Ours To Use

The Rev. Jeffrey A. Geary
Setauket Presbyterian Church

Selections from the prophet Micah
July 26, 2001

Last week, I began a sermon series on the prophets. Jim and I will continue this series through the rest of the summer. If you were here, you could not forget the dramatic presentation of the social, economic, and military issues to which the prophet Micah addressed himself in the 8th century B.C.E. Today, we'll look a little more closely at what prophets are, and how prophets think, and what the prophets might have to say to us today.

What is a prophet? A prophet is one who speaks the truth in a particular time and place. A biblical prophet should not be confused with a fortuneteller or a soothsayer. The prophet's role is less predictive and more descriptive. By helping people to see the reality of their circumstance, realities the people were often trying to ignore, the prophets made it possible to imagine alternate futures for the people of Israel. The prophet offers God's critical, compelling, liberating vision to people trapped in political, economic, military and systems that use religious rhetoric to legitimize the self-securing aims and abuses of the powerful. As the prophet Habakuk so eloquently summarized, the prophetic role is to "make the vision plain." Prophets dreamed and pleaded – like lovers aching for their beloveds' understanding and commitment; but they also warned and chastised. They are not the sort of people you would invite to a dinner party for fear that they would insult the gathered guests or engage in some embarrassing behavior to make a point. Take Jeremiah. This guy went out and bought a brand new, clean, crisp pair of underwear and paraded all around Jerusalem in them. Then he soiled them and buried them in the ground for a month. After 30 days, he dug them up and again marched around Jerusalem wearing only this disgusting rag. His point?! A people who has abandoned justice for the poor are as attractive to God as crusty, dirty, undies. Or imagine the popularity of Hosea who likened the nation to a whore, lusting after global partners to take to bed. Or when Amos called the wealthy women of Israel "cows...who oppress the poor, who crush the needy, who lie on their couches and say to their husbands, ‘Bring something to drink.'" Or when Jesus insulted his dinner host, a prominent religious leader, by suggesting that when he gives a dinner he should not invite his friends and relatives or people who would give honor to him, but rather, "invite the poor, the crippled, the lame and the blind." Prophets say what needs to be said without deference to station, circumstance, or outcome. They speak truth to power. And the truth is always the truth of God's covenant: that God called Israel out of Egypt to be a nation that knew no oppression, no idols, that looked to its most vulnerable first and its own comfort last. A people that would then know the meaning of life and stand secure before God and the nations as a light to the nations.

In prophetic fashion then, I would like to use today's sermon not to further flesh out the historical setting of the prophet Micah, but our own historical setting, drawing the lines of comparison and challenge for us so that we may discern how God may be calling us today. And I will take as my subject, as the prophets always did, our nations treatment of the poor in our midst.

Today's World

In 1996, the Congress of the United States enacted far reaching changes in the laws surrounding the provision of federal and state welfare for poor persons, families and children. The title of the legislation, the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act" reflected the intentions behind the change. Poor persons were personally responsible for taking advantage of the opportunity to work. Failure to make ends meet was a personal failure, and the language in the opening paragraphs named it a moral failure. The chief problems of poverty are defined as single parenthood and out-of-wedlock births resulting from the moral decisions of individuals. Lack of education and sufficient jobs paying living wages, like all systemic economic factors are seen as irrelevant to the choices individuals must make. (As Inspector Javert in Les Miserables says, "Good Job, Hard Work, That is the Lord's Way.")

The passage of this legislation (opposed by most mainline denominations and supported strongly by the religious right) had two chief results. The first was to replace the social safety net traditionally provided by Aid to Families With Dependent Children, with a new program called Temporary Assistance to Needy Families. The important word is "Temporary." This was the imposition of time limits on government assistance to the poor. Since the legislation assumes the availability of jobs at living wages with job training, education and flexible enough schedules to allow for parenting, failure to work was the clients moral failing and thus no longer the problem of the common good. The result has been the much heralded reduction in welfare roles as families reach their five year time limit and are removed from the public eye. But poverty and need have not been reduced (in fact they have increased as welfare has been lost), the poor have not really disappeared, and those in chronic need have been left on the doors of churches synagogues, mosques and other charitable organizations.

But this is no accident. Since poverty is deemed a moral failure of the individual, and it is commonly believed that faith based organizations have as their primary goal the change and transformation of individuals, religious organizations are in the "best" position to end poverty. This is what Cathlin Baker has called the personalization and privatization of poverty: "no longer is poverty a public problem, it's a personal problem. No longer is poverty a problem to be tackled by the government, it's to be addressed by the private sector, including business, community groups, religious organizations, and families."

This is the second result of the 1996 repeal of welfare. Churches and other charitable organizations were given the task of taking up the slack. Attorney General John Ashcroft, then Senator Ashcroft, introduced as part of the legislation a little noticed provision called Charitable Choice. "Basically, the Charitable Choice provision requires that any state that contracts with private contractors, such as for profits and non-profits, for social service delivery also include religious organizations as eligible contractors." However, religious organizations would not be required to meet safety, conduct or professional standards in their program that their secular counterparts are. Nor would they be required to implement fair hiring and non-discrimination employment practices if they had religious reasons for objecting. Thus federal money would be used to support what would normally be considered illegal and discriminatory behavior in business. And while the law ostensibly prohibits proselytization, religious practice may be considered a treatment technique, prayer an alternative to medical care, character development the goal, and, after all, nobody's checking.

The issues here are complex but not hard to understand, and have been studied deeply by our denomination. They are summarized in an excellent 30 page pamphlet prepared by our partner denomination, the United Church of Christ, which I recommend to you. It brings together in one place all the ideas expressed by our church in a series of publications, and the UCC has given us 100 free copies for study in our congregation.

To summarize, the drive over the last 5 years has been to clear the way for our government to wash its hands of caring for the poor and ensuring the common good through the provision of a social safety net and to make it easier for individuals to contribute financially to the provision of social services through private charities and local congregations of faith who now bear the burden of helping the poor.

Biblical Faith

What does our biblical faith have to say in such a world?

Last week we looked closely a the prophet Micah. Micah, in his original prophesy, refers to the way the rich were stealing the land of the poor - either outright or by charging usurious interest rates which caused the farmers to forfeit their land to pay the loans. Listen to chapter 2: "Alas for those who devise wickedness on their beds! When the morning dawns, they perform it, because it is in their power. They covet fields, and seize them, houses and take them away."

Micah views the impending Assyrian invasion of Jerusalem as God's judgement against the rich and powerful who, along with the religious leaders, have conspired to hurt the poorest among them – in direct defiance of God's commands. Chapter 6: The voice of God, "O my people, what have I done to you? In what way have I wearied you? Answer me! For I brought you up from the land of Egypt, and redeemed you from the land of slavery. Can I forget the treasures of wickedness in the house of the wicked? Can I tolerate wicked scales, and a bag of dishonest weights? Your wealthy are full of violence; your inhabitants speak lies, with tongues of deceit in their mouths. Therefore I have begun to strike you down."

At this point in history, Jerusalem does not fall. The Jewish king pays a tribute to the Assyrians who then leave him alone for the time being. Needless to say, the rapacious behavior of the wealthy continues. More and more poor are turned off their lands and now work in horrendous day laboring conditions. Chapter 7: "Their hands are skilled to do evil; the official and the judge ask for a bribe, and the powerful dictate what they desire; thus they pervert justice."

Micah's vision of justice for the people is found in chapter 4: each shall sit under their own vines and their own fig tree and no one shall make them afraid. Poverty is indeed a moral problem, but it is not the moral problem of the poor. Micah and all the prophets agree that poverty is a moral problem, but it is the immorality of the political, military and religious leaders which is the problem. The greed for trade in luxury items, the land grabbing, the economic system that makes and keeps surplus poor while protecting the wealthy, or as Micah says, the leaders cry ‘Peace' when they are well fed, but declare war against those who are not productive.

The judgement of the prophets is that no nation which ignores the poor in its midst will last long. In turning to military force for protection, trust in political alliances with the elites of other nations to secure the government, and expanding trade agreements which further exploit the poor, the nation descends into idolatries which are ultimately self-destructive.

Responsible Discipleship

In light of this reading of the world in which we live and of the world of our biblical faith, what does active discipleship call upon us to do?

This past week we had placed before all of us a choice. We each received a check from the federal government, a tax rebate because the government says it doesn't need our money. And no matter where you stand on the question of the de-funding of welfare programs, and while the Congress continues to debate redirected billions of dollars from already restricted social programs to missile defenses, we are each of us faced with a choice: what will we do with our check?

This is a real dilemma. My first impulse was the return it. But then I thought it would be used to build missile defenses. I know it wouldn't be used to help those who have been removed from public assistance. The President and John Ashcroft want me to spend it on charity, especially on all these groups addressing the moral issues of poverty through private means. But as a Christian I see the issues differently, and I don't want my check to be an implicit endorsement of Charitable Choice and the privatization of poverty. While the immediate relief of the suffering of the poor is incumbent upon us all, the prophets urge me to keep my eye on the long term work of justice and the common good. Alternatively, I can spend it all on myself, or save it, since I am reminded, the money is mine to begin with since I earned it. But this too is a moral message which privatizes my income and assumes all is well in our economy and anyone who wants can earn a living wage. I am reminded again, it is the poor who fail. And I cannot forget that this was part of a legislative package that gave me this check as a bribe while providing incredible tax relief for those with incomes that exceed all I have earned here in Setauket over the last six years.

Jack Rogers, the moderator of the Presbyterian Church, urges each of us to at least tithe, to give 10% of our check to a mission agency of the church. These agencies are listed on the website at pcusa.org, and this would, he estimates, if all Presbyterians participated, provide 54 million dollars this year for mission work. But should our churches, national or local, profit from the de-funding of social programs? Should local soup kitchens be glad to receive our checks which are the result of our governments's refusal to help the neediest? Will any agency who benefits substantially from these funds be able to raise the critical questions about national justice that might affect the future of such funding? Will we be satisfied to fight among ourselves for the same pot of money that has always been available to religious groups, while social programs continue to be raided to fund missile defenses?

While I think tithing is a good goal churchwide, I think in our community we need to do more. I think we need to do two things. First, I encourage you to give the whole check away. While some may want to help meet the immediate needs of those who are most vulnerable through a donation to a community meal or food pantry, like our own soup kitchen, I would strongly encourage you to give a balanced share to organizations working for structural and systemic change, and not only immediate relief. Organizations like our Presbyterian Washington Office are working every day on our behalf to ensure that government priorities reflect justice for the poorest among us. While Presbyterians always rank this work highly in churchwide surveys, it is consistently underfunded by our denomination. You can pick up Washington Office brochures in the hallways which will help you direct your giving to them.

In a conversation last night with the Rev. Bob Moore, director of the Coalition for Peace Action in New Jersey whose Peace Education Day I visit every year with our high school youth, he reminded me that these checks are not considered income this year, and thus not taxed, while charitable donations will be deductible. A double dip. And, he added, support for peacemaking work, either through the church or through organizations like peace action, have a further benefit of actively working to change our nations budget

priorities.

Working Assets, through a program outlined at their website www.giveforchange.com has offered to match donations in the amount of $300 or $600 to any one of a number of organizations working for social change and not just meeting immediate need.

But I think we must take a second step, and that is advocacy. Don't settle for just giving the money to a cause your conscience supports. Talk to Elders Bob Russo and Edna Zemanian about the conference they attended this past spring on Charitable Choices. Read the UCC's excellent pamphlet. Study the PC(USA)'s positions on a just economy and for fair tax policy. (Found in a new resource in our church library). One idea I liked was to write our representatives and President, thanking them for the checks and letting them know how we spent ours.

Dear Mr. President,
I want to thank you for the tax rebate check I received last week. While I resent receiving it at the cost of a federal reduction in care for the poor, I want you to know I have used it to support an organization that is working to change our national budget priorities.
Sincerely,
The UCC, in it's excellent paper, notes that long before Jesus was born a prophet spoke these words "For unto us a child is born, to us a son it given, and the government will be upon his shoulders." (Isaiah 9:6) Our biblical faith knows that governments have a legitimate role in defending the common good, but that as Jesus learned political and religious leadership can become an oppressive force. Like it or not, religion has a prophetic dimension that calls nations to accountability whenever justice and righteousness are ignored.

This is our dilemma. No matter what we may think of the specifics of these programs or the analysis of the situation, we have been given a gift. Like it or not, it is now ours to use. What will you do with yours?