The week of Andrew Puzder’s withdrawal as nominee for U.S. Secretary of Labor also marks the fourteenth anniversary of the largest world wide protest in the history of our species. On Feb. 15, 2003 anti Iraq War protests in nearly 800 cities across the globe brought into the streets, according to the Guinness Book of World Records, between 12 and 14 million people. British Member of Parliament and peace activist Tony Benn described it as “the first global demonstration, and its first cause is to prevent a war against Iraq”. That day, Bishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa met with then Secretary General of the United Nations Kofi Annan and declared, “those people marching in all those cities around the world, we claim the United Nations as our own. We claim it in the name of our global mobilization for peace.”
This February week of 2017, in the aftermath of the weak responses of the Mexican government to the current U.S. administration’s threats, thousands of people marched in protest in twenty Mexican cities. “We are all migrants. We are all one. This is a time to build bridges, not walls,” said 73-year-old protester Jose Antonio Sanchez, who was marching with his nine-year-old granddaughter. With neither the U.S. nor the Mexican administration inclined or able to “build bridges” now, it is the protests on both sides of the border that reveal the common ground that unites our peoples.
On the Mexican side, the end to government subsidized gasoline prices recently led to a twenty per cent increase at the pump. On the U.S. side of the border, big oil is riding high under the new administration with endorsement of the Dakota Access Pipeline and an EXXON executive as Secretary of State. In the recent auction of Mexican oil deposits, BP, who brought to the U.S. Gulf waters the Deepwater Horizon disaster, was one of the big winners. The major oil companies all claimed victory back in 2013 when the Peña Nieto administration announced as part of its Energy Reform the sale of the prized off shore Mexican oil fields. Ali Moshiri, president of Chevron Africa and Latin America Exploration and Production, told reporters shortly after the 2016 auction. “Everybody in the oil and gas sector is interested in Mexico, especially the deepwater.”
For Mexicans, in addition to the nearly $3.50 per gallon cost of gasoline, the privatization andloss of control of their formerly nationalized oil production has been seen by Mexicans as akin to pawning the family jewelry. For U.S. residents, raising tariffs on Mexican exports would mean an increase in our food prices. The U.S. Department of Agriculture figures 71 % of tomatoes sold in the U.S. come from Mexico and 93 % of Haas avocadoes. Availability of Mexican produce has helped change U.S. diets in the last fifty years with Mexican mango, avocado, broccoli, and lime sales up well over 1000 % since 1970. Mexican industrial farming won’t be alone in paying for that border wall. So will we U.S. consumers.
Mainstream and moderate Mexican political commentators are calling on Peña Nieto to stop appeasing and stand up to the U.S. threats but given the Mexican President’s woeful approval ratings that’s not likely to happen without more mass demonstrations. For a more humane, peaceful and equitable world, we all need more manifestations of global resistance like the February 15, 2003 anti Iraq War mobilization. The day after that historic wave of protest and resistance, the New York Times referred to the people’s rising up as “the second superpower”.
One of the New York City movement organizers, Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies, summed up what the demonstrations achieved with these words: “Our movement changed history. While we did not prevent the Iraq war, the protests proved its clear illegality, demonstrated the isolation of the Bush administration policies, helped prevent war in Iran, and inspired a generation of activists. February 15 set the terms for what ‘global mobilizations’ could accomplish.” Such mobilizations remain the most powerful deterrent to the threats to world peace, health and sustainable development posed by the current U.S. administration.
************ **************** ************
With gratitude for the Phyllis Bennis article on the Institute for Policy Studies web site at
“It is not easy to put in practice such a solidarity when conflict abounds, and when a bewildering array of opposing projects spill forth from a divided national and regional culture. It becomes still more challenging in a context of apparently triumphant individualism and a combine of reigning forces that would compel us to see the other as a virtual enemy.”
Written and published over a month before the presidential election in the United States, these words from the following reflection on the meaning and aims of “solidarity” in the context of Nicaragua emphasize that our task as citizens of Nicaragua (or the U.S.!) has not been altered by the election results. Written by the Executive Director of Nicaragua’s Interchurch Center for Theological and Social Studies (CIEETS), the essay measures how far we humans have to go while proposing guidelines and tools for achieving “solidarity in community”. Its universal message should be hailed as a sign that while our national agendas vary in the details, there are means for progress that can, indeed must, unite us across national boundaries. It is, for example, enticing to contemplate what might be the effect on Central Americans’ migration to the U.S. of our government’s focusing its future foreign aid on the kind of community development projects in solidarity with the poor organized by Msc. Jairo Arce’s organization across Nicaragua. To learn about CIEETS’ work go to http://www.cieets.org.ni or write them at firstname.lastname@example.org
“The word ‘solidarity’ is intimately bound up with the concepts of unity and community. Its application calls for visible signs of love such as the struggle to identify with those who suffer pain and poverty and defy the apparent human incapacity for lasting solutions to the conditions and basic elements necessary for survival. In our time a call for solidarity has been issued by the thousands and millions of our brothers and sisters who have passed through the shadow of death on their journeys throughout the earth on a search similar to Abraham’s and by God who also has been a refugee among us.
A theology dedicated to unpacking solidarity must start with the conviction that God is concerned about poverty and is in solidarity with every human being alive today. God in human form, God incarnate, is the highest expression of a God who is in solidarity with humanity. Solidarity then gives us practice in those values and fundamental principles that unite us and strengthen the social fabric and the creative dynamic which are the foundation of community while constituting also an appeal to defend those values and principles and ensure that they are guidelines for daily living.
– Solidarity brings grace to our life in community and counters the violence that destroys the life of the planet and our ecosystem.
– Solidarity assures every man and woman that they are chosen now to present and strengthen the ethical foundation of community in a time of neoliberal obfuscation.
– Solidarity assures each of us that in our roles and with our personal histories we are responsible for the world and the nation that we live in. The awareness that issues from solidarity demands that we all work for comprehensive progress within our nations.
– Solidarity demands that we root out the logic and pattern of individualistic and egocentric interests lodged in our hearts and reject the use of aggression and force as easy ways to resolve conflicts while devaluing or ignoring those who are different.
It is not easy to put in practice such a solidarity when conflict abounds, and when a bewildering array of opposing projects spill forth from a divided national and regional culture. It becomes still more challenging in a context of apparently triumphant individualism and a combine of reigning forces that would compel us to see the other as a virtual enemy. In spite of all this, we have the gift and shared destiny that remind us that our nation’s future is in our hands, that its future belongs to us and that the humanity that we share with others is not an abstract concept: it is cause for our earnest suffering and for vibrant hope.
The true criteria for solidarity are all founded on the principle that the society in which we live must protect, cultivate and preserve values such as respect for life, liberty, justice, transformative tolerance, human rights, work with dignity, truth telling, and the protection of the weak, among others. Without such a foundation for solidarity, it will be hampered in enabling a life of joy for all and the peace and security of the nation’s citizens.
Solidarity calls for the personal ownership or, at least, a growing appropriation of a social personal ethic, be it publicly or privately expressed. We will all be affected in the process of ethical formation through the leadership of men and women who do take into account the social consequences of their actions. Our contribution to solidarity lies in ensuring that every individual and social institution will go beyond empty appeals to “unity” and will defend life in its diversity and will find through dialog and political action the constructive means to deal with personal and social conflicts. There is no doubt that to emerge from the grip of violence in which we live and make human, peaceful solidarity possible, a serious educational task at different levels is necessary to establish the ethical principles of human community and break the hold of forces that cloud the future.
Jesus invites us to accept differences. He tells us that “the Father makes the sun shine on the good and the bad and makes rain fall on the just and the sinner”. Nothing can justify in the 21st Century discrimination and exclusion or, in a word, racism which is the practice of exclusion in its many and varied forms. Jesus of Nazareth noted that wheat and weeds grow next to each other and by this reminds us that every human being has the right to life and the liberty to go his or her way. To guide us, the Apostle St. Paul invited us to conquer evil by means of the good. Jesus’ concern and care for the little ones, the sick, the weak and those whose life is threatened show us the importance of the values of uprightness, truthfulness and honesty as the basis for our participation in the civic dialog. Jesus’ embrace of his ministry makes clear our responsibility for the creation’s well being in preparing the way for solidarity in community.
Jesus’ call to live by the golden rule, “Do not do to others what we would not want them to do to us” becomes an indispensable ethic for life in solidarity and true community. Similarly, Jesus’ relationships with public authorities insist on an exercise of power free of arrogance and in service of others. Through the life and words of Jesus, with respect for the cristological context, we can find guidelines for a social ethic which forms the basis of a human solidarity lived out peacefully and committed to peaceful life in community.
The life of Jesus can always serve as instruction, as a fruitful path for humanity regardless of our individual religious affiliation. By means of the rich lessons disclosed by his life and his words, we are challenged to find additional means to heighten the ethical behavior of all in their daily lives. It is then on behalf of solidarity that we stand and declare “affirm life and oppose the forces of death”, the task that demands the best of ourselves. Through our work we can always participate in forming the ethical awareness of others and it is in this task that our spirituality is grounded and grows. Solidarity is the pathway by which we seek and find the hopeful message that celebrates the dream and bolsters our affirming and imagining a world for everyone, without barriers and borders, without the threat of death for those who would seek better conditions in a different setting.
