Why Do They Hate Us?

By Monte Sahlin – Memories of what happened ten years ago bring me back to the haunting question of the time. It still remains largely a mystery. Why do some people have such hate for those who believe differently that they think God has authorized them to kill?

This is not a Muslim problem, despite the slander believed by some. Christian fundamentalists bombed the Federal courthouse in Oklahoma City before Muslim fundamentalists flew planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. In fact, it seems most religions have a very small percentage of people who are insanely, violently zealous. There are Christians willing to kill people they disagree with over abortion despite the fact that Jesus clearly taught us to “turn the other cheek” and not resist evil with evil.

Ultimately this kind of hate does not come from God. It is not about piety or devotion in any religion. It is rooted in evil. It is a marker of all the God is against. There is a word for this in all religions; sin. Anyone who thinks they can rid the world of sin by resorting to violence or injustice is overcome by the very thing they are supposedly fighting against. It is like the old folk tale of the tar baby. The more you hit it, the more you are stuck in it.

The only thing that is victorious over sin is divine love. God chooses to struggle against sin by extending mercy, forgiveness and grace because He is wise enough to know there is no other way to actually overcome sin. Hate and terrorism ends when I decide to quit hating those with whom I disagree on the most profound topics, the most cherished truths.

Why do they hate us? Because we hate them. The only thing that disconnects this vicious cycle is when we choose to join God’s side and love the hater. That takes far more courage, a far more fearless moral stand than anything else. The Son of God gave His life to demonstrate this reality.

Monte Sahlin originally posted this on his “Faith in Context” blog at http://www.montesahlin.com/  He is the author of 20 books, 56 research monographs and hundreds of magazine articles. His most recent book is entitled “Mission in Metropolis.” 

 

The End of the Community Action Program?

By Monte Sahlin -

One of the items on the hit list of the new majority in the House of Representatives to “balance the budget” is the Community Action Program (CAP) or what is currently labeled Community Service Block Grants. This is a program begun in the 1960s in the Lyndon Johnson administration. It is a nearly unique program in that it empowers local, grass-roots organizations made up of partnerships of citizens and local elected officials. It is perplexing that the same party that wants to encourage solutions outside of government bureaucracy also wants to do away with one of the few examples of this kind of strategy actually being implemented.

I have personal knowledge of CAP because I worked in it for 18 months in 1971-72 while in graduate school. It was launched with the idea that it would help local citizen groups reduce or end poverty in their communities and it never really provided much that is in the self-interest of politicians or political parties. Over the years it has been weakened by every administration and both parties. Yet there are hundreds of local Community Action Agencies (CAA) that continue to work as best they can.

There are those that argue that CAP is a government program, despite the fact that each of the CAA are locally controlled and almost all of them are incorporated as nonprofits with 501c3 tax-exempt charity status. The law originally required that the majority of the board members be people living below the poverty line and some CAA still follow that guideline. The Federal funding is simply a catalyst, not the major source of the budgets for most CAA.

The savings to the Federal budget from cutting these funds is miniscule. It cannot make any difference in the deficit or repaying the debt. This is actually a good example of how budget cuts are often just a cover story for getting rid of things for other reasons. In fact, both parties have already agreed to not cut the items that are necessary if anything significant is going to be done about budget deficits or the national debt.

There are three kinds of opponents to the Community Action Program:

(1) Those who do not believe in doing anything about poverty. These are often people who believe that the economy will take care of itself and if no one helps the poor they will get jobs and take care of themselves. In my opinion, this view can only be sustained out of ignorance, even if it is willful ignorance. Any significant experience with entrenched poverty reveals that intervention is necessary to overcome it.

(2) Those who think private nonprofit organizations can fight poverty more cheaply than government. This category includes people who really do not care about the poor, but feel that civilization demands that something be done about poverty and want the cheapest possible solution. They choose to ignore the fact that the cheapest solution is not always the best solution.

(3) Those who think private nonprofit organizations can fight poverty more effectively than government. It is tragic that there are people who want to defund CAP on the basis of this logic. This is the very purpose for CAP. The inventors of CAP believed this precisely and designed the CAA on this basis. The Federal funding is simply a catalyst and the CAA are weak enough (especially at this moment in our economic history) that without the catalyst the whole structure could collapse in many communities where it is most needed.

In 1927 the great Mississippi flood demonstrated to Americans that the country had become too large and complex to continue a policy of non-involvement by the Federal government in issues related to disaster response, unemployment and poverty. It is unfortunate that most Americans have such a limited knowledge of history that we seem fated to relearn important lessons every 80 years or so.

—————

Monte Sahlin is chairman of the board for the Center for Creative Ministry, a research organization and resource center helping pastors, congregations and other organizations understand new generations and how to engage with them. He is also chairman of the board for the Center for Metropolitan Ministry, a “think tank” and training organization based on the campus of Washington Adventist University in Washington, DC, as well as an adjunct faculty member at the Campolo Graduate School at Eastern University in Philadelphia and in the DMin program at Andrews University. In addition, he serves on the steering committee of the Cooperative Congregational Studies Partnership, a coalition of researchers from more than 40 denominations and faiths who produce the Faith Community Today (FACT) research.

Sahlin is an ordained pastor in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, currently serving in the Ohio Conference of the denomination.  He is the author of 20 books, 56 research monographs and hundreds of magazine articles. His most recent book is entitled “Mission in Metropolis.” Others currently available are “Ministries of Compassion,” “One Minute Witness,” “Understanding Your Community,” “Trends, Attitudes and Opinions” and “Adventist Congregations Today.” In 2005, he coauthored with Harold Lee, “Brad: Visionary, Spiritual Leadership,” a history and evaluation of the career of Charles Bradford, the first African American to serve as president of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in North America.

This article was originally posted on his blog at MonteSahlin.com.

RLTV PODCAST: Monte Sahlin on How to Help Haiti

Monte Sahlin is the director of Research and Development of the Ohio Conference of Seventh-day Adventists and is an expert international humanitarian aid.  In this podcast he discusses the Haiti Earthquake and the response of a church group from Idaho that tried to help but got in trouble. He discussed Haiti  and other current issues on his blog at http://www.MonteSahlin.com.

[display_podcast]

BUMPER MUSIC: “Haitian Vacation” – from The Alan Craig Project. Podsafe music from MusicAlley.com.

OPINION: When Did “Conservative” Become Anarchist?

By Monte Sahlin –

What planet am I living on? I have grown up with the idea that conservatives were those who value tradition and defend the status quo ante; who support the institutions of our society. But now it seems that “conservatives” believe that it is wrong for the president of the United States to talk to the nation’s school children despite the fact that Ronald Reagan did so; that it is OK to carry an automatic weapon to a public meeting with elected officials; that un-fact-checked statementscirculated by unknown bloggers and radio entertainers are to be believed over independent newspapers with long histories of factual reporting.

Part of the problem is simply ignorance combined with complex issues and the do-it-yourself value that leads people to think they can determine the facts for themselves without any expert help. For example, a reporter told me this morning of an Email from a woman who told him to look at a specific page in one of the health reform bills in Congress. She told him that there was proof on that page that if the bill were voted, it would mean that every citizen must have a card with an account number or they could not get any health care. When the reporter read the page and the section that it was in, he discovered that it was a list of information that health insurance plans would be required to place on their ID cards so that hospitals and doctor’s offices would not have to phone or Fax and get the basic information they need in order to treat a patient, thus saving time and money.

The distrust of government has become so pervasive and so extreme that I cannot help but think what would happen if America faced another 9/11 type emergency. Would people and their children die because they refuse to believe official announcements to take cover or boil water, etc.? Part of this is political manipulation by unethical people who are willing to use widely-believed lies to their advantage, but underlying that is a sector of our society so fearful of “socialism” or “liberals” (or perhaps people of color) that they are (probably unwittingly) sliding into anarchist positions. It is the combined effect of the assasinations of the 1960s, Watergate, terrorism and the popular culture of grand conspiracies such as The DaVinci Code, the Left Behind series and the 

This breakdown of trust could be a significant danger signal for America. Increasingly the polarized elements of our democracy define the world so differently that they really do live on different planets. This has some potential, over time, of drifting into the kind of situation that existed in America in the years of “bleeding Kansas” and “the wild West.” It is my prayer that those who value our Bill of Rights will see that they have a patriotic duty to give greater emphasis to shared values than political differences.

 

Reposted with the permission of the author.  Originally posted by Monte Sahlin on his blog, Faith in Context, a commentary on religion, values, and contemporary issues.

Faith in Context: President Obama & Faith-based Initiatives

By Monte Sahlin – As he said he would during the campaign last year, President Obama has retained the “faith-based initiatives” emphasis at the White House, but restructured the organization that he inherited from President Bush. The new unit consists of two parts, where Bush’s White House had only one: An Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships and a President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. The council is make its final recommendations in February next year (2010), so it appears that further changes may yet surface. At the same time it is clear that Obama is committed to some kind of working relationship with the nonprofit sector, including the large part of it that is related to religious constituencies.

The key staff person in the White House for this activity is Joshua DuBois, a 27-year-old Evangelical activist who served as Obama’s liaison with the religious community during the campaign last year. DuBois was a student at Boston University and associate pastor at the Calvary Praise and Worship Center in Cambridge. This is a neighborhood that I am personally familiar with because in the 1970s, I planted a congregation there and worked in Boston as a community organizer. The congregation is small, not affiliated with any denomination, but Pentecostal in orientation, made up largely of African Americans and for a while, at least, shared space with two other Protestant congregations in Faith Lutheran Church. Pastor DuBois got the church involved with the Ten-Point Coalition, an effort by African American churches in the Boston area to prevent teen violence and gangs run by the National Ten-point Foundation, also located in Boston. DuBois maintains a mentoring relationship with a teen in Boston even as he takes on the very busy schedule of a White House staffer. He chairs the advisory council as part of his job. The other members include:

  • Diane Baillargeon, CEO of Seedco, a New York nonprofit involved in economic development projects. She is a self-described secular member of the council.
  • Anju Bhargava, president of Asian Indian Women in America, an immigrant women’s advocacy and help group. She is also a Hindu priest.
  • Charles E. Blake, presiding bishop of the Church of God in Christ (COGIC), one of the largest historically African American denominations in America.
  • Noel Castellanos, CEO of the Christian Community Development Association (CCDA) and a well-known Evangelical leader.
  • Arturo Chavez, president of the Mexican American Catholic College and a former prison chaplain who has worked as a community organizer and teacher. He is Catholic.
  • Peg Chemberlin, executive director of the Minnesota Council of Churches and president-elect of the National Council of Churches and a minister in the Moravian Church.
  • Fred Davie, an ordained Presbyterian minister and senior staff member at the Arcus Foundation.
  • Nathan Diament, director of public policy for the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations and a key player in the interfaith coalition that has pushed for religious liberty legislation.
  • Joel Hunter, senior pastor of Northland Church, a nondenominational megachurch near Orlando, and a board member for the National Association of Evangelicals (NEA).
  • Harry Knox, a former Methodist pastor who is liaison with religious leaders for the Human Rights Campaign, a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender advocacy group.
  • Vashti McKenzie, presiding prelate of the African Methodist Episcopal Church (AME) in Tennessee and Kentucky.
  • Dalia Mogahed, director of the Gallup Poll’s Center for Muslim Studies. She was born in Egypt and is a practicing Muslim.
  • Otis Moss, a long-time civil rights leader, retired pastor of a Baptist church in Cleveland and a board member for both the M.L. King Centerand Morehouse College.
  • Frank S. Page, past president of the Southern Baptist Convention and pastor of Taylors First Baptist Church in South Carolina.
  • Eboo Patel, founder of Interfaith Youth Core, a nonprofit that recruits young people to participate in interfaith community service. He is a Muslim born in India.
  • Anthony Picarello, general counsel for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, an attorney and Catholic lay leader.
  • Nancy Ratzan, president of the National Council of Jewish Women, an attorney and president of Reform Jewish congregation in Miami.
  • Melissa Rogers, director of the Wake Forest University School of Divinity Center for Religion and Public Affairs. She is a lawyer and teaches courses on church-state relations.
  • David Saperstein, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, and both a rabbi and an attorney.
  • William J. Shaw, president of the National Baptist Convention, the largest historically black Protestant denomination, and pastor of White Rock Baptist Church in Philadelphia.
  • Larry J. Snyder, a priest and president of Catholic Charities, one of the largest nonprofit social service agencies in America.
  • Richard Stearns, president of World Vision; an Evangelical lay leaders with a long background in business before he joined the Christian humanitarian agency.
  • Judith Vredenburgh, CEO of Big Brothers/Sisters of America, the largest youth mentoring nonprofit, and a self-described secular member of the advisory council.
  • Jim Wallis, founder and president of Sojourners, and one of the best-known Evangelical social action leaders.
  • Sharon Watkins, president of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) Protestant denomination.

The president has asked the council to focus on four priorities: (1) connecting faith-based and community groups to economic recovery, (2) promoting interfaith dialog and cooperation in the arena of community service, (3) encouraging responsible fatherhood and healthy families, and (4) reducing unintended pregnancies and the need for abortions, strengthening maternal and child health, and encouraging adoptions.

