Sept. 26, 2004

Isaiah 55

Psalm 146:3-7

One of the things I’ve learned along the way, is that if you want to have a safe conversation, you ought to stick to the age-old wisdom of avoiding the subjects of politics and religion. Well, today I’m going to talk about both! But relax—I’m not going to tell you how to vote, I’m going to try my best not to say anything partisan, and I’m hoping to help you think about how your religion might help you in this political season. I want to begin with a story about a preacher and a lesson she learned.

Her name is Barbara Brown Taylor, and she’s an Episcopal minister who lives in a rural area out East. In a recent article, she described an exchange she had with a neighbor who dropped by her house one day while she was cooking supper. They had both been listening to the news about a local murder. That got them talking about the death penalty, which led to talk about the use of deadly force to oppose evil, which led to talk about the war in Iraq. As fast as a speeding train, they began arguing about why the United States had failed to win the support of the United Nations in the first place.

Her neighbor said it was because Kofi Annan had received kickbacks from the oil-for-food program. She said the UN wouldn’t support us because we wanted to attack a country that had not attacked us. As they crunched on dry-roasted peanuts, they verbally dueled their way through the existence of weapons of mass destruction, the wisdom of U.S. relations with Saudi Arabia and the relationship of Osama bin Laden to all of the above. But here’s the strange thing about their conversation: along the way, each of them supported their arguments with facts that the other one had never heard before!

Finally, she looked at her neighbor and asked, "WHERE do you get your news?"

"I don’t know," he said, taken aback, "from the radio I guess. I listen to the radio all day, mostly conservative stations. Where do you get yours?"

"I listen to National Public Radio," she answered.

"Well, see," he said, "that’s a liberal station." (To me, National Public Radio presents a balance of news but then, I don’t hear it with conservative ears.)

Anyway, from that moment on, their conversation moved to how neither of them knew anything about Iraq except what they heard on the news. And how neither of them had ever consulted each other’s news sources, nor did they want to! While neither admitted out loud that what each of them believed to be true might have something to do with the news source they had chosen, you could almost see that thought floating in cartoon fashion above both of their heads. And it sucked the anger right out of them. They slowed down on the peanuts, too, she said. They agreed that there was a lot about the Middle East that they did not understand. And when her neighbor rose to leave, he laughed as they hugged. "Next time, let’s talk about religion," he said. "All I have are questions about that."

But after he left, Taylor spent considerable time thinking about the fact that no matter what topic we choose, we still have to deal with the question of our news sources. It’s a lot like the church, and believing whatever we’ve been taught. A Muslim child grows up learning from Muslim sources and believes them to be true. A Jewish child grows up learning from Jewish sources. Another person may have grown up learning only Pentecostalism or only Catholic theology or only UCC teachings. Each of these person’s source of information is very different from each other’s sources. And everyone’s sources of information fundamentally shape their concepts of the truth about God, and about life, and maybe even politics. Barbara Brown Taylor suggested that we do well to remember this, lest we start to think only our sources capture the truth.

She ended her article by saying this: "In my kitchen, talking with my neighbor who disagrees with me on almost everything political, one thing was confirmed: at any given moment what is most important to me is the person sitting across the table from me, and how I treat him is the best expression of all else that I believe…how I treat him is the best expression of all else that I believe."

In a political campaign how do we respect those with whom we disagree? Perhaps we can begin by widening our news sources. I like the advice that a United Methodist Bishop gave at their 2004 General Conference, just after a vote about splitting their denomination, that’s how divided they are today. He was relieved that they voted not to split. He said we need to listen to liberal and conservative elements in the church…just like riding a bicycle, to balance you need to lean a little to the left, then a little to the right. If you try to go in a perfectly straight line, you lose your balance and don’t travel as well! Maybe, that’s true in the church and in politics too.

Would we be better informed, and more able to extend grace to our neighbors in opposing political parties if we changed the channel occasionally, listening a little to the left and then listening a little to the right? At the very least we would be reminded that the truth is larger than any one telling of it. Perhaps we should do what my daughter does: she listens to foreign news—the British Broadcasting Service, for example. We’ve often found the BBC broadcast at 6 pm on Minnesota Public Radio. I appreciate getting news from a non-American source, so there is less bias from either the left or the right.

Recently Bill Moyers interviewed Jon Stewart of The Daily Show. He’s the comedian whose fake news show has actually become a popular source of news for Americans, even though it’s wildly preposterous and makes a parody of the news. Jon Stewart, in a serious moment, said we ought to laugh at the news because much of it is absurdly biased and sensationalized. Take, for example, the show Crossfire, which pits liberal and conservative analysts against each other not in a calm, constructive way, but in a strident antagonistic way. Look at the very title: Crossfire is what innocent bystanders get caught in when gangs are fighting. The title is perfect, because like angry gangs, the discourse is generally reduced to an attack from one side, then a counterattack from the other side, and led by a moderator who does his best to keep everybody riled up. The intent is not to seek common ground or carefully outline the nuances of a complex issue. Last week, an expert in American elections and the media told us in Adult Forum that after you watch a show or a political advertisement, you should take a minute to deconstruct it. Ask yourself "What just happened" Did I actually learn anything that will help me make a choice, or did one side just impugn the integrity of their rival? Was there any factual content in this show or ad?"

The lack of depth and the lack of civility on shows like this often provide little real information on which to access issues. How would that change if Christians became smarter consumers of television? They could demand civility and calm, respectful, balanced coverage from their news sources. What if they said, we refuse to watch or listen to shows that degrade humanity by using disrespectful language, character assassination and misrepresentation of political rivals?

We would also benefit from reading a variety of newspapers—many are free online these days. One could balance reading the more liberal Washington Post with the more conservative Wall Street Journal. If you have time to read only one newspaper, consider going to the library to read the Christian Science Monitor, which has a reputation for a more balanced, objective analysis than most.

Because in the end, how we do politics says something about who we really are. There is a new petition on the web from a group called Sojourners, whose director Jim Wallis, tries to bring together conservatives and liberals. At the top, the petition says, "God is not a Republican. . .or a Democrat." It calls on Christians to stop condemning people who disagree with their moral and political views. It also calls on Christians to measure candidates by the full range of their policies. When I first saw it I was taken back. It reminded me of the words from Isaiah 55.

In Isaiah 55, God shouts "Ho!" which today would be translated "Yo!" He says, "Yo! Wait a minute. Have you people forgotten who your sponsor is? It’s me, it’s the God you will never understand, because my thoughts are not your thoughts! Who are you to speak like ventriloquists for God?"

Four times in Isaiah 55 God yells "Yo!" trying to get our attention. The God who doesn’t care if you are Democrat or Republican but who does care how you treat every other human being. The God who wants a relationship with you! And we are so hard of hearing in this age of information overload that we sometimes forget our sponsor. Can we interrupt the political programs long enough to hear a word from our sponsor?

Remember who your sponsor is? Who gives you the ground you walk on? Who gave you another day of life when you woke up this morning? Who holds you up when you feel like you’re falling into a pit? God is our sponsor and God has a word to say to us in all this.

I think it is that we can disagree without becoming disagreeable. We can be different without being indifferent. It is that we have been given the gift of life with all its complexities, all its ups and downs, but through it all God is with us, accomplishing that which God intends.

So take hope. When we get discouraged by the slings and arrows of political discourse, we can rise above it in our own actions. And we can take hope in knowing that there are always occasions for joy, just as Isaiah claimed. If we don’t feel it just now, why the mountains and the hills may have to burst into song, and all the trees of the field clap their hands for us. Because in spite of what happens in this world, our trust is ultimately in God our sponsor! Thanks be to God. Amen.