Thread: An anti-Trump Easter awakening: Christians must wake up and see the threat the Presid

An anti-Trump Easter awakening: Christians must wake up and see the threat the President poses to their values

BY
Jim Wallis
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Sunday, April 16, 2017, 5:00 AM

Three days ago, on the day we Christians call Good Friday, the church marked and commemorated the death of Jesus of Nazareth, killed by the Roman governor in collusion with the local religious authorities.

He was killed because he was perceived to be a threat to their power, a fact we too often seem to forget. The brutal execution method of crucifixion was regularly used for political criminals.

On this Easter Sunday, we celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ, which signifies the ultimate victory and vindication of the way of Jesus — justice, love and peace — over the ways of wealth, violence and power preferred by the rulers who had him killed.

But we easily forget that too in America in the young but pernicious political era of Donald Trump.

Instead, many Christians merely personalize the meaning and message of Jesus — coming to believe that to save us from our individual sins, and his resurrection assures our going to Heaven after him.

In the meantime, they believe, we can feel free to ignore or even collaborate with the wealth, power and violence of the state (and, yes, even the church). We can make our private religious well-being a substitute for what Jesus called the Kingdom of God that is intended to change the world and us with it.

This radical contrast between private religion and a world-changing new order that Jesus brought to the world is glaringly evident on this first Easter with Trump in the White House.

No shortage of stories this week focused on whether the administration was doing a good job organizing the annual Easter Egg Roll, which has become a hallowed American tradition.

Given the larger and massively important religious story to tell, that was a dangerous distraction. The deeply disturbing fact is that a majority of white Christians in America supported Trump for President. A majority of white Christians voted in favor of his professed support of their "issues" and "values" despite Trump's lifelong desecration of all the values Jesus stood for.

They voted for him despite his use of bigotry, his appeals to racism, and his blatant misogyny. And now, they continue to lend Trump vital support as he leads a government that contravenes so many Christian values.

Just before the events of Jesus' Holy Week entrance into the political and religious power center of Jerusalem, He preached a sermon that was absolutely core to his message. In the 25th chapter of Matthew, He says "as you have done to the least of these, you have done to me."

Jesus said "I was hungry…I was thirsty…I was naked…I was a stranger…I was sick…I was in prison…" That as we have done or not done to the poorest, most vulnerable, and marginal people among us, we have done to him — to Jesus himself — is one of the most radical teachings in the Bible.

The Matthew 25 text dramatically reverses the values and priorities of political and often religious power; it certainly would turn the policies and practices of Washington D.C. upside down.

How can Christian supporters of Trump claim to adhere to Jesus' clear call when the President's proposed budget would slash vital programs that make food, housing, heat, health and education available for the poorest and most vulnerable, all while his administration is poised to cut taxes for the richest Americans?

How can they support an administration that would slash critical humanitarian aid to the hungry in countries on the edge of starvation to help pay for massive increases in military spending? How can they justify cutting the health care of millions of people, or threatening to deport and destroy the families of millions of immigrants, or denying welcome to refugees being slaughtered in their home countries, or deepening the unjust and racialized mass incarceration of prisoners?

These are all people specifically named in Matthew 25. How can these Christians not see that these are Easter issues, and that their political savior is acting in direct contradiction to the values of their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ?

Through his entire life, Donald Trump has been a literal worshipper of money, sex and power — a worship directly contrary to the Christian values of simplicity and generosity, commitment and integrity, service and sacrifice. How can Christians reconcile their support for him with the Christian virtues of humility, mercy, grace and love, which are seemingly absent from the life of an arrogant and consummate marketer and dealmaker whose only consistency is relentlessly prioritizing his brand and ego above everything else?

They can't, and it's time to stop pretending otherwise.

I remember speaking at an evangelical Christian college during one Holy Week. I asked the students, "Why was Jesus killed?" A long pause followed, indicating that the question was one that had not been thought about much before. Finally, an answer came: "To save us from our sins."

True enough, as to the result of Jesus' death and resurrection. But I was asking about the historic and immediate cause of Jesus death. Why was Jesus killed?

It is indeed quite doubtful that the Roman governor Pontius Pilate, and the local religious leaders who offered him calculated encouragement, were conscious of their part in salvation history. What they were conscious of was that Jesus was a real and potential threat to their power and authority.

Jesus frequently had confrontations with these rulers of the people, treating them with disdain and scorn (Luke 13:31-33, and 20:9-19). He spared no words in his criticism of the rich and powerful (Luke 6:24-25, 16:14,15,19-31, 18:24-25, 20:46-47), and on one occasion he specifically condemned the kings of the Gentiles, who sought power and dominated their subjects while calling themselves "benefactors."

He contrasted his own approach to power with that of the secular rulers and called upon his disciples to imitate not them, but his own servant style of leadership (Luke 22:24-27, Mark 10:35-45). Jesus, in fact, told his disciples to expect persecution from political authorities on his account, and he instructed them in how to bear witness when they are "brought before kings and governors for my name's sake" (Luke 21:12-25).

Jesus' cleansing of the temple was a flagrant act of civil disobedience aimed at the religious, economic and political power center of the established order. The temple symbolized the power of the ruling authorities. Jesus acted directly against their authority by accusing them of corrupting the worship of the temple and by challenging their economic base: "My house shall be a house of prayer; but you have made it a den of robbers" (Luke 20:45-46).

Jesus' anger is clear in the scene's description. He took direct public action, and his behavior was bold and startling to all those around. His action was deeply political and a fundamental challenge to the economy of the temple.

The temple authorities recognized a frontal assault on the religious and political establishment and demanded that Jesus explain what his authority was for doing such a thing. Jesus, using the image of the temple itself, pointed to his own resurrection as his authority.

That temple action sparked a chain of events which led to his crucifixion.

At his trials before the Sanhedrin, Herod and Pilate, Jesus showed little respect and no deference toward the instituted authority. Rather, he risked antagonizing them in his answers to their questions and with his lack of cooperation.

But Jesus not only confronted the reigning authorities directly, he initiated a whole new way of living which undermined the entire system upon which their rule was based. This new order, which relied on the power of love, and hewed suffering and servanthood rather than violence and domination, represented a profound threat to leaders of the establishment. It was such a threat, in fact, that they marked him for death.

Easter is a season of hope. It is my hope that this Holy Week and Easter day become a wake-up call to Christians who support Trump in spite of the clear teachings of their Christian faith.

For example, might those Christians who supported Trump out of a political Supreme Court strategy to protect the unborn — and who have just notched what they consider a victory in the confirmation of Neil Gorsuch to fill Antonin Scalia's open seat — start to call for some consistency from their President in protecting all of the vulnerable during all of their lives?

Jesus' clash with the ruling religious and political authorities of his day surely has a message for us this Easter season. Yet the idea that the gospel lives in conflict with the ruling axioms and authorities of the American nation still sends tremors through a church that has fought so hard to achieve majority status.

We still want to make the gospel compatible with our cultural desires and loyalties. But we can't.

Most of us have yet to fully realize the enormous distance between the culture to which we are so tied and the gospel we espouse. We have greatly underestimated the disruption and struggle that genuine conversion will occasion in our lives.

The message is the same in each case. Suffering is the natural consequence of living the gospel; joy and strength are the fruits of suffering for the sake of Christ.

Perhaps the most grievous thing about the white American church today is the absence of suffering and struggle. It is, in fact, our fear of suffering that has extinguished the possibility of real joy.

It is a great mystery, this relationship between suffering and joy, weakness and strength. But to those who have known it, it has been the deepest of all human experiences.

Such is the rhythm of Lent, Holy Week, and Easter. We are invited to follow Jesus as he heads toward Jerusalem where power resides, to enter into his sufferings and to feel the power of his resurrection.

It has never made sense. But the truth of it has been confirmed in the experience of Christians who, since the beginning, have been willing to take the risk. A faith refined by fire is the testimony of all Christians who now suffer for the sake of the gospel. And that is what has always changed the world, often sparking the greatest social movements, instead of merely accommodating to it.

Entering the sufferings of Christ in our own situation offers the American church its only real future. The time is rapidly approaching when we will no longer be able to avoid this reality. To avoid the path of suffering is to remain ignorant of Jesus; to embrace it is to learn intimacy with Christ.

Our hunger for security and success has taken away our appetite for the gospel. May we seek the grace to enter into an authentic and biblical faith, to stand with the poor and vulnerable, and to become faithful again.

Wallis is president and founder of Sojourners and author of "America's Original Sin: Racism, White Privilege and the Bridge to a New America."

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/a...icle-1.3056807

How can Christian supporters of Trump claim to adhere to Jesus' clear call when the President's proposed budget would slash vital programs that make food, housing, heat, health and education available for the poorest and most vulnerable, all while his administration is poised to cut taxes for the richest Americans?

How can they support an administration that would slash critical humanitarian aid to the hungry in countries on the edge of starvation to help pay for massive increases in military spending? How can they justify cutting the health care of millions of people, or threatening to deport and destroy the families of millions of immigrants, or denying welcome to refugees being slaughtered in their home countries, or deepening the unjust and racialized mass incarceration of prisoners?

Jim Wallis (James E. Wallis Jr.;[1] born June 4, 1948) is a Christian writer and political activist. He is best known as the founder and editor of Sojourners magazine and as the founder of the Washington, D.C.-based Christian community of the same name. Wallis is well known for his advocacy on issues of peace and social justice. Although Wallis actively eschews political labels, he describes himself as an evangelical and is often associated with the evangelical left and the wider Christian left. He worked as a spiritual advisor to President Barack Obama.[2] He is also a leader in the Red-Letter Christian movement.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Wallis

No wonder Trump goes to Florida so much. Who knew DC was as awful as it's proving itself to be. One man can't drain this swamp. The sickness in our Capital is way beyond what one man can do by himself. He'll try and do the best he can, and we'll be better for it, but this mess goes much deeper than politics and policies, it's rotten to the core and requires divine intervention.

"How can Christian supporters of Trump claim to adhere to Jesus' clear call when the President's proposed budget would slash vital programs that make food, housing, heat, health and education available for the poorest and most vulnerable"

-------------------

This is a tired old story. Time for the Church to change gears and FOCUS on personal responsibility, education, respect, manners and WAIT to have a family YOU can afford. Stop advocating uncontrolled breeding, living in poverty off the backs of others. There are too many and we do not want to pay for it.

As far as the "rich" people...who do they think puts their money on the line to open business and employ people, not the "poor" with 8 kids and 8 different baby daddies. Get your head out of the sand.

Time for the Church to loose its Tax Exempt status and PAY taxes like the rest of us to support their archaic beliefs.

Help those who help their selves.

Christian ethics do not support illegal immigration

[COLOR=#555555 !important]By: Guest Opinion August 27, 2010 , 7:02 am[/COLOR]

Recently a number of leading evangelicals announced plans to lobby Republican senators in Washington for “comprehensive immigration reform.”

I agree with them on many biblical essentials, including fervent opposition to racism and racial profiling and the importance of recognizing the dignity of every person.

I also believe it is critical that American Latinos understand that opposition to illegal immigration should have nothing to do with race, and that we welcome them with open arms to the conservative movement, with our shared cultural values and commitment to rewarding entrepreneurialism and hard work.

But the policy proposals set forth by these evangelical leaders are the same unworkable ideas already rejected by Congress and the American people.

More significantly — from my perspective as an evangelical — they are largely in conflict with biblical notions of Christian ethics, justice and God’s purposes for government.

Rather than an even-handed attempt to evaluate how Christian values apply to this weighty issue, some evangelical leaders have provided a mostly one-sided, conclusory citation to a few biblical principles about justice and compassion.

But nations are given specific instruction about their duties. Somehow, when discussing our national response to this crisis, evangelical leaders manage to completely ignore principles such as these from Romans 13:1-4:

“Everyone is to obey the governing authorities. For there is no authority that is not from God, and the existing authorities have been placed where they are by God. Therefore, whoever resists the authorities is resisting what God has instituted … For rulers are no terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you like to be unafraid of the person in authority? Then simply do what is good, and you will win his approval … But if you do what is wrong, be afraid! Because it is not for nothing that he holds the power of the sword; for he is God’s servant, there as an avenger to punish wrongdoers.”

These general principles are not absolute, but scripture provides only two circumstances when defying the law is permissible: when the law requires you to do something God forbids — such as participate in a murder — or when the law forbids you from doing something God commands. Thus, the Hebrew midwives refused to murder innocent babies at the command of their king (Exodus 1:15-17), while in the New Testament Peter and the apostles, when arrested for preaching the gospel, responded by saying they must “obey God and not man” and continued to preach (Acts 5:29).

There are many heart-rending, tragic stories of illegal immigrants that tug at the heartstrings of all Christians and people of faith. And there are undoubtedly flaws in our immigration laws.
But there is simply no serious argument that our immigration laws force Americans or those from other countries to violate the law of God, and as a result, there is no biblical argument for defending or justifying such mass lawbreaking.

Scripturally, we know that the primary purpose of government is to maintain the peace, security and order of a community or nation, and to promote justice.

The whole concept of lawful versus unlawful entry into our nation — also the foundation of Arizona’s new SB1070 — is based on principles of property rights that flow from the Ten Commandments. Those who violate our immigration laws by jumping the fence are stealing rights of citizenship and, in essence, coveting and stealing their neighbors’ property.

These same evangelical leaders say we must “think about immigration from the perspective of justice.” Well, that’s fine. Let’s start by considering the enormous injustice of telling those who have followed the legal immigration process that they must wait in line, year after year, while those who have cheated and broken the law to get in are allowed to stay. Where is the justice for these hard-working, family-oriented but law-abiding aliens who also desire to emigrate? Or do we only have “compassion and mercy” for those who break the law?

To summarize, there are serious and principled reasons, consistent with scripture, which justify evangelical support for enforcing tough laws against illegal immigration. The accusation by some evangelical leaders that opponents of illegal immigration somehow lack compassion or a commitment to justice is simply untrue.

Members of the faith community should despise racism and oppose racial profiling, have compassion and concern for the alien among us, love and appreciate Latinos and the richness of Latino culture — yet still believe in the rule of law and the need for a strong governmental response to illegal immigration.

— Attorney Len Munsil was the Republican nominee for governor of Arizona in 2006, and has been an adjunct professor of Christian ethics at Southwestern College.

http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2010/...l-immigration/

I don't see how these people can go on and on. Christianity is under attack constantly, while it is trying to rescue people. People spend enough on a weekend of entertainment to fund enough to build a house for someone in a poor country. I had some respect for Jim Wallis at one point since he has been very active with inner city programs. And our inner cities are still rife with poverty, and this organization of his can be credited with accomplishing a lot. But I don't see what the purpose of this editorial is.

The purpose of his editorial was to spread hate against an innocent person for political purposes, the same reason Jesus was crucified.

A lot to think about.

First, I do believe in helping those in need, in feeding the hungry, giving care to the sick - who can't afford it.

I think, though, there must be some investigation into why these people are in the situation they are in.

Is it because they don't want to do better - are unwilling to do better?

Is it some catastrophic, unforeseen event?

Is it because they really don't know how to do better?

Is it because they really aren't in that much need - that the 'need' is created by the yardstick our government uses to decide who is needy?

If they won't do better - then let's get them motivated.

If a man or woman produces a child, I think society should make them, if possible, be responsible for those children. Even if the children are removed from them because they are unsafe, it doesn't relieve the parents of the financial responsibility of caring for them.

If they don't know how - let's teach them. On a site I post sometimes, we were talking about saving money through our cooking. One woman said when she was younger with a couple of small children, an older lady friend gave her some dry beans, flour, cornmeal and potatoes. She said I had to admit to her, I had no idea how to use those things.

Again, has the government created an large segment they consider 'poor'? When my Mother went to work for one of the poverty programs around 1960 - she said she was aghast when she realized they were poor. Now we lived poorly all my life. My Stepfather was a Scotsman and pinched the nickle until the buffalo bellowed, but they owned a 400 acre farm, cattle, equipment, vehicles, money in the bank, paid cash. By government guidelines, they were poverty stricken.

That's probably not the case today, but maybe we need to reconsider the 'yardstick'.

I don't have any envy for a wealthy person - if they got their wealth honestly. While I don't envy, I certainly resent and feel is wrong, when their wealth is a result of lobbying in Washington for the goodies that make them wealthy.

Don't think though, that the wealthy corporations are whining over all the benefits the 'poor' get. Most of that ends up in the pockets and bottom line of the wealthy.

What would happen to big agribusiness if food stamps or whatever program for food was closed out? You would see all the big agribusiness people run to Washington and begin passing out checks. Food stamps, school lunch programs, etc., are a subsidy for agribusiness.

What about Wal Mart, grocery stores, rental owners, and home builders?

How about healthcare corporations?

When you think of the poor getting things, you need to think who actually benefits from it. The illegals are making hay with it - because they can continue to work and make as much money as they like and still receive benefits. An American family can't.

The real crime with the 'benefits' is the waste of human potential when you give a person enough to exist on and maybe have a few beers, etc.., but tell him/her they can't better themselves.

Why would a man who has healthcare for his children, food, shelter, free lunches, free school supplies, help with utilities, and some extra cash look for a job? He might find a job, he looses all those benefits. Certainly, he should do it - but in today's market - a job today isn't a guarantee of one next month. The company can hire an illegal to replace you, hire an immigrant to replace you, or any of the other 'programs' our government has in place to employ 'minorities'. The company could move overseas.

There are many facets to our welfare system that need to be considered - it isn't just that we taxpayers are having to foot the bill.

Rush Limbaugh used to say often, 'A poor man never gave me a job'. Well, a poor man gives jobs when he spends his money with the rich man. So who gives the job?

It takes both the employer and the employee. One is not more important than the other. The employer is an employer because of the work his employees performed. The employee is an employee because of the investments and business goals of the employer. The two may have differences through the simple goals of higher wages the employee wants and needs and the higher profit the employer wants and needs. But this is a math problem, not a social issue. Make them money, protect your jobs, wages can then rise because of their value through the demand for the great products and services you produced or provided. It's really pretty simple when you get down to it.

It takes two to tango. Always has.

Well, in a perfect world, it wouldn't be a social program, but we don't live in one.

It is an economic problem, but it becomes social when one has more power than the other - or one has power over the other - or both don't live by the same laws and rules.

Right now, I'm not sure the worker has any power.

If you can't work for the wages the employer is paying, that employer will just get congress to allow illegals to come and stay, bring in more immigrants, or HB tech workers to replace you.

That's when it becomes a social and I think, legal problem.

But what to do -