God acted on behalf of the community of Israel in biblical times, on behalf of Abraham’s family and even to the extent of becoming a refugee among us. God loves, defends and gives life. And what about us? What about we Christians?”
“I think you just got the President of the U.S. that Mexico has had for many years” Rev. Lisania Sustaita Martinez comments in the interview below. Lisania completed her studies at the Ecumenical Seminary of Puerto Rico in 2013 and returned to her hometown of San Luis Potosí. She now serves as Associate Minister of the downtown Central Christian Church and Education Coordinator in charge of leadership development with the Roundtable of Congregational and Disciples of Christ Churches in México. In this interview, she describes what gives her hope as a young woman working in the Protestant Church for a more just social order in her nation and the continent of North America.
What has been Mexico’s reaction to the election of Donald Trump as President? What are the greatest concerns in Mexico resulting from his election?
Mexico is also shocked by the elections in the U.S., the election of Trump in particular. Mexico is shocked and concerned about the things that he said, talking about Mexicans, talking about Latin people in general, talking about not just Mexicans in Mexico but Mexicans, Latin people living in the U.S. The general opinion of the people around me is that what he is saying cannot be done because many Latin people have been working in the U.S. for many many years so it would bring problems to the economy. We are concerned because even if he doesn’t do everything he has promised, his words and pronouncements have encouraged other people to be aggressive with Latin people, with Mexicans and with other people who are not male, white, adult. We are concerned because violence is always the result of such pronouncements.
We have been made more aware of the deep divisions in our country caused by racism and economic inequality in our culture through the election contest this year. How about in Mexico? What divides people in Mexico today and how does the culture, the political realm and the Church respond to those divisions?
What divides us most in Mexico is the economy. We have extreme poverty and we have a small group of rich people, entrepreneurs who own and control the economy. And it also has to do with our government. I think you just got the President of the U.S. that Mexico has had for many years. If I compare and contrast Trump and our President Peña Nieto, I have to say it is the same thing. A person who doesn’t know about working with people, a person who doesn’t know about how a nation develops and grows, a person who doesn’t know anything beyond the economy and its industry.
They both don’t know about working with people in need and rising up from the bottom. Peña Nieto and his government have been focused on the economy at the highest levels, industry in particular, and he doesn’t talk about agriculture and education. They only know about their world and they don’t know how to work with people in need, people who have been excluded from their economy.
I think the Protestant Church, the evangelical churches and the Catholic Church as well have felt the urgency, the importance of walking with the people since our governors, the government, don’t know how to walk with the people. I think the church has tried to walk with these people. Walking with the hungry, with the poor, with people in the hospitals and helping to grow micro enterprises, to give attention to children, to women, to the elders. Since we have such a bad government we have to stand up for these people.
We can’t say we have a good country because of our President. We can’t claim to be good because we have a black President. We have to stand up for black people, we have to stand up for dignity, for equal rights because our president is not black. And now you have to do as we have done since we have had this President and because it’s become worse and worse with each President in Mexico. So you all now have to say that in spite of this President, in spite of Trump, we are good people. In spite of what he has said, we take care of our people, we respect our differences, not as boundaries, but as diversity, a good thing. In spite of our President we stand up for diversity and taking care of people in need.
For example , the Theological Community of Mexico City (ecumenical seminary in Mexico City) has had many programs encouraging churches to open their doors to people who are suffering because of the crime, because of the poverty, because of the natural disasters in the country. So I think we have to do that since we can’t count on the government.
We hear in the U.S. that the generation now named “the millennials” are rejecting “established” churches, or, put another way, “the establishment church”. What issues are “the millennials” in Mexico most concerned about and how is the Disciples of Christ Church responding to their concerns?/strong
Well, we don’t use the word “millennials” in Mexico much; it’s not frequently said. But we have found that the new generations of youth here are also looking for other kinds of experiences of faith, new expressions of faith. They are finding the new in Buddhism, in oriental faith practices, in yoga and science, in agnosticism and atheism. The new generations have to study and work and they are looking for ways to earn money not just in industries or in traditional ways of working. So as they experiment with new ways outside the traditional to earn money they are as well seeing the traditional church as the church that tells you, “don’t do this or that. Don’t, don’t.”
So they are looking for churches who are capable of walking with them and who understand that they have to work and
study at the same time and can’t be the people the traditional church expects or wants them to be. Some of the new generation are struggling with their sexual orientation, struggling with broken relationships, broken families and others are struggling with what the new science about our earth is saying. And so churches are seen as old and traditional when they can’t respond or haven’t responded to these realities, these new realities. So we may not talk about the millennials but we know how the new generations are looking to be their own boss, looking for what I can sell, what I have to contribute to my people, what I can do for better life today. So we are not just talking about traditional church but traditional everything.
