Category: Faith & Public Life

Regarding the proposal for a Carlisle Truth and Reconciliation Commission

“WHERE COMMON MEMORY IS LACKING, WHERE PEOPLE DO NOT SHARE IN THE SAME PAST, THERE CAN BE NO REAL COMMUNITY. WHERE COMMUNITY IS TO BE FORMED, COMMON MEMORY MUST BE CREATED.”

-George Erasmus, Native American Elder

Compared to most nations around the world, in the United States we have an incredibly short memory regarding our history. And that is particularly true when that history is unpleasant or uncomfortable. It’s much easier to buy into simple, nice, triumphal narratives that make us feel better about the past. But as George Erasmus’ quote points out, if you bury that ugly, nasty past, you can never truly forge real community. That is why truth-telling, particularly the form of truth-telling that comes through “Truth and Reconciliation Commission“-type projects, is such a crucial tool for correcting past injustices. The most famous TRCs have been in Rwanda and South Africa, but truth-telling tactics were used in Germany, Canada, Australia, and in a host of other countries.

In recent weeks, my tiny town of Carlisle, PA has made local headlines after a proposal for Truth and Reconciliation Commission was introduced by the Borough Council, as a key way to address systemic racism in this community (here’s the seventh, hopefully final version of the proposal). I am supportive of this Truth and Reconciliation Commission for a number of reasons, which I will explain below.

Image result for carlisle pa downtown
Carlise Borough hall

First, I think this proposal starts in the right place by first focusing on examining, illustrating, and documenting the problem of racial injustice.

According to the wording of the proposal, this TRC’s main work will involve: “(1) examining and documenting policies, practices, and actions by the Borough of Carlisle and the Carlisle Borough Council that have contributed to racial inequity and systemic racism; (2) providing opportunities for individuals impacted and traumatized by systemic racism to share their stories and experiences, relating to polices, practices, and actions by the Borough of Carlisle and the Carlisle Borough Council; (3) facilitating conversations among and between community members from various backgrounds; (4) collaborating with existing businesses, institutions, nonprofits, agencies, boards, and commissions; and (5) identifying, analyzing, and recommending to the Carlisle Borough Council institutional and policy reforms meant to mend the wounds caused by and combat systemic racism.”

These activities are all part of establishing a “common memory,” rather than one that selectively remembers the past. While merely documenting the past and proposing reforms is not the only thing that needs to be done, it is an important first step. I also appreciate that the TRC has an end date of December 2022, meaning that it is not some ambiguous, eternal project, but one with a clear timeframe and goals.

A second thing I like about the proposed Carlisle Truth and Reconciliation Commission is the collaborative way it has come about. According to conversations with Council members, the proposal came about after the recent town hall panel on racial equity in January, that featured a variety of local leaders and activists. An initial draft was put together, then sent to those same panelists, who offered feedback and revisions. A subsequent Zoom session generated some more revisions, and then more have come up after the proposal was introduced at the February Borough Council meeting. Next, the proposal will be voted on in March. What I really appreciate about this is how truly collaborative this process has been. Too often, government bodies create proposals that sound nice rather than being actually meaningful to the community (or on the flip side, activists create proposals that have no chance of governmental implementation). To have a truly collaborative approach between the Borough Council and community members is a very encouraging start.

Image result for carlisle pa racism
The proposal for the TRC comes in the wake of unprecedented demonstrations this year in Carlisle to demand racial justice

Thirdly, I appreciate that in this proposal the Borough is taking ownership for the legacies of racism have been passed down from the previous generations. While of course there is still active racism happening in Carlisle, a large part of the economic and social disparities between different ethnic groups is due to governmental policies that existed in the past and have left a long legacy. For example, I have a friend who owns a house on Parker Street, and the original deed from ~1920 states that the house is not allowed to be sold to “Negroes” and members of other non-white races. While housing discrimination based on race is now technically illegal, for how many decades were whites allowed to build up wealth and real estate in Carlisle while Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color (BIPOC) kept out of this wealth generator? Real estate is just one topic; there’s tons of local issues like this.

