The War On Poverty Has A New Enemy... The Poor

According to Wikipedia: "The War on Poverty is the name for legislation first introduced by United Sates President Lyndon B. Johnson during his State of the Union address on January 8, 1964. This legislation was proposed by Johnson in response to a national poverty rate of around nineteen percent (in 2009 it was 14.3% with another 4.6% at risk - US Census data). The speech led the US Congress to pass the Economic Opportunity Act, which established the Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) to administer the local application of federal funds targeted against poverty." The idea was to provide community service, support and opportunity, so that poor people could climb out of poverty and discover one of the Four Freedoms along the way: "Freedom from Want (for you Franklin D. Roosevelt and Norman Rockwell fans). Unfortunately, Freedom from Want and Freedom from Fear have both seemed to have left the building, or at least the halls of good governance these days.

Case in point... Did anyone catch House Tea Party Caucus Leader: Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) on ABC's Good Morning America on November 16th. Please check it out: http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/11/michele-bachmann-supports-tax-cut-compromise-but-not-if-tied-to-unemployment-benefits-.html. Not only were her facts incorrect and twisted to elicit fear, but she seemed to totally mis the point of George Stephanopoulos' question; "Why is it OK for the wealthiest Americans, earning over $250,000 a year to have their tax cuts extended... but for people who are out of a job, needing unemployment benefits, not to have their benefits extended?" For Rep. Bachmann extending unemployment benefits will increase our massive spending problem, but extending tax cuts will help everyone by creating jobs... anyone else confused by her logic and sense of service to her fellow citizens?

Maybe you need to read two other articles: 1) "More than 40 of the nation's millionaires have joined Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength to ask President Obama to discontinue the tax breaks established for them during the Bush administration" http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20101119/ts_yblog_theticket/millionaires-to-obama-tax-us.

2) "Despite a stubbornly sour national economy congressional members' personal wealth collectively increased by more than 16 percent between 2008 and 2009, according to a new study by the Center for Responsive Politics of federal financial disclosures released earlier this year." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/17/congress-richer-recession-millionaires_n_785222.html

Wow... that's right... Congress has done alright in the wealth department during these economic hard times and 40 of the wealthiest Americans don't want the tax cuts. I wonder how many Senators and Representatives are members of the Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength?

Somewhere along the line, and maybe it's the fear factor that seems to be pervading every aspect of our political, social and economic lives these days... you know, that has caused our generally kind, generous and compassionate culture to become so self-serving and protectionist... but somewhere somebody got it all wrong. Maybe it's people like Rep. Bachmann who make a congressional salary of $174,000; receives approximately $25,000 annually in farm subsidies for the family farm; who's husband, Marcus runs a Christian counseling service (Bachmann and Associates, Inc) that receives approximately $10,000 annually in state funds; and, we don't know what Marcus' annual salary is... maybe these are the wealthiest Americans who are so worried and confused. Confused, because they have somehow turned the War on Poverty into the War on the Poor; making them out to be shiftless, users that want nothing more than a handout from hard working Americans.

A wise friend, The Rev. Bill James, once said to a group of seminary students that I was a part of; "No one wants to be poor. Most of the time the poor lack the skills, support systems and opportunity to get out of the cycle of poverty." I wish we would focus on teaching job and money management skills; being part of a support system; and, work to ensure opportunities to work at a living wage... as much or more than we seem to focus on those who are abusing the system (on either end by fraud or corruption). If we did, we might actually be able to take on poverty, rather than further victimizing the poor.

Want to rethink fighting poverty? Check out some of the work www.MoveTheMountain.org is doing. Also, remember your faith more than your fear... "'When did we ever see you hungry and feed you, thirsty and give you a drink? And when did we ever see you sick or in prison and come to you?' Then God will say, 'I'm telling the solemn truth: Whenever you did one of these things to someone overlooked or ignored, that was me—you did it to me.'" (found within Matthew 25:31-46)

1032: Bad Decision Then, Worse Now!

On November 2nd the United Methodist News Service hit us with the discouraging news that the United Methodist Judicial Council ruled (during its Oct. 27-30, 2010 meeting) that “a United Methodist pastor has the right to determine local church membership, even if the decision is based on whether the potential member is gay or lesbian” and “Annual (regional) conferences cannot limit that right or ask the church’s top court to set policy (full story at: http://www.umc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content3.aspx?c=lwL4KnN1LtH&b=525969&ct=8854503 UMNews service By Linda Bloom).” This, of course, is all relating back to Judicial Council Decision No. 1032, from Oct. 29, 2005, related to the case of the Rev. Ed Johnson, who had been the senior pastor at South Hill (Va.) United Methodist Church until he was placed on an involuntary leave of absence by the Virginia Annual Conference. You can read all about the case and the actual decision and rationale at: http://archives.umc.org/interior_judicial.asp?mid=263&JDID=1098&JDMOD=VWD&SN=1001&EN=1032.