What is most encouraging, what brings you hope about the church’s part in God’s mission in Mexico today?
I think those who are looking to create the new bring me the most hope. Those people who are looking for a new experience of God walking with them gives us opportunity to rethink the Bible and rethink theology and rethink church. And I have to say this is a hard time for us because rethinking is never soft, rethinking is rough, rethinking is contrasting, rethinking is debating and arguing. So it is hard to destroy, and I have to use this word because we are talking about rebuilding. So it’s harsh but I think it is necessary.
This new generation with this new way of thinking may be what the youth, women and children need today. They feel the need to stand up for the sectors of people who have been pushed away from God and they feel the need to give them some kind of answer. So I think this can be good as youth and other people are asking “why” and the answer “because the bible says so” is not enough. So they need a different kind of answer. This gives me hope because people are thinking; people are asking questions; people are trying to understand; people are looking for a genuine faith of their own not one given to them because they’ve been told they need it. They need a faith that is their own. This gives me hope in this time of transformation, this time of crisis when you are closing an epoch and opening another.
If the church doesn’t rethink itself it will get old and become obsolete. But now new generations and people are starting to find and explore what they don’t understand about the Bible, and about theology and God and the church and that brings me hope. With this rethinking we are transforming ourselves.
In the United States, we are all trying to decipher the messages sent us by the resounding election victories of Donald Trump and the Republican Party. While the election’s handwriting on the wall will continue to be interpreted in different ways as in chapter 5 of Daniel, one area of the message is certain. As much as we try to ignore or put it behind us, mistrust, fear and abuse of the Other (persons of other races and nationalities) continue to threaten the rule of democracy in the United States.
Here in Kansas City, the Negro Leagues Baseball Hall of Fame celebrates the African American baseball players who never made it to the major leagues of the “great American past time” not because they didn’t have the talent but because of their exclusion from U.S. professional teams until the year 1947. The Kansas City museum also honors the memory of those white players who in the winter off season during the years of segregated baseball played on teams outside the country with black players.
Surprisingly, some of those white players, like the brothers Paul and Dizzy Dean, had grown up in the fiercely segregationist southern states which enforced separation of the races in their territory. For some of the whites like the Dean brothers, the wintertime move to Mexico, Cuba and other nations of the Caribbean was motivated by the desire to play baseball against and with the best U.S. players, whether black or white.
For the African American players, leaving their home country to play baseball brought benefits the whites took for granted in the U.S. As the black player Willie Wells said of playing ball in Mexico, “We live in the best hotels, go to the best restaurants, and can go anywhere we care to. We don’t enjoy such privileges in the United States.” In short, Wells and the other African Americans found “respect, freedom and democracy. In Mexico.”
Today of course, professional sports teams in the United States are fully integrated and black players excel. But the recent election provides additional evidence of a strategy to restrict if not suppress the rights and the impact of African American and other voters in U.S. elections.
Anti- democratic voiding of the ballots of several thousand black voters in Florida in the 2000 presidential election put us on notice. Since then we have learned of defective voting machines, closing of polling places, new voter identification requirements, redrawing of voting districts in the states, and new voter registration procedures all implemented within states, in the south and the north, controlled by Republican legislatures intent on limiting the impact of the increased numbers of persons of color in American elections.
One of the most troubling aspects of the past election is summed up by the observation made by one U.S. political scientist who said, “this is the first election held in this country without the full protections of the U.S. Voting Rights Act of 1965”. One way to better understand the importance of this statement is offered by viewing the 2014 film “Selma”.
This film recounts the history of the struggle for African Americans’ right to vote in southern states. For decades since the Civil War southern politicians had devised various ways to deny African Americans the right to vote. Now in our day, the 1965 Act that prohibited such practices has been weakened through devious legislative maneuvers in many states of the U.S.
What might the long term effects on American democracy be if such practices continue and a wall is built between persons of color and the U.S. polling place? Let me share a story, a kind of parable, that suggests what we might be in for.
In the mid 1970’s a friend here in Kansas City played basketball for one of Kansas’ community colleges. The team had black and white players on it and had a couple of games against teams in the southern State of Texas. When they got to the small town’s biggest restaurant the black players were told, and this only forty years ago, that they would be served in the room behind the kitchen.
My friend and the other black players went to the back room and enjoyed meeting the entirely black kitchen staff and eating what they cooked for them. Their portions were more than ample and the kitchen help offered to make the leftovers into sandwiches for the team’s trip north. That night some of the white players got to sample what their black teammates had eaten. When they returned after the next day’s game to the same restaurant all the white players told the coach they wanted to eat the better food and bigger portions provided in the back room too.
The story suggests what this country will lose if the campaign continues to limit or exclude the human rights of segments of the population. Not only will citizens of the nation, of all ethnic backgrounds, be deprived of the best a democracy offers. The image of the U.S. as a bastion of democracy world wide will be malnourished. And this means we all will suffer the consequences.
On March 25, 1980, during my lunch break from teaching English in Guadalajara, Mexico I strolled past jacaranda trees in bloom and while waiting for my tacos to be prepared bought a newspaper. On reading the bold headline I knew that the news would somehow deeply afffect my life.
I had followed the rise of the Sandinistas in Nicaragua and their overthrow of the Somoza dictatorship. On reading “Archbishop Romero Killed in San Salvador” I knew the armed struggle against the oligarchy in El Salvador would now rage more intensely in that small country. I also knew that the U.S. CIA, diplomats and the Army’s School of the Americas had played a major role in preparing the Salvadoran army and intelligence officers to defend the rule of the Salvadoran elite.
What I did not know or anticipate was that the war in El Salvador would cause thousands of young men to flee conscription by the guerrilla forces or the government’s Army and arrive in Tucson where I would be living three months after reading the news of the Archbishop’s death. Helping organize Tucson First Christian Church’s aid and refuge for the Salvadoran refugees brought me greater understanding of what is driving migration to the U.S. in these times and guided my return to the wellsprings of Christian faith.
Since graduating from seminary and ordination as a minister of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) thirty years ago this year, I have kept these words of Archbishop Romero near my desk: “I simply want to be the builder of a great affirmation, the affirmation of God who loves us.”
This month hundreds of people gathered on the Mexican border south of Tucson to express solidarity and compassion for those forced to flee their Central American homelands still wracked by authoritarian rule by the elite. Among other things they paid tribute to the courageous young Honduran woman Berta Cáceras who had organized opposition to transnational corporations threatening the environment and the people of her country. Like the Archbishop she was assassinated early this year.
The following report on the gathering at the border in Nogales, Arizona is by Scott Nicholson who serves the Hogar de Esperanza y Paz (House of Hope and Peace) in Nogales, Mexico. Scott’s volunteering is made possible by the Global Ministries of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and United Church of Christ.
BORDER CONVERGENCE October 26, 2016
Hundreds of people gathered on both sides of the border wall that separates Nogales, Sonora from Nogales, Arizona on October 8 and 9. The convergence was organized by SOA Watch to protest the militarization of the border that is causing so much suffering and death for our migrant sisters and brothers.
This militarization was started by Bill Clinton and has been further escalated by Barack Obama. A “crisis” of unaccompanied minors that were fleeing violence and poverty in Central America and seeking refuge in the U.S. occurred during summer 2014. The response of the Obama administration was to pressure the Mexican government to further militarize its southern border with Guatemala. Millions of dollars were given to implement Plan Frontera Sur (Southern Border Plan) which placed more immigration agents and checkpoints in southern Mexico.
Sister Guadalupe; of the Hermanos en el Camino shelter in Ixtepec, Oaxaca; told us that the militarization in southern Mexico has forced migrants to pass through more isolated, and dangerous, regions. She said that nine of every ten migrants arriving at the shelter have been assaulted, and more than half the women have been raped. Mexico is now deporting more Central Americans than the U.S., and this repression and violence have reduced the number of people arriving at the U.S. border.
“I very much appreciate Mexico’s efforts in addressing the unaccompanied children who we saw spiking during the summer,” said Obama in January 2015. “In part, because of strong efforts by Mexico, including at its southern border, we’ve seen those numbers reduced back to much more manageable levels.”
The Nogales Wall was first built by the Clinton administration in October 1994 – just three months after he visited the site of the former Berlin Wall. The Obama administration built a taller, and stronger, border wall in the summer of 2011.
“We celebrate unity,” Clinton had said in Berlin. “We stand where crude walls of concrete separated mother from child, and we meet as one family. We stand where those who sought a new life instead found death. Berliners, you have proved that no wall can forever contain the mighty power of freedom.”
The Clinton administration created the Border Patrol’s first national strategy in 1994, “Prevention through Deterrence.” The goal was to “Raise the risk…to the point that many will consider it futile to attempt illegal entry… Illegal traffic will be deterred, or forced over more hostile terrain, less suited for crossing.” Since then, the bodies of more than 6,000 people have been found in the southern border region. The actual death toll is much higher because many bodies are never found.
Last month, we commemorated the 15th anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and I found myself reflecting on how we define terrorism. It seems to me that terrorism involves the use of violence, targeting civilians, to achieve a political objective. Thousands of civilians have now died after being forced over hostile terrain along the border in order to deter people from entering the U.S.
