Refugees and the Pesky Law of Hospitality

I must confess that I am concerned about the Syrian refugee crisis. But perhaps not for the same reason as most. While this issue has become quite a political football, I think the issue of Syrian refugees is deeper than the rhetoric.

Many fear that allowing un-vetted refugees into the country will put us at risk of terrorist attacks by hostiles pretending to be refugees. Perhaps so, but you can’t vet where there is no infrastructure to accomplish it. In my snarky sense of humor, I like to say that "vetting is for farm animals and family pets, not for people." While I am convinced that we, as followers of Jesus, need to be different and extend as much love and care to authentic refugees as we can, I am not convinced that bringing them to the USA is always the right step for them or for us. Setting all of the national security concerns aside, it may still not be a good idea.

What about That Verse?

Ironically, a common Bible passage used to address the refugee crisis has nothing to do with refugees, but with resident aliens. Leviticus 19:33-34 says,

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

Similarly, “sojourning” refers to a temporary stay, not to permanent immigration. Visitors should be treated as citizens, but this is not a verse about refugees. There are better texts for that including:

• The Golden Rule (Matthew 7:12);
• The Good Samaritan (Luke 10:22-37);
• The call of true religion to provide care for widows and orphans (Ex. 22:22; Deut. 10:18; 1:29; James 1:27); and,
• Passages about doing good (Matt. 5:16; 1 Timothy 6:17-19; Romans 2:9-11; 12:20-21; Galatians 6:9-10, etc.) and,
• Showing hospitality (e.g., 1 Peter 4:8-10; Romans 12:12-14).

^“Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers,

for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.” (Hebrews 13:2)

Having said that, once refugees are settled in our country we will need to treat them like we treat each other... or better than that. However, I am not convinced that we are prepared to do this.

What Then Should We Do?

We should begin to pray for the Holy Spirit to release a new-found love for those who have historically been considered enemies and with it the wisdom we need to bring honor to Christ by serving the "least of these." Here are some of my suggestions for ways that we can help Middle-Eastern refugees, along with my concerns. You can judge for yourselves whether I prayed about it before sharing them.

1. We can support sacrificial relief efforts by the church in Turkey.

Why not support those who are helping in Turkey (as my colleague Mark Nicklas shared in his blog Refugees) where it is both geographically near and culturally similar to what they have left behind? There is no government assistance in Turkey; help comes from a marginalized church. It is the formerly Muslim converts to Christianity who are helping the refugees, and who after exhausting their own resources, are willing to go door to door begging on behalf of the destitute. Are we willing to go to such lengths of sacrificial humility for refugees? Are we willing to help the helpers? I hope so.

2. We could use existing regional refugee camps more effectively.

While no one wants to live in a “camp”, perhaps they could still be used more intentionally with international resources to resettle refugees in Jordan and Saudi Arabia if they do not want to specifically assimilate into European or American cultures. To take someone who has already been brutally displaced, perhaps having lost family members to violence, and plop them down in a culture for which they are not prepared is not helpful and may, in fact, produce further marginalization. It seems this approach might better care for them and would take their preferences into consideration. If we could work for an acceptable peace in Syria within the next 1-3 years this would be an even better option, but I doubt that the power players in the region have the will to do it.

3. We should prepare refugees for the culture shock of immigration.

In our pluralistic, politically-correct, tolerance-oriented behavior are we actually marginalizing immigrants by not teaching them our culture? Soon Ang and Linn Van Dyne, in Handbook of Cultural Intelligence (2008) suggest that we are doing just that, and caution those engaging with immigrants,

"When there is a large cultural distance, it is necessary to train immigrants to understand the consequences of their immigration, and to become somewhat culturally intelligent. In my opinion, it is irresponsible to give permanent visas to people who do not understand the local culture. It is also undesirable to use the "leave them alone" policy in "respecting" immigrant cultures. Immigrant cultures need to change, and people must become culturally intelligent or stay on the margins of society. People who are culturally intelligent zero in on aspects of culture that are different and respond appropriately."[1]

Suppose a refugee family wants to come to Europe or the USA and we accept them. In that case, their cultural law of hospitality may lead them to believe that we, as the givers of hospitality, are responsible for providing for their needs on an ongoing basis. Are we really willing to send that message? One Oregon church has Iraqi refugees coming in every day seeking financial help. In our country, we have become used to institutionalizing assistance to the place where we now call them “entitlements”. However, this doesn’t relieve us of our responsibility and calling to care personally. We need to understand that we have very different views on hospitality. In the West, permanent house guests are not culturally appropriate except as fodder for late-night comedians.

4. We ought to ask refugees what they want and why they want it.

Even if we are prepared to accept refugees and mass migrants into our society are they open to such a change in cultural values or are they motivated by a false promise of affluence? Jesus asked Bartimaeus, the blind man, “What do you want me to do for you?” Doesn’t that seem like a “Captain Obvious” type of question? Of course, a blind man wants his sight restored…isn’t it that simple? No, not really. Bartimaeus was a beggar and likely had been one for quite some time. His cry to Jesus for mercy could merely be a request for a generous gift of alms (cash) to support himself in his current condition. Or it could be that he wanted Jesus to heal his eyes, but that would require him to stop being a beggar. He would have to get an education, work a job, etc. Was he willing to do all this? The question Jesus asked gave the blind man the chance to decide for himself whether he wanted to remain as he was or if he wanted to face the frightening responsibility of things being different. 

What does all this have to do with refugees? Two things: First, refugees should be told what they will face if they immigrate to America and should be asked if they really want to move here given our very different cultural values. Secondly, we need to honestly ask ourselves, whether we are willing to be personally involved in their lives for the long haul, "to the end of the line" or not. 

5. We must be personally involved no matter how scary it may be.

If we decide to allow refugees to come to America (and we will), we must be personally involved. That would be true hospitality indeed! How can we help?

• We can work to help them begin being educated about our culture (both values and systems) before they get here so that they are not further marginalized once they arrive. Some of their culturally accepted behaviors will land them in prison here just as some of our behaviors would land us in jail where they come from. We don’t want them to be ghettoized in addition to being transplant-traumatized already.
• We can specifically sponsor families (as families, small groups, or as whole churches) so that they have relational advocates to help them through the adjustment process. We can get involved on many levels, including helping them to learn English, teaching “culturally appropriate” driving skills, finding housing, navigating utility hookup issues, shopping, as well as helping with our healthcare and legal systems, etc. If help comes only through the government, it produces an institutional dependence that is more hurt than help. If help comes relationally through the love of Christ then it will set the immigrant up to win, to be a contributing member of the community. 
• We can do our best to welcome them into our lives and allow them to teach us about their culture and invite them to make use of the gifts and talents which they bring with them…for the common good (Jeremiah 29:7).

If we are not willing to be personally involved with a refugee family over the long haul then we should not bring them here. However, they are probably coming anyway, whether it is in their best interest or not, so how can we make the best of it for everyone involved?

Jesus shows us the way if we are bold enough to follow. Will we show ourselves to be the lambs or the wolves?

And he said to them, “The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few. Therefore pray earnestly to the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest. Go your way; behold, I am sending you out as lambs in the midst of wolves. (Luke 10:2-3)

[i] Soon Ang, and Linn Van Dyne, eds. Handbook of Cultural Intelligence: Theory, Measurement, and Applications (Armank, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., 2008), xii.

Leaving the Light On For You: A Response to “Lights Out”

This post is an assigned response to Paul Louis Metzger’s article “Lights Out: Shining a Light on Caring for the Dying in a Multi-Faith World” which addresses the need for cultural and multi-faith sensitivity on the part of chaplains serving the terminally ill on palliative care teams. The dying process is a time when patients’ desires and as well as those of their immediate families, are to be considered carefully.  Dr. Metzger advocates for a kind and respectful approach and cautions that “Gentleness and respect require that we do not force our views on others.”

Please Don’t Point Your Light in My Eyes

Just as having a spotlight pointed at your face is obnoxious, so too some witnessing approaches and methods can cause us to close our eyes tightly. Light can be encouraging, helpful, and even attractive, but when pointed into someone’s eyes it can also be something oppressive to hide behind. Christ’s light is not to be wielded as a weapon. It is helpful in providing care that shows our faith well, “adorning the doctrines of God” (Titus 2:10), to understand what other people believe, how they are feeling, and why they so feel and believe as they approach their death.

While time is short, and the need is urgent, there is no call to be pressing or pressuring on our part—unless it is in prayer. I find that there often comes a new openness to the spiritual realm on the part of the person suffering. This is a great mercy from a loving God. As the things they have trusted in are stripped away they see their emptiness and begin to search for something, or someone, with enough throw-weight to carry their soul into the next life. So should we! I am reminded of  Paul’s “near-death” experience described in 2 Corinthians 1:8-10,

For we do not want you to be unaware, brothers, of the affliction we experienced in Asia. For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself. Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death. But that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead. He delivered us from such a deadly peril, and he will deliver us. On him we have set our hope that he will deliver us again.

As a pastor, my job is different from that of a chaplain…and is unchained from multi-faith restrictions. However, my approach should also be “gentle and respectful” and never forced or coercive, yet neither should it miss the rescue opportunity by being too timid. Dr. Metzger writes,

Yes, as Christians committed to the biblical hope, we long to share about our faith in the eternal security of life with God in the resurrected Jesus through faith in his love poured out by the Spirit (Romans 8:18-39; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; Romans 5:5). But hopefully we also desire to live out the biblical exhortation to do for others what we would want them to do for us (Matthew 7:12). If we wish to be treated with respect and not have others force their views on us, no matter how well-intentioned, we should respect them and not force our views on them.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. We do long to share our faith, not to somehow win or control another but to simply share the blessing we have received. We also agree that no spiritual decision should ever be forced; neither a baptism by Jesuits 500 years ago nor an evangelical’s “sinners prayer” or a Shahada by Muslims today.

Ladybug, Ladybug, Please Don’t Be Offended…but Your House is On Fire

I remember a John Leo column from the early 80s (Newsweek) where he told non-believers that they should not be offended when evangelical Christians witnessed to them, for it was a sign that they really cared. If you believe your neighbor’s house in is on fire you will be motivated by human decency to warn them. Like the person warning residents that their house is on fire, sometimes witnessing is neither subtle nor soft-spoken.  I agree. If we really believe the Bible, we should care enough about our neighbors to tell them.

When I think of watchmen, I think of the well-known passage in Ezekiel 33. A watchman’s job was to warn the city of the approaching danger. However, the responsibility to respond to the warning is on the people of the city, not the watchman. The watchman need not force the city to respond to the coming danger; he gives his observations and leaves the response to the people.

The word of the Lord came to me: “Son of man, speak to your people and say to them,

Jerusalem before dawn

If I bring the sword upon a land, and the people of the land take a man from among them, and make him their watchman, and if he sees the sword coming upon the land and blows the trumpet and warns the people, then if anyone who hears the sound of the trumpet does not take warning, and the sword comes and takes him away, his blood shall be upon his own head. He heard the sound of the trumpet and did not take warning; his blood shall be upon himself. But if he had taken warning, he would have saved his life. But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, so that the people are not warned, and the sword comes and takes any one of them, that person is taken away in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at the watchman's hand. (Ezekiel 33:1-6)

Delivering My Soul…and Yours

So the trick is to “deliver our soul” (v. 9) by warning those in danger. But there is a catch that I don’t remember noticing before. In verse two we find that the watchman's role is conditional; it is conferred by the people taking one from “among them” and making “him their watchman.” When we apply this watchman principle to our own lives and ministries (I have, since my name means “watchman”) have we ever stopped to consider whether “my people” have made me "a watchman" for them? Or do we just assume that we can be freelance “watchers and warners” without first earning the relational trust of others? If we don’t listen authentically how can we ever be “among them” enough to be trusted as a watcher?

I read Metzger’s post as suggesting that we need to be relationally trustworthy before others might ask us for our input into the great crisis moment of their lives. God doesn’t want any to perish (2 Peter 3:9) not even the really bad ones (Eze. 33:10-11). Even so, people die every day, many without really hearing the life-giving gospel of Christ. Could it be that our methods of urgency are too transactional (“Do this...and get that”) to allow others to truly join us (or for us to join them) on a spiritual journey that no person was designed to walk alone? I don’t want to be a roadblock, how about you?

We need boldness—boldness to listen long, to love with the love of Christ who loved us while we were his enemies (Romans 5:6-10, to consider the needs of others more than we impose our own perception of their needs upon them, and that they might see Christ in what we say and do, as well as in what we don’t.

The following poem I wrote a few years ago in response to my father-in-law’s emergency surgery, his 33-day struggle for life in the hospital’s intensive and critical care units, and his death. He was not open to discussing spiritual things earlier in his life and would leave the room when others talked about or answered questions about Jesus. However, after his wife died he stopped leaving the room, but still didn’t participate in any spiritual conversations—until the day he was scheduled for emergency cancer surgery and his ears were opened to hear the voice of the Lord calling him. His transformation stunned us all. The following poem, written in the first-person, was inspired by that process and such scriptures as Matthew 7:1-14 and 19:23-26. I hope it speaks to you today.

The Narrow Gate

Utterly burdened beyond strength

Looking, facing, fearing

Narrow gate’s eye of the needle knowing

I don’t, can’t, won’t fit.

Despairing painfully of any solution

But pressed, drawn, nonetheless by

God’s possibilities, and

My latent mortality.

Dreadful as death’s door was

From a distance, now

Up close, uncomfortably close,

Squinting against the needle’s eye

Perhaps glimpsing bright sparks beyond,

Through my grimace.

How could I trust,

Transition, from here to there

Through this impossibly narrow

Moment of prolonged surrender?

Yet I am sought, welcomed

Comforted as I hear his voice with

Others he has led this way before.

I reach for the rope

Grace’s already threaded

Sticky scarlet cord grasps me

In suffering’s fellowship.

What is earthly, mean, camelish,

Scraped off, exfoliated, removed,

Wrung out, expressed into a disposable bag,

What was once my focus, now

So much medical waste.

Good riddance.

The brass buttons of my autonomy

Catching on eternity’s door

I fight to free them, until with embarrassment in

Purgatory of my last years, days, 

Giving up I ask for help

Slowly casting off the uniform of my birth

While putting on that of His

Through learning to love.

My eyes seem to blink away the mist

Suddenly seeing truly

Awesome God

Yet I am not consumed.

What was pressed, pulled through the eye

By the power, possibility of God’s love

Weightier, more expansive

Than I ever was before.

© Greg K. Dueker

We need to leave the light on for others to find their way. May it be the kind of light that draws us near and delivers all from fear. 

The Lord is With You…Yes, You!

As followers of Jesus, we celebrate Christmas in remembrance of his birth “long ago in a Galilee far away” as the internet meme proclaims. Jesus is the One through whom God has revealed his righteousness, worked salvation and made it known! We cannot help but declare his praise along with the psalmist,

Oh sing to the Lord a new song,
    for he has done marvelous things!
His right hand and his holy arm
    have worked salvation for him.
The Lord has made known his salvation;
    he has revealed his righteousness in the sight of the nations.
He has remembered his steadfast love and faithfulness
    to the house of Israel.
All the ends of the earth have seen
    the salvation of our God. (Psalm 98:1-3)

Perhaps you heard many Christmas sermons this year as well as read or listened to plenty of Christmas devotionals. Sure the decorations are down now but I would like to consider how the birth of Christ reaches out to the poor, the working poor, travelers, and refugees alike, who too often consider themselves excluded from sharing in the joy of Christ in the church.

I want to share with you the familiar verses from Luke 1-2 and a few simple thoughts that we considered in our Christmas Eve service this year about how to respond when God comes near and begins to reveal his will for your life.

1. “Strange Greetings” (Luke 1:26-29 ESV)

In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin's name was Mary. And he came to her and said, “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!” But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be.

Gabriel said to Mary, “Greetings O favored one, The Lord is with you!” (Luke 1:28)

The greeting was strange! Mary was “greatly troubled” and couldn’t figure out what kind of greeting this was. Certainly, I would think that angelic greetings would be startling, but Mary was blown away and was trying to read between the lines and reconcile the message with her circumstances…perhaps asking questions such as:

• What do I have to rejoice about?
• How could God be with us a sinful people? How will sin be dealt with?
• Wait…isn’t this the kind of greeting Gideon received not far from this very spot?

Perhaps you didn’t get that last question, but Mary was well versed in her knowledge of the Scriptures and perhaps it was that similarity to Judges 6 that caused her concern as she waited for the other sandal to drop. For those of us without familiarity with the story of Gideon, let’s read Judges 6:11-16:

Now the angel of the Lord came and sat under the terebinth at Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, while his son Gideon was beating out wheat in the winepress to hide it from the Midianites. And the angel of the Lord appeared to him and said to him, “The Lord is with you, O mighty man of valor.” 

And Gideon said to him, “Please, sir, if the Lord is with us, why then has all this happened to us? And where are all his wonderful deeds that our fathers recounted to us, saying, ‘Did not the Lord bring us up from Egypt?’ But now the Lord has forsaken us and given us into the hand of Midian.” 

And the Lord turned to him and said, “Go in this might of yours and save Israel from the hand of Midian; do not I send you?” 

And he said to him, “Please, Lord, how can I save Israel? Behold, my clan is the weakest in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father's house.” 

And the Lord said to him, “But I will be with you, and you shall strike the Midianites as one man.”

When Israel needed to be delivered from its oppressors, the Lord heard their cry and commissioned Gideon to lead them to victory…beginning with the admonition,  “The Lord is with you…”. Now, do you see why this got Mary’s attention?

Ironically, the Lord was with her and she was going to carry the child who would be called Immanuel. So what does "Immanuel" mean? It simply means “God with us” (Matthew 1:22-23) and it is the answer to the cry of our heart...individually and collectively whether we know it or not. As believers, our community comes from the presence of God as does our witness. It is not based on our personal impressiveness, wealth, or social standing as the Apostle Paul pointed out to the church in Corinth (1 Cor. 1:26-31).

God is with us. In the incarnation (God the Son coming in a physical body) God has made a permanent link with his creation. The scope of this goes way beyond this short reflection. Suffice it to say, God is all in, he is with us to the end…which is much brighter for his having come to us!

2. Don't Be Afraid (Luke 1:30-31)

And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. 

This is the second dose of “fear not” in Luke 1 (Zechariah got one). It is rare for an angel to not lead with the “Fear not!” line. Sometimes when God calls us to respond to him in faith, we are afraid and our fear is quick to make excuses for us:

• I’m not good enough.
• I don’t have anything to offer.
• It is too good to be true for the likes of me.

Well, long ago the Lord spoke through the prophet Micah about a “too little” town that felt how we saw Gideon feel and perhaps you feel as well…

But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah,
    who are too little to be among the clans of Judah,
from you shall come forth for me
    one who is to be ruler in Israel,
whose coming forth is from of old,
    from ancient days… (Micah 5:2)

Does the thought of God speaking to us average people in the little wooden church by the laundromat in the bad part of town and calling us to be part of something with cosmic ramifications scare us? Yep…pretty much! But the messenger of God says to us as to Mary, “Don’t be afraid.” The basis of our courage is the love of God for us, and his presence with us!

3. Know the Power of God (Luke 1:34-37)

And Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?” 

And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God. And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. For nothing will be impossible with God.”

To her credit, Mary didn’t doubt that the Lord could do what he said, nor did she argue over being chosen. Her question was simply because she didn’t understand how the Lord would work it out. It seemed impossible since she was a virgin, but as the angel answered, “Nothing will be impossible with God.” I think we could also say that nothing God has said will fail. This One who was to be born was the power of God working to shepherd and protect his people. He is our peace.

And he shall stand and shepherd his flock in the strength of the Lord,
    in the majesty of the name of the Lord his God.
And they shall dwell secure, for now he shall be great
    to the ends of the earth.
And he shall be their peace. (Micah 5:4-5a)

Mary took this message at face value, responding, “I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.”

4. Believe What He Says (Luke 1:38, 45)

And Mary said, “Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.”

“…And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord.”

Mary was blessed when she believed what God had said to her. Abraham was similarly blessed. The trick for us average people is to believe, or trust, what God has said in his Word. We want to believe, but sometimes we have to be honest about our doubts. It reminds me of when Jesus came down from the Mt. of Transfiguration and encountered an argument arising from his disciples’ inability to cast out a demon that was convulsing a man’s son. The boy’s father petitioned Jesus,

“But if you can do anything, have compassion on us and help us.” 

And Jesus said to him, “‘If you can’! All things are possible for one who believes.” Immediately the father of the child cried out and said, “I believe; help my unbelief!” (Mark 9:22-24)

Will we respond in faith to the God who loves us and came to earth to show us that he exists and is good?

