A label categorizes people. It allows us to draw quick conclusions, which then drive our actions - sometimes for the good and sometimes for the not so good.
Sticking a label on me will serve you well most of the time, but not all of the time. All labels are that way.
Even if I say I agree with you, my behavior may contradict my words, which opens a whole 'nother can of worms - faith without works.
I'm a liberal because of my I. And it's a deep rooted I. I'm an only child. I react to situations and people out of insecurity. I don't like to be told what to do or what to believe. At least, that's how I was.
Now, my insecurity doesn't run as deep. I no longer need to place myself above others or above God. I recognize what's at the heart of my reactions, and I can better receive what I used to perceive as judgment - most of the time anyway.
A lot of my anger at the Roman Catholic Church stems from not knowing why we did stuff - just being expected to do/believe whatever I was told. Even now, when I attend Mass, the animosity stirs a bit because there is still a lot I don't understand.
Evangelical Christianity stokes my anger too. I sometimes feel incorrectly judged, and the cliches "personal savior" and "born again" still rankle because of the way they were used in my past.
I used to be the stereotypical non-Christian to the stereotypical evangelical. I was one of these people. I never felt like a person. I always felt like a cause. I was never met where I was at. The demand was to do x, y and z. How God got through that fog of self still amazes me.
I've been trying to imitate Christ for two and a half years now, and I fail bunches. I fail in my eyes because I'm a perfectionist. I fail because I confuse imitating Christ with not being the stereotype I hated. I fail because I'm human. And I fail in the eyes of other people because I don't fit in their box of labels.
But I also succeed a lot. And regardless of how I am judged by people, God knows my heart. I am at peace. He's bigger than our small judgments of one another.
Some time ago, I had an email conversation with a co-worker.
"liberal and Compassion employee?" I was asked. "That doesn't make sense...how can you believe it's ok to kill babies while working at Compassion? I don't see how those fit together. :)"
And despite my best efforts to be a Love Giver and Teacher, I answered in this holier than thou, "I'm enlightened and your not" kind of way.
"It's interesting what the word liberal means to you. For you its a synonym for killing babies. You've taken the word and assumed that I support abortion. Why is that? Labels like liberal or Republican or American or whatever don't fit everyone like the glove the masses believe."The reply:
"No, I don’t assume that liberal goes with killing babies. However, by accepting liberalism, you’re accepting everything that goes with it. In voting, you can only either vote Republican or Democrat, there isn’t a middle ground. So, if you vote liberal because you don’t like the war, want welfare, etc., you’re also supporting abortion."That's where the emails ended and this blog began.
This is what I know. Politically speaking, I'm financially conservative and socially liberal. Not the best bedfellows. How do I propose to pay for all those programs I support? I dunno. And I'm okay with that. That's why I'm not running for office. I don't have any proposals. How I vote ebbs and flows like the tide. Sometimes I emphasize a social issue at the expense of a fiscal issue and vice versa. It depends on the year and the candidate.
I consider myself a Democrat because I tend to vote that way more often than not, usually on the presidential level, but I vote Republican too - usually on the gubernatorial or congressional levels.
Voting for someone doesn't mean I'm in lockstep with them or the party on the issues. I'm plowing the middle ground - convincingly, even though my reasons for doing so may not convince anyone to follow.
On Abortion
I'm not vocal about my political views. I don't actively promote them. I just have them.
I do not believe abortion is an option in any circumstances, at any time. I believe everything happens for a reason, even the bad stuff. God is in it all, whether we understand it or not, and regardless of whether we accept it or not.
If a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, I believe God wants her to have the baby, even if she can barely support herself, even if the baby is born addicted to drugs, even if (insert your most incredibly painful and difficult situation here).
I can't answer the why. I don't know the details of God's plan, but I trust Him. He knit us together in the womb. He knows every hair on our head. He created us in His image. He is glorified in our weakness.
If I was that woman, I'd probably struggle with living my beliefs. I might place my wants first. Anything is possible. I like to think I wouldn't, but I can't be certain. I'm not perfect. I'm human. And God would continue to love me because of who He is.
P.U.S.H.
This past Sunday, the message at church was about how to lead others to Christ; how to P.U.S.H. without being pushy. P.U.S.H. stood for:
- pray for family, friends and associates
- understand people; develop friendships and discover people's stories
- share what Christ has meant to me
- help introduce the curious to environments that will expose them to the gospel
"Before you put someone in their place, put yourself in their place."The Liberal Part
I believe in free will. God has given us the ability to choose Him or to refuse Him. Free will isn't about doing what I want, when I want, how I want; although, that's how it usually looks. Free will is choosing what I want, when I want it and how I want it because I want it. When I do that, I choose myself and I reject God.
Because I believe in free will, I don't believe that it is my responsibility to prevent someone from doing something I disagree with. My responsibility as a disciple of Christ is to share Him, imitate Him and to love you when you screw up.
To take it from the middle ground, I state for the record that:
- I do not believe abortion is ever an option.
- I do not have the authority to dictate how another person chooses to live, whether I agree with that person's choices or not.
Slap your label here.
3 comments:
Hey Chris,
Thanks for posting this!! By the way, I didn’t think you were being holier than thou at all. Hopefully you don’t think I am either. :)
There’s still one thing about your post that puzzles me, regarding your last statement: "I do not have the authority to dictate how another person chooses to live, whether I agree with that person's choices or not.”
Ok, that sounds relativistic (the idea that what’s wrong for me may not be wrong for you and I have no right to tell you what’s wrong). I believe that’s ok to an extent – for example, it wouldn’t make sense for me to tell a non-Christian that the Bible says they shouldn’t curse – however, on matters of like & death, I think we DO have the right to say what is right and wrong. The Bible clearly says that murder is wrong, there is no gray area around that issue, it’s fully black & white. Taking the Bible completely out of the equation though, I’m sure you would agree that if someone felt it was their right and choice to go out and murder their neighbor, it would be wrong, and they should face consequences enforced by the government.
Another example - most people, secular or Christian, if they witnessed someone abusing a child or spouse, would say something. They wouldn’t just stand there and watch, or walk away and pretend they never saw anything happen. If they did, many people would look at them with “judgment” for watching someone suffer.
I feel it’s the same way with political thought, and how that relates to issues of life and death. We can stand by and watch millions of innocent babies be murdered every year, or we can make the choice to elect those who value life into office. That is the way we have authority. I believe that God created every life, and every life, whether it’s born or unborn, is a life worth protecting.
If you don’t believe we have any authority, what’s the point of voting at all? In Biblical times, people didn’t have the choice of who their ruler was, yet God still required obedience. I think that today, we have the awesome privilege of choosing the ruler we will obey for at least the next 4 years of our lives, and we shouldn’t take that for granted. And I think God’s made it clear that money is not to be the largest deciding issue, but issues of life (Thou shalt not murder, money is the root of all evil, and store up your treasures in Heaven – not that I think God wants us to be poor, but our first concern should be life and morals over money). For me, if someone supports abortion, they’re out, regardless of their other policies. After those people have been filtered out, I narrow down the other candidates by their policies, because not valuing life is a mindset that underlies and influences, indirectly or directly, all other policies.
I don’t know if you’re considering Hilary, but what little I know about her besides her socialistic viewpoint is that she’s already trying to pass a policy that will make it against the law for Christians to preach the Gospel on CHRISTIAN radio! I know the end times that the Bible talks about in Revelation are coming, but I’d rather prolong them than welcome them with open arms, which is what I’d be doing if I voted her into office. Candidates come as a whole package, you can’t say that you support Hilary’s socialism without also accepting, whether you agree with it or not, her desire to stifle the rights of Christians specifically (this is just an example - I have no idea if you’d vote for her or not – my grandparents are Christians and are voting for her, which I still don’t get, but anyway, that’s another story).
Just so you know…there are other issues which might be considered more liberal-minded that I accept, like almost being an animal-rights activist (seal hunting in Canada and animal fights are so wrong!!)…but the larger issues are human lives so I vote along those lines first and THEN work on the external issues. :)
I don't feel you're being holier than thou, and I didn't think I was either until I re-read the email I originally sent. I detected a hint of "enlightened" smugness in it.
I can understand the relativism you sense, but I don't think I'm being relativistic. I think I'm struggling with two absolutes that can't be reconciled neatly. I categorically stated in my post that I believe abortion is wrong. I said, "I do not believe abortion is an option in any circumstances, at any time."
I didn't use the word wrong because its a trigger word for people. It prompts emotional reactions. It often comes across as judgment, even when judgment is not intended, and that destroys an opportunity. I know how I was, and if someone told me my behavior was wrong, that person just lost the opportunity to influence me. I don't want to lose the chance to love a hurting person to Christ because of how I speak or think, even if I feel/think/know it's the truth. I want to meet people where they are and speak their language, and I don't believe that is watering down the truth, or watering down Christ, as has been suggested by people before.
Your examples about murder and child abuse are good ones. I agree with your assumptions and what you said there. But the difference is that I believe you feel you're comparing apples to apples, where I feel you're comparing apples to oranges. With our underlying assumptions being different, we're going to come to different conclusions more often than not.
I believe that life begins at conception and should be protected from that moment. The life in the womb is equal to the life outside the womb. I believe you feel that way too. Our difference resides in how we view the rest of the equation.
Let me know if I'm wrong, but I think you're priority is the well-being of the baby. And if that's the case, you are giving the baby's needs more value in the equation of life. A person who supports abortion is giving the woman's needs more value in the equation. If I step into the situation and say something should or shouldn't be done, I am elevating one life over the other.
The life in the womb often has more at stake, whereas the life of the mother isn't always threatened. However, if I then take my one vote and cast it for a a particular candidate, I'm also tacitly supporting that candidate's views on everything else - global poverty, the death penalty, the environment, etc., some of which I may not agree with.
Once that candidate is elected, he or she is confronted with thousands of other non-black and white trade offs and value compromises that must be made. My one vote most certainly matters, but it matters on every issue. If I cast a vote for a candidate who opposes abortion but is weak on global poverty, how many people am I "killing" because of that. How many children aren't given a chance to live past age five. My vote "for life" unravels quickly..
I have absolute authority in how I live - whether I choose God or not. But I only have partial authority in other matters of this world. My authority is rapidly going to bump against someone else's authority - opinions, thoughts, behavior, interpretation, etc. I am not always right, and I know it. I try to focus on the speck in my eye and allow the Holy Spirit to help me see clearly how He wants me to help with the plank in another person's eye.
I am not advocating anarchy. I don't propose people sit back and let abortion, murder and child abuse happen. I don't sit back. I vote. I always have. I don't take it for granted. But there is much in this world that needs fixing. I don't let one issue dictate my vote. That's approach is neither right or wrong, it's a matter of perspective.
God has put the needs of the unborn on the hearts of many people. Those people will vote and act as they feel led to. I may not always agree with the approach, but I support their right to have a different approach.
I am not silent about my beliefs, but I don't shout them out either. I am not ashamed of myself or God, but I don't feel compelled to "solve" the abortion issue. I say all that, not to infer that other people are the opposite of me, I say it to explain what others may perceive as silence and lack of action.
An interesting thing to consider is what would you do if your candidate supported abortion but had the most aggressive plan to eliminate global poverty. How deep of a conflict would that be for you since you work at Compassion and Compassion is about releasing children from poverty in Jesus' name?
It sounds like it wouldn't be a tremendous conflict for you because fighting abortion a priority issue for you, and there is nothing wrong with that. But it is an interesting thought that ties this conversation back to the original question you asked of me.
Ok, I've just NOW had time to read your response. Only took me a month! :)
Well, I must say everything you had to write in response gave me a great deal of thought, and helped me better understand your point of view. I don't quite get it - like, it's not something I can accept for myself - but I do see how it fits and makes sense for you.
As for your final question - "What would I do if my candidate supported abortion but had the most aggressive plan to eliminate global poverty. How deep of a conflict would that be for me since I work at Compassion and Compassion is about releasing children from poverty in Jesus' name?" - that's something that's technically hard for me to answer at this point. A month ago I would've said the first priority is abortion. However, today, when I'm struggling to make ends meet myself and wondering why it's hard to find a second job that pays more than minimum wage - I don't know the answer.
However, I guess my first thought right now is that while I wish I had more money, and I wish the rest of the world had more money, for me money is not the most important thing. The value of life is. I guess when I think about all the injustices that occur in the world, money is truly the root of all evil. And I personally don't think I could ever look at my Maker in the end and say "well, I wanted more money so I voted for this person while I decided it was ok for the mother next door kill her baby,” which is essentially what I’d be doing in voting for a candidate who’s pro-abortion. Yes, I know my perspective is quite different, and I don’t think we’ll ever see eye-to-eye…but at this time, that’s what I think. :)
In the ideal world, there’d be a candidate who was both pro-life and making strides to eliminate poverty. I still am needing to do my research, but I doubt that candidate exists today for whatever reason.
Post a Comment