“No más, no more, tear down the border walls!” we chanted during the litany for those victims at the end of the convergence here in Nogales.
In Love and Solidarity, Scott Nicholson
Scott’s report is from the web site of Global Ministries: http://www.globalministries.org/border_convergence
For an excellent article on the background to Archbishop Romero’s assassination and the recent beatification of the Archbishop by Pope Francis go to:
This coming week a mass demonstration will be held in solidarity with the thousands of children and adults who have been detained and brutally treated as a result of the unprecedented border security policies of the current U.S. administration. There will be calls for recognition of the causes for the migration from the south of the border, and our U.S. role in many of these causes, along with proposals for immigration reform in the next Congress. Following is the announcement (edited slightly by Erasing Borders) of the gathering at the southern border in the United Church of Christ News of September 7 written by Connie Larkman.
“At Border Convergence in Nogales, Arizona/Senora, Mexico, UCC congregations will join the School of the Americas Watch, immigrants’ rights groups and interfaith partners during the first week of October to demand justice for immigrants and laws that address the root causes of migration.
Thousands of activists are expected to gather at this vigil to push back against militarization of the border, against criminalization of migrants and refugees, and to name the root causes of migration. As the denomination’s October multimedia initiative, the UCC National Collaborative on Immigration has identified goals that also include a commitment to immersion education, and work to stop deportations.
The Southwest Conference of the United Church of Christ is hosting the denomination’s delegation, along with Good Shepherd UCC in Sahuarita, Ariz. General Minister and President the Rev. John Dorhauer will be speaking at the bi-national interfaith service and vigil.
“Jesus put his body on the line for the sake of justice and to save others,” said the Rev. William M. Lyons, designated conference minister. “The Southwest Conference is calling the Body of Christ, the Church, to stand on the line between the U.S. and Mexico October 7-10 to bring attention to the injustice of militarizing rather than economically revitalizing our border communities, and who will build bridges rather than walls between privileged and marginalized people.”
“It is important for the United Church of Christ to have a presence at the School of the Americas Watch convergence in Nogales because it allows us to be witnesses to the injustice at the U.S./Mexico border, but it also allows our church to be in solidarity with the throngs of people from Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras and beyond that have been violently pushed out of their countries of origin and pulled into the United States,” said the Rev. Randy Meyer, pastor of Good Shepherd UCC and member of the UCC’s Collaborative on Immigration. “It doesn’t take a genius to follow the root causes of that push and pull. Without much effort you begin to uncover that the United States has a long history of manipulating foreign economies to its favor while in the same breath propping dictators and their officers who create terror and repression. As people of faith we can no longer stand by as our nation helps ignite the fires that are ravaging Latin America and pushing its humble masses to our border.”
Thousands of people are expected to attend the event, including members of more than a dozen UCC congregations representing six different conferences. A few days before the weekend program, which includes a march to the border wall between the United States and Mexico, the UCC participants will have the opportunity to take part in an immersion experience, with a desert walk with Samaritans, theological reflections on border ministry and a strategic discussion on immigrant justice.
“As a follower of Jesus and faith leader in the United Church of Christ, I am grieved that current U.S. border security policy targets human beings and violates everything I know of what it means to be a Christian,” said Lyons. “If even one person in our land can be targeted or labeled illegal, every person runs the risk of being targeted or labeled illegal. No one should ever be put at such risk.”
“Walls and security will never be the answer to the problems of fear and greed.” said Meyer. “Instead we must search our hearts and recognize our wrongs—and build a world that is free of suffering and violence—a world where all have opportunity.”
“The boundary lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; I have a goodly heritage.” Psalm 16:6
Celebrating the increasing cultural diversity of our new environment has helped move me to a new reading and new appreciation of my favorite verse in Psalm 16. Gratitude for the opportunities in Kansas City, heartland of the U.S., to relate to people of diverse cultures – from the Middle East, from Congo, from Mexico – leads Kate and me to contemplate again the real, tangible “boundary lines” and borders of our lives. In serving alongside Disciple and UCC church members in Mexico for three years we experienced many ways that extended the “boundary lines” of our lives as we sought to strengthen ties between churches in the U.S. and Mexico.
In reading verse 6 of Psalm 16 today, “the heritage” I embrace is that of being a Christian concerned about the prospects for full and abundant life of all human beings. In reading the Bible I am now guided by the conviction that the Bible testifies repeatedly to God’s love for ALL people and never should be read as favoring one people over another based on national identity. In a nutshell, the Bible, I now believe, aims to shape and strengthen persons whose fundamental loyalty and identity will be to think and act as “global citizens”.
