Liberals and Conservatives
Filed Under: General
This last weekend’s sermon (you can watch it below) elicited some e-mail from several of our members. Some were grateful and inspired by the message. Others were frustrated by it. Most of those who were frustrated were gracious in expressing their disagreement with the message. Thank you. One of the key disagreements that came up was framed in terms of political liberals versus political conservatives. Here some noted that “liberals” favor government involvement in social issues like poverty and in humanitarian concerns in other nations. “Conservatives” noted that they don’t feel this is government’s job, and that these concerns are best handled by churches and the non-profit sector. I’d like to offer a couple of responses to this idea. First, I generally agree that churches and non-profits should be on the front-line addressing poverty and other social service concerns. Our church is probably as involved as any church in Kansas City in these issues. I also agree that we don’t need an ever increasing government bureaucracy to address these concerns. Much of what happens, in terms of emergency aid to impoverished people in Kansas City, is administered by the non-profit/religious community. But I can’t imagine churches trying to administer all of the programs currently administered by county, state and federal government. Unless the government gave us authority to levy taxes, we could not do this on the basis of the average voluntary contribution of between 2 and 3% of people’s income that is currently donated to local churches. The preamble to the Constitution includes, among the responsibilities of our government, the promotion of “the general Welfare” which I take to include certain safety nets that might be dictated by justice, righteousness and mercy. The government is not solely responsible for programs for the poor and the weak but there are things that it would be difficult for others to do. In the sermon I noted that God demands, in the scriptures, that individuals as well as the political leadership and the king, care about issues of poverty and other social concerns. The prophets foretold the judgment of God upon the nations of Israel and Judah in part because they refused to care for the weak (see Ezekiel 34:1-6 where God is explaining why he allowed Judah to be destroyed by the Babylonians - keep in mind the “shepherds” here were the kings and political leaders of Israel). What do these passages (there are dozens in the Old Testament) tell us about what Jesus would expect of us as individuals and also as a nation? Again, thank you to those who raised questions with respect and graciousness. I appreciate your perspectives and your desire to dialogue on these issues. You have important points to raise. In tomorrow’s post I’ll address some of the questions that were raised regarding my comments on defense spending and U.S. foreign aid.
.
17 Comment(s)
Post a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
quest5355 | Feb 7, 2008 | Reply
Thanks Adam. I really appreciate getting some clarification on these issues.
In addition, I have been wondering about how to view immigration. Some of my more conservative friends say that the government shouldn’t do anything for those who are here illegally, while I feel that while we shouldn’t subsidize their living here, we should allow them a pathway to citizenship.
Also, these conservatives don’t believe that the government should provide money to those poor who won’t work and who don’t take responsibility for their well-being, but live off welfare, etc.
Lastly, the same people state that they don’t believe that the wealthiest people in the country should have to pay more to take care of needier people.
I am struggling with these issues and looking at various viewpoints in an effort to clarify my own.
Your comments?
Thank you and bless you.
lonestar | Feb 7, 2008 | Reply
As a conservative, I don’t have any issue at all providing support to immigrants with the stipulation that they are LEGAL. As a new member to COR, what is COR’s position/practice in providing support to illegals? I’ve heard that COR does knowingly provide a sort of “refuge” to that category of immigrants - is that true? If so, how is violation of the law justified? I, too, am struggling with what appears to be an increasing liberal air at COR.
lonestar | Feb 7, 2008 | Reply
One last comment regarding last weeks sermon and Adam’s comments on defense spending. I am a big supporter of the government and military -I retired with 20 yrs in the Navy and an additional 16 years in the government and both of my sons are careerists in the Air Force. My wife spent 37 years in government and was in the Pentagon on 9-11.
Interestingly, my youngest son attended the 5 PM service last Saturday while visiting us with his wife, enroute to his new duty station in Germany. He has already spent a tour in Saudi Arabia and Korea and expects to do a minimum of a tour somewhere in the Iraq or Afghanistan area while in Germany.