Here are the problems as I see them:

1) The Judicial Council tries to wash its hands of any responsibility by stating that they “do not set policy” when it comes to UMC law. That statement is misleading. Decision 1032 does in fact set policy. A) It set the policy that a pastor has the right to decline membership based on prejudicial beliefs that are already outlined in the Discipline as against UM Church beliefs. B) It set policy in that it denied the right of an Annual Conference the due process of holding an individual clergy member accountable for their behavior in terms of prejudicial actions regarding church membership. C) It set policy in determining that an individual pastor has more authority, when it comes to church membership, than the ecclesiastical body which they joined and agreed would have the job of overseeing their actions (the Clergy Session of their Annual Conference).

2) Decision 1032 moves us even further towards “creeping congregationalism” and undermines our “connectionalism.” By giving an individual pastor (the senior pastor –remember the initial complaint came from Rev. Johnson’s associate pastor) the right to act as gate-keeper in terms of membership; and holding that right above all others (ie. accountability to the Annual Conference and clergy colleagues); the UMC becomes that much less connectional and accountable to one another.

3) The 2008 General Conference amended Paragraph 225 of the Discipline, replacing the word “may” with “shall.” The revised sentence reads: “A member in good standing in any Christian denomination who has been baptized and who desires to unite with The United Methodist Church shall be received as either a baptized or professing member.” By not revisiting Decision 1032 or at least amending it, the Judicial Council is allowing a ruling to stand which the General conference has tried to correct. This sets both precedent and policy for future cases and is the main reason why I believe the Judicial Council has made a bad decision worse at this point.

4) Most important of all… the United Methodist church continues to try to live a façade of inclusiveness (Article 4 of our constitution) while embracing structural policies of discrimination and alienation. The real cost of Decision 1032 lies in the human cost – the grace-filled, loving Christian people who continue to walk away from the UMC because of our hypocrisy and un-Christ-like actions. Yes, others will walk away if we become truly inclusive, but I would rather live by a set of standards that reflect Jesus’ love and ministry, than by hurtful policies of exclusion that may make some who ae already in the pews feel more comfortable in their prejudice! May dad always use to tell me to “beware the comfortable pew.” Speaking of which, whenever I did something wrong and/or self-serving and would make excuses or talk about how I was going to change or improve; my father would simply look me in the eyes and say, “don’t tell, show me.” Well judicial Council & UMC – it is past time to walk the walk! To read more about our hypocritical approach to Human Sexuality as it relates to Homosexuality, read what we have online about “What is the denominations position on homosexuality? (http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=1&mid=1324).”

I can’t understand why the Judicial Council won’t revisit such a destructive, un-Christian and non-United Methodist (or so we say in so many other ways) decision, like 1032. It leaves me wondering if motivations might lie in the run-up to General Conference 2012 and the re-election bids of several of the Judicial Council members. Maybe it’s true that we tend to mirror culture and society much more than we lead and shape it. What a shame and what a loss for our God – the one who calls us to live, love and serve as Jesus did!

Respectfully & Sadly Written by

Rev. Steve Clunn

Six days ago a Youtube video was posted of Ellen Degeneres expressing her feelings of devastation over the recent suicide of Tyler Clemente (as a result of bullying) and other gay youth. While the statistics on lgbt youth and young adult suicide and the bullying that they often face has been talked about for years, it seems that Ellen's video has touched off a firestorm of celebrities doing Public Announcements and calling on lgbt youth to reach out for help and hold on to hope... "Things will get better. You should be alive to see it."

I too am heart broken by the recent rash of suicides among lgbt youth and young adults. Yet I have also been aware of the bullying that goes on in schools all over our country. Unfortunately, the church is often the last place that youth and young adults will turn for help. Our record and reputation for being "gay friendly" is horrible and has more often added to the problems for lgbt young people...

October 5's episode of Glee commented on the church's reputation for homophobia, a timely message given this month's tragic string of gay-bullying-related suicides. Despite the humorous title, in "Grilled Cheesus," viewers got a serious glimpse into young people's spirituality in the face of tragedy. Members of the unpopular high school Glee Club are drawn together when the father of one student lands in a coma. The student, Kurt, also happens to be gay and finds it difficult to handle the prayers of his well-meaning friends. Even before tragedy strikes, Kurt's objections to Christianity are made clear: "The reason I don't go to church is because churches don't think too much of gay people."

