over the years. In my reading of the Bible, I appreciate the narratives of the Kings....Solomon, David, and the story of Samson. I appreciate the story King of Kings; Jesus Christ. I appreciate these narratives and parables because they FIRST and FOREMOST have no lesson at the end which says something is RIGHT or WRONG. ---and it amazes me that this is exactly the FIRST thing a "church person" wants to tell you. HOW to act, believe, or think. The Bible is not written that way. These are stories of Men (and women). Just like you and me. Fallen, fallable people, who in living fallen fallable lives, looked to God for support. Sometimes they succeded...sometimes the failed. But, in the process of living, they looked to God for wisdom and guidance. Their successes and/or failures are written for us to gain wisdom and a sense of the world. When I read the Bible I read LOVE. I read a book of Bold action, unpopular stances, unorthodox behavior based on principle. Themes such as power, falling victim to lust and abuse, deceit, trechary, Love, fear, hypocrisy, redemption....they are all available to read. So I read. I will be open to reading the themes of other religious texts. I will use my spirit of discernment, and I will continue to live the best life I can.
This post is written with no adherence to organization. It is more a collection of thoughts. It is random. But, it is here for you anyway.
Here's what I haven't done after reading the Bible. I have never finished reading the Bible, and felt the need to go run and tell somebody what to do or how to live. It's never happened. I actually don't see how "church folk" have made that leap. When I read the Bible, it is always so humbling an experience.
The church, as an institution, is not above critique. Martin Luther King, Jr. critiqued. Malcolm X critiqued his. Jesus Christ critiqued the church. (The Pharisees, "church folk," were constantly challenging Christ.) All of this is written.
Ghandi was a Hindu. Malcolm X was a muslim. Am I to believe, despite the good these men did for their people and world, they are not in heaven, because they didn't except Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour? And in Ghandi's instance, his philosophy of non-violence helped an entire society of African-American Christians find strength to fight their battle for freedom; is Ghandi in Hell because he was a Hindu? Is Martin King a BAD Christian for using the philosophy of a Hindu to liberate his people? If so, is he banished to Hell for it?
Be Great and leave an impact. Those who actually Live Strong say the best Prayers.
WeBeGeekin'
www.ghettogeekin.blogspot.com
2 comments:
This is a good discussion. In my experience too, I have found that reading the Bible is very humbling, and so going out and telling somebody else how to live usually never happens. Unless you were Jesus and had to deal with the Pharisees, aka "church folk" who thought they were perfect. ghettoGOSPEL shine on.
this ghettogeek fellow is NOT a black person repeat "ghettogeek" IS NOT an AFRICAN PERSON, he is a caucasion devil he ask you to STOP BLAMING the caucasion however he has never addressed any forethough on why anyone would, this ghettogeek is a white supremacist pretending to be ,African he often frequents stormfront, and has it out for Africans maybe because his mother left with and African gentlemen, please ignore this hate blog and move on to a more insightful blog like mine.
Post a Comment