Now, it would be easy for the Borough of Carlisle to say, “Well, all that injustice all happened in the past, and we condemn it – but it wasn’t our fault!” That is the common deflection of so many people in our society, refusing to take responsibility for anything and instead finding someone else to blame. But instead, by choosing to take responsibility for the past, present, and future of this town, the Borough Council is showing real leadership – a leadership that is all too lacking in our country. (In a different world, Carlisle wouldn’t need to be doing its own TRC because there would have been a national or state-wide TRC decades ago…but that’s another topic.)

Potential Objections to the TRC

Let me address a few concerns that others have brought up about the proposal for the TRC, and a share few concerns of my own.

Firstly, there have been a few (white) Carlisle residents who have voiced their opposition to the proposed TRC by saying that such a commission is a waste of time, because there is no systemic racism in Carlisle. To me, that’s an easy claim to put to the test. If there truly is no widespread, systemic racism in Carlisle, then the TRC will be truly unable to collect any stories, experiences, or evidence of it! But, if the TRC does indeed up with significant evidence about racism, wouldn’t that be something worth getting out in the open? As a Christian, I firmly believe that all evil gets worse when it is covered up. So instead of covering it up, we should be exposing it to the bright, disinfecting light of truth, where it can be properly dealt with.

Moreover, after just 7 years of living here I can tell numerous stories of racism in Carlisle that I have either personally witnessed or heard firsthand, not to mention very public displays like the KKK flyers in 2019, or the drivers who cursed out and mimed shooting Black Lives Matter protesters downtown this fall. One quick story: on my street this past June during the George Floyd protests, an elderly white landlord told me unprompted that he used to rent to Dickinson College students but stopped in recent years because “it’s been going downhill ever since they started letting all the minorities in,” saying something about it being a jungle down there. I called him out saying something to the effect of “Hey you can’t say that” but wish I had a better response in the moment. Looking back, I’ve only seen him rent his house to white folks in the 5 years I’ve lived on this street. Coincidence? Or … ? And if he doesn’t rent to non-white folks…is it any reason that those folks struggle to find affordable housing in Carlisle? How many landlords, businesses, etc. are racist like this man? And if he felt safe being blatantly racist to me, someone he had never met….who else is he influencing with his views? Anyway… I could tell dozens of anecdotes like this…and the fact that some people deny racism exists shows just how necessary the TRC really is!

Secondly, there are some who would argue that we need to simply move on and forget the past. Can’t we all just have unity? But trying to impose unity and historical amnesia without justice is a false peace, built on a foundation of violence and lies. It is only in a study of our past mistakes that we can begin to make amends and avoid repeating similar mistakes. As one anecdote: after their defeat in World War II, German soldiers civilians were forced by the Allied armies to watch graphic videos about the concentration camps. For most of these people, it was their first time seeing the full extent of the evil perpetrated in their name, and they were horrified. To this day, 75 years later, Germany still pays financial reparations to the descendants of Holocaust victims as well as to the nation of Israel. Moreover, anti-Semitic speech such as denying the Holocaust is illegal in Germany and carries criminal penalties. This does not fix the past, but it is a sign of contrition. In contrast, when there is no study of past mistakes and no redress of wrongs, it opens the door for the same or even worse mistakes to be made. Imagine if the Union troops had required Confederate civilians to actually come face to face with the horrors of slavery after the Civil War–would white Southerners have been so quick to turn to the KKK, to lynch mobs, and to Jim Crow laws?

Force confrontation: German soldiers react to footage of concentration camps, 1945.
German soldiers react to footage of concentration camps, 1945.