Reflecting on the changes in the “boundary lines” in my own life has heightened my attention to the changes in the borders of my country and especially the changes in the U.S.-Mexico border.
Two artists, a Mexican and a U.S. citizen, have recently called attention to the redrawing of that border in the negotiations with Spain that resulted in the Adams-Onís Treaty of 1821. The Treaty ceded Spain’s claim to Florida as well as much of the Pacific Northwest to the U.S.
Although in Article 3 of the 1821 Adams-Onís Treaty the U.S. agreed that it “renounces all claim to the said Territories FOREVER (my emphasis)”, twenty seven years later Mexico lost a half million square miles of its Territory in the Mexican-American War of 1848. The artists’ “DeLIMITations” project thus reminds us in a dramatic way of what Mexico lost. “So that’s the thing for both of us — let’s mark the wound, let’s make the scar” declared¬¬ the artist Marco Ramirez.
The “DeLIMITATIONS” project also reminds us that both the actual borders between nations and the border policies of nations are in flux today in an increasingly interdependent world. In placing the obelisk of the 1821 Mexico-U.S. border in Dodge City, Kansas the artists learned that the town where “Gunsmoke’s” Sheriff Matt Dillon kept the peace is now 60 per cent Latino. And recent travelers in Europe return with accounts of crossing borders on that continent with no visa requirement.
These developments point to the day when the longest border in the world dividing a rich nation and a developing nation will be viewed very differently by the people of the U.S. and Mexico. The rise of the Latino population in “El Norte” and the more permeable borders in Europe today fuel the hope that historic changes are indeed “erasing borders” throughout the globe.
“They shall wander from sea to sea,
and from north to east,
they shall run to and fro,
seeking the word of the Lord,
but they shall not find it.” Amos 8:12
Last Saturday night June 11, Kate and I sat under a clear sky at Kansas City’s Starlight amphitheater swaying to the mostly familiar words of singer, songwriter Paul Simon and his band. Most of the audience joined in the last song of the second encore, “Sounds of Silence”:
“Silence like a cancer grows,
hear my words that I might teach you,
take my arms that I might reach you,
but my words like silent raindrops fell
and echoed in the wells of silence.”
Three hours after we sang “Sounds of Silence” at the concert, the gruesome siege of party goers exploded on the night in Orlando. As in most of the recent mass murders, the assailant used a military style assault weapon whose sale in the United States is not only legal but on the rise. While sales of other long rifles have risen 3% in recent years, sales of the AR-15 and other “modern sporting rifles” have risen 27%.
For whatever reason – the unprecedented number of victims, the evidence that loathing of gays dominated the perpetrator’s psyche, the steady recurrence of mass shootings making use of such weapons – there is renewed concern in this country over continued marketing and sales of the AR-15 gun model. Re-enacting in Congress the ban which expired in 2004, or passing a stronger ban with fewer loopholes, will not, however, be easy. The National Rifle Association (the NRA), the most powerful lobby working for gun manufacturers and gun retailers, now refers to the AR-15 as “America’s rifle”.
How could this be many of us are asking? How could a rifle which was originally manufactured as the M-16 for soldiers in the Vietnam War now be marketed to and widely purchased by civilians? How could the nation with the largest number of Jesus’ followers permit sales of a weapon which has killed dozens of schoolchildren, movie goers, co-workers and party goers in the last five years?
But the nearly unfettered sale of assault weapons to civilians in the U.S. may not be so surprising to our friends in Mexico. Since the Mexican Revolution at the turn of the 20th Century, the U.S. has supplied most of the guns for revolutionaries resorting to violence, for the Mexican army and police forces and for our neighbor’s criminals. An estimated seventy percent of the deaths during Mexico’s “drug wars” were due to weapons imported from the north. Signs at the border reminding visitors that it is illegal to bring guns into Mexico are a weak defense against the dangers resulting from Mexico’s proximity to the country which exports far more weapons than any other in the world. The well known saying, “Poor Mexico, so far from God and so close to the United States” has taken on new weight in the aftermath of 80,000 plus “drug war” victims.
In Mexico, research teams continue to pursue what really happened to the 43 students of Ayotzinapa. In the U.S. we know very well how 49 young people died in the Orlando nightclub. We may never know what primarily drove the killer to act but we know he acted alone that night and we know his primary weapon continues to be advertised using militaristic language like “get your man card” and “the opposition will bow down”. We know that using the AR-15 model Sig Sauer MCX he was able to fire into the night club crowd 24 shots in nine seconds. We know that in 2012 the Newton, Connecticut 20 year old who fired 154 rounds of bullets in less than five minutes in an elementary school killed 20 children and then killed his mother, who had purchased the Remington Bushmaster for him.