What does this mean?

President Obama hopes to avoid some of the mistakes of the previous administration, such as trampling long-held notions about the proper line between religion and government, and overly politicizing the involvement of people of faith, while continuing the necessary cooperation between government entities and religious charities which has been a key part of America from its founding. In many ways it is a return to the ideas that Colin Powell presided over in the 1990s in the aftermath of the Presidents’ Summit on Community Service. In a time of need in a democracy, elected officials are always going to challenge religious leaders to mobilize their adherents to help out simply because religion advertises itself as being about compassion, love and charity.

 

—–

Reprinted from http://msahlin.typepad.com/faith_in_context/ with the author’s permission. 

Monte Sahlin has worked to understand contemporary trends in our society and to help congregations and faith-based organizations make innovations since he organized ACT while in college at La Sierra University, Riverside, California, in the 1960s. ACT was a student volunteer organization that served in inner city neighborhoods and with suburban teenagers.

He is currently chairman of the board for the Center for Creative Ministry, a research organization and resource center helping pastors, congregations and other organizations understand new generations and how to engage with them. He is also chairman of the executive committee of the Center for Metropolitan Ministry, a “think tank” and training organization based on the campus of Columbia Union College in Washington, DC, as well as an adjunct faculty member at the Campolo School for Social Change at Eastern University in Philadelphia and in the DMin program at Andrews University. In addition, he serves on the steering committee of the Cooperative Congregational Studies Partnership, a coalition of researchers from more than 40 denominations and faiths who produce the Faith Community Today (FACT) research.

Sahlin is an ordained pastor in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, currently serving in the Ohio Conference of the denomination. He served for 12 years at the denomination’s North American headquarters with responsibilites for church ministries, media projects, social needs and issues, and research and development. He then served eight years as a regional vice president. He has pastored small and large congregations in major metropolitan areas and Appalachia.

He is the author of several books, scores of research studies and hundreds of magazine articles. His most recent book is entitled “Mission in Metropolis.” Others currently available are “Ministries of Compassion,” “One Minute Witness,” “Understanding Your Community,” “Trends, Attitudes and Opinions” and “Adventist Congregations Today.” In 2005, he coauthored with Harold Lee, “Brad: Visionary, Spiritual Leadership,” a history and evaluation of the career of Charles Bradford, the first African American to serve as president of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in North America.

Sahlin has worked as director, board chairman or strategic consultant with more than 100 innovative, community-based ministries, church plants and nonprofit organizations over the last four decades. In 1994 he was awarded an Outstand Public Service Award by the United States government and in 1996 he participated in the Presidents’ Summit on Volunteerism as well as the prepatory gathering of 50 representatives of the nonprofit sector at the White House.

New Religions: A Small Sect Makes it to the Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court has accepted an appeal from a religion that you probably never heard of until it hit the news yesterday. Summum is rooted in gnostic Christianity (or, at least modern understandings of gnosticism) and ancient Egyptian religion (or, at least contemporary understandings of ancient Egyptian religion). It was founded in 1975 and has its headquarters in (of all places) Utah. You can get more information at the official Summum web site.

The case before the Supreme Court is based on the fact that the small town in Utah has a large, stone monument in the city park of the Ten Commandments. The believers in Summum petitioned the city council to add another monument with their seven principles of good behavior. The city council refused, thereby establishing the religions of the Ten Commandments (Judaism and Christianity) over the little sect of Summum. The small religion has raised enough funds to hire attorneys and appeal their case all the way to the top court in America.

There are serious constitutional issues about religious liberty in this case even if you have a hard time taking Summum seriously. But, I want to focus on something else: The way new religions are being invented and why so many people are moving away from the large, historic faiths.

U.S. society today is dominated by three social realities: (1) a free market, (2) individualism and (3) access to information (unconfirmed and well-proven, but with no easy way to tell the two apart). In this context everyone has the freedom to make their own decision (unfettered by real logic and facts, among other things) about what to believe. Because faith is clearly a fundamental part of what it means to be human, this does not mean that religion simply shrivels and fades away (as sociologists of religion generally believed when I first studied the discipline in the 1960s). It means that people who find existing religions unsatisfying are free to create their own custom-built spiritualities. If they have any capacity for being influential or their creation appeals to others, then any of these custom spiritualities can become a religion. Consequently we live in a time when more new religions are being created than any time in about 2,000 years.

[The Supreme Court has no option, in my opinion, but to tell the city council of that little town in Utah that they cannot allow one religion or set of religions to have a public monument in the city park while denying the same to other religions, no matter the relative numbers of adherents. Of course, they could take down all religious monuments from the public land and let each religion purchase its own land for its displays. Or, they could provide a space where all religions that come forward with a memorial that meets minimum standards of size, etc., are allowed to place such displays. There are those who do not like any religion who will argue that the second solution discriminates against those who believe in nothing. But, if we were to apply the same logic to freedom of speech, then there could be no public speech because it discriminates against those who oppose all speech. Either way, such logic ends up doing away with the right that the Bill of Rights is supposed to protect.]

For those of us who are believers, there are a couple of lessons here that are even more important:

One, we must respect all expressions of religion and spirituality. Each represents at least one person trying to relate to the divine, reaching out to God, in their own way. If we look down on their attempts, we certainly will not be able to provide any assistance in guiding them along the way closer to, or at least in the direction of, “the God that is there.”

Two, We must take seriously the religious/spiritual expressions of others, no matter how ridiculous they seem to us. These are real people who are really trying to relate to divinity, to make sense out of the larger realities in the universe. Unless we take them seriously, listen to them, we cannot enter into dialog with them. If we cannot dialog, then we cannot follow the commands of Christ to share His good news.

The time is gone when we can go through the long-established routines and well-known arguments on various doctrines, using the logic that is familiar to us. That seals off the truth from discovery by most Americans; it makes the faith non-accessible.

It is also true, I think, that the large numbers of Americans who are not active in religion (about six in ten) are, most of them, in a kind of neutral place between leaving behind the established religions and embracing or creating a new faith. The Nov. 14 issue of The Week has a small piece about Sally Quinn, the well-known journalist, and her journey with religion, which is quite instructive. I quote key passages in the summary below.

Quinn was “forced to go to Sunday school” as a child, but at age 13 declared herself an atheist. “When her first son … was born with a hole in his heart, Quinn found herself praying fervently for his life. ‘Nothing happened. I didn’t feel anything. No sense of comfort, no feeling of being embraced. I didn’t try praying again.’ For the next decade” she ignored spirituality all together while struggling with the severe medical problems of her son. “But in 1992, at a California spa, she became fascinated by a huge labyrinth that was traced on the ground. She was told to walk it focusing on something important to her. ‘I entered the labyrinth and walked very deliberately toward the center, holding an image of a normal healthy [son].’ Surrounded by soaring oaks, bathed in the sun’s warmth, Quinn had a revelation. ‘The tears came streaming down my face as I saw my gorgeous little boy, smiling, his arms outstretched, reassuring me that he was going to be just fine.’ [Her son] has since grown to manhood and Quinn herself now sees divinity in the everyday world. ‘My image of God may not be the personal God so many pray to. But, yes, I do believe in the everyday preciousness of life. That is what I call God.’” (Page 12)

Quinn’s experience is an honest personal experience with faith, no matter how unorthodox or heterodox her theology may be. If we cannot accept it has such, then there is no hope for dialog and we are denying, in practice, our own, orthodox Christian faith.

From: Faith in Context – commentary by Monte Sahlin on religion, values and contemporary issues

Used by permission.

——

Monte Sahlin has worked to understand contemporary trends in our society and to help congregations and faith-based organizations make innovations since he organized ACT while in college at La Sierra University, Riverside, California, in the 1960s. ACT was a student volunteer organization that served in inner city neighborhoods and with suburban teenagers.

He is currently chairman of the board for the Center for Creative Ministry, a research organization and resource center helping pastors, congregations and other organizations understand new generations and how to engage with them. He is also chairman of the executive committee of the Center for Metropolitan Ministry, a “think tank” and training organization based on the campus of Columbia Union College in Washington, DC, as well as an adjunct faculty member at the Campolo School for Social Change at Eastern University in Philadelphia and in the DMin program at Andrews University. In addition, he serves on the steering committee of the Cooperative Congregational Studies Partnership, a coalition of researchers from more than 40 denominations and faiths who produce the Faith Community Today (FACT) research.

Sahlin is an ordained pastor in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, currently serving as a vice president in the mid-Atlantic region of the denomination. He served for 12 years at the denomination’s North American headquarters with responsibilites for church ministries, media projects, social needs and issues, and research and development. He has pastored small and large congregations in major metropolitan areas and Appalachia.