And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. (Hebrews 11:6)

Jesus is not like some fictional fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants Aladdin-type asking us, “Do you trust me?” But perhaps we should be a little more like Jazmin, or in this case like the real-life Mary, and say “Yes!” to him this year. It is true that we cannot change the world by our own power and plans…but it never was about that. It is about Jesus and the Holy Spirit, who were sent by the Father—God with us. Yes, with us!

If there was one group of people in the dark that night who had no expectation of being included in God’s marvelous plan it was the shepherds, which leads us to our last point.

5. Tell Others (Luke 2:8-20)

v. 17 "When they saw it, they made known the saying that had been told them concerning this child."

v. 20 And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them.

We can’t have a Christmas message that leaves anyone out. From the oppressed peasant girl giving birth to the Messiah to an old woman who lived in the social shame of failing to give her husband a son and would have thought that it was too late for her to be a part of God’s plan, to simple shepherds who were not even allowed to worship in the temple (for they were considered unclean) now having God come to them that night to announce the good news—what a gift!  And they went and told all that they had seen and heard…who would have thought that they would one day announce the birth of the Good Shepherd!

Arise, shine, for your light has come,
    and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you.
For behold, darkness shall cover the earth,
    and thick darkness the peoples;
but the Lord will arise upon you,
    and his glory will be seen upon you.
And nations shall come to your light,
    and kings to the brightness of your rising… (Isaiah 60:1-3)

And speaking of gifts, we can’t leave out the Magi who came later,

the wealth of the nations shall come to you.
A multitude of camels shall cover you,
    the young camels of Midian and Ephah;
    all those from Sheba shall come.
They shall bring gold and frankincense,
    and shall bring good news, the praises of the Lord. (Isaiah 60:5b-6)

Beyond a shadow of a doubt, the Lord loves you—no one is beyond the reach of his plan to fix a broken world. He is our Advocate, our Helper, but he didn’t just come to fix things, he came to dwell with us!

Perhaps you may still be puzzled like Mary was about this whole incarnation thing. Let me share a helpful story with you that I first at Christmas in 2001.

----------------

THE MAN AND THE BIRDS (written by Paul Harvey)

Now the man to whom I’m going to introduce you was not a scrooge. He was a kind, decent, mostly good man, generous to his family and upright in his dealings with other men. But he just didn’t believe all that incarnation stuff which the churches proclaim at Christmas time. It just didn’t make sense, and he was too honest to pretend otherwise. He just couldn’t swallow the Jesus story, about God coming to earth as a man.

“I’m truly sorry to distress you,” he told his wife, “but I’m not going with you to church this Christmas Eve.” He said he’d feel like a hypocrite and that he’d much rather just stay at home, but that he would wait up for them. And so he stayed, and they went to the midnight service.

Shortly after the family drove away in the car, snow began to fall. He went to the window to watch the flurries getting heavier and heavier and then went back to his fireside chair and began to read his newspaper. Minutes later, he was startled by a thudding sound. Then another, and then another. Sort of a thump or a thud. At first, he thought someone must be throwing snowballs against his living room window.

But when he went to the front door to investigate, he found a flock of birds huddled miserably in the snow. They’d been caught in the storm and, in a desperate search for shelter, had tried to fly through his large [picture] window. Well, he couldn’t let the poor creatures lie there and freeze, so he remembered the barn where his children stabled their pony. That would provide a warm shelter if he could direct the birds to it.

Quickly he put on a coat and galoshes and tramped through the deepening snow to the barn. He opened the doors wide and turned on a light, but the birds did not come in. He figured food would entice them in. So he hurried back to the house, fetched bread crumbs, and sprinkled them on the snow, making a trail to the yellow-lighted, wide-open doorway of the stable. But to his dismay, the birds ignored the bread crumbs and continued to flap around helplessly in the snow.

He tried catching them. He tried shooing them into the barn by walking around them waving his arms. Instead, they scattered in every direction, except into the warm, lighted barn. And then, he realized that they were afraid of him. To them, he reasoned, I am a strange and terrifying creature. If only I could think of some way to let them know that they can trust me – that I am not trying to hurt them, but to help them. But how, because any move he made tended to frighten and confuse them. They just would not follow. They would not be led or shooed because they feared him.

“If only I could be a bird,” he thought to himself, “and mingle with them and speak their language. Then I could tell them not to be afraid. Then I could show them the way to the safe, warm . . .  . . .  . . . to the safe, warm barn. But I would have to be one of them so they could see, and hear and understand.”