Lacking the sweet, high voice of Art Garfunkel at his side, Paul Simon did not sing “Bridge Over Troubled Water” at the concert last Saturday night. But thousands of people this past week in vigils around the world sung the lyrics in solidarity with friends and family members of the Orlando victims:
“When you’re weary, feeling small
When tears are in your eyes, I’ll dry them all
I’m on your side, oh, when times get rough
And friends just can’t be found
Like a bridge over troubled water
I will lay me down
Like a bridge over troubled water
I will lay me down.”
We who live in and love this country stand in gratitude for the words of solidarity, of comfort and consolation that have been offered by persons worldwide. But after this latest in a long list of horrific acts of violence suffered from San Bernardino to Orlando, from Roseburg, OR to Newton, CT, we also stand in need, seeking “the word of the Lord” for this nation at this time.
Senator Patrick Murphy of Connecticut stood in the U.S. Senate chamber this week speaking for 15 hours before Republicans consented to talks about acting on gun control legislation that remains pending. That legislation has to do primarily with background checks on those purchasing guns. None of it calls for reducing or outlawing sales of military style “modern sporting rifles” within the borders of the United States of America.
for an excellent Boston Globe editorial published Thursday, June 16, 2016 titled “Make It Stop”
These days, we in the United States continue to discover new intersections of our personal political positions and our personal theology. In this year’s campaign for President, the issue of immigration policy has taken a new direction with even more obvious theological overtones in the contrasting positions of the two parties on admitting Muslim refugees.
As we approach the presidential election, it is likely that Donald Trump’s opposition to Muslims being admitted into the country will continue to feed the perception that the nation with the most Christians in the world is conducting a war on Islam. Some U.S. Christians counter that perception with action such as helping Syrian refugees resettle in the country (as reported in the last posting of this blog). In our context of xenophobia and fear, such action needs now to be joined by defense of freedom of religion along with declaring trust and respect for adherents of Islam.
It is also important if not urgent for Christians in the U.S. to clarify their views on mission and evangelism in the Muslim world. Prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, conservative Christian mission boards in the U.S. had considerably stepped up efforts to convert Muslims overseas to the Christian faith. The Southern Baptist Convention began distribution of a prayer guide in the late 90’s to guide their followers in praying for conversion of Muslims at the same time they considerably increased the number of missionaries being sent to majority Muslim countries such as Kyrgyzstan.
Fortunately, U.S. Christians seeking ways to unite with Muslims in movements of reconciliation and healing worldwide can find guidance and encouragement in the beautiful statement written by the Commission on Mission and Evangelism of the 349 worldwide churches making up the World Council of Churches. Led by a Bishop of the Syrian Orthodox Church, the Commission unequivocally proclaims that the aim of Christian mission and evangelism today is to join with persons of other faith traditions in affirming human life and the whole of creation.
A summary statement of the Commission’s 2012 document “Together Towards Life: Mission and Evangelism in Changing Landscapes” declares, “Authentic evangelism is done with respect for freedom of religion and belief, for all human beings as images of God. Proselytism by violent means, economic incentive, or abuse of power is contrary to the message of the gospel. In doing evangelism it is important to build relations of respect and trust between people of different faiths.”
At the beginning of the document, the Commission envisions its task as discerning the implications of the “shift of the centre of gravity of Christianity”. One outcome emphasized is the accompanying “shift in mission concept from ‘mission to the margins’ to ‘mission from the margins’” and the ensuing question of “what then is the distinctive contribution of the people from the margins?”
Living the Christian faith as a minority community on the “margins” leads to some profound reflections on our relationships with persons of other faiths: “Plurality is a challenge to the churches and serious commitment to interfaith dialogue and cross-cultural communication is therefore indispensable. What are the ecumenical convictions regarding common witnessing and practicing life-giving mission in a world of many religions and cultures?”
One conviction that emerged from the Commission’s deliberations is that “mission activity linked with colonization has often denigrated cultures and failed to recognize the wisdom of local people. Local wisdom and culture which are life-affirming are gifts from God’s Spirit.” Christians in mission today who join with “local people”, whatever their faith tradition, in life sustaining and life enhancing actions find that “marginalized people are reservoirs of the active hope, collective resistance, and perseverance that are needed to remain faithful to the promised reign of God”.
In this time of deep division within the two political parties of the United States and within the country itself, the World Council of Churches’ overview of Christian mission and evangelism calls us to a new vision of unity. The document “Together Towards Life” challenges us to include the entire human species in our interpretation and celebration of the familiar words of Psalm 133:
“How very good and pleasant it is/ when kindred live together in unity!” (NRSV version)
Pour la traducción en español du document de la Comisión ver
For a copy of the “Together Towards Life: Missiona and Evangelism in a Changing Landscape” document go to: