[Peace-discuss] re: approaching local churches

[Morton K. Brussel]

Some thoughts: Our initiative to be an anti-war, anti-torture, anti- 
justice presence outside churches comes from our recognition of the  
self imposed silence of too many churches in ignoring these foremost  
moral issues of the day. All the more so since we understand the  
importance of religion in this nation and the influence of its  
churches. To bring up issues like anti-religious activism and anti- 
abortion activism is gratuitous to say the least.   Our efforts are  
not against religion or churches per se. We seek simply to dialog and  
inform members of the religious community about these critical  
politico-moral issues.

My inclination is that if the leaders of the churches approach us, we  
should gladly respond. However, if such leaders are antagonistic  
about discussing these issues, we should not refrain from approaching  
their membership in whatever peaceful way we can. This will no doubt  
arouse antagonism by those who support our government's policies or  
think it unseemly to bring forward such controversy. So be it.

And what does "self -righteous" imply in this context?

Our working group has not yet determined exactly how we shall proceed.

--mkb

Appended below are a few responses relative to those of Reverend  
Smith, below.


On Nov 6, 2005, at 1:20 PM, Phil Stinard wrote:

> Reverend Smith raised some important issues in his comments to  
> AWARE.  I agree that it would appear foolhardy and self-righteous  
> for AWARE to picket/leaflet a church unless an attempt at dialogue  
> has been made.  The repercussions of such an act would be to  
> marginalize AWARE and make it appear like a group of lazy, anti- 
> religious activists, and as a person of faith, that would sadden  
> me.  There is a huge difference between leafleting in a public  
> space in downtain Champaign and leafleting churchgoers.  Please  
> approach the churches first, as Reverend Smith suggests, discuss  
> the issues, and even ask permission to leaflet the churchgoers.   
> And if you do leaflet, make sure that the focus is on being anti- 
> war.  That is, I think, the common issue for all AWARE members.  If  
> other issues are brought in, such as abortion, you might see me  
> picketing on the other side.
>
> --Phil
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> [Peace-discuss] approaching local churches
> Karen Medina kmedina at uiuc.edu
> Thu Nov 3 21:21:51 CST 2005
>
> Dear AWARE members,
>
> A few weeks ago we discussed the idea of approaching the
> local churches and asking that they speak out against the
> occupation of Iraq and for peace, especially during the
> holiday season when people of several faiths are reminded to
> seek out peace on earth. We set up a working group that is
> considering creating a presence outside several local
> churches.
>
> Below is what I think will be a typical response from a
> church will be. These comments come from a local minister. He
> has brought up some good questions, and I offered to share
> them with you:
>
> "we are the typical thicket of opinions one finds in
> mainstream congregations.  The congregation has NOT taken a
> formal stance on this issue.

If some in a congregation condone murder, is that a reason why the  
leadership (or the pastor) should avoid this issue?
Of course there are problems of keeping a congregation united, but  
where then do questions of morality enter?
>
> "The implication of picketing and protesting is that one
> party, holding administrative power, has refused to
> participate in earnest and open minded dialogue with people
> who are powerless.

???.

> Picketing and protesting then become a
> part of a strategy to change power dynamics.

We do not consider ourselves as pickets, and we protest only the  
silence of the church on what are supreme moral issues.


> Ethically
> speaking, they should occur AFTER attempts have first been
> made to hold conversation.


Where is the ethical aspect? Perhaps courtesy could be claimed.
Inaction/silence by the churches already is a statement.

> Some protests are in the spirit of
> Martin Luther King Jr.'s principles he outlined in "Letter
> from the Birmingham Jail." Other protests are a parody of his
> principles.  Any protest that short circuits a genuine
> attempt at initial conversation is questionable in my mind,
> even an indication of laziness on the part of the protesters.
>
> "If protesters from AWARE appear in front of [a given] Church,
> at this point, it will be interpreted by me as an act of
> self-righteousness.

Are not people who firmly believe in the tenets of a religion already  
self-righteous?
Perhaps this has a particular religious connotation which bypasses my  
understanding.
>
> "Up until now, no one from AWARE has approached [a given]
> Church and engaged its leaders in genuine dialogue.  We have
> received generic mailings and notices from AWARE, but that is
> hardly relational or trust building.  Mass mailings do not
> constitute the building up of relational foundations that
> eventuate in genuine change of people's hearts and political
> involvement.  I have yet to see anyone from AWARE approach the
> people of [a given church] with political savvy or genuine
> interest in personally inviting folks into collaboration on
> this issue.
>
> "I also think that AWARE should reconsider what kind of power
> resides in congregations.  In other words, what kind of power
> do congregations really have to affect the course of political
> events.  In my opinion, passing an "official resolution" is
> actually an abdication of the real power that congregations
> possess.  I would welcome the chance to meet with you over a
> cup of coffee and explore this issue further.

Churches usually claim to focus on personal and public morality.  
Also, they often instruct on basic moral principles. If their  
congregations are affected by what is discussed in their environs,  
then that can affect society as a whole, and obviously constitutes  
power. Does this need to be pointed out?
>
> "Having said all of the above, please know that these comments
> come from someone on your side. I too abhor the war in Iraq.
> It is offense and embarrassment to wise and peaceful people
> around the world.
>
> "And churches have been sinfully slow in engaging the massive
> ungodliness of this war.  We have indeed been attending to
> internal institutional issues rather prophetic callings,
> compartmentalizing political life from spiritual life, and
> underestimating the power of God to effect international
> issues as much as private and personal problems.
>
> "And because I am in full support of your passion for peace, I
> hope the first PERSONAL encounter people of [a given] Church
> have with AWARE will be one of mutuality and respect.  I hope
> you will take the time to find out what the people of [a given
> church] are already doing in the realm of peacemaking,

Peacemaking is not enough; justice has enter the mix.

> how the
> people of [unnamed] Church understand their own power (and
> that AWARE would be respectful of that self-understanding),
> and how the people of [a given church] are wrestling through
> their own ethical principles about a war that is being fought
> in the context of larger and more complex international
> issues.

We're talking about wanton killing, destruction, and repression,  
based on deceit; We wish to cut through the propaganda and  
ratiocination which tries to veil the brutality of these facts.


> I hope the people of [a given church] will first
> experience the people of AWARE as people of faith, passion,
> goodwill, determination, spirituality, strength, and humility.

Amen!

>
> - from Rev. Michael Smith of Grace United Methodist Church on
> Philo Rd.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss