Not Learning from History: American Attitudes Toward Islam

For the past several weeks, the news has been filled with the debate over whether a proposed Islamic Cultural Center (inaccurately referred repeatedly to as a mosque) should be built near Ground Zero in New York. On top of that this week Pastor Terry Jones from Gainesville, Florida has planned a well publicized “Koran-burning Ceremony” to mark the 9^th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. Moreover there have been other protests around the country in Tennessee and California also protesting the building of mosques. What is so troubling in these reports is the way in which grief, fear and ignorance have been exploited for personal and political gain.

Recently, the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life released a report on American attitudes regarding Islam as a religion and Muslims in general.  Some of the insights from the report are revealing in their political implications, and what they suggest about US citizens in general. Overall the study revealed that Americans are divided on their favorable or unfavorable views of Islam (30% favorable, 38% unfavorable, 32% don’t know). However, that is only the tip of the iceberg. Consider these other findings

-          While 51% believe that the New York mosque should not be built in its proposed location (compared to 34% who say it should be allowed to be built), 62% of those polled believed that Muslims should have the same rights to build houses of worship in local communities. [Does anyone else see a contradiction in these numbers?]

-          54% of Republicans have an unfavorable view of Islam, compared to 27% of Democrats.

-          The older a person is the more unfavorable that person is toward Islam.

-          The less formal education a person has the more likely he is to have an unfavorable view of Islam.

While in no case do a majority of Democrats, college educated people or young adults have a favorable perspective on Islam, it is clearly evident that older, more conservative and less educated people tend to have the most unfavorable views of Islam. Additionally as the first bullet (above) indicates we profess freedom of religious expression, but don’t extend that freedom to Muslims.

However, the most telling chart came near the end of the report, where people were asked about how much they knew about Islam as a religion. Pew has asked this question several times over last decade, so the chart helped reveal how much Americans have chosen to learn over the last decade. In 2010 approximately 55% of Americans said they either knew little or nothing at all about Islam.  What is striking is that in 2001 after the 9/11 attacks 61% of Americans said they knew little or nothing at all about Islam – only 5% difference.

What this tells me is that despite having been attacked by “Islamic extremists” nine years ago, we Americans have done little to understand the religion of those who attacked us. Moreover, we have not sought to understand the difference between a militant Muslim and a peace-loving adherent of the Islamic faith. To turn it around, it would be akin to not trying to understand the differences within Christianity between a Jim Jones or David Koresh on the one hand, and the Mennonites or Presbyterians on the other. I would not want my faith to be judged on the basis of militant extremists, but in fact that is exactly what we have done toward Muslims both in the US and abroad. What the Pew report makes clear is that a majority of people are reacting out of ignorance and fear, rather than understanding and a willingness to learn.

In part responsibility for this maladjustment needs to be placed at the feet of the media and certain politicians. Today I listened to an interview with Pastor Jones and wondered:  Why are they even giving this whack job a hearing? Why treat him as if he is an appropriate representative of America or Christianity? Why not denounce him for the self-righteous hate-mongerer that he is? Politicians like Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin, and newscasters like Glen Beck and Shawn Hannity (FOX News) have used the NYC mosque debate as another way to slam Democrats and President Obama. I give credit to people like New York City Mayor Bloomberg and others for speaking out in favor of the mosque building going ahead as planned, but there are too few leaders willing to take a strong stand on principles that all Americans take for granted. This includes religious leaders.

As a Christian and an American, I am embarrassed and saddened by the current attitudes toward Muslims revealed in the report and in the news. This current scape-goating of Muslims is yet another example of the pattern of US history where Americans have repeatedly singled out certain groups of people to vent their fear and guilt in place of seeking understanding. US History is filled with examples of historical scapegoats from African slaves to Native Americans to Irish and East European Catholics to Latino farm workers to Chinese railroad workers to Japanese Americans to Jews to undocumented immigrants. What is equally sad is that some members of these previously denigrated groups now point the finger as Muslims.

Just as with slavery, the treatment of Native Americans, and the internment of Japanese- American during World War II, one day we will as a nation look back and shake our heads at our shameful behavior toward our fellow citizens who happen to practice Islam. One would hope we could learn from history, but as more than one sage has reflected, if we do not learn from the mistakes of history, we are doomed to repeat them; and so it seems we are repeating them once again.

The Anti- War Alternative in Afghanistan

I was troubled and saddened to learn of the capture and murder of ten Christian medical aid workers on August 7 returning from providing eye care to rural Afghans; the Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack.

When I heard of the attack my first reaction was: I hope our leaders don’t use this as an excuse to “get tough” on the Taliban, and try to whip up support for increased military action in that country. Right now there are deliberations in Congress over whether to continue to fund the war, as President Obama has promised to do, or to begin to withdraw as a small number of Congresspersons are seeking to do. This attack just heightens the personal and political stakes of that debate.

In no way do I want to diminish the pain, grief and even anger that the friends and families of the deceased must feel. At the same time, a vengeful response would be diametrically opposed to the spirit and motivation of those who were killed. Tom Little, the eye doctor who headed up the team, had been working in Afghanistan for 30 years, which means he had been working there during the worst of the Taliban rule, and even the Russian war with Afghanistan (when ironically the US was actually supplying the Taliban with weapons that are now being turned on us!). Another victim, Glen Lapp, a Mennonite Central Committee worker on the team had been in the country over the last two years in the midst of the war. Other stories could be told of each of the victims. They died as they had lived – selflessly and sacrificially, a sign of shalom amidst death, chaos and violence.

Much has been made of the fact that they were innocent victims of this war; this is true. They were not there as combatants but as healers. Yet, they are not the only innocent victims of the war; thousands of Afghan citizens have been caught in the cross fire between NATO and Taliban troops and are simply referred to as “collateral damage.” Most experts agree that the killing of these innocent Afghans has been the Taliban’s best recruiting tool. To respond with vengeance as a way of gaining support for the war is to be no better than our enemy, and to play into their hands

I am in basic agreement with those who advocate that we must get out of this war. I did not and still do not support President Obama’s plan to increase our military presence there. I cringed during his State of the Union speech when he said we would spare no resources in support of our military efforts there. While Democrats and Republicans bicker about taxes and spending here at home, they are in basic agreement on Obama’s support of the Afghan war. Meanwhile our poverty at home increases, we bicker about health care reform, and Democrats and Republicans debate the best approach toward addressing the economic recession.

However, in my mind I hear Martin Luther King’s 1967 “Beyond Vietnam” speech in which he linked the suffering of the poor at home with the war in Vietnam; the resources we spend on war abroad only feed the poverty and devastation at home. Moreover, I think of so many in my generation directly or indirectly wounded by the Vietnam War. I worry for the twenty-somethings of today, who will be bearing the economic, social, and psychic scars of this war for decades, just as my generation lives with the after effects of the Vietnam War. Like the Vietnam War, the war in Afghanistan is un-winnable and has no redeeming purpose.

So I support the anti-war effort, and yet I don’t think we can just pull out and leave the Afghans to pick up the pieces; we have contributed to the chaos there, and have a moral obligation to do what we can to bring peace and healing to that divided nation. Brazilian educator Paulo Freire said that in calling for social and political change, people must engage in both denunciation and annunciation. Denunciation involves denouncing the status quo that needs to be changed, in this case our current military involvement in Afghanistan. Annunciation involves projecting a vision of a positive future as an alternative; that’s where I think we in the anti-war effort need to do some work. We know what we don’t want – the war – but the only alternative we offer is getting out, and leaving the Afghans in disarray.