Well there you have it. Within the first five minutes of a show watched by 11 million people, the church is unmistakeably labeled as homophobic. To say that this has nothing to do with the young men recently tormented to the point of suicide would be dangerously naive. (From MFSA's October 6th E-News)

I don't want to rehash what others have already been saying and doing, but I do want to suggest some things that inclusive (that means welcoming and affirming of lgbt as whole people of God) churches can all do to make a difference...

1) Take up the cause for anti-bullying legislation... hurray, New York just passed it! "The Dignity for All Students Act" was signed into law on September 8, 2010. Bullying will soon be illegal and a chargeable offense. Unfortunately, it doesn't go into effect until July 1, 2012. So what do we do to help in the meantime?

2) Help others to learn about the effects of bullying and to develop methods of confronting bullying. There are many good resources out there: GLSEN has a number of ideas for lgbt youth and educators; Teaching Tolerance has a wonderful video - Bullied: A Student, a School, and a Case That Made History that they offer for free.

3) Don't let the silence come back! Keep speaking out and making your voice heard! Our kids need it and so does our society. As time passes, people's attentions will move on to the next news item. The church needs to continue to be an advocate for those who often aren't given a voice, or worse yet, are bullied out of feeling that they can speak out. Host events all year long that bring youth and young adults together to share their hopes, struggles, joys and concerns... imagine what it could do for the Church and it's not so healthy reputation.

Upcoming UNY MFSA Dinner

Join Us!
First Dinner Meeting of our new chapter!
Special Guest Speaker, Mark Miller
(www.markamillermusic.com)

Friday, September 10th
@ Trinity UMC in Albany
(Trinity is located at the corner of Lark & Lancaster Streets)

The evening will include:
*Elections of Steering Committee
*Special Guest Speaker, Mark Miller
*Presentation of the 1st annual Micah 6:8 Award

For planning purposes, it is important that you RSVP to UNYMFSA@yahoo.com

O.K. The World Has Officially Gone Crazy!

During the course of this past week three issues came to my attention that have me wondering just how ridiculous people will ultimately become in terms of their prejudices, bias and downright contempt for other people...

1) And you thought we had come a long way on the issue of race over the past 50 years. Consider the case of a Louisiana Justice of the Peace, Keith Bardwell, who refuses to marry an interracial couples. Here's the Associated Press release on the story:

AP) NEW ORLEANS A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have. Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long.

"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way," Bardwell told the Associated Press on Thursday. "I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."

Bardwell said he asks everyone who calls about marriage if they are a mixed race couple. If they are, he does not marry them, he said.

Bardwell said he has discussed the topic with blacks and whites, along with witnessing some interracial marriages. He came to the conclusion that most of black society does not readily accept offspring of such relationships, and neither does white society, he said.

"There is a problem with both groups accepting a child from such a marriage," Bardwell said. "I think those children suffer and I won't help put them through it."

If he did an interracial marriage for one couple, he must do the same for all, he said. "I try to treat everyone equally," he said.

Bardwell estimates that he has refused to marry about four couples during his career, all in the past 2 1/2 years.


2) How literally do the so-called Bible Believing folk really take the Bible? Or are we now seeing that many of them aren't simply satisfied any longer with being selective literalists, but have decided that being revisionist is o.k. after all? That is as long as the revision verifies their beliefs. Here's the story:

I read in "The Tennessean" newspaper, "Andy Schlafly, founder of Conservapedia.com, wants to save the Scriptures from liberals with his latest venture, the Conservative Bible Project. He says translations like the New International Version have added socialist ideals to the Good Book. But his rewrite of the Bible has drawn criticism from biblical scholars, liberals and conservatives.

Schlafly, the son of national political activist Phyllis Schlafly, says a conservative Bible should be masculine, for example, using the words mankind and man rather than more inclusive language. It also should shun terms like laborer or comrade. It also should put a free market spin on the sayings of Jesus."

3) Finally, 30 US Senators voted against Al Franken's proposal to get rid of an old clause in government contracts, that makes it impossible for someone to sue if they are raped on the job. Say What??? John Stewart picked up on this one on the Daily Show and you can watch his satirical attack here:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-14-2009/rape-nuts
It would be funny if it weren't so sad and offensive.


My friends... pray for our land and its people!