A third objection to the Carlisle TRC might be that there are more urgent things to focus on in Carlisle, such as COVID-19, mental health, crime, affordable housing, food deserts, infrastructure, sustainability, etc. A few quick responses: a. It’s possible to do multiple things at once. b. The TRC will operate semi-independently from the Borough Council and not necessarily distract from day-to-day activities. c. Nearly every problem in Carlisle also has a racial component to it. Minority residents have less of an access to affordable housing, affordable healthcare, healthy food within walking distance, smooth roads, healthy trees to provide shade, etc…I could go on and on. Some of these problems might be too big to fully solve in our tiny town, but isn’t it better to at least try to solve them for the people who need the most help? For example, hypothetically, if the Carlisle TRC discovers that in the past the Carlisle Parks and Recreation department avoided planting trees in minority neighborhoods, one possible avenue of redress could be to set aside a lump of money to deliberately plant extra trees in those neighborhoods. Why would that be a bad thing?

Photo by Paul Joseph Brown/InvestigateWest Photo by Paul Joseph Brown/InvestigateWest

Those are a few of the major objections to the Carlisle TRC that I’m aware of. I have a few concerns of my own, which I will briefly share:

First, I’m afraid that the TRC will do lots of meaningful research but that nothing will be done with that info. Thus it is incumbent for us as residents to hold each other and our leaders accountable to act on the things that are revealed by the TRC.

Secondly, there is a concern I have that the TRC will not fully address the genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Native Americans that used to live in this area (not to mention those who were forcibly acculturated into White American culture at the Carlisle Indian School, the first example of such “Indian Boarding Schools”). Partially that’s due to the fact that there’s virtually no Carlisle Natives left here to share their stories and to offer redress to…but that doesn’t mean it’s not important. Carlisle first started off as a frontier/pioneer town on the western border of the original US colonies, with frequent confrontations with Natives, and we must not skip that piece of history.

Image result for carlisle indian school
Young Natives were brought to the Carlisle Indian School and “westernized”. Many endured abuse, racism, sickness –and many died, buried thousands of miles from their ancestral lands.

A third fear I have is that many white residents are not actually interested in learning the truth about racism in Carlisle nor doing anything about it. A one-sided TRC that exposes unsettling truths about racism but doesn’t involve white residents could cause these residents to double down on the status quo, or worse lead to a reactionary “whitelash“. There are probably a number of ways to try to address this concern, but one way is for white allies to bring as many of our fellow white neighbors and family members into this process of learning history. The truth may be painful, but it must be known.

Overall, despite my concerns I think that this proposal for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Carlisle to address racial injustice is a good idea, and long overdue. I look forward to seeing what this TRC brings to light.

Please reach out to your Qanon friends this week

This is not the blog I thought I would be writing this week. I had plans to write something hard-hitting about the death of truth, or about Bonhoeffer’s antifascist theology. But I feel led to offer a different piece, one that is both more gentle and yet more potent. (And isn’t there a mysterious potency in gentleness, when you really think about it?)

Here’s what I want to say: After Joe Biden’s is inaugurated, I invite you to lovingly and graciously extend an olive branch to your friends, family, and acquaintances who’ve fallen into conspiracy theories – particularly Qanon and/or the Christian “prophecies” that Trump will be a president for two terms. Only 1 out of a 100 of these conspiracy believers might be willing to emerge from the rabbit hole they’ve disappeared into. But you might be the one to help pull them out.

See, Inauguration Day marks a very significant deadline for both Qanon believers and the Christian prophets who are certain that Donald Trump will serve two consecutive terms. Right now, there are tens of millions of Americans – from a variety of ages, ethnicities, geographies, and socioeconomic backgrounds – who are convinced, against all logic and odds, that Donald Trump will somehow remain the president after January 20th. (I could post screenshots of people I personally know who believe this, but perhaps even more illustrative is to scroll for a few minutes through this Facebook group). Whether it’s through an act of God, a military coup, or some fancy legal maneuvering, these believers just know that Trump/Q/God couldn’t allow someone so wicked as Joe Biden to become president. (In fact, that’s what the insurrection on January 6th was all about; attempting to force Congress into throwing out the election results and keeping Donald Trump in power.)

Admittedly, the leaders of these cults have given other failed deadlines before January 20th, none of which have come to pass, and so they will probably just kick the can to some other deadline. But after Biden’s inaugration, some of the followers might be fed up and willing to start to back out of these conspiracy movements. And this is where you come in. By reaching out after the inauguration in a kind, confident, and non-aggressive manner, you may be able to win these people back to reality. This isn’t something I recommend for everyone, as it can be very emotionally draining and potentially risky if the person lashes out. And it will look different for different people. But by reaching out to your conspiracy-minded friend after Inauguration you may prevent the next terrorist attack, or the next lone wolf gunman–and never realize just how much of a difference you made.

Here’s a few tips and thoughts shared by a @QOrigins on Twitter that I think perfectly encapsulate the importance of this moment:

“For those with friends or family in QAnon, [Inauguration Day] will be quite a day. The Inauguration is going to plunge many Q believers into doubt and dismay. The most committed will simply double down, but others will want a way out. If you’re able, give them an off-ramp. No mocking. It’s HARD not to mock or taunt or say “I told you so” when, for months or years, the person you’re talking to has chosen conspiratorial, antidemocratic Trump worship over… y’know… a relationship with you. But the thing is, QAnon provides its followers with certain benefits: replacement friends. A substitute family. A wholesale new reality. And a sense of community that’s a powerful draw, especially when they’re feeling confused and upset. So… to compete with it, you have to draw on your old ties — and remind them what life was like before Q. Because the truth is that QAnon immiserates its followers. Their relationships falter. They find it difficult to sleep. They fear for themselves and their children — unreasonably, but the fear is often quite real. And while conspiracism GENERATES the fear, it also soothes it.

“So this is, however unfairly, on the shoulders of people who DO have a connection with reality. And that’s NOT to say that you absolutely must reach out to your Q person in a spirit of unity and rainbows. You’ve learned, & shouldn’t rush to un-learn, some ugly truths about them. And it might not be safe, either. Some of these folks were abusive and toxic before Q and will be abusive and toxic after. Some WEREN’T abusive and toxic before Q but will be afterwards. They’ve marinated in bitterness and revenge fantasies. It’s a long and bumpy road back.

“But if there are people in your life who you DO want back, odds are good that [Inauguration Day] is a pivotal moment. So if you want to reach out, what does that look like? Well, I can’t tell you the details. I don’t know your relationship. But I can tell you that it’s not triumphalist, it’s not mocking, it’s not taunting. It doesn’t demand they disavow all their beliefs immediately (if they do it on their own, GREAT). It offers them empathy. It establishes that you care about them as people & want a relationship. And understand they won’t shed all their beliefs in a day. You don’t have to SHARE their beliefs. You shouldn’t pretend to agree with them. Neither is healthy. But talk to them & then follow up. Stay in *very* frequent contact. Give them genuine love. And folks… good luck. (P.S. If you can’t do this, no judgment. QAnon folks are isolated from friends and family because they’ve *hurt* friends and family, and generally refuse to recognize that or make amends. It’s not always healthy to engage with someone like that. It’s VERY much OK not to try.)”

There’s not much I can add to QOrigin’s post, except to close with a story that feels very relevant here. If because of this blog even a one single person who is swallowed in conspiracies can be nudged even slightly towards the path of truth, love, and real community, it will have been well worth it. Helping one person out of a conspiracist mindset doesn’t erase the larger systemic, political, cultural, economic, and spiritual work that’s still to be done in our world. But it’s not nothing, either.

The Starfish Story

One day a man was walking along the beach when he noticed a boy picking something up and gently throwing it into the ocean. Approaching the boy, he asked, “What are you doing?”

The youth replied, “Throwing starfish back into the ocean. The surf is up and the tide is going out. If I don’t throw them back, they’ll die.”

“Son,” the man said, “don’t you realize there are miles and miles of beach and hundreds of starfish? You can’t make a difference!”

After listening politely, the boy bent down, picked up another starfish, and threw it back into the surf. Then, smiling at the man, he said…..

“I made a difference for that one.”

[Original Story by: Loren Eisley]

The Starfish on the Beach Parable

Bad Shepherds

One of the most common metaphors throughout the Bible is that of shepherds (political and religious leaders) who are in charge of the sheep (AKA the common people). Throughout the Hebrew scriptures, God continually calls out the bad shepherds that are misleading and mistreating the people under them, while trying to put into place good shepherds instead – Ezekiel 34 is a great example of this type of metaphor.

Truthfully, as an individualistic American, I don’t really like the shepherd metaphor as it implies that most human beings are simple sheep, without the capacity to make complex decisions on their own. (The pejorative use of the term “sheeple” as a secular insult to castigate people who believe in vaccines and a round earth hasn’t helped my aversion to the concept.)

However, after witnessing the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6th, I actually realize the metaphor of sheep and shepherds is quite apt. Without shifting away any blame from the average Joes and Karens who perpetrated the Capitol invasion (I hope they all face appropriate civil and criminal penalties), the simple truth is that this act would not have happened without the long list of political, cultural, and religious leaders/shepherds who instigated it. After all, six months ago virtually none of these Capitol invaders knew about the role Congress plays in certifying the Electoral College vote. Thus the mass gathering and violence we saw on January 6th is almost entirely due to the bad shepherds that organized it, promoted it, and then allowed it to happen.

Many of those who stormed the Capitol were planning to take hostages–note the zip ties– and execute them on camera. There was even a noose and gallows set up outside the Capitol.

It’s easy to imagine how differently January 6th would have gone if we didn’t have so many bad shepherds misleading the sheep  

If Trump, the political shepherd of our nation, had peacefully conceded the election back in November or December, most of these sheep would have grumbled but peacefully gone along with it. If Trump had not demanded a mass rally in Washington DC on January 6, calling for his followers to march on the Capitol, a few diehard protesters still would have been there, but not the thousands we saw overpower the police.

If far-right newscasters, politicians, and media personalities hadn’t invented and spread hundreds of false and misleading narratives about the election, the sheep would have accepted the conclusions of the 60+ different federal judges (many of whom were appointed by Trump!) that the elections was free, fair, and without widespread fraud. If these same shepherds hadn’t kept stringing along false hopes that Mike Pence would magically overturn the election on January 6, the sheep would not have been so devastated when the inevitable certification of the election results happened.  

If conservative Christian pastors and theologians had taught their flocks to love their enemies, instead of dominating and killing them, we would not have seen Christian banners and symbols waved as battle flags and taken into the halls of Congress. If these Christian leaders had accurately taught that white supremacy and Christian nationalism are satanic heresies from the pit of hell, these sheep would not have been so bloodthirsty and eager to overturn the legitimate election of someone who doesn’t represent those things to them. If these Christian shepherds had spent more time speaking against the dangerous Qanon / End Times conspiracies actively spreading in their pews instead of against scary liberal acronyms like “CRT”, “BLM”, and “AOC”, maybe their congregants would have been less likely to fly to Washington DC to beat up cops and scrawl “Murder the Press” on the Capitol walls.

A STUNNING 45 % of Republicans support the storming of the US Capitol Link

The blame for what happened on January 6th does not solely fall on the far-right: If the liberal shepherds who run social media corporations such as Facebook and Twitter had heeded the warnings of experts and taken steps to stop the radicalization of sheep on their platform via viral fake news and incendiary accounts, there would be far fewer people falling prey to conspiracy theories like Qanon or the election fraud narrative. Granted, there’s always a few kooks in every society, but without the aid of social media their numbers would be much smaller.  [On a related note, I have actually come around to agree with conservative pundits that Section 230 should be repealed and the federal government should regulate social media corporations much more firmly than it currently is. These massive, greedy companies have shown over and over that they care more about profit than people; they are the bad shepherds that are allowing wolves to eat their sheep and cannot be trusted to keep self-regulating without any checks and balance.]  

Those are just a few of the bad shepherds who are to blame for the shameful actions we saw on January 6th. To my knowledge, none of these shepherds have publicly repented of their ways. What will God’s judgment upon these bad shepherds look like? And perhaps an even more important question: who will raise up a generation of good shepherds to better guide the sheep?

Four Things the 2020 Election can Remind us About Evangelism

“Evangelism” is a word that often carries a negative connotation—of angry street preachers, or of post-church restaurant patrons who leave gospel tracts instead of tips. Be that as it may, evangelism simply defined is the act of telling others about the gospel/good news of Jesus and his Kingdom. In fact, evangelism of some form or another is commanded for every Christian! (For me personally it’s part of my job with InterVarsity to help give staff and college students a vision for evangelism, as well as the tools and techniques to do it skillfully in the context of a 21st-century university.) Recently, as I’ve been reflecting on the past few months, I believe there are four truths that we can observe about the 2020 election that also point to important lessons about evangelism.

1. Just like political advocacy, evangelism works best person-to-person in your current relational networks.

As part of my job, I often invite young adults to prayerfully consider who in their friend groups might be interested in discussions about faith and spirituality. The idea is that evangelism isn’t always about going up to strangers in grocery stores, but more often simply recognizing that God has already placed people in our lives with whom we have the opportunity to share his love and grace. To help students better understand this, I frequently ask them to physically draw a “network map” of all the people they’re connected to on campus (from their dorms, classes, clubs, sports, sororities, etc.), and to pray about who among them might be intrigued by Jesus. Invariably, students are surprised when they are drawn to someone they never dreamed would be interested in spiritual conversations, who ends up responding enthusiastically! Relational evangelism works because it builds on the foundation of your current friendships and relationships.  

Thus I nearly laughed aloud when I read a news article about the 2020 election touting the benefits of “relational organizing,” which is functionally a very similar strategy to doing relational evangelism! To quote the article (which is lengthy and left-leaning but very interesting), “At its most basic, relational organizing is simply facilitating conversations between friends, family, neighbors, and co-workers. Instead of relying on traditional strategies like door knocking, phone calls, or texts from strangers, it harnesses existing relationships to mobilize voters….[one] meta-analysis of voter turnout studies found that outreach from friends and family was three times more effective at mobilizing voters than a door knock.” While the article I linked to focuses on progressive groups, this political strategy is not inherently liberal or conservative. Instead, it relies on a simple truth: people trust people they know over anonymous phone calls or ads that they see online.

In fact, while the 2020 election has inevitably included more anonymous digital ad campaigns than ever before, there’s more and more evidence that these are not what made the difference in the end (for either party!). Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale’s much-vaunted “Death Star” digital ad strategy ultimately ran out of money months before the election, with little to show to it. On the flip side, in Miami-Dade County, Republicans utilized in-person, door-to-door canvassing of predominantly Latino neighborhoods while Democrats practiced social distancing and relied solely on digital communication. The results were clear, as Republicans racked up a surprisingly high number of votes in this historically blue community. Whether in the domain of spreading the good news about Jesus or a piece of good news about a political candidate, it is clear that in-person, relational organizing is supremely better than trusting to digital campaigns and algorithms. Those tools have their place, but should not replace the work of in-person organizing.

An example of a network map

One final note on this topic–both relational evangelism and relational political organizing have as their key premise that each of us have within our friend groups people who disagree with us. Unfortunately, as people isolate more and more within their own bubbles, that becomes less and less true! There’s a sad reason behind why some Christians tend to evangelize their restaurant servers and people they meet on airplanes: those are literally the only non-Christians they encounter on a regular basis! Similarly, many Republicans and Democrats don’t have a single close friendship with someone of the other political party. If you’re seeking to be personally comfortable and never have meaningful interactions with people who are different than you, then that’s fine. But if you actually want to see other people understand and perhaps believe your viewpoint, then it is important to intentionally expand your networks to include more people who think differently from you.

