Jubilee Bridge Crossing

The T-shirt said, “Rosa sat so that Martin could walk.  Martin walked so that Barack could run.  Barack ran so that our children can fly.”  I’m almost never a fan of T-shirt slogans, but this one really hits home.

We stood in a crowd outside Brown’s Chapel AME Church waiting for the commemorative walk to begin.  This is where it had all started 45 years ago on March 7, 1965.  The first march didn’t make it very far.  The third march, led by Martin Luther King, Jr., did.  Today, when all the congresspersons and other famous people (Terence Howard) had made their way to their places, the walk began.  We left Brown’s Chapel, headed south a block, turned west to downtown and south on Broad Street.  The bridge over the Alabama River loomed in the distance.

It took awhile to get there, but we walked across the bridge, remembering how the marchers had eventually made that walk all the way to Montgomery to advocate for voting rights.  Life Magazine and the evening news caught the shocking images of people being beaten, even killed.  Bloody Sunday. 45 years ago, March 7, 1965.  Today, maybe some 10,000 or so walked across the bridge.  People from all over the place.  College groups like ours.

The day’s activities were part ongoing struggle for justice, part reunion, part state fair carnival.  After the walk across the bridge, people enjoyed foods and music at booths set up for the occasion: polish sausage, funnel cakes, chicken on a stick, lots and lots of CDs available for purchase.  One man offered a new documentary CD of Selma and the Civil Rights Movement.  But what caught my attention were the little clusters of senior citizens or near that age, white and black, talking like old friends.  Some of them had marched together in the original event.  They were reminiscing and catching up all at the same time.

Months after the march to Montgomery, the Voting Rights Acts did pass.  A Federal law guaranteed that black people, properly registered, would not only have the theoretical right to vote, but they actually could vote and did.  Forty five years later, we are into the fifteenth month of the presidency of the first African American president.  Considering where our country was in 1965, this is a staggering change.

Earlier in the day as I stood in front of the chapel, a man walked by me in bib overalls and a yellow vest.  I noticed the name hand written on the vest: John Rankin (my paternal grandfather’s name, by the way).  For the third time in my life, I had encountered an African American who shared my surname.  I couldn’t resist.  I spoke to John and asked him if he knew where his name came from.  He had done some checking, he said, and he thinks that his family had come from South Carolina originally (well, not originally).  Since Rankin is a Scottish name, I surmise (as I have done before) that some Rankins back in the day were slave owners.  This John Rankin had been on the original march to Montgomery.  He took off his hat, rubbed the top of his head and said, “And I’ve still got the knot on my head to prove it.”

On the Civil Rights Pilgrimage

Just time for a quick one.  I hope you friends and colleagues who attended the Wesleyan Theological Society meeting had a most edifying experience (Kevin, I hope your paper went well!).

I’m in Montgomery, AL, at the beginning of a Spring Break Civil Rights Pilgrimage.  SMU has been taking this trip each year for several years, so I’m playing catch-up.  The bus left Friday afternoon, but I could not leave until Saturday evening.  Flew into Montgomery last night.

As I prayed with the group Friday afternoon, I spoke about how this trip will challenge us in particular ways.  I had shared with the class earlier that, because I was a boy of 13 when Dr. King was murdered, I grew up watching the Civil Rights movement on television.  I lived in rural, racially homogenous Kansas.  Actually, not true.  Part of that time I lived in Texas and it was not racially homogenous.  Pete Chapa (Mexican) was one of my boyhood baseball teammates and friends.  Paul and Manuel (Mexican) were friends to me during a very lonely 5th grade year in a new town. Later, in junior high, it was Oscar Guerra the star running back and Leonard White (African American) the star on our basketball team.  Still, the Civil Rights movement was something psychologically remote for me.

It was not until years later, as a man with children of my own, that I read “Letter from a Birmingham Jail.”  Dr. King wrote it in response to clergy in Alabama who wanted him not to engage in direct – even if peaceful – action.  His reply, written on anything that could be used (toilet paper, margins of newspapers), is nothing short of agonizingly eloquent.  He asked his clergy colleagues to consider how it felt to be the man who had to tell his young daughter that she could not go to the local amusement park because it was not open to black children; how if felt to watch the dark clouds of racial prejudice hang over his kids and to witness how it was shaping their young mental worlds.  That letter put a human face on the Civil Rights movement for me.

Over the years, of course, partly because of interest and partly because of my work, I’ve studied, at least in superficial ways, parts of the story.  This trip will be rough in some ways.  The church was on both sides of things (as it often is) back in the 50s and 60s.  Some of the story is just plain ugly.  But some of it is glorious.

I have a feeling I’ll learn a lot on this trip.  I’m going to try to blog each evening during the week, if you’re interested.

Saying “Yes” to the Appointment Process

Trust(This blog is an updated post from 3 years ago [2/27/2010], as I reflected then about the significance of the time of year for United Methodist clergy going through appointment changes.  Appointment time in United Methodism is always a little nerve-wracking for everybody involved.)

 

It’s appointment season again in the United Methodist Church.  Cabinet members and bishops likely think that this season never ends.

Since I work in higher education, I no longer suffer as acutely the pangs of worry and wondering that this this time of year brings. However, I quickly add that, as University Chaplain, I am under episcopal appointment.  The longer I am in the ministry, the more weighty the disciplinary questions about itineracy, about going where I am sent, become.

Thus, the great Methodist Migration each year always makes me stop and think.  Every year I have friends on the bubble, waiting to hear about their staying or moving.  It reminds me of the times clergy friends have spoken about the anxiety and powerlessness they feel in the appointment process.  As I work with young people who are considering ordained ministry, this subject – of itineracy, of going where God and the bishop send – comes up often.  (Yes, I do know the assumption in the way I just stated the matter.)  It just doesn’t seem right that someone else can decide where and in which condition you’re going to live.

Thus, Luke 9 is one of many scriptures packed with significance for any minister – United Methodist or otherwise – being sent.  And that sending comes in a context of a variety of powerful encounters that help us realize the importance of ministry.

Jesus calls and sends out the Twelve to do the work he has been doing – preaching the good news of the Kingdom, healing the diseased and liberating the demon-possessed.  He feeds the five thousand.  He asks the disciples about how people identify him.  He tells them that he’s going to suffer and die (he tells them twice in the same chapter).  He is transfigured.  He heals a demon-possessed boy whom the disciples could not heal.  He listens to his disciples argue about who is the greatest in the Kingdom (showing decisively that they don’t understand Jesus’ destiny).  And we haven’t even covered the whole chapter.

The passage prompts me to think about the paradox and the risk of itinerant ministry – well, ministry of any sort, actually.  First the paradox: On the one hand Luke indicates how deeply the sense of destiny, the calling to suffer and die, lies within Jesus.  There’s a Plan and he’s going to fulfill it.  It is set.  (Is it determined?)  Yet, at the same time and in the face of his destiny, the developing situation is filled with contingency.  There are lots of moving parts to the unfolding story.  A range of actors are making strategic decisions affecting the narrative.

Jesus is spiritually heading one way while his disciples think he’s heading another.  They know they’re going to Jerusalem, but Jesus seems to know that he’s going there to die, while the disciples think they’re going to establish Jesus as the King and to re-establish the Kingdom.  He warns his disciples, in effect, not to misunderstand his Messiahship, but they seem to do exactly that.  Jesus tries to control the “fame factor” that is working around him.  Lots of unpredictability and human agency.

The paradox: in the midst of what feels like so much unpredictability emerges a sense of divine providence, of guidance, but not heavy handed.  That guidance is more like the hand of an expert sailor on the tiller, light and responsive.  The world around us may feel pretty crazy, but underneath are the Everlasting Arms.

Yet, the risk is real.  There is risk in saying yes to the appointment process.  As a preacher’s kid, I experienced the appointment process all my life, long before I was, myself, directly under episcopal authority.  I spent my entire childhood until I graduated from high school, waiting to hear if we were moving or staying.  We lived in some of the most remote places one can find in rural heartland America.  I attended two high schools.  I was always “the new kid.”  I felt the risk of potential moves.

As a kid, sometimes the move really hurt.  I liked the school where I was and the friends I had made.  I finally was starting to feel “at home” there.  As a pastor, I felt the anxiety, waiting for the call to come, wondering what it would mean for me and my family.  I have felt, at times, confusion, worry and frustration, yes even heartache and anger.

Yet, those experiences are not the ones that stand out.  Even in the most difficult of situations, I felt the reality of God’s loving, guiding Presence.  In every case, God provided: good friends, a place to serve, a ministry that mattered.  And God provided growth – in me – growth that I desperately needed.

Only hindsight works here and no other kind.  Every aspect of my life heretofore has prepared me for the ministry in which I am now engaged.  I can’t say in a brief blog entry how, but I’m not kidding, every part, every place, every segment of time.

And I admit, I think the same is true for everyone in the ministry and subject to the appointment process.  I hope these words don’t sound too pious and unctuous.  I’m speaking the truth as I see and have experienced it.

I am praying for United Methodist pastors waiting by the phone – literally or figuratively – to find out where they will be sent.  May the Triune, omniscient God, who in Jesus Christ knows exactly the paradox and the risk of ministry, bless and keep your heart strong.

Doing It the Right Way

So, am I the last guy in the United States to learn that Drew Brees is a real Christian?  I add the term “real” because stardom and celebrity seem to breed a shallow, made-for-TV faith that often ultimately disappoints.  Remember Jessica Simpson?

Although I love sports and enjoy pro football, I’ve grown weary of the hype surrounding the Super Bowl.  My goodness, the build-up on Sunday alone is literally longer than the game.  But this year, I sat down about an hour or so before the kick-off, turned on the tube and was treated to the feature on Drew Brees.

In the interest of full disclosure, I still hold it against Brees for picking apart my K-State Wildcats in the 1998 Alamo Bowl.  But after watching that Super Bowl pre-game story, I’ve become a new fan.  I knew he was a great quarterback, but I absolutely love what he has done in New Orleans – not on the football field.

Generally, I don’t believe the over-hyped baloney about what pro sports do for a city.  The gaudiness of pro sports generally sickens me, though I keep watching the games.  For goodness’ sake, the NFL tried to control the use of “Who ‘Dat!”  How silly.  I live in Dallas now, and I’m still waiting for a new generation of Tom Landrys and Roger Staubachs.

But Drews Brees’ story, it’s a classic.  At least what I have seen I would say that he is being a Christian in the right way. And I’m ready to acknowledge that the Saints have helped New Orleans rebound from the awful hurricane, that the team has given this city new life and some hope.  And Drew Brees is in the big middle of it.

In case you don’t know his story, Brees had a serious shoulder injury a few years ago that could have ended his pro career.  He left the San Diego Chargers and wound up with the Saints, who decided to take a chance on a guy with lots of talent and a winner’s heart, but with a damaged passing arm.  Brees and his wife made a choice to live in the city rather than the suburbs.  If the Super Bowl pre-game segment told the truth (please, Lord, let it be so), they live in a neighborhood and are known as real neighbors.  He likewise has a foundation that pours money and resources into the community.  From appearances, then, it really looks like Drew Brees gets his responsibility as a highly-paid and high-profile athlete in a high-stakes game.  If God put him on this platform, then he’d better take this responsibility seriously.  To whom much is given, much is required.

As much as I love athletes who share their faith openly, I’m kind of tired of people sticking their fingers in the air when they score a touchdown.  I kinda’ like it that Brees does not wear his faith superficially on his sleeve (even though I do like it that Tim Tebow wears his on his cheekbones, because I think Mr. Tebow is the real deal, too).  I watched a video clip on STV (“Sharing the Victory”) and Brees talked about letting his actions speak louder than his words.  I love it.  May his tribe increase.

Which goads me.  I am a man who makes his living with words.  I’d better watch myself.

Bigotry and Power

So, from bigotry to power politics and back: I got worked up this morning watching Headline News.  Gloria Allred is alleging that the Tebows are not telling the whole story about Pam’s decision not to abort Tim.  Allred’s allegation is based, so far as I can tell, merely on the fact that abortion is illegal in the Philippines and, since there is a serious penalty for doing so, no doctor in the Philippines would give such advice.

My mind reeled with the sheer audacity of this claim.  Questions began to pop: What doctors gave the advice?  American doctors abroad?  Philippino doctors?  Someone else?  Was she actually in the Philippines when she got this advice?  (Missionaries often have medical care in places besides where they serve.)  One article I found – a Baptist homeschooling blog, of all places – said that it was an American-trained doctor in the Philippines.  That’s the only place I found any reference to the doctor in question.

More questions: Did that American-trained doctor tell Mrs. Tebow he/she would do the abortion?   What exactly did he/she say to her?

In other words, what does Allred actually know to ground such a headline-grabbing allegation?  All these questions need a certain kind of answer for her allegations to begin to have any merit.  I heard absolutely nothing in the news clip to ease my qualms.

No one outside of Focus on the Family and, I suppose, the Tebows, has seen the ad.  On what basis, therefore, can Allred allege both that the story is false and that the Tebows are actually distorting their own story in order (apparently) to play politics?  It’s a staggering suggestion she has made when you think of how careful, how determined Tim Tebow has been to present a transparent, consistent Christian witness.  Does Allred realize that she is actually accusing them of going against everything they say they stand for?  Are we really that cynical?

I want to make clear, my post is not about abortion.  I also don’t care if the ad does not run.  I care that people like Gloria Allred can spout off with complete impunity on television, essentially to engage in character assassination while giving the impression that her legal knowledge gives her the license so to do.  And don’t bring up Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly.  They don’t pretend to be lawyers and at least they fulminate on their own TV shows.  Allred got 30 seconds on Headline News.

If you remember that AskOxford.com definition of bigotry, it includes the word “prejudice.”  If Gloria Allred has not made sure that she stands on firm ground with the circumstances of the Tebow story, then she clearly has prejudged, in the most glaring, daring way.  Is she a bigot like Huffington?  Google for yourself and read.  If it walks like a duck…