Jesus and the 99 Percent By The Rev. Madison Shockley

[xchrom]

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/jesus_and_the_99_percent_20111202/


Composite: Wikimedia Commons / Flickr / _PaulS_ (CC-BY-SA)

Many have asked whether the Occupy Wall Street Movement has a coherent message. It really seems pretty clear to anyone who is listening at all. Because of the greed of the 1 percent, the other 99 percent of the population has been reduced to working for lower wages (or not working), to trying to survive (unemployment insurance, welfare and family handouts), to renting or homelessness, to suffering environmental degradation with sickness but without health insurance, and to paying higher prices for food and education while getting lower returns on savings and investments. The unchecked greed of these capitalist elite (symbolized by the banks) impoverishes the majority of people and undermines our democracy. This much was obvious in just the first five minutes of OWS.

We in the Christian community are also asking how the movement’s message coheres with our theological precepts. Should the church be for or against OWS? Should the church offer spiritual support? Should the church lend physical and material support to movement members? As I write from here at Union Theological Seminary in New York City (my alma mater where I’m currently on sabbatical), I have observed and participated with OWS at Zuccotti Park and its Oct. 15 action in Times Square. Union Theological is the seminary of choice for progressive Christian clergy in the United States, so it is no surprise that it has spawned what are known as “Protest Chaplains”: seminary students who participate in OWS as spiritual support and presence. I have attended meetings and worship services conducted by local clergy Occupy Faith NYC who felt drawn to be involved, even before all the questions listed above have been answered.

What has become clear among these liberal and progressive clergy is that although we do not know fully what the movement is or where it will wind up, we know that we are called to be there. The fundamental question is whether we are called to be there for the OWS members’ benefit or for ours. Do they need us or do we need them? We intuitively feel the connections between the nascent OWS and the major social movements of the past from the free speech and civil rights ones of the ’60s to the anti-Vietnam and peace ones of the ’70s. When the history of this second decade of the new millennium is written, we don’t want it said that American Protestantism was late to the party, again.

[izquierdista]

1. Late to the party?

Baptists are just starting to arrive at the Civil Rights party.

[darkstar3]

2. Holy shit.

"The fundamental question is whether we are called to be there for the OWS members’ benefit or for ours. Do they need us or do we need them?"
That had better not be the fundamental question, because it's completely the wrong one. The protestants thinking about joining up shouldn't be worried about their own image or benefit, and the OWS "members" are certainly not thinking about their benefit when protesting. The Vietnam War protestors weren't worried about their own benefits, after all...

"When the history of this second decade of the new millennium is written, we don’t want it said that American Protestantism was late to the party, again."
So the concern is image control and PR? Again, in the same paragraph, it comes back to whether it benefits the church.

Seriously, WTF is wrong with these people? When you deliberate about whether to join a movement like this, it should never be a question of what it can do for you, but instead a question of whether the movement is right.

[Old and In the Way]

3. There is a weird presumption in that question.

"The fundamental question is whether we are called to be there for the OWS members’ benefit or for ours. Do they need us or do we need them?"

Does the author think all OWS attendees are atheists and/or agnostics? The inference in the question seems to make that point.

[applegrove]

4. The right wing will slime any organization that backs up the 99%. Groups and

people have to think of their flanks when they are at war (a class war not of their making where the 1% have been attacking the middle class for 30 years). Being attacked and cowed is a reality from the right. It is human nature to have to think of the wounds you can sustain.

[lwo]

5. Joining is Good

I take the original post differently. Clergymen who participated in the civil rights and antiwar movements didn't do so to benefit their churches. I think progressive Christians should stand w/ OWS because it is the right thing to do. In the past, the church was often on the wrong side of history. Indeed much of southern protestantism split away from their national church and founded their own segregated churches. Such issues perennially confront the churches. The truly progressive ones choose progressive values even if it costs them donations. They don't do this to look good but to fight for what is right. Progressive Partisan

[Sal316]

6. Continue to the next paragraph

Upon serious reflection, the question emerges as to whether the Christian church has a message for OWS or whether the movement has a message for us. Of course the answer is “yes” and “yes.” Occupy Wall Street’s message to the church is, “If you were doing your job we wouldn’t be necessary.” The message of the church to OWS is, “There is an ally in the liberal progressive Christian community, and not all Christians are on the right.”

The question isn't asked in a "what's in it for me" or "how can we co-opt this" kind of way. It's asked in a way to better understand, and develop, a symbiotic 'partnership' (so to speak) between the church and OWS and how the church can reexamine its roots and its role in society.

In fact, if the liberal progressive Christian community were to find its way to fully supporting this movement it just might breathe life into itself. Occupy Wall Street seems quite healthy, thank you.

[darkstar3]

7. A "partnership" was neither asked for nor desired.

For OWS to be effective it must be the voice of the masses and not the "partner" of anyone. The overarching theme of this article is opportunistic, and the last paragraph you quote along with what I've quoted shows that quite nicely.

[Sal316]

8. Ok, so people of faith not welcome...

..got ya.

[darkstar3]

9. There is no way you can get that from what I said.

Don't let that stop you from trying to stir the pot, though. It gets funny from time to time...

[Sal316]

10. Riiiiiiiight.

A "partnership" was neither asked for nor desired.

Now, take a deep breath for a minute and think about this.

Doesn't OWS benefit from a diversity of groups being part of it? You know, unions, single-moms, middle class families, veterans, (gasp) people of faith.

Don't these diverse groups make up "the masses"?

Secondly, if the concern is that it be "the masses", then why identify ANY group that supports OWS? I'm sure you responded to union and veteran groups identifying with OWS with the same response, correct?

...or is your antipathy only reserved for Christians?

[darkstar3]

11. People joining OWS does not consitute a partnership.

Furthermore, partnerships of any kind will most likely harm, not help, the movement. If you're too thick to know that or too obtuse to admit it, I can't help you.

If you want to stir some more, go right ahead. I've lost all interest in talking to you.

[Sal316]

12. I guarantee that organizations who joined OWS..

...had these exact conversations. If they didn't, well, that's just short sighted.

Of course people and organizations are going to ask questions like that before joining any kind of movement.

"partnerships of any kind will most likely harm, not help, the movement"

Just like preachers urging their congregations to join the American revolution (Mayhew's discourse changed public opinion on the application of Romans 13).
Just like churches and the religious faithful who joined the abolitionist movement (Quakers anyone?).
Just like churches and the religious faithful who marched with Dr. King (this goes without saying).

In all 3 of those examples, those peoples' faith, of congregants and clergy, transcended the political ideologies they were fighting.

In all 3, this sort of questioning took place.

But hey, if you want to be all pissed off because "them Jeebus people" are asking these questions publicly and trying to find where their common ground is, go right ahead.