A conversation at the Commission on Religion & Race in Milwaukee this past weekend brought to mind three encounters — two from my time in Tennessee and one since coming to Wisconsin.  About eight years ago, I got into a conversation about peace, and what it means to be a peacemaker in these scary modern times.  The two men and one woman I spoke with made the following points: 1) peacemaking should be a high value regardless of one’s religious convictions — even those who do not have a religion benefit from peaceful coexistence; 2) those who defend violence in the name of faith make a mockery of faith and do inestimable damage to the majority who do not subscribe to their thinking; 3) that often the practice of a few defines the faith of the many; and 4) that it is tragic that extremists continue to inflict such violence on our world when there is so much potential for good.

The second conversation took place a few years later as I sat with professors and students at Starbucks talking about an abortion clinic bombing perpetrated by Christian women and supported by a local clergyman.  One professor and his student were furious with the incident.  “It makes us all look crazy,” lamented the professor.  “We do so much good for so many people in so many places and it takes one fanatic and a rag-tag team of fundamentalists a moment to destroy it all.  We get blamed for being extremists, but look at what the “acceptable” wing of the Christian church does?”  The student chimed in, “I do not wish to be judged solely on my religion.  I would never do anything as unholy and evil as take another life, yet I am viewed with suspicion because of my beliefs — beliefs that others assume I share with those who do violence.”  The whole group agreed that it is a tragedy when the lunatic fringe of any faith defines faith for us all.

I listened recently to a husband and wife talk about the sanctity of the family.  With tears in their eyes they challenged the current cultural values that make divorce, abortion, domestic violence and child abuse so prevalent.  They decried the rise in the use of mood-enhancing drugs and sadly shared their sorrow at the rise of suicide.  The focus of the event was to recommit to a higher standard of family values and to stop allowing the dominant culture to undermine the values of our faith.  They called for covenants to resist temptations and put family first.  They urged the audience to return to the teachings of the prophets and of Jesus.  While the thinking was a bit rigid and dogmatic, it was quite obviously heartfelt and real.

Now, of course, all three of these conversations were with Muslims, not Christians.  I have yet to meet a Muslim that condones in any way the violence committed by extremists.  Those I know are advocates for peace, justice, morality, compassion, and hope.  Muslims of my acquaintance tend to be very positive and upbeat, critical of Western cultural values (like most evangelical Christians), and willing to work together to make things better for everyone.  Yes, I have seen the horror stories on TV and have witnessed the shocking images of the extremists — the same media that takes such glee in focusing on any and all transgressions of Christians as well.  The mythos of Islam in these United States that is grounded in misinformation, deceptions, fiery rhetoric, lies, and manipulative images is so sad, and it brings to mind another conversation I had in Austria in 1998.  There I met a group of students and had a spirited and energetic discussion — until I told them I was a United Methodist pastor.  When they heard I was a Christian minister, they grew quiet and sullen.  I asked them directly what I had said to offend them, and one replied, “We do not care for your attitude toward black people.  It is offensive to us that your Ku Klux Klan is allowed to attack and kill black people in the name of Jesus.  You should be ashamed of yourself!”  I was taken aback and stuttered, “I’m not part of the Ku Klux Klan!  Whatever gave you that idea?”  Upon further discussion, I found out that these young student’s opinions and understanding had been shaped by their media, which took great glee in broadcasting examples of American bigotry and violence.  They took the UM cross-and-flame logo to be a sign of the burning cross, and the connection between Klan and Christianity was a part of every report they ever heard.

This was an excellent object lesson for me.  I am deeply sceptical of any narrow depiction of any faith I witness on CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc.  I do not want people around the world to define American Christianity by the actions and practices of the KKK — as I am sure Muslims do not want their faith defined by us by the actions of their extremist fringe element.  Are there dangerous Muslims out there?  Sure, just like there are dangerous Christians and Jews.  These people are not violent BECAUSE of their faith; they are violent in spite of it.  They are people who have not been transformed by the best of their religion, so they live out the worst of it.  I get so sick of listening to all the hate-mongering gossip and innuendo about “those” people — as if they are really so different from “us.”  These artificial divisions do not serve us well in either the short- or the long-term.

