Monday, October 29, 2018
Pittsburgh is a city close to my heart. For the past three years (and for at least the next two) I have traveled through her borders in order to attend the Sacred Music Institute (the past two years) and the St. Stephen Course residency (this past year and for the next two). I have gotten to know her people, including several I consider personal friends. And Pittsburgh is a city of fine people, people who love, who work, who treat others with respect. She is the best of what our country has to offer.
But this was not an attack on Pittsburgh. Nor was it an attack on some vacuous notion of "religion." It was an attack on Jews. Ethnic Jews. People who were targeted not because they had done something wrong, but because they are part of a group who was wrongly considered by the shooter to have done something wrong. To call this an act of terrorism is to understate the problem. Because it is not the terroristic act that moved him to do it, but the false association of ethnic Jews with all manner of evil. This was an act of terrorism, but it was a sin of the heart.
The Orthodox Church has recently had some serious issues with anti-semitism. Fortunately the worst of the worst -- the high profile so-called "white nationalists" who infected certain of our parishes -- have been excommunicated. That is not to say there are not others. I'm certain there are. It is to say our hierarchs appear to be dealing with the problem appropriately. I pray they continue to do so. Those who bring hatred into Christ's Church must repent or be expelled. Their beliefs are an infectious invader upon the Body of Christ.
I'm not sure what attracts such types to the Church. Perhaps it is the "old world" manner in which our troparia speak. Our parish patron's troparion, for example, includes the phrase "for when thou hast censured the Jews' madness thou sawest Christ Thy Savior standing at the right hand of the Father....." We do not intend such to be a condemnation of modern Judaism, nor of modern Jews, nor even of ancient Judaism or ancient Jews. It is a simple historical statement. But maybe that is misunderstood by people looking for justification for their anti-Christian views. And, per the title, anti-semitism is anti-Christian. Perhaps, instead, it is our roots in traditionalism. The Orthodox Church cares little whether she is perceived as backwards, old fashioned, stuck in old ways. Often, we revel in it. And perhaps those who wish to look to a previous time which they perceive as "better," a time when Jews and others were persecuted, see us as refuge for the idea that any old idea is a good idea. Perhaps, yet again, it is our own phyletism -- our own ethnic enclaves that seek to exclude and remain exclusive. Perhaps, that is, it is our own sin that draws such people in.
In any of these events, or in any other, we must repent. We must repent of our failure to explain our hymnody and writings in a way that makes clear we may speak archaically, but we do not speak bigotry. We must repent of our elevation of tradition to something higher than Christ and His Church, that is, we must repent of valuing tradition for its own sake rather than valuing Holy Tradition for Christ's sake. We must surely repent of our own sins and sweep around our own back doors in regards to how we treat our fellow man.
As Christians, we have a duty to reject the false divisions of this world. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28). We are to see our neighbor as our brother, as one redeemed by Christ the Crucified. This is true, perhaps especially true, of our brethren who do not claim Him. For our Lord did not say to judge and persecute those who reject Him, but to love even our enemies. And Jews, Muslims and other religious groups are not our enemies, certainly not by the loosest of associations. How much more are we to love them?
On the subject of loose associations, we have a corresponding duty to refuse to view our neighbor by association with some larger group, the better to tar him with. Our Jewish friends are not "Jews" (or any of the current code-word associations for people of Jewish ethnicity or identity). They are the creation of the Father. They are beloved of God. Without getting too far into the thorny issues of the exclusivity of the Christian faith and the salvation of those outside the Church, because that is a far longer and more intensive topic than may be dealt with here, suffice it to say that God's earnest wish is that everyone come to know the truth and be saved. And without reciting the various Christian heresies that lead to a belief that those outside the canonical walls of the Christian Church are our enemies, it should be sufficient for any Orthodox Christian to understand the properly basic Christian belief that judgment is not ours to render. We are to love our neighbor. Christ will judge us all. And who is to say He will judge my self-defined exclusivity and hatred less severely than another's unbelief, weak belief or uncertain belief? We are not universalists. Some will be damned. But it is not for me to say who.
All of which is a long way of saying this: If you want to know how to be saved, I point you to the Church, to Christ and His Mysteries. If you want to know who is damned, I can only say that is not for me to say. And if you want to know who you are called to love, simply look around you. Love your neighbor as yourself. That is, love everyone.
So it is that we offer prayers to those who lost lives, health, security, friends and family this past Saturday. We pray for all of our Jewish friends, and for those who suffer under the weight of such tragedy. We pray for all who are persecuted, hated and reviled. We pray for those who persecute, hate and revile, that they might repent. We pray for he shooter, who I will not further enshrine in infamy by repeating his name here, that his heart may be softened and his hatred be quelled. And we pray for ourselves, that we may do better. Lord have mercy on me, a sinner.
Friday, August 24, 2018
Most people know Rogan as the spokesman for the UFC, the somewhat sophomoric comedian, and from way back, the host of the 2nd iteration of "The Man Show" (the first iteration of which included misogynist-turned-feminist Jimmy Kimmel). Most people -- until recently present company included -- do not consider Joe Rogan an intellectual.
Perhaps he is not. However, in avoiding overstatement, we should be careful not to swing the pendulum too far the other direction. What Joe Rogan is, is intellectually curious. He challenges without being a jerk. He asks good questions. And he has interesting guests to interview in long-form format, which obviously gives a better picture of the person than a shorter interview, much less Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms.
This interview gave me a glimpse of him I haven't seen before, either in shorter interviews or even on his hunting show, "Spirit of the Wild." And one of the things I realized was that for all of his wackier political ideas, for all of his lack of couth and vulgarity, and for all the times "overstatement" was a kind way of saying he'd gone off the deep end, Ted Nugent also has a wealth of knowledge and wisdom about bowhunting.
This might seem out of sorts so far -- this is after all an Orthodox Christian blog, not a blog about politics or hunting or music. Bear with me.
The thing that really stuck out to me was this guy who I'd put in a box with others I perceived to be like him -- Alex Jones, maybe Ann Coulter or Ben Shapiro -- this guy who at times says things that made me want to turn the channel, had another side to him. A side that interested and intrigued me. A side that was honestly fascinating. Ted Nugent is an historian of the bow and arrow. How the compound bow came to be. How bowhunting became legal in various states. How the bow and arrow began as a primitive tool used by primitive people, but became refined and perfected over the years as archers learned better and better ways to apply it, even as its use as a primary weapon for defense or obtaining food was greatly diminished. As a beginning archer I was fascinated by this. I listened to the entire interview.
And that got me thinking -- how often do we simply put people in boxes? I think social media, Twitter in particular, but there are others, tends to bring out that tendency in us. We see others through the lens of their politics, or their religious affiliation, or their race, sexual orientation, or other abstract classifications. And if we don't like the box we put them in (perhaps that is precisely why we put them there), we write them off as having no value to add to us as persons or to society as a whole.
Yet we as Christians are to see others in Christ, and more, to see Christ in them. Part of this problem is social media and its limitations encourage some of our worst traits. Narcissism is chief among them. We think we are so very important that our opinions matter more than other considerations (like someone else's feelings). Sarcasm is another. I speak it fluently, so mea culpa (more on that below). Still, when you only have so much space, points are sometimes easier to make by using rhetorical tools that mock and deride instead of explain and build up. Having these tendencies encouraged seems to me to make them habitual. And as with any other passion, becoming habituated to sin necessarily means losing habituation to virtue.
I had occasion to witness this earlier this year. I posted an article by the Babylon Bee, a satire site, on Facebook. The article poked fun of Planned Parenthood by claiming they defended Bill Cosby because "sexual assault is only 3% of what he does." I found it funny, and also insightful. Several friends found it offensive. Some made that known in very polite terms. Some did not. But one thing that struck me was the desire on the part of those whose views had been mocked to virtue signal in the other direction. Instead of refraining from comment, comments were made. Publicly. The purpose was clear -- to let others know which side the commenter was on. In one instance, the respect for boundaries broke down entirely, resulting in that person's comments being deleted from my page.
On the one hand, I certainly bear some responsibility for that. I posted an article I knew was intended to make a point with sharp, biting sarcasm. And it quite clearly made that point. On the other hand, others felt it necessary to respond, with the responses nearly all polite save that one responder I mention above. And it makes me wonder -- why? Why did I want to post that article? Clearly, I thought it made a good and valid point, but I knew it was inflammatory. I knew people who felt a certain way about abortion would be challenged by it. And certainly those challenges are necessary in a world where the mainstream media works so hard to pretend opposition to abortion is some lunatic fringe in our society. But then, I posted it in a place where the only possible responses were combox responses. And I got exactly that which the forum gives best -- mostly gentle commentary that served the purpose of showing opposition to the article, and in one case mocking and sarcasm in return (directed, unfortunately, at my wife). And why did they feel the need to respond to it? What is it about social media that encourages us to draw battle lines in this way? To show everyone which side we are on?
One thing that should be stated is that I know all of the people who commented -- including the one whose comments were deleted -- personally. These are not merely virtual acquaintances. I've met them. I know they are more than their comments on social media. They know I am more than mine. And yet one felt comfortable attacking my wife in that forum because he disagreed with her politics. Mocking her and deriding her. And when that happens, it tells me a polite society (such as we were ever polite) is broken. And I wonder what we can do about it.
I think part of the answer comes down to how we view each other as persons. We as persons are defined first as being created in the image of God. Those we disagree with, even vehemently, are created in God's image. Those whose comments might cause strong offense are ultimately there for our salvation because they are sons of the Father. They are our brothers and sisters. They are not our enemies. I fall short of this, often. It is too easy to reduce people to arbitrary classifications. And we know the evils that are borne of this -- racism, antisemitism, etc. Every mass murderer in history has first reduced their targets to the level of subhuman. The great irony of the example I chose is this is exactly how people who wish to see abortion continue in our society treat the unborn. But it starts with me, and for you it starts with you.
As persons, we are more than our politics. We are more than our prejudices. We are more than the lowest common denominator we share with some larger group. I am not in any way calling for us to stop using social media. I do think we ought to consider how we use it, and why.