Despite their tragic deaths, the ten aid workers represent the alternative we in the anti-war effort must present: a vision of people coming to provide assistance in quality of life. As Greg Mortenson, the author of Three Cups of Tea and Stones into Schools has shown, well meaning people can operate in war-torn places like Afghanistan if they operate in collaboration with the local people and offer resources and assistance that address the their basic needs. Tom Little, Glen Lapp, Greg Mortenson, and others represent a vision of a positive American presence in Afghanistan that could do more to bring peace to that land than all the weapons and soldiers will ever be able to accomplish.

At the end of Three Cups of Tea, Mortenson quotes a Muslim cleric who says that the enemy is not the Taliban, but rather ignorance, and that the building of schools in that country would do more to defeat the Taliban than the military intervention there. The enemy to be addressed in that poor and divided country are not the terrorist, but the poverty, the lack of health care, the lack of education, and other basic needs that serve as breeding grounds for terrorism. The vision we in the anti-war movement must cultivate is a vision of an Afghanistan that is healed and restored; a vision of empowering the Afghan people thru education, training and other basic services to rise out of their poverty and devastation. We need more not less people like those that were killed, who are willing to offer their services to those in need. If the military has a role, it is to protect and provide safe haven for those seeking help and those seeking to help.

If we truly want to end our military involvement in that war, this is the positive vision we must announce, even as we continue to denounce the war and its continuing devastation.

Is the "Race to the Top" Rigged?

President Obama is to be commended for making the improvement of the nation’s public school system a national priority and for challenging states and school systems to completely re-think the way they deliver education through the program called Race to the Top. States are being invited to submit proposals for funds to engage in a process of major educational reform. State plans must address six priorities that range from early childhood education to providing resources for high risk and special needs students to recruiting and training high quality teachers.

However the recent announcement that Washington, DC superintendent Michelle Rhee fired 241 “low-performing” teachers after instituting her program called IMPACT. Rhee’s action raises the question if the emphasis on teacher performance indicates that the Race to the Top is rigged against the teachers. Whenever educational issues come up, the first target of critics is usually the teachers. So as the Washington Post reported, Rhee’s action is meant to “send a message” that teachers need to raise the quality of their performance. No doubt some teachers need to find another career, but others may be forced outto that career not because of lack of skill or commitment, but a lack of structure, resources and support.

Critics often complain that teachers are overpaid for “only 9 months of work” and aren’t held accountable. Over the past several years no one group of people so valuable to our society have been so maligned and misunderstood as teachers. Now put those teachers in an old building that looks like a prison, has poor ventilation, with 35 kids per class, 5-6 periods a day, not enough textbooks, and no aides. Then include in that class 5-6 kids who come from dysfunctional families, another 5-6 who have childcare responsibilities or are expected to contribute to the family income, don’t give those kids breakfast and then blame those teachers that test scores are not “meeting standards”. You will begin to understand what Michelle Rhee’s “low-performing” teachers are up against.

I offer three points of reference. First, my own children went through a suburban school system that was at best adequate. Every year the local paper published the salaries of all the teachers in the district, and complained about “rising property taxes,” which happened to be lowest in the county. Through their 13 years of schooling, my kids had some outstanding teachers, a few poor ones, and a majority of mediocre teachers. But these teachers had adequate technology, a decent library, and manageable class sizes. Most of the kids came from families that provided enough food and other necessities, so that the kids were not expected to contribute the family income. Most of those families had at least one college graduate, so that these kids grew up expecting to attend college. My kids and the vast majority of kids graduated on time and went to various post high school pursuits including college. Mediocre and even poor teachers get by in that system, because they were operating in a context that surrounded them with adequate resources, necessary support, and a college going culture.

Second I am a college teacher who has taught graduate students, first and second year undergrads, and adults returning to earn a college degree. One year I simultaneously taught students across that spectrum. With the graduate students who were intelligent, motivated and resourceful, I was “outstanding” – my students grew and learned tremendously - by their own evaluation. However at the same time I taught a group of students most of whom were first generation college students, and who often had major economic and family responsibilities outside of class. I also taught some adult students who had difficulty reading and others who could not write coherent paragraphs. I worked doubly hard and pulled out every creative idea out of teaching bag of tricks. I ended up failing half the students in the undergrad class, even though it was one of the most creative, draining and challenging teaching experiences of my career. Even more amazing is that some of the students I failed actually thanked me for the way I had respected them in that class. So which teacher should be evaluated – the teacher of grad students, the teacher of the adult students or the teacher who failed half his undergrad class?

Third, I am part of a community group that provides support to a large urban public high school, I sit on the board of an urban Mennonite high school and I have consulted with a new charter school. All three schools serve the same demographic of students: lower income, urban, mostly students of color. The urban high school sees only about 50% of its 9^th graders persist to graduation. The Mennonite high school has a 100% college acceptance rate of students, and the charter school is only one year into operation, so it is too soon to tell. However, what is common to all three schools is that they all have innovative and creative principals and a group of teachers who love kids. However the charter school and Mennonite high school have class sizes around 20, while the public high school averages 30-35. The charter school and Mennonite high school have local autonomy, while the public high school answers to the superintendent. Despite its low test scores, the public high school has seen phenomenal improvement in scores and morale, was on track to substantially improve the graduation rate. Justlooking at the scores the superintendent decided the principal needed to be re-assigned and her efforts halted. My prediction is that any momentum and hope she built with students and teachers will be undercut and the school’s performance will decline.

In these scenarios (my children’s school, my own classes, the three schools I compare) which teachers failed and who succeeded? Blaming teachers for a failed system is an easy explanation, but wholly inadequate. If I was teacher looking for a job, would I want to go into a system where the odds are stacked against me like the Philadelphia or DC school systems? Would I choose to operate in a system, where I am underpaid, and under-resourced, and yet expected to achieve progress on my kids test scores? Are the test scores even the proper measure of success? Or would I choose to go to an adequately resourced suburban district where even if I was mediocre, my kids would do okay? Or would I gravitate to a charter school or a private school, not subject to the whims of a politically vulnerable superintendent?

If we as a nation are truly concerned about public education, we need to stop laying all the blame on the teachers. The system as a whole is broken and creating a culture of fear and distrust distracts everyone’s attention, especially the teachers, from being willing to re-shape and re-form that broken system. What we need is a systemic approach to urban education like Geoffrey Canada’s Harlem Children Zone. Canada recognizes that there many factors outside the school building that affect learning inside the school building. While I don’t fully agree with Canada’s almost totally behavioristic methods, I do think he has recognized that the problem with urban public education is systemic and is seeking to address it that way. This is why cities across the nation are seeking to adopt and adapt his model to their situations.

I recently read the reflections of a 5th year teacher in the Philadelphia public school system. Half of all teachers quit by their fifth year, and this teacher had survived that threshold. Yet, just when she should be hitting her stride, she writes that one of the realities she lives with is that most days she drives home “feeling like a crappy teacher.” Moreover, as she looks out over the career ahead of her she wonders if she can sustain her career over a lifetime. I want that teacher to feel valued, supported, and excited about the work she will do, because those feelings will be conveyed to her students, and will influence her students’ performance. Creating a culture of fear and intimidation (as Michelle Rhee has done in DC) will not help this teacher feel any better about herself, her work or her students. She needs to be surrounded by a system that helps her get better at her craft, not that threatens her to get better or else.

The Race to the Top seems rigged against the teachers, and the ones who will suffer in the end will again be the students.

Engaged Spirituality

Many years ago I began thinking that the classic forms of Christian spirituality that I had been taught in church and seminary just didn’t work for me. I came to faith in the evangelical tradition where a good Christian was supposed to have their daily “quiet time” of Bible study, prayer and reflection. I read all the books of Richard Foster and Dallas Willard on spiritual disciplines, and still consider Foster’s Celebration of Discipline as a critical book in my formation. I explored Roman Catholic wrters like Morton Kelsey, Brother Lawrence, Thomas Merton and Henri Nouwen. I read the classic Testament of Devotion by Quaker Thomas Kelly. I explored the charismatic movement and even dabbled in speaking in tongues for a few years. Yet, in the end something was missing.

The first seed was planted when I moved to Jersey City, NJ, a crowded poverty stricken city, where I realized that there was no place to find true and complete quiet in such a noisy, busy community. Moreover, I found that I was most spiritually alive when I was in the midst of people actively working on changing things that were causing suffering. It struck me that one did not have to retreat from the people and activity of one’s daily life to connect with God; God was there in the midst of it all. John 1 proclaims that “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.” God was not far off only to be experienced in some mystical transcendence, God was among us to be touched and experienced in the busyness of life. I had developed what theologians call an “incarnational theology.”

However, I did not actively think about these things much for many years. I tried to fit my spiritual discomfort into the classic disciplines of prayer, meditation, Bible reading and worship. Then a few years ago, I read through most of the writings of the Brazilian educator Paulo Freire. Freire is best known for his book The Pedagogy of the Oppressed, in which he outlines his philosophy education as a way of raising the consciousness of oppressed people in order to motivate them to change the social and economic order that keeps them poor. His critique of the “banking model of education” and the concepts conscientization and teaching as dialogue are now standard subjects in introductory education courses and presented as an alternative to traditional methods of teaching. No one author has shaped my own approach to teaching as much as Freire has.

However, as I read through his writings, I saw and sensed and underlying spirituality that sought to engage the world even as it sought to change it. A lifelong Roman Catholic, Freire was critical of the Roman Catholic Church in Brazil for its support of the ruling oligarchy. Moreover, he criticized the clergy’s promotion of what he called “magical thinking” among the poor; encouraging them not to question the status quo (that was literally killing them) but rather to look for God to provide for them in miraculous ways and to reward them for their faithfulness in the hereafter. Instead he called for the church to be prophetic and to work in solidarity with those being crushed by the ruling elite. Terms like love, salvation, hope, conversion, and the Word, fill his writings. I find it odd that while many authors mention his affinity with liberation theology, few of his biographers and interpreters have explored the underlying spirituality that drove and sustained him.

What I found in Freire was a Christian whose spirituality did not remove him from the pain and suffering of the world, but rather engaged him more fully in that pain and suffering. As he wrote one time, he “met Christ in the people.” This was a perspective with which I deeply resonated. For years I had noted that I felt God’s presence more fully in a political rally or demonstration, than I did in a worship service. Prayer seemed to make more sense as a way of expressing concern for other people and connecting with their struggle, than it did as a way of communicating with God. Jesus was less of a Savior on a pedestal, and more like a brother walking along side of me in the midst of the search for justice. Freire gave me a way of thinking about these aspects of the spiritual life that was not removed from the world, but rather fully engaged with it.

Just recently, I came across the book, Spirituality of Resistance by Roger Gottlieb. Gottlieb is an agnostic Jewish philosopher who teaches at Worcester (MA) Polytechnic Institute, and is actively involved in promoting awareness about the critical nature of global climate change and the environmental crisis. Like me, Gottlieb is seeking to find a way to connect with some sort of spiritual presence as a form of resistance to the poverty, disparity and environmental degradation being committed by governments, corporations and individuals. He writes “To find a peaceful heart…we need to live on this earth: fully conscious of what is happening on it, actively resisting that which we know to be evil or destructively ignorant.” (p. 13). In other words, we can’t go into our prayer closets or out in the woods to seek God or spiritual peace, and hope that God or technology will somehow save us from our own self-destructive ways. We must meet God while we we are engaged in the issues of life and seek and express our spirituality through lives of active resistance to the status quo and in solidarity with those seeking to create a more equitable and just world. While Gottlieb rejects traditional forms of religion (and at points is understandably critical of their contribution to the current social, economic and environmental crisis), he does not reject those who can find a way to engage this crisis through those means.

Gottlieb and Freire have renewed my interest in exploring what an engaged spirituality would look like in our time. I do not know at this point where that search might lead, but I am excited about the possibility of finding a way to be a spiritual person and yet fully immersed in the struggles of our time in a way that “seeks justice, loves mercy and walks humbly with our God.”

A Teachable Moment on the True Nature of Racism

The recent accusation of racism that led to the firing, apology and offer of a new job to Shirley Sherrod is instructive of many things on several levels. For those who may have missed it, conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart took a statement of Shirley Sherrod out of context to make it look like she discriminated against a white farmer in her role as an official in the Agriculture Department. FOX News ran the story as an example of Obama administration racism against whites, Ms. Sherrod was fired, and the NAACP (to whom her speech as addressed) denounced her words; then the truth came out. Ms. Sherrod’s story was exactly the opposite and the white farmer in question said she was an invaluable help to him. The Obama administration apologized and offered Ms. Sherrod another job, which at this moment she has neither accepted nor rejected. To read more on this incident go to this link.

Putting aside the out and out character defamation of Mr. Breitbart, the opportunistic race-baiting of FOX and the knee-jerk ineptness of Obama’s Agriculture Department, let me add a thought on why even if Ms. Sherrod had done what she was accused of, it could not be considered racism.

It seems that many folks are so uptight about race in this country, that we are afraid to honestly look at the underlying issue of institutionalized, systemic racism in our nation. The election of a black President did not eradicate racism in this country, it only made it more confusing for many to discuss, and raised the level of fear among many whites. The election of a black president, like the changing demographics of the United States as a whole, has a lot of whites in this country scared. By the year 2042 most demographers predict that white people will comprise less than 50% of the population. Whites will still comprise the largest racial/ethnic group, but Hispanics will be over 30%, while African-Americans will comprise about 12-13% and Asian/Pacific Islanders 6-8%. English will be one of many languages spoken. “American” history will by necessity have a different slant, as the various peoples who make up our populace will include less people from European backgrounds and more from Africa, Asia and Latin America. For a group of people who have always had their culture, their history, and their way of thinking and speaking as the norm, this signals change, and change generates fear for many white folks.

Having said that, the systems that are in place (education, law enforcement, health care, etc) still overwhelmingly serve white citizens much more effectively than they serve citizens of color. Why do schools with predominantly Latino and Black students generally receive significantly less funding than white school districts? Why do areas where people of color live experience more crime and less security than white neighborhoods? Why does the health care system not serve people of color with the same effectiveness as it does white patients? Why do African-American drug offenders consistently receive harsher sentences than their white counterparts committing the same crimes? The answers to these and related questions are both simple and complex. The simple answer is that racial preference and bias is built into the very systems that inequitably serve different groups of people. The complex answer is trying to figure out a way to make those systems serve all people equitably.

When people look at the laws and policies on these issues, one sees that while they may seem “fair” on the surface, the results they generate create tremendous inequities. For instance, funding public school systems with property taxes seems “fair” and yet when one looks at the disparate results, one sees that that system creates schools with widely different levels of resources. State and Federal governments are now trying to compensate by funneling additional funding to underfunded districts, encouraging charter schools and offering vouchers, but these actions are band-aids on an oozing sore. What is needed is a totally revamped system of how education is funded and delivered in this country. The people working in this system may be sincere, dedicated, and personally non-biased when it comes to race, but the system they work in is irretrievably discriminatory against people of color, especially when they are also poor.

Now that doesn’t mean that there aren’t some white schools or communities that lose out, or that there aren’t white citizens who sometimes are discriminated against, but the overarching pattern favors one group over another. The laws, the policies, the structures and the institutions that have served whites very well over the long haul, do not serve their fellow citizens of color at the same level. That’s racism; and one sees the effects of that racism by looking at the results these systems produce. Like doctors we need to use the symptoms to diagnose the underlying problem. Simply treating symptoms does nothing to address the underlying disease.

Had Shirley Sherrod chosen not to help a white farmer because he was white, that would have been an act of prejudice. If she had consistently chosen not to serve white farmers at the same level she served black farmers, that might be a pattern of racism on her part. However, the Agriculture Department where she worked historically takes quite good care of white farmers, and therefore would not be institutionally racist.

People like Andrew Breitbart and the folks at FOX News use distortions to distract folks (especially scared white folks) away from the deep systemic issues that need to be addressed in this country. I suspect that there are smart people at FOX, so I can imagine (though I don’t know) that their distortions and character assassinations are a deliberate attempt to keep the systems that privilege whites over others intact. They use half-truths (which are really lies) and out of context statements (like Breitbart’s video) to paint a picture that makes whites feel like they need to fight to “take the country back,” when in fact the systems in this country continue to serve them just fine. Parading a black spokesman like Republican National Chairman Michael Steele in their reports confuses the unsuspecting and gives flimsy justification for those who seek to keep the systems as they are. When it seems opportune, they then throw in the non-sensical charge of “reverse racism,” which is what happened in Sherrod's case.

As a white person, I am not interested in developing a system that punishes whites; that is not in my interest. However, as a white person of faith who is concerned for justice, I am committed to creating a system that serves all people equally. Honesty compels me to recognize that as a white person I can take for granted many things that my friends of color cannot: from the schools their kids attend, to the way they are treated by the police and courts, to how often their trash gets picked up to the kind of health care they receive to how they are treated by the media to who knows what.

One lesson we need to take from this unfortunate incident is to take a look at what is actually going on in this country. The disparities mentioned above are widely cited. Can we wake up and see what is going on? Shirley Sherrod told her story to illustrate her personal growth in race relations, but at the very worst she might have been prejudiced against one white man (which she was not). On the other hand, all of us live within a network of systems that is inherently racist and must be significantly overhauled, if this “land of the free” is going to offer that freedom equally to all.

Good to the Last Drop

This past week I attended the funeral of co-worker and good friend, Sheri Robinson. For the past three years Sheri had been battling cancer first of the breast and then the liver. Like any good “homegoing service” (a common term for funerals in the African-American Church), Sheri’s service was much more a tribute to her life than a mourning of her death.

While she was only 48, Sheri had lived a full and vibrant life. I met her about 11 or 12 years ago, when we hired her to join the faculty of Eastern University’s Degree Completion Program (a program designed to enable working adults to earn their college degrees). At the time of her hiring we were concerned about her stamina because she had already had one bout with cancer and many other medical issues, not to mention lupus, a disease that attacks your immune system. Over the years I knew her Sheri had battled various other health problems, even before this last battle with cancer. Given all the health challenges she had to face, it was a miracle she lived as long as she did. No, I take that back, it was a testament to the vibrancy of her living.

Sheri was a woman full of life and power. She was an intelligent woman with three degrees in HR, Marketing and Law. She loved students, and fought valiantly on their behalf. She always had a smile and a laugh, but behind that smile was a passion for justice, a concern for excellence and a deep love of people. Moreover, as was so beautifully brought out at her service, she gained strength and hope through her deep faith in and love for God. In addition to all her school and community involvements, Sheri was a leader in her church, both in her actions and in the quality of her faith.

That is why the preacher of the day chose to entitle his eulogy “Good to the Last Drop.” He based his remarks on Philippians 2.17, where Paul characterized his life this way: “I am being poured like a drink offering on the sacrifice.” This refers to the Old Testament passages that describe the drink offering of lambs’ blood poured out over a fire in the Temple, which then created a savory aroma up to God. He said that Sheri had poured out her life on behalf of others and of God, and that she had left nothing behind. She was “good to the last drop.” I agree – she was a woman who gave her all right to the end.

Funeral services often cause us to reflect on the nature of our lives. We ask ourselves: What will they say at my final service? Who will show up? More importantly what kind of legacy will I leave behind? Psychologist James Hollis says that the reality of death actually gives us the urgency to find meaning in the days and years we have. I think that is true. What is really important? What relationships do I need to nurture? What work do I have to do? What values and passions will fuel my living? Like most people I want my life to count for something. Like Sheri I want to be “good to the last drop.”

I said goodbye this week to a good friend, a great woman, a person of deep faith, and quality person. I was also reminded that this life we have is a gift from God, which in turn must be offered as a gift to others and the One who created us.

What Happened at West Philadelphia High School?

I have shared some of my feelings about the terrible string of decisions and actions regarding West Philadelphia High School. However, I came across a blog (A Good Day of Teaching) that puts it well: Did Saliyah Criz Steal Arlene's Thunder?" (For those unaware of the situation Saliyah Criz was the outstanding principal of West Philly High School who was replaced by Philadelphia Schools Superintendent Arlene Ackerman for "low test scores" despite having made tremendous progress in the school.

I can't say it any better, so I refer you her blog here.

The Way of the World by Ron Suskind


My rating: 4 of 5 stars
Ron Suskind has a way of writing about current events and feeling like you live thru them. He follows the lives of several people in the years 2006-2008: an Afghan high school exchange student, a Pakistani college grad in the US, several CIA operatives, lawyers defending prisoners detained at Gitmo, Benazir Bhutto, George Bush and Dick Cheney. The message Suskind brings is clear: America's political leaders have lost their moral authority by pursuing an "annthing it takes to win" approach, even when that involves outright lieing to the American public about WMDs and terrorists cells in Iraq as a pretext for invading Iraq. Suskind can not be well liked by the former members of the Bush White House as he portrays them as people who lived by the maxim "don't confuse me with the facts, I know what I believe." Yet Suskind ends with a positive view of the ordinary American citizen who stills believes and lives by the values of honesty, integrity and compassion. I came away with a different feeling: that our place as a nation in the world has been severely undermined by the hypocrisy of our stated values (democracy, freedom, integrity, compassion) not being backed by our actions as country. I see the crumbling of the Empire, and its not pretty.

View all my reviews >>

Reflections from the U.S. Social Forum

This past week (June 22-26) I was in Detroit, Michigan for the Second Unites States Social Forum (USSF). The first US Social Forum was held three years ago in Atlanta, as an outgrowth of the World Social Forum that began in Brazil in 2001. While estimates varied widely, there were somewhere between 15,000 and 20,000 people who converged on the Cobo Center in downtown Detroit for workshops, strategy meetings, dialogues and occasional protests.

According to the program booklet (p. 2) a social forum is “an open meeting place for reflective thinking, democratic debate of ideas, formulation of proposals, free exchange of experiences and interlinking for effective action, by groups and movements of civil society that are opposed to neoliberalism and the domination of the world by capital and any form of imperialism, and are committed to building a planetary society directed toward fruitful relationships among Humankind and between it and the Earth.”

That’s a mouthful, but basically it is a gathering of politically and socially progressive grass roots groups and organizers who have not generally benefited by the current social and economic order, and therefore are seeking to create a society that is more equitable, more humane, and more environmentally responsible. As such there were people and organizations representing causes such a public education, racial justice, mountaintop removal, gay & lesbian rights, trade unions, economic justice, climate change, and a whole lot more. As I kiddingly said to friends when they asked about USSF, we came together to plot the overthrow of the Empire.

This was my first time attending a social forum and as such I was taking it all in. What follows are a few impressions and reflections I took away from this amazing gathering of community organizers and social activists.

First, the USSF demonstrates that there is a massive movement of people who want a more equitable society and who operate from a variety of political and economic visions – Socialism, Communism, Anarchism, Solidary economics, modified capitalism, Buddhist economics and so on. While there was a significant minority of religiously oriented folks, by and large this vision is not informed by any sort of spiritual or faith perspective. Moreover, while the Tea Party folks, who represent the extreme conservative right, get a lot of media attention, this group represents the poor, the excluded, the forgotten and generally invisible in our society. While not widely publicized, this is a massive group of people to be reckoned with.

Second, I would estimate that 2/3 to ¾ of those gathered were under the age of 35 at least 50% were people of color: African Americans, Native Americans, Asians, various Hispanic groups and so on. There were also a predominance of poor and working class people and a great number of students. By and large the “leaders” ( I put this in quotes because by and large they were largely an anti-authoritarian group) were in their mid 30’s to early 40’s and brought with them a clarity of vision, a depth of experience and a deep respect for activists 50 and up who had gone before them. As opposed to my generation when they were in their 20’s (remember the phrase ”don’t trust anyone over 30”), these folks openly spoke of their debt to the activists of the 1950’s, 60’s and 70’s who went before them. The USSF is an intergenerational movement that sees that the struggle has been and will be over the long haul.

Third, while there was great deal of criticism of the current, social, political and economic order in the developed world, this is not just an “anti” movement (anti-war, anti-racism, anti-imperialism, anti-capitalism). The purpose of the USSF is to seek and provide solutions, to build alliances and coalitions, and to work together in a more coordinated way. I expect that there will be several efforts that come out of this gathering addressing a wide range of issues.

Fourth, at the USSF I heard a perspective on the current state of affairs that is rarely reflected in the mainstream media. In light of the economic recession, the current instability in the Middle East, the debate over immigration in the U.S., the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and even the current disaster in the Gulf, it appears that global capitalism and the dominance of Western nations has peaked in terms of its dominance and is beginning to fall apart.

One striking example of the change taken was illustrated by a newly released Oliver Stone documentary, “South of the Border, ”which shows how over the last 10-15 years there has been a dramatic shift toward socialist leaning governments in Latin America (Venezuela, Argentina, Bolivia, and Brazil just to name four). These countries have rejected the past dominance of their political process and economies by Western governments and large corporations, and instead have sought to make reforms that are designed bring uplift to the poorest of the poor in those societies. This trend has caused U.S. officials to vilify leaders such as Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, when in fact he has been democratically elected and is widely popular in his own country because of the people oriented reforms he has made.

From the USSF perspective, one gets the sense that that tectonic plates of history are shifting and that we live in a window of opportunity for significant social and political change. It is more than a little symbolic, maybe even prophetic, that just days before the G-8 and G-20 nations were meeting in Toronto this weekend, there was a mild earthquake (5.0 on the Richter scale) in that city. Is God or the Creation trying to show us something?

Finally, while there was a small presence of religiously oriented groups a the USSF, I was struck by the overall absence of the Christian radical movement. Groups such as Sojourners, the new monasticism, and the emerging church were not evident ( the one group I did see represented was the progressive Jewish group Tikkun), despite the fact that many of the concerns discussed by such groups were very similar to things discussed at the USSF. As a Christian, I often felt like I was on the outside looking in. The language we socially oriented Christians use and the language dominant at the USSF don’t mesh easily. For example I attended a session on spirituality and economics, and it was clear that even though we freely talked about things we thought were wrong in the world, folks got very uncomfortable when the word “sin” was attached to such wrongs. So much what I saw being imagined and discussed would fit with my understanding of the Reign of God on earth, yet to use that language was difficult; apparently there is a lot of hurt and animosity from past religious baggage. I would hope there would be a stronger Christian presence in the future so as to connect our vision of God’s Shalom with the USSF vision of a more just world.

Overall, the USSF was an amazing experience; my cup was filled to overflowing, and I have been given a summer’s worth of ideas to ponder and digest. At times I felt overwhelmed by the magnitude of the event and often wondered why I was there, but it wasn’t because people excluded me in any way. I was just so humbled and awed by the amazing work that so many dedicated people are doing under oppressive and difficult conditions, and yet still remain hopeful for a future of peace, equity and justice.

What Else I Wish Obama Had Said

In Tuesday night’s speech President Obama sought to assure the nation that he was on top of the situation with the BP oil spill and that the company would be held accountable. As a result BP has been forced to set up an multibillion dollar emergency fund for victims of the spill. He also used the speech as an opportunity to emphasize the need for the U.S. to push more aggressively toward developing clean energy sources. As far as it went, I was satisfied and impressed with the President’s resolve. So what follows is not meant to be taken as a criticism of President Obama, but I must admit that I wish he said more.

I wish Pres. Obama had taken the occasion not only to push for clean energy, but also for calling us to simplify our lifestyles. While I am not aware of the current percentages, I do know that as 5-6% of the world’s population, the United States consumes well over half of the world’s natural resources. This need for natural resources, such as petroleum, causes us to go to war in the Middle East, to seek resources in previously protected and restricted wilderness areas, and to push further out into the ocean floor for oil. Had the accident that occurred in the Gulf occurred on land, there would have been no deaths, the well could have been capped immediately, and the unfolding environmental disaster in the Gulf would not have happened. The environment and the world at large can not afford us, nor can it afford countries like China and Brazil trying to emulate and catch up to us in terms of lifestyle.

By stopping at calling for clean energy and not also a change in life style, President Obama implied that we can keep on living our exorbitant and wasteful lifestyles, as long as we have “clean” energy. His options in addition to wind and solar energy, are nuclear power, which we still have not figured out how to “safely” store nuclear wastes for thousands of year, and so called “clean” coal, which many experts say is an oxymoron. What the world and the environment need is for those of us in the developed world to reduce our carbon footprint, by driving our cars less, eating locally grown food (rather than having things shipped from all over the world), and building communities that are eco-friendly rather than wasteful.

A few years ago I attended a conference at the University of Pennsylvania with the title “Building Cities After the Age of Oil.” This collection of scientists, architects and urban planners shared ideas and models for building communities that were walkable, and energy efficient, and that utilized clean energy sources such as solar, wind and geothermal. They talked about having gardens on the tops of houses, capturing rainwater for cleaning, building more public transportation, relying less on cars, and finding ways to store and save energy in neighborhoods. While much of the technical discussion was over my head, the message at that conference was clear: we know how to build green cities and green communities, what we lack is the political will.

I have no idea if President Obama sees the need for simplifying our lifestyles, but if he did, calling for a reduction of our consumptive lifestyles would be politically risky. I still remember then President Jimmy Carter during the gas crisis of the late 1970’s. He called on Americans to turn their thermostats down to 68 degrees and put on sweaters as a way of reducing our energy consumption. He is still ridiculed for that statement 30 years later, but he was right then and he would be right now.

The world can not afford our lifestyle, nor our pursuits to support that lifestyle. We would have no reason to be militarily involved in Iraq and Afghanistan, were it not for oil and our addiction to it. We would have no need to be drilling further and further out in the ocean, were it not for our need for multiple, often gas-guzzling automobiles. As President Obama contemplates allowing for more offshore drilling, the current crisis should give us pause to ask if that is truly necessary. Now the critics will bring up the economy and the fact that it could be economically disastrous for some. The disaster is upon us, the question is: will we get the message its trying to give us?

There are numerous resources that can help us learn how to simplify. The place to start is with ourselves, to (in Gandhi’s words) “be the change we want to see.” Two resources that I have found helpful are Simple Living.Net and the Sabbath Economics Collaborative , both of which provide practical guides for living more simply, justly and eco-friendly. However, simply Google-ing “simple living” would reveal any number of other resources.

As the experts at the conference stressed, the issue is not that we don’t know what to do, or how to do it; we just lack the will. Every day the oil oozes out into the gulf and pollutes the shore line, we should be reminded that the birds, fish, vegetation, and the world at large can not afford us. It is not just BP that must mend its way. We too must look closely at how we are living.

Where Were All The Christians (& Other People of Faith)?

Last week (June 3-7) I attended the annual conference of Pedagogy and Theater of the Oppressed (PTO) at the University of Texas in Austin. This gathering brings together students, educators and practitioners working for healing and social justice in communities and schools across the world. The organization takes its name from the two seminal thinkers and activists who developed the Pedagogy of the Oppressed (Paulo Freire) and the Theater of the Oppressed (Augusto Boal). Both men have passed away, but this conference brings together folks who continue to work in solidarity with those most ignored and injured by the policies, structures and practices of our society. About two-thirds of the participants were practitioners of Theater of the Oppressed (TO) and one third were educators such as myself seeking to practice the pedagogy of the oppressed (PO) within and beyond the formal classroom.

While I have only recently begun to learn about the life and thinking of Boal, I have studied and sought to put into practice the teaching philosophy of Freire for several years. In that study, I have come to recognize that Freire was a revolutionary thinker and educator who sought to use teaching and learning as a tool for helping the oppressed change the dehumanizing systems that hold them down; I have also learned that he was a deeply spiritual man who referred to himself as a “friend of Christ.” In Freire’s native Brazil the overwhelming majority of people are affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church. Freire himself had great tensions with the Church because of its complicity with the military junta and wealthy elites that exiled him from his country. Nonetheless one can not read his writings without coming across references to Christ, Easter, conversion, and love. While he did not write extensively about his beliefs, it is clear that his spirituality and faith in God shaped and undergirded his work and writings. Furthermore, his thought was shaped and helped shape the writings of the Latin American liberation theologians who taught that Jesus preached a “preferential option for the poor” and stood on the side of the poor and oppressed

As a result it has always baffled me that only a handful of scholars have written about Freire’s spiritual beliefs, and usually only in the context of liberation theology or religious education, and rarely in relationship to his philosophies of teaching and social change. Many authors make mention of his relationship to liberation theology and his use of Marxism, but few make mention of his connection to Christ. Moreover, it surprises that so many folks who claim to be shaped by his perspective on teaching & learning, and the process of social change don’t make the connection to the spirituality that undergirds his work. This is a project I have taken up and am attempting to present and publish in when I have the opportunity.

It also surprises me at gatherings such as the PTO conference that spirituality is rarely if ever discussed. In one workshop I attended we were discussing what a society free of oppression would look like. After several substantive suggestions were made, I offered that this new society also ought to have a spiritual dimension in that (a) Freire himself was a deeply spiritual man and that (b) almost all the world’s major religions have a vision of a preferred future that can inform our thinking on peace, equity and social justice. Well that comment dropped like a stone and the conversation quickly moved to something else. Afterwards a woman who worked at a church came up to me and shared a similar experience from another workshop where she also had felt alienated when she dared to bring up a spiritual topic.

So it left me thinking: where were all the Christians and other people of faith who see their faith tied to issues of social justice? Where are people whose work for justice and peace is fueled by a deep spirituality? Where are people like Freire, like Martin Luther King, like Gandhi, like Mother Teresa, who are willing to bring their religious faith and spiritual beliefs into the public sphere? What confounds me is how often in circles where we discuss issues of social justice the names of people like Dr. King and Gandhi are invoked, and yet how seldom the focus goes to the spiritual vision that energized them to do and speak as they did.

Have we as justice seeking Christians become so intimidated by the religious right that we are unable or unwilling to associate with so called political radicals? I know that’s not entirely true because I have many friends actively involved in politically progressive efforts who do so as an outgrowth of their faith; yet are there not other thinking people of faith who see that connection? Likewise, I have to believe that there are many political activists who in the quiet of their own offices or homes are nurtured by spiritual practices such as prayer, meditation, worship or devotional reading be it Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Zen or otherwise. Where are these spiritually oriented folks when it comes to these conversations among political progressives? For the past three years I have been attending conferences such as these, both politically oriented, as well professional academic settings, and I have experienced the same void when it comes to discussing spirituality. Next week when I attend the US Social Forum in Detroit, I expect to find the same hesitation. While this hesitation confuses me, it also troubles me because it suggests that issues of faith and spirituality have been pushed out of serious public conversation to the private and personal sphere, the implication being that spirituality has nothing substantive to offer.

During the years I was a Baptist pastor I often got in trouble with my congregations when in their words I “mixed religion and politics.” Most of those folks would have been considered political conservatives. The ironic thing is that people on the left of the political spectrum seemed to have the same hesitation.

Ironically, at the conference the most extensive conversation I had about spirituality and Freire’s work was with a Brazilian born linguistics professor who was a professed atheist. He said to me “Even though I am an atheist, I recognize that Freire was a dedicated Christian.” He too was surprised that spirituality was not more of an item of conversation at the conference. So here I sit in what my colleague Nathan Corbitt calls the “muddled middle” wishing to find more people of faith willing to make the connections between our spiritual practice and our work for social justice.

When it comes to Educational Politics, Where are the Adults?

When it comes to educational politics, one wonders where the mature
adults went to?

The Neshaminy (PA) teachers have been in a long and protracted struggle with the local school board over their contracts. The teachers have worked without a contract for two years, and over the last month the teachers have been “working to contract,” which means they are in the classroom but not available after school or any extra curricular functions. Just this week, the local FOX news station reported that now the teachers will not attend the graduation that will be held this week. All I can say is: Teachers that’s a bad move; shame on you.

Let me be clear: I am about as pro-teacher as they come. For starters, I myself am a teacher (though not at the K-12 level), as is my daughter. For years I was involved with our local public school district, and always spoke up on behalf of teachers’ salaries. I would take on anyone who would say they “only work 9 months out of the year,” because I know how many nights and weekends they put in, not to mention those so-called “summers off” preparing to do the best job they can. I think teachers are grossly undervalued and therefore underpaid in our society. If some salesman can make six figures pushing widgets, a teacher should be remunerated at least the same level. The public scrutiny and degradation that public school teachers have to endure makes me wonder why anyone would go into that profession. Yet, they do and we entrust our children’s learning to their care. To be sure some teachers are incompetent, but they are the vast minority; the bad ones weed themselves out quickly. Most teachers are more than competent, and some are outstanding. Yet all, regardless of competence level, are generally undervalued, under-appreciated and under-paid.

But the teachers in Neshaminy made a big mistake when they decided to boycott graduation. Teaching is not about politics, subjects or even school budgets. Teaching is about students and their learning. Teaching is about relationships. Teaching is about love of student and love of learning. The really good teachers have a way of lighting something inside a kid that gives them a hunger for learning. A fifth grade teacher took one of my children who had been designated as “behind,” and got her excited about books; that daughter is now a teacher. Another child at one time had trouble reading, but a high school English teacher ignited her love of ancient literature; now that child says “Dad, you have to read Beowulf!” Still another child found a love of life embedded in a course on Shakespeare. My wife and I had a part in our children’s education, but so did their teachers.

As a teacher I look forward to graduation because it was a way of seeing the fruit of my labors and to know that in some small way, I had a part in the growth of that student. Teaching isn’t just about imparting information; in fact that is a very small part of teaching, as most information we impart will soon be forgotten or replaced. Teaching is ultimately about is shaping lives and inspiring dreams. Teaching is about helping kids discovering a future, and gaining the confidence to go after that future. So for a teacher, graduation is the capstone, the coup de grace, the finish line of a job well done – for the students, yes; but also the teachers.

Reportedly students were upset that their teachers were not coming to graduation because they wanted to be honored by their presence, but also to thank them. You see, the kids know what the last 12 years of school were about. Regardless of budgets and contracts, it’s about love, and gratitude.

I can only hope that some of the teachers break their own boycott, and show up out of uniform, but show up nonetheless. The kids have earned it, and so have the teachers. After the mortar boards have been thrown up in the air and the diplomas dispensed, then the teachers, parents, and school board can get back to figuring out how to make it possible for kids and teachers to again join forces in this adventure we call learning.


On another note: Philadelphia Schools Superintendent Arlene Ackerman (in the picture above) has really screwed up West Philadelphia High School. After ignoring pleas by students, teachers and community members not to make WPHS one of her Renaissance schools; and then ignoring the school community council’s request to become a Talent High School in conjunction with John Hopkins University; after creating conditions of uncertainty that forced many teachers to seek employment in other schools; now Dr. Ackerman says its too late for West to have John Hopkins as a partner. Four years ago WPHS was one of the most violent and dangerous schools in the city; today students talk about their love the school, the teachers and the principal , Saliyah Cruz. As a member of the Community Partners of WPHS, I can testify to the vast improvement that has occurred in the school. There is no doubt there is much more that needs to be done before WPHS is a fully functioning school, but there has been momentum, hope and a workable plan. Despite her impressive resume, and her contention that she is all about community involvement, Dr. Ackerman has discouraged the students, teachers and community members by her irresponsible leadership. There is no excuse.

Maybe we ought to let the students take over not only the school, but the system. I'm not sure they could screw it up anymore than it is.

Jesus Camp

Recently, at the urging of my daughter I watched the movie Jesus Camp, a 2006 documentary film which follows the lives of several children in fundamentalist, Pentecostal families, and a charismatic children’s pastor named Becky Fisher. The film takes its name from a summer camp for children and their parents that pastor Fisher runs, at which she evangelizes and challenges children from ages about 6-12 to be the generation that brings the United States back to God. The film follows these folks from the summer of 2005 to the January 2006 against the backdrop of President George W. Bush’s appointment of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court seat vacated by Sandra Day O’Connor. While the directors claim that they are not evangelical Christians, they seem to portray the main characters of the film (mostly children and Pastor Fisher) in a fair and favorable light. If the film had an agenda other than to inform, that agenda was not obvious.

As I viewed the film I found many aspects of it very familiar from my involvement and contact with evangelical and fundamentalist Christianity. For instance, the program and dynamics of the summer camp was similar to most Bible camps I have seen, and even the Young Life camps that I helped run in my 20’s. The peer pressure, the intense love for the kids, lots of fun activities, and a clear and simple gospel message portrayed in the film is a powerful formula used by many successful children and youth ministries. While on one hand the leaders of the camp claimed not to have a political agenda (meaning partisan political agenda), there was a clear and open purpose to instill Judeo-Christian values back into government particularly on issues such as homosexuality, abortion and the adoption of creation science curriculums in schools. At one point in the film, the children even prayed over a life size cutout of Pres. Bush, who was seen as the political savior and champion bringing America back to God. I must admit I can’t imagine the camp prayed over an Obama cut out last summer.

In part what was troubling about the film was the co-opting of the word “evangelical” by both the participants and the film makers. The word “evangelical” means “bringer of good news” but in the film the emphasis on bringing government back to God and human sin in all aspects of life seemed heavy and guilt-ridden. In many people’s minds today, the words “fundamentalist” and “evangelical” are synonymous, and yet the modern evangelical movement actually split off from fundamentalism in the 1940’s because of fundamentalism’s unwillingness to meaningfully engage the culture. Early evangelical leaders such as Carl H. Henry and Harold Ockenga sought to bring a balance between clear Christian principles with a meaningful interaction with current social and political issues. However in the 1980’s the rise of the so-called “Christian Right” made “evangelical” a political term often linked with extremely conservative Republican political views especially on homosexuality, abortion, the military, and a reduced welfare state. Today too many so-called evangelicals seem to want to create their own world complete with their own schools, own businesses and now their own form of government. Even the National Association of Evangelicals seems to have embraced this agenda, so that fundamentalist and evangelical for many are inter-changeable. For that reason many years I gave up calling myself evangelical.

The views expressed regarding the Christianizing of government reminded me of the writings of Rousas John Rushdoony, a Calvinist philosopher who is considered the author of the Christian Reconstruction movement. While Rushdoony died in 2001, his message has been most forcefully carried on by TV evangelist Pat Robertson and radio host James Dobson. Rushdoony believed in theonomy, which basically states that Christians should take over the government and institute a governmental system based on the principles of Old Testament and New Testament law. Christian Reconstructionists do not believe in the separation of church and state, but rather work to establish God’s Kingdom on earth in anticipation of Christ’s Second Coming. In their world, homosexuality and abortion would be criminalized, and the welfare system would be dismantled.

The Tea Party movement seems to have largely tapped into this movement, although it would be unclear if all so called Tea Party-ers would fit with their views. A libertarian like Kentucky Senate candidate Rand Paul would not seem to fit with an idea of a Christian “takeover” of government, but Sarah Palin might. Though Christian Reconstructionists believe in “less government” they would overhaul government as much as they accuse Obama of doing, only in a way that fits their view of the world.

The Christian Right movement portrayed in this film is powerful because it touches on some of the basic values of family and community, but it does so in a polarizing, exclusive and uncompromising way. Its simple “us vs. them” view of the world is both the source of its power and its destructiveness. At the same time while claiming to “counter-cultural” there is an unquestioned allegiance to American style individualism, militarism and capitalism. Like their Puritan forbears these folks seem American as “God’s nation, and they are bound and determined to “bring it back” to that perspective.