What will it take to move us from this hostile, fearful ignorance to a place of collaboration and community?  I have found one way and one way only: relationship.  We need to meet those who are different from us, get to know them, demythologize the labels, and find common ground from which to build a future.  As categories of people, Muslims, Christians, Jews, etc., don’t come off too well.  But on a personal, case-by-case basis?  I know wonderful, lovely, gracious, honest, compassionate men and women of integrity who are Muslim, Jewish, and Christian.  The only label I’ve found that adequately describes them is FRIEND.

25 responses to “Mythtaken Identity”

  1. The church and teen suicide « John Meunier Avatar

    […] I’ve written at Dan Dick’s blog, I am confused by why people make this […]

  2. John Meunier Avatar
    John Meunier

    @ Amanda – What I do not see is any indication that the bullies in these actual cases either were themselves Christians or understood their actions as Christian actions. (Since one case involves kicking a kid in the head, I hope no pastor teaches that.)

    It appears to me that some are connecting bullying and mockery (two very unChristian behaviors) with Christianity because many Christians consider homosexual sex to be the same category as adultery and fornication.

    My question is why is that connection being made? Is there a prominent or influential Christian teacher or body that teaches that it is okay to secretly tape the sex act of your dorm mate and post it on the Internet?

    1. Brad S Avatar

      Perhaps it is the repetitive teaching that being gay is sinful without the teaching that God loves us despite our sins that makes kids think that teasing and bullying gay and lesbian persons is justified. Is there a point when kids become desensitized to the God Hates Fags message despite it being on the fringe of Christianity? It seems that most of the Christian voices on television come down on the side of condemnation of gay persons. I wonder how much of that justifies their actions in the mind of the bully. I think we need to ask them.

      1. John Meunier Avatar
        John Meunier

        I agree, we should ask them. I would like to see some actual research on the motivation of the people doing the bullying.

        I’d even like to know if the bullies are Christians. Of course, hanging out among some church youth groups, I know being Christian is often no bar to all kinds of mean and anti-social behavior.

      2. Brad S Avatar

        According to this survey, most Americans see the rhetoric coming out of the church partially responsible for the recent suicides. http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/21/churches-contribute-to-gay-suicides-most-americans-believe/?hpt=C1

        Whether this is actually the case remains to be seen.

  3. Joseph Avatar
    Joseph

    And let’s not forget suicides of gay teenagers. Nice job by Christians there, and again based on positions straight out of the Bible.

    Although I will say that I see some signs of repentance among the hellfire and damnation crowd, but that must be cold comfort to the parents of the dead teens.

    1. doroteos2 Avatar
      doroteos2

      I think you’re making my point here. The senseless, ignorant lunatic fringe do not represent the majority. Sadly, the majority do not often challenge and confront the fringe, so the case can be made that the majority are complicit with the fringe, but that’s where there is hope for change. Judging any group by its non-representative minority is problematic.

    2. John Meunier Avatar
      John Meunier

      Joseph,

      Those suicides are tragic, but I’m not clear where you make the connection with Christianity. Maybe I’ve missed some stories, but I don’t recall the bullying being based on Christian conviction. In most cases it sounds like it was teen-agers being mean to other teen-agers.

      http://abcnews.go.com/US/gay-teen-suicide-sparks-debate/story?id=11788128&page=1

      Bullying and secret videotaping of sex acts are condemned by most – I hope all – Christians.

      1. Amanda Avatar
        Amanda

        I think the point he’s making is: Who taught their kids that it was okay to see homosexuality as something to mock, and why?

        You can say it for any other kid being bullied (who taught their kids that it was okay to see fat as worthy of mockery? who taught their kids that it was okay to mock intelligence?), but most of those aren’t religiously based, whereas the condemnation of homosexuals often has a religious slant.

      2. larry Avatar
        larry

        @ Amanda – an orthodox Christian answer would probably say that those behaviors and mindsets don’t need to be taught – our inherent human sinfulness is cause. Rather, we have to teach, and re-teach multiple times, and lead by example, etc., that those things are not right. However, teaching and exemplifying right practice cannot resolve these kinds of problems – they are part of the human condition in sin. Of course, I’ll throw Jesus in there as the one solution that works as far as addressing our sin goes . . .

  4. Joseph Avatar
    Joseph

    I grew up in an area with lots of KKK, and I can remember the letters to the editors arguing from the bible that Black people were inferior.

    I think when you say that people are not violent because of their faith, but in spite of it, you have a very kind view of the human condition.

    I’m over on internetmonk reading the horrible things that Martin Luther said about Jews right now. Did he have that position in spite of his faith, or was it based on it? Looks like the latter, at least to me.

    Not to mention the subordination of women in our society — something that, without the Bible, would be far less of a problem. Without a Christian platform for that discrimination, the Kingdom would be closer.

    1. doroteos2 Avatar
      doroteos2

      My point, Joseph, is that hateful people are hateful people, and if they did not claim to be people of faith and have the Bible to use as a weapon they would find another means of destruction. There are unhinged people, ignorant people, unenlightened people, etc., and giving them “religion” is like handing a lit match to a toddler. I think there are correlations that should not be confused for cause-and-effect. If religion was the true cause, there would not be literally billions of people of various faiths calling for peace and justice. When I was in Africa and witnessed both Christians and Muslims beat their children, I never once thought they did so because of their faith, but because of the culture in which they lived and the widespread lack of education. Shove any religion through the filter of ignorance and the results won’t be pretty, but that isn’t the religion’s fault.

  5. John Meunier Avatar
    John Meunier

    I get the point about the cross and flame and the KKK, but let us not forget that our first symbol – the cross itself – had all kinds of bad connotations attached to it, too.

    Remaking the meaning of things is part of what Christians have always done.

    As a marketing ploy, it might be a bad idea. I’m not convinced that rules it out.

    1. doroteos2 Avatar
      doroteos2

      I make no case for doing away with the cross and flame, merely that it is important for us to be aware of the messages we send to others — intentionally or not.

    2. larry Avatar
      larry

      Ought Christians attempt to remake the meaning of the swastika then? Or are some things best left alone? I don’t mean this to sound snarky at all – just an honest question about how far we take that principle.

  6. Rex Nelson Avatar
    Rex Nelson

    To understand a bit more of the perception, search for
    William Joseph Simmons
    and for
    Nation: THE VARIOUS SHADY LIVES OF THE KU KLUX KLAN

    The swastika symbol, over 12,000 years old, has had many meanings, generally related to the metaphysical. But any organization attempting to use it as a logo now could not expect to avoid its latest meaning.

    I understand the meaning of the different elements of the cross and flame, and the intent of combining them. I don’t understand how an organization headquartered in the South could expect to avoid its latest meaning, or claim it didn’t see the similarity. Even in Southeast Wisconsin, its meaning is confused.

  7. Becky Coleman Avatar
    Becky Coleman

    Thanks, Dan, for all that you share & challenge us to think about. Today I am particularly grateful for your story about the Austrian students. As our “new” congregation (from two “old” ones) was talking about logos and whether to incorporate the cross & flame, there were some African-Americans who reacted in the same way as the Austrians. Some members of European descent couldn’t see it. (And we remember the Nazis, by their choice of the swastika as an emblem, forever destroyed the use of an ancient symbol of good luck.) Several of us here are reading and discussing “Jesus and the Disinherited”; Thurman comes to the same conclusion — honest, respectful relationships are the way of Jesus and God’s way of changing the world. What is good news to the poor? I would think, someone who is on their side, who is not willing to oppress them or to deny them opportunities and will actively work to include and work WITH them.

Leave a reply to doroteos2 Cancel reply