Palin - Bono interview cancelled

The facetime that Sarah Palin was to have with Bono today was apparently cancelled due to scheduling conflicts. Just as well - since no press representatives are allowed in on her meetings with ... well ... anyone. God forbid we get a sense of what she really thinks.

In other news, despite the constant commentary from the Mad One and his minions, Paul Hewson continues his work on behalf of the United Nations' Millenium Development Goals. Along with Jeffrey Sachs, Bono is blogging about the Millenium Development goals over at the Financial Times blog - it is definitely worth checking out.

We are Shocked

In other news, the earth is discovered to rotate around the sun.

An Open Letter

To Senators McCain, Obama, & Biden, and Governor Palin,

As I follow this election season, I regularly hear that I am your target audience - that it is my voting group that you are particularly looking to receive this year. Yet it does not at all feel like it. Indeed, I feel quite often overlooked - and I am through.

You see, I am an evangelical. That is, I believe strongly in the power of the evangellion, the Gospel, to transform the lives of individuals, communities, and yes, even nations. In fact, that evangelical conviction is the center of my life: privately, professionally, and politically.

I am also a values voter.

I believe in the inherent value of all those created in God's image - regardless of economics, race, creed, or sexuality. And I believe it is the job those called to lead our country to protect and preserve that inherent value.

I believe in the importance of marriage, because the God of the evangellion is the God of love. Family life is the building block of our life of faith -in the many forms that modern family life takes. To degrade families with arbitrary legal definitions ("legal union," "life partnership") is to deny those families the validation of being at the center of our community life.

I am an evangelical values voter who follows the One who called us to care for the sick, the poor, the stranger, and the oppressed among us. I am an evangelical values voter who is ashamed at the behavior of the wealthy in our nation towards the poor. I am an evangelical values voter who thinks Jesus really did mean it when he said that we should love and serve our neighbor.

"God has shown you, O mortal, what is good; And what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God?"

I am a values voter.
It is time you listened.

-RR

Trouble in Canterbury

It seems that the children of Cranmer and Hooker* are having some difficulties. At heart, the differences point to the conflict between morality and mercy, between a strong sense of right & wrong and a strong sense of what binds us together, between a hermenuetic of unchanging legality and a hermenuetic of context.

It would be helpful if, perhaps, somewhere in our shared tradition, there was a someone who dealt with the conflict between legality and conventional morality on the one hand, and the power of love and mercy on the other. If only we could find an example like that ...


*I am not clear if I can still use "Anglican Communion" or not. Has that been usurped by one faction over against another? Because there are few things I would like to avoid more than a fundamentalist with a lawyer.

Budget Priorities

It seems to me that both candidates this year feel, rightly so, that our government is a little overextended - financially speaking. That pesky little deficit again.

The real question is not whether or not we need to adjust our national spending habits (has anyone thought about freezing the pentagon's credit card in a block of ice?), but what priorities and values will we use for that adjustment?

Will we, as a nation, invest in the education of our young people? Will we seek to eliminate hunger in one of the world's wealthiest countries? Will we provide healthcare to those who need it most?

Or will we continue to fund (expensive!) crazy-ass ideas in the name of "national defense"?

Myths & Morals go to Washington

As children, we were taught that Robin Hood was a hero, as he stole from the rich and gave to the poor. Indeed, in 1938 this was a dominant enough truth to receive the star treatment in a feature film directed at adults.

The underlying assumption on the Robin Hood myth - the assumption that makes this thief a hero of morality and truth - is that the rich have gotten their wealth at the expense of the poor. In a culture with a very small upper crust, this is a popular and powerful truth. However, as the wealth of a nation/culture grows, this diminishes in popularity - the rich become rich by virtue (hard work, industriousness, etc) rather than at the expense of others.

Of course the question remains - at whose expense have we become wealthy? I don't think that it is a question that any of us is comfortable with.

And, larger questions about our current policies arise. When did the myth become reversed, so that we steal from others (as a nation) in order to give to the rich? When did the Robin Hood principle become called social welfare (with negative connotations), rather than virtue?

Overheard

At a public gathering, from a congregant:

"It all depends on the election. If Obama is elected, he's gonna give all our money away to those black folks."