God's Politics

"Will values be used as wedges to further divide up or bridges to bring us together--to find common ground by moving to higher ground?" --God's Politics, Jim Wallis (Sojourners), p. xvii

As a Christian I recognize the Constitution's first 10 amendments as a secular insistence on rights while failing to list corresponding responsibilities. After having participated in a six week study through First Baptist church (McMinnville, OR.) that reflected on Jim Wallis's book, God's Politics, I have been questioning more deeply what is meant by Christian values, and family values. I fear most of us don't truly wrestle with understanding and arriving at firm values, based in an orthodox, historical Christian faith, that embraces the paradoxes of truth, and the inexorable demands of authentic, redemptive, consuming LOVE. Many American evangelicals simply spout a canned Republican line, and have let someone else do their thinking and theologizing. I like Jim Wallis's periodical assessment of much of current evangelical, right-wing thinking: its just bad theology.

So how does a good theology, a reflective, faithful, sacrificial theology work, that desires the redemption of the world, and takes seriously Jesus's actions, strategies and teachings? I have decided to reflect and theologize practically: Let me propose an example using an actual cherished American value: car ownership. Now some may object immediately, and say that car ownership is not a "value," but I would say that it is, because obviously since we spend so much of our time purchasing, servicing, fueling and driving our vehicles, we value them. We value what they look like, how we look in them, how others look at us and regard us when we are driving in them or parking them in our driveways for others to see. We are quite ready to pay whatever price it takes to keep them on the road. They are valuable to us, therefore they are a value. We, as a society, value automobiles. Although we would describe this as an economic value or personal taste value, it can not help also being of moral value.

Let's see how one reasons theologically:
To own a car we must purchase a car. To use a car, we must drive it, fuel it, maintain and control it. Cars, however morally neutral they may be in themselves as inanimate manufactured vehicles, have associated with them conditions that effect us morally. Do we spend tens of thousands of dollars on one vehicle in order to boost our social standing and define ourselves as superior to others financially, when we could just as easily purchase an inexpensive practical sedan for under ten thousand dollars, or a used one for thousands less? The latter decision would have not only been a humbler choice, having achieved no social promotion or encouraged envy within a circle of friends, clients or family--it would also have freed up tens of thousands of dollars for serving others' needs and preventing debilitating indebtedness.

Do we purchase large vehicles with larger engines that will necessarily demand greater quantities of gasoline and take up more space on the road, or do we purchase smaller, fuel efficienct vehicles? This becomes a moral issue on numerous levels: Greater gas consumption (according to the economic laws of supply and demand) increases the demand thereby driving up prices for everyone. If my Hummer or SUV consumes more I end up forcing others to pay more because I have reduced the common supply of gasoline disproportionally more than my neighbor who drives a small, 4-cylinder, fuel efficient Toyota or Honda sedan. Additionally my larger vehicle pollutes to a greater extent, harming the environment. My large vehicle is also more difficult to park fairly in a common parking lot~~at times intruding on another parking space that forces another driver to find another space further away since they can't squeeze into the space I have left over. Larger vehicles are more difficult to slow down quickly (due to the laws of inertia that Newton explained cogently centuries ago) thereby making large vehicles less safe of other on or near the road (particularily bicyclists). In essence,then, larger vehicles so coveted by the American public are a selfish choice~~their purchase and use, consequently, involve moral values.

Dropouts

I saw another headline lamenting the high school dropout rate. As a teacher I'm usually quite sympathetic to the concern we, as a society, have for keeping students in school and all that implies. Generally, as a society, we are supposed to be concerned with youth completing a high school education so that they can become productive, informed, responsible members of society, and that consequently they may get jobs, pay taxes, and perform essential services for the rest of society. Somehow, keeping every high school kid in school through graduation is supposed to assure this. Or at least encourage it. The problem is this: the deeper problem is much bigger than this, far more systemic, and fundamentally beyond the scope or capabilities of public (or private) educators.

First of all must be challenged the assumption that all high school students should graduate. Along with that is the corollary that after graduation, graduates should go on to attend college. There is also the assumption that the root of the problem lies within public education system, or is a defect within the power of teachers to rectify. Consequently since the problem has not been rectified teachers are blamed. But one assumption at a time.

First of all, we should not assume all students should graduate. Many, if not most, student should be encouraged to graduate because it suits them. It suits them. They are inherently oriented towards academic pursuits, they can benefit from those pursuits, and gain skills and knowledge that can be put to good use for the benefit of society. In other words, society and individuals mutually benefit, prosper and mature together. An example is a science oriented student (gifted in scientific intelligences) that learns biology, disciplines his mind and energies to go on to medical school, and subsequently becomes a doctor who serves a given community healing diseases, setting broken bones, and the like. A high school education was an integral part of that process of becoming educated.

However, what if a given student is not benefited by a high school diploma, or can pursue his own education without the need to jump through hoops? What if a student is too oppressed by the atmosphere, feels too belittled by fellow students or perhaps a staff member? What if, in some way, the high school scene does not suit him, and is detrimental to his hope, his abilities, his aspirations? Other students with limited mental abilities may have enough education for the job that they wish to have at the tenth grade level, and would like to move on, work for a relative, settle down into some sort of job and establish them selves in an occupation that does not require a high school diploma. We must not assume that one shoe size fits all, or that some people will do quite fine going barefoot.