2. As in politics, evangelism requires compelling communication and meeting people where they’re at

Another piece of my job involves helping staff and students know how to share the story of Jesus and his Kingdom in ways that make sense to the people they are communicating with. This can take many forms, such as asking good questions, listening well, sharing personal stories, eschewing confusing “Christianese jargon”, and knowing how to communicate core truths about Jesus in clear and concise ways. Perhaps most importantly, you need to communicate the next step for that person to make on their faith journey-which might be very small! A next step may be to try praying, to check out a church or Bible study, to ask a friend about some tough theological questions, or to do some more personal reflecting (and of course, some people are ready and excited to make a public decision such as becoming a Christian or being baptized, but these steps can’t happen unless these foundations are there).

In many ways, I would argue, these truths are also true when it comes to inviting people to consider supporting/voting for the political candidate/values you care about. We need to be able to communicate passionately but winsomely, inviting others to align themselves with our core beliefs without alienating them. One blogger writes:

“About the most significant election in modern American history, there is much we still don’t know. But some things are already becoming clear….Too many of us are not only unable to persuade people on the other side but also unwilling to try, uninterested in winning people over. Movements that agree on fundamental values need to learn to be better coalition allies to each other in spite of their differences….The fantasy that incremental change is most appealing to most people must be buried, and the prophets of real change must find the language and candidates to make the cause of social democracy less frightening to many Americans than it now is….We have ceased to be a country in disagreement; we are now a country of mutual disgust; and these widespread feelings of disgust essentially shut down politics. …The way out of this cold civil war is a politics that is thrilling, inclusive, substantive, visionary, galvanizing, empathetic, tolerant of different degrees of on-board-ness, and deft at meeting people where they are. Democracy is not a supermarket, where you pop in whenever you need something; it’s a farm, where you reap what you sow. Let’s plant.”

There’s a lot of great points in this paragraph that can also make connections to evangelism, but I especially love the farming metaphor at the end, which is a metaphor Jesus uses over and over. There is no magic factory or technique for introducing people to Jesus; like farming it takes hard work, time, maintenance, and in the end is a bit mysterious. Yet if we are faithful to do the work in casting a compelling vision and meeting people where they are at, whether in building our democracy or in introducing our friends to Jesus, there is certain to be a harvest.

White already for harvest. | Imprints of Light
“Lift up your eyes and look at the fields, for they are already white for harvest!” John 4:35

3. Evangelism, much like political advocacy, is ultimately the pronouncement of a new ruler and a new Kingdom

Despite being a common term, most Christians are unaware of the original political and cultural connotations of the word “evangelism.” The Greek word from which we derive evangelism is evangelion / euangelion (note the root words eu = good, angelion = message.) One scholar defines it thus: “The original meaning of the word evangelion, “gospel,” is a technical term in Greek, meaning the announcement of a great military victory, or the rule of a new king or emperor. It’s the PR of empire, the announcement of good news of victory. As the imperial cult took hold, it was the standard word for any announcement of auspicious news about the emperor and the imperial family. This term figures in the vocabulary of the Roman emperors, who understood themselves as lords, saviours, and redeemers of the world. The messages issued by the emperor were called evangelion, regardless of whether or not their content was particularly cheerful and pleasant. The idea was that what comes from the emperor is a saving message, that it is not just a piece of news, but a change of the world for the better.”

Knowing this context, it thus becomes incredibly significant that Jesus and his disciples use this wide-spanning political terminology to explain the Kingdom of God. Following Jesus is not just a personal decision, nor one that only has private effects. To believe in Jesus is to believe that one now lives in a fundamentally different world, similar to (but much bigger than) the differences between a Caesar Augustus and a Caesar Nero, or between a President Trump and a President Biden. It’s not just about a new person in power, it’s about everything that new person represents.

Related to that, to proclaim a new ruler will be good news to some but bad news to others. When President Trump was declared president late on the night of Nov. 8, 2016, the next day was dark and mournful for many people (and joyful for others!). When President Biden was declared president at noon on Nov 7, 2020, thousands of people flooded the streets to celebrate (while others mourned or fumed privately). For Jesus, it’s clear for whom the announcement of his Kingship will feel like good news—it’s the poor, oppressed, and marginalized. For his very first sermon in Luke 4, Jesus quotes Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” The flipside of that of course, is that Jesus’ Kingship is not automatically good news to those who are rich, comfortable, and powerful. In Luke 6 Jesus warns: “Woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort. Woe to you who are well fed now, for you will go hungry. Woe to you who laugh now, for you will mourn and weep. Woe to you when everyone speaks well of you, for that is how their ancestors treated the false prophets.” And that is why Jesus says that to follow him is to forsake comfort and ease, and instead embrace the way of suffering, the way of the cross.

Now granted that there are ways in which Jesus statements can also be interpreted metaphysically and not solely literally, the basic premise remains the same: sharing the gospel of Jesus should not be a story about a Santa Claus in the sky who wants to only live in your heart and give you a free ticket to heaven. Instead, it’s a radical pronouncement of the true ruler of the heavens and the earth, who is completely different than any other ruler, and calls us to live differently. Which brings me to my final point.

4. Like a president who’s been elected but not yet inaugurated, we too live in a transitory, in-between time where Jesus has already been declared King but has yet to return in his full power and glory.

A fourth thing we can learn about evangelism via the 2020 election comes from the period between the election and inauguration day. As is clear now (to most people), Joe Biden won the 2020 election but does not have yet full authority of the president. He is the “president-elect” which means that the authority is there waiting to be claimed and picked up on January 20, but constitutionally he is not yet the president-it’s still Donald Trump and he still has immense power! Now this of course is not unique to 2020; it has been true of every presidential transition. (In fact, in the early days of the United States, this interregnum period used to last until March, until the 20th Amendment was in 1933 passed to shorten it to January.)

In some ways, this in-between period can remind us of the state that we are in right now as Christians. Jesus 2000 years ago totally defeated sin, death, and Satan through his death on the cross and his resurrection three days later. However, although his kingdom was ushered in and initiated in many ways on that day, he has not yet taken full control of this world. In a sense he is president-elect and we are in the in-between period, the interregnum. Jesus has the rightful authority and is one day going to physically come back to earth, be fully inaugurated, and his kingdom will be fully present. But that is not yet the reality; we are still under the partial control of sin, death, and Satan (who is in this analogy a lame-duck president).

Moreover, similar to those in our world who still refuse to acknowledge Joe Biden as president-elect and may continue to ignore his authority after Inauguration day, there are many who don’t acknowledge Jesus as the as the Lord Savior and God of the world. (This analogy of course is NOT to compare Joe Biden to Jesus! Rather it’s just an illustration—one could have made this same analogy about Donald Trump back in 2016.) However for those of us who follow Jesus, we are called to pre-emptively consider ourselves citizens of his kingdom and to live as if we are already under the full reign of Jesus Christ. In a sense, just like President-elect Joe Biden has a “transition team” to help prepare the way for him being President, us Christians are essentially called to be a “transition team” to prepare the way for Jesus’ return. Among other reasons, that is why Christians are called to reject violence, greed, hate, and selfishness, and instead embrace the values of Jesus’ kingdom: generosity, sacrificial love, and selflessness. We’re preparing for the future ruler. That’s not the way the world works right now, but it’s a way of living that embodies what will be true in Jesus’ coming Kingdom.

For me, I would much rather be a part of Jesus’ “transition team” helping make this world ready for his reign than I would be part of Satan’s lame-duck regime, bitterly clinging to power and privileges that will soon disappear. If you’re not already, I invite you to considering joining me on Jesus’ “transition team”–let me know if you’d like to learn more about it! 🙂