The film was produced in 2006 and one wonders what has happened to those kids in the last four years, who today would be in their early to mid teens, and what will happen in the next few years. Will they go the way of Robert Wright, author of the Evolution of God, who grew up in such a home and now considers himself an agnostic? Will they go the way of Shane Claiborne, who also grew up in that environment, but now is a radical Christian anarchist? Will they become like an Andy Stanley, a son of Southern Baptist preacher, who himself is now a Southern Baptist preacher? Or will they be like my former Duke professor who totally renounced his faith after hearing hellfire sermons in his youth but who could not bear the thought of being in heaven while watching his non-believing friends burn in hell? Will they adopt the faith of their elders as Pastor Fisher hopes, or will they be like so many fundamentalist children turned adults who spend years seeking to undo the rigidity, shame and guilt of their fundamentalist background?

One thing the movie makes clear is that the Christian Right has a clear and well crafted message that has been adopted and is being promoted by millions of people in this country. While I don’t subscribe to their brand of Christian faith, I have encountered it enough to realize that the “simple gospel message” has a powerful appeal to many because it helps people make sense of a complex and frightening world. My Christian faith is far more focused on social justice, dialogue, meaningful engagement with the world and inclusiveness, and combating the evils of racism, militarism and economic elitism in our culture. Like the Christian Right, I see our culture in dramatic need of renewal. However, the changes we respectively seek are dramatically and diametrically different. The fact that we both claim to follow the same Jesus makes me wonder if just like the word “evangelical” the word “Christian” has begun to take on an implication I can no longer abide.

Educational Justice

Educational justice has been at the heart of my work over the last 13 years.

In 1997 I left pastoral ministry and turned my interests and talents to education. While I was working in higher education, I did not teach the typical 18-22 year old college student; instead my students were adults who had decided later in life to return to college to get their bachelor’s degree. In many cases they had started out on the traditional track years before, only to be derailed by a lack of finances, family crises, or personal issues; they dropped out, and entered the working world.

The more I got to know these adult students the more I realized three things. First, very often the earlier problems these students faced were related to issues of poor K-12 education, family history, and poverty. Second, I realized that getting a college degree was one of the few legitimate roads available to adults seeking to rise out of poverty. Third, I came to see that adult academic success had generational implications, as often their academic pursuits set an example for their children and grandchildren, who in turn pursued their college degree. I realized we were not just educating individuals, we were changing families and perhaps communities.

Convinced of these insights, I returned to school and earned a doctorate in adult education with a view toward helping craft programs that could serve whole communities beset by poverty and create quality education programs that could transform those communities. I joined the Community Partners of West Philadelphia high school, one of the schools with the lowest test scores in the city. I helped in the formation of the Eastern University Academic Charter School, and I served as a tutor for adults learning to read. Just this month I joined the board of the Philadelphia Mennonite High School.

The most exciting opportunity along these lines was my work with a program called Eastern in the City (EIC). This innovative program was developed by my university to provide a pathway for under-prepared urban high school graduates into college success; unfortunately after only three years the program was discontinued. Nonetheless, two weeks ago, I had the joy of seeing 10 of my former EIC students earn their bachelor’s degree. They ranged in age from early 20’s to mid 60’s (Two of them, Shelita Jackson and Rayna Norris are pictured above), and all of them credit EIC with getting them started on their road to a college degree. A few are even continuing on toward graduate work.

All the demographic data on high school students today, indicate that the college students of tomorrow will look and think a lot differently than the college students of the past. Not only will they be more racially and ethnically diverse, but they will be economically poorer, and academically less prepared. Many of them will not speak English as their first language, and they will have cultural perspectives far different than the Western mindset of our current educational system. Thus, colleges like mine can not continue to do business as usual if they are to effectively educate the next generation.

One response that colleges are making is to work harder to recruit the diminishing numbers those upper middle class kids from private and elite public schools. The other response is to work for educational justice. Everyone from President Obama to the teacher in the classroom to the kid on the street knows that our educational system is broken. Education is one of the strongest antidotes against violence, drug abuse and crime, yet we pour money in to prisons and let the schools fester. Vast inequities exist in per pupil funding between poor rural and urban districts on the one hand, and wealthy suburbs on the other. Exciting experiments like Geoffrey Canada’s Harlem Children Zone (one of Obama’s favorites) and Big Picture schools provide hope, but the fact is addressing this problem must occur on all levels. Schools must be safe place, parents must support and encourage their students, teachers must be adequately trained, and students need to apply themselves. Colleges need to provide bridges that help under-prepared students succeed at the college level, and must offer their expertise to their communities. Government must abandon the archaic property tax system for funding public education, and make education as much a state and national priority as fighting wars overseas and terrorism at home.

John Dewey, the seminal American educational thinker, contended that education should be the vehicle for shaping the character of students so that they could become responsible and productive citizens. If that is so, then we as a nation, and particular we who as educators, have failed to live up to our calling. Pointing fingers at others for not doing their part is a waste of time; there is enough work and sufficient blame to go around for everyone. The challenge is that we as educators, institutions, community leaders and citizens must step up and create opportunities for all students, young and old, rich and poor, white, black, brown, red and yellow, to gain the skills and the knowledge necessary to live fruitful and productive lives. Until we have done so, there will be no educational justice and our work is not done.

An Open Letter to Joe Sestak and Pat Toomey

Note: The following letter was set to both candidates and the Philadelphia Inquirer.

For those outside Pennsylvania, Joe Sestak (Democrat)and Pat Toomey (Republican) won their respective primaries and will face off in the November's election for the U.S. Senate now held by Arlen Specter.

Congratulations gentleman, on your respective primary victories. Though I did not vote for either of you, I am now left with the two of you as the principal candidates in this fall’s Senate election. So I have a request: please keep the campaign focused on the issues.

Mr. Sestak, you ran a campaign that basically had the message “I am a Democrat and Arlen Specter isn’t.” You rarely discussed your own positions because despite Specter’s recent change in political party, you were not substantially different than him. So you played misleading ads that highlighted Specter’s Republican connections and implicitly (by virtue of the images you showed) reminded people of Specter’s age and recent battles with cancer. It was a disgusting and disappointing campaign. In your acceptance speech you exclaimed that “Democracy works!” However, your campaign represented the worst of what democracy has become in this country, and it needs to stop.

Mr. Toomey, because you did not have a serious challenger, you did not have use such tactics in your primary campaign. Furthermore, your political strength in the Pennsylvania Republican Party was significant enough to drive Arlen Specter from the party he had served for 30 years. Your pushing him out was the first nail in his political coffin, Sestak’s victory was the second.

Even so, you now represent a party that’s recent claim to fame has been “We are not Democrats.’ Republicans have become the part of “no” – no health care reform, no banking reform, no taxes, no government. Moreover, your party has exploited race and class divisions in a manner Eduardo Bonilla-Silva calls “colorblind racism:” (Racism Without Racists, 2009) not speaking of race, but using code words race and class to turn white folks against President Obama and his agenda.

Both of you, prominently display your young children on your websites and your political ads. So here’s a proposal: Conduct yourself in this fall’s campaign in the same way you would expect your children to behave on the playground. No name calling. No dirty tricks. No misleading or dishonest statements.

Instead why not focus on the issues, since there are significant differences between you on a variety of concerns from health care reform to environmental issues to education to the role of government to gay and lesbian concern to women’s issues to immigration, and so on. Talk about those things. Let your ads focus on what you believe and how it is similar or different from your opponent. If your opponent chooses to make misleading, personal attacks, don’t take the bait. Call him out for his bad behavior. We voters are sick of the misleading attack ads; all they do is make us disrespect you more.

At the end of each day until November, before you go to bed, ask yourself this question: In my words, decisions, and behavior today was I living an example I would want my child to follow?

Believe me, if at the end of each day you can answer that question in the affirmative, we will all sleep better.