This was his first visit to COR and quite frankly, we all squirmed a bit hearing the comments regarding comparison of defense spending and diplomacy. No one is perfect running the country - not the current administration nor the previous Democratic administration.
rkeeper | Feb 9, 2008 | Reply
I also struggled with last week’s sermon. I support the belief that we should use justice, righteousness and mercy as the guide for our decisions. I have questions about the 41% military and 1% aid spending comparison. You contrasted our military spending to the world’s spending, but doesn’t the US, even at 1% give more to other nations in need than any other country(almost as much as the next 2 largest contributors combined and 50% of the largest 4 combined -UK/Japan/Germany/France)? Shouldn’t the world’s view of the US include the combined government($22 billion) and private giving($122 billion) in times of crisis when determining whether we are a nation for good? Is the US government’s role to provide for the whole world? Doesn’t the common good number increase substantially when you recognize that 50% of the total US budget pays for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid? I would like to see the government provide for our defense and US citizens in true need. Have we established safety nets that set the bar too low, creating a nation of people looking for entitlements? Should government tax to accomplish goals that are more efficiently delivered through the private sector? Without our military at its current strength, would we have the freedom to be as generous as those who want more emphasis on general aid want us to be? We are a great country with a stronger moral mandate than any other.
Tom | Feb 11, 2008 | Reply
One issue is how does one define “promote” general welfare. Of course running the soup kitchen is one option. However those people are hungry tomorrow and the next day. You really don’t solve anything through the handout, which is government welfare policy. If you look at the welfare programs on the government level all they do is warehouse the person. If you want to change things and help the person in a period over 24 hours you need to do something different. You need to both teach the person how to succeed plus create conditions in the country which allow people to succeed. As the saying goes you teach a person to fish you feed him for life.
Right now our government expenditures is being eaten up by government pay outs. To raise social security just $8 or so a month costs billions. Wealth is funny, no matter what you make it isn’t enough. Many in Johnson County will tell you they don’t have enough. That is why they give so little at the collection plate. However we in KS have more than most of the world. Our poor suffer from a variety of diseases caused by obesity. The poor in Sudan suffer from gunshot wounds.
The high tax rates socialistic governments always create always chokes economic development and pushes the jobs for those at the bottom overseas. We may be make things worse in our compassion.
adam | Feb 12, 2008 | Reply
Great questions, rkeeper. There are several ways to compare what the US gives in humanitarian aid with what other nations give. One is in actual dollars given. By this comparison, we do give more than other nations. Another is how much a nation gives as a portion of its GDP, in which case we are near the bottom of the list of developed nations (this perspective may tie in to what Jesus says Luke 12:48, “from the one to whom much has been entrusted, even more will be demanded.”) Another comparison would be, as you mentioned, what we give as private citizens to aid those in other nations. This number tends to spike in times of disaster, and then falls dramatically at other times (where did you find the $122 billion given by Americans in foreign aid? The number I’ve seen is $36 billion). Regarding the Federal Budget, our income taxes provide support for the discretionary budget, while our social security tax funds “pension” payments to current retirees, with our medicare tax funding medicare. I see the discretionary budget and the Social Security/Medicare budgets as two different arenas. Social Security is a program, for better or worse, that we have bought into as a nation - one that in its current form is unsustainable in our lifetime without some modification. In it, all of us pay into a system that uses our current contributions to fund current retirees regardless of their economic need. In exchange, in theory, the next generation will pay their social security taxes to fund payments to each of us, regardless of our need. A portion of this could be considered aid to low income people. A larger portion of it does not go to low income people, but simply acts as an unusual pension fund that will begin operating in the red sometime later this century.
adam | Feb 13, 2008 | Reply
Hello, Lonestar, thanks for writing. I am not aware of any programs we have at the church focused specifically on providing assistance to illegal immigrants. Your question, however, prompts me to ask this question: If you saw someone who was hungry, or naked, or thirsty, or sick - would you ask them first, “are you here legally?” Or would you simply help them? What do you think Jesus would have us do? If the law said that we should not give food to someone who was hungry because they were here illegally, and you came upon a family that was literally starving would you obey the law and allow them to go hungry, or would you give them food? I realize that this is an extreme example, but one perhaps worth considering. Regarding a liberal “air” at Resurrection - One of the most important points of this last sermon series is that neither conservative nor liberal are adequate without the other. To be conservative is a good thing - it means holding onto the treasures of the past and not “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” To be liberal is a good thing - the word means to be open to change, embracing reform, and generous. Most of us are liberal compared with some people and conservative compared with others. Jerry Falwell was derided by Fred Phelps as a “liberal.” In the end we’re trying to be faithful followers of Jesus Christ. Jesus didn’t neatly fit the categories of liberal or conservative. I don’t think we can either. I’m grateful that you are worshiping with us, Lonestar! Thanks for contributing your comments to these pages.
Northstar | Feb 13, 2008 | Reply
My thoughts on whether or not to ask the “are you legal” question of a person in need are that laws in America are made for lawbreakers. I don’t mean to be short, but I don’t think it is our business to decide which laws we will abide by and which ones we will push aside so we can be “helpful”. Maybe here in Johnson county an illegal is less likely to be dangerous, maybe not, but in other states closer to the border, where illegals are more likely to be criminal (where landowners’ state they can no longer allow their own children to play alone on their personal property), perhaps we should follow the laws that we as citizens have agreed upon for the common good and go ahead an ask that question before we decide who we put at risk.
lonestar | Feb 13, 2008 | Reply
Thanks, Adam; you asked if I would feed someone who was starving regardless of their immigration status - of course I would and I believe all Christians would. However, if I found they were illegal, I would notify the appropriate authorities so that our laws would be enforced. To continue to knowingly violate our laws and harbor illegals, as some churchs have in the past, is something I would not do - do you think that’s wrong? I’m truly amazed at the focus all of the illegal immigrants are receiving and have begun wondering why there is not focus from the churches on feeding the American Indians, some not very far from Kansas City. What about that forgotten group of REAL Americans?
The degradation of what was great about America continues…morality and integrity are things of the past - look at the US ten years ago with respect to those things and look at it now. What will it be like in another ten years? Look at the attitude toward religion today versus ten years ago. What happened with the Episcopal church? I was baptized and confirmed Episcopal in 1954 and remained in the faith until the they started interpreting things radically and ordained a gay bishop living in an open relationship with another man - and they said it was ok. Huh? Where was the church (any of them) during the scandal in the White House with a former sitting President and a young female aid? Another example of society’s acceptance.
As new members of COR, we’re amazed at the activities, vibrancy, opportunities, and sheer size of the church - and it wants to grow bigger physically and build another sanctuary. But then we stop and ask ourselves - why? What’s wrong with the size of the church now? Why does it have to get bigger; surely not to be able to say we’re the biggest. Is having a lot of “stuff” or “property” really what being a UM is all about?
I digrest; I’m conservative but am open to reasonable and legal change within the confines of morality. I’m just really frustrated with the silence and absence of the church in walking the walk when it comes to issues which are eroding American society.
rkeeper | Feb 13, 2008 | Reply
I want to start by saying the military, government spending and liberal beliefs make me feel like someone is driving nails in my back, so I react a little differently than I want. I really appreciate the way God is using you in our community, the effort you put in to your messages and your dedication to the church.
The information about US private foreign aid was on the following website:
www.america.gov/st/foraid-english/2007/May/20070524165115zjsredna0.2997553.html
The america.gov website is sponsored by the US State Department.
I really agree with our need to help people. I am challenged when a large segment of believers think the best way to accomplish our mission is to increase a secular agency’s responsibility for determining how to do it, how much to give and who should receive it. The greatness of our democracy is that the federal government was intended to have limited authority and that individual states rights were to be protected. Taxation is out of control and proposed increases in federal programs will demand more taxes. I remember reading that one of the founding fathers said that this democracy will fail when those who have less learn that they can vote in to office representatives who will take from those who have more and give it to them. Pretty interesting thought 200+ years before it happened. What a positive/powerful message for Christ (and the church today) if we had the additional resources to dedicate to truly helping those in need. Wouldn’t it be a great witness if the church and believers were identified as the face of America and not our government?
adam | Feb 15, 2008 | Reply
Lonestar, I wanted to give a response to your question about the size of Resurrection and its continued growth. You wrote, “What’s wrong with the size of the church now? Why does it have to get bigger; surely not to be able to say we’re the biggest. Is having a lot of “stuff” or “property” really what being a UM is all about?” The first time someone asked me, “what’s wrong with our size now, why do we have to be bigger?” was when we had 100 people per weekend in worship. Had we stopped inviting people and stopped making room for people then, and remained a church of 100, what would NOT have happened? Who would NOT have been reached? What programs, ministries, or acts of service to those in need would never have occurred had we felt that we were “big enough” and stopped having a passion for reaching out to new people? Our aim is not to grow simply for the sake of growing, nor is having more “stuff” or “property” our aim - our aim is to pursue our mission - which is to reach out to non-religious and nominally religious people and to invite them to follow Christ. Last Sunday 297 people did just that in joining the church, making their profession of faith in Christ. It was a joy to talk with a number of them and to hear their stories of how their lives had been enriched and changed by attending our church. There were many who, for the first time in their lives, were choosing to become followers of Christ. I think our leaders are clear that we’re not pursuing growth in order to boast about our size, or to become bigger for the sake of becoming bigger. At issue is whether there are people who don’t know Christ, and people who don’t have a church home, who might visit our church, meet Christ here, and find a congregation that welcomes them. Regarding building, we don’t plan to build a larger sanctuary until we need it - again, the aim is not to build a bigger sanctuary. The aim is to make sure that when you invite your unchurched friends or children, there is a place for them. Currently we have empty seats most weekends, hence no need to build our permanent sanctuary yet. In addition we’re now sending people from our church to help start or reinvigorate other churches, which helps make room in our current sanctuary. But if the day comes when we no longer have empty seats (which we think could happen around 2012) then we’ll build a larger sanctuary. Buildings are only tools for ministry. Reaching people is our aim, and if we forget this we would stop being a church and would instead be a religious country club. Jesus said he came “to seek and to save those who are lost” (Luke 19:10) and he told us to “go and make disciples” (Matthew 28:19). You hit a bit of a nerve with me, Lonestar - evangelism and reaching people for Christ is what drives me in ministry. It is the reason I serve this church. If, as a congregation, we stopped valuing this, it would be time for me to move on to another congregation. Okay, I’ve done more commenting on this thread of comments than I intended. My aim is to invite the rest of you into conversation, not for me to be doing all the responding. So, I’ll sign off on this particular thread, but I’d like to invite the rest of you to jump into the conversation. Lonestar, thanks for raising these questions - I hope these answers are helpful. Blessings! Adam
renewal | Feb 15, 2008 | Reply
Adam,
Thank you for not shying away from contreversial issues, and for challenging us, the congregation, to think and pray and come to our own conclusions. Partially because of your challenge from the pulpit, I participated in a Kansas caucus.
Besides looking at our country’s spending, I am glad you continue to invite us to look at our own. How can we as individuals and as a nation make the best use of our God given gifts, resources, knowledge, experience?
I have just finished reading and highly recommend Bishop Desmond Tutu’s book, “God Has a Dream: A Vision of Hope for Our Time.” He is one of a group of 14 (also including Nelson Mandela and Jimmy Carter) called The Elders who are serving as global conflict mediators. On their website, I invite you to sign the Universal declaration of human rights http://www.everyhumanhasrights.org/sign_up/
I was also touched hearing Zanib Salbi speak at a conference this fall regarding her work with women war crime victims. COR has many great ministries partnering with others in different parts of the city and the world.
I raised my children in a lake community East of Kansas City. To come “into town”, we drove past much more modest homes. One of my children, as a preschooler, asked, “who lives in those houses?” My reply: “90% of the world wishes they could live in that type of house.”
Let’s really look beyond ourselves and our comfy little part of the world when we ask: How can we as individuals and as a nation make the best use of our God given gifts, resources, knowledge, experience?
tr | Feb 18, 2008 | Reply
Thank God for Pastor Hamilton. God has given him a gift and he is using it in a wonderful way to draw people to God and to challenge people to go deeper in their faith.
I have a question. I read Adams remark about helping an illegal immigrant in need with food or clothing. And I agree with him. My question is how do we as Christians justify our spending when we are aware of the suffering in the world. Isn’t it almost the same as seeing someone in need and than turning our back and going out to a nice expensive dinner. I have spent a lot of time in Mexico and Central America the last several years. And I always struggle with this.(in my own spending as well) In a sermon a couple of weeks ago it was mentioned that 30,000 children die a day of starvation. Shouldn’t we as Christians, at the very least, really struggle with our spending when we are aware of the suffering?
Northstar | Feb 19, 2008 | Reply
Tr, the path of your thoughts scares me. Where will you end up? How much will you have to give in order to not “feel” a struggle about spending? What does being aware of the suffering have to do with spending? If you judge yourself, then you won’t have to be judged by God. But if you judge others…watch out, it will be the measure of how you are judged.
Blog Poster | Feb 19, 2008 | Reply
I agree with you TR, I struggle with - for example - the number of luxury cars we have in our parking lot. I can’t imagine Jesus wouldn’t come down pretty hard on us for buying something just so people will go wow look at what they got - while the world is starving. I’m guessing that if ever Lexus owner and BMW owner sold their cars and downgraded to a Toyota - and all that money was given to organizations like compassion, we might make a major dent in world hunger.
Northstar - I think Jesus’ standard was something like - everything - give away all you have to the poor and come and follow me. Tough challenge but i don’t think he was joking when he said its harder for the rich to enter the Kingdom of Heaven - than for a Camel to go through the eye of a needle. Thats my two cents.
Northstar | Feb 19, 2008 | Reply
Blog Poster, Tr didn’t mention the standard that Jesus sets, and neither did I. I’m just saying that we have to judge ourselves and not others in regard to spending. I believe Adam addressed this in one of his sermons..the very topic was looking at others and judging what they have without knowing the first thing about them. Just for the record, I don’t drive an expensive car and I don’t live in a huge house…oh, and I have had a compassion child for the last 12 years, her name was Hannah and she was from Ethiopia…she died this Christmas…she was 16. And as far as the “eye of the needle” scripture…I think Jesus was saying that it is impossible for anyone…rich or poor…to get into heaven through their own efforts….even if I give everything to the poor, and my body to be burned…if I don’t have love, I gain nothing.
tk | Feb 22, 2008 | Reply
To anyone who does not believe in the responsibility and need for our government to have supportive programs, please explore the world around you! Do missions work in KC or abroad and get to know the people! Find a single mother of 3 whose husband is deceased and she cannot afford the childcare that working would require. That’s here in JOCO. Befriend a South African woman caring for 10 children whose parents have died of AIDS and she doesn’t know how she will feed them all much less afford their school fees. The church cannot help as everyone else is in her same situation but she knows God will provide and sings praises for the blessings she has. Talk to the mother of a young man who has been diagnosed with a medical condition that costs over $100k dollars per month for prescriptions that are not covered by the private insurance. Should his children go hungry so their father can live? If you have a better way, by all means, please share it with the world. Otherwise, don’t knock it until you’ve lived it. Our pastors, and many of our members, talk with these people on a daily basis and know their pain and often go above and beyond to help them because of the gaps in the system but the church cannot do it all!