At that moment, the church bells began to ring. The sound reached his ears above the sounds of the wind. And he stood there listening to the bells – listening to the bells pealing the glad tidings of Christmas. And he sank to his knees in the snow.

Autopia, or Searching for Spock?

This post is an assigned response to Dr. Paul Louis Metzger’s blog post, Should Ethics Be “Biologicized”? What Might that Mean for Eugenics? which deals with those who see biological studies—rather than philosophy—as the true authority on ethical behavior as well as those who advocate for democratized eugenics. While this is not a normal topic you might see on my blog, it is an important issue to consider. 

Dr. Metzger quotes Harvard University’s Edward O. Wilson as supporting sociobiology, “the systematic study of the biological basis of all social behavior.”[1] So is all of our social behavior, including ethical decisions, the result of our biology? I am open to considering that the answer may not be as obvious as some might think. The psalmist in praising God wrote,

For you formed my inward parts;
    you knitted me together in my mother's womb.

I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.
Wonderful are your works;
    my soul knows it very well. (Psalm 139:133-14)

Certainly, we are complex and well-designed creatures. As our knowledge of the human body has progressed we have begun to see a mind-boggling level of complexity. In many cases, the complexity of the human body is irreducible which means that the system/organ/structure in question had to be designed and deployed intact and could not have evolved from some less complex state. Structures such as the human appendix once considered vestigial (mostly useless) by evolutionists have now in many cases be found to serve important functions. How much information is contained in our DNA? 

Perhaps you remember one of the original rides in Disney's Tomorrowland was called Autopia (1955). It involved being strapped into a small, smelly, slow, gas-powered car and driving along miniature faux-freeways while being cautioned not to bump into the car in front of you [which was one the few things that made the ride interesting]. Starting in 1965, the cars were all mounted on a rail or concrete center curb that kept you in your lane and reduced collisions. No matter how you turned the wheel you still followed the rail to the end of the ride, in fact, the steering system barely worked at all and at best allowed you to finish the ride more quickly (by reducing friction against the guide rail).

Is it possible that we have some kind of pre-programmed, Autopia-style ethical guide from which we cannot deviate? One passed genetically from our parents and ancestors? Is this guide for our social behavior something that has evolved or was it designed? Is it violable or inviolable? Is it possible that there are biological circuit boards, related to our ethical behavior, that were designed and programmed by a loving Creator? While I don’t want to rule out that possibility, such a record would certainly have been corrupted by the fall (Genesis 3). If micro-evolution (variations within a species) always involves a loss of preexisting genetic material, how would a biologicized ethical system be any different? I cast my vote for the philosophical and theological disciplines being better suited to watch over and determine how ethical our social behavior is than that of evolutionary biology. Yet I might be surprised.

What about those who drive too slow, who impede the pleasure of others? Should they be removed from the ride, or, to borrow a reality-show metaphor, be voted off the island? Who decides? If ethics are pre-programmed then the resulting democratically determined eugenics would be in keeping with such evolutionary-developed ethics. This is frightening.

Dr. Metzger shares this concern, “one of my fears in this democratic country is that we champion a form of utilitarianism, which entails the greatest amount of pleasure for the greatest number of people.” Utilitarian ethics, while effective in getting things done, are not kind to those whose existence stands in the way of the comfort and pleasure of the majority and is judged expendable. He cautions that the elderly, prisoners, and other minority communities, would be at risk. This is no minor issue as the masses seem to become increasingly self-focused and unwilling to sacrifice for others.  I totally agree with Metzger’s statement that,

Wilson’s discussion of eugenics in On Human Nature evinces not the prejudice and racism of which he had been accused, but rather a naïveté about the prospect that science will be guided by the essential goodness and rationality of mankind. Not only does Wilson display too much confidence in science’s ability to control human genetics safely, he also believes that adherence to the democratic process will eliminate the potential for abuse.

Scientists and structures of power are not as good as all that. In addition, democratic nations are not immune from racism, ethnic cleansing, infanticide, euthanasia, forced sterilization, and involuntary human testing of new drugs. Large governments also tend to be heavy-handed in suppressing those most immune to their propaganda and most independent from their entitlement programs.

It is the work of a corrupt ethic to demand the sacrifice of another to further one’s own advantage. Rather, it is the work of love to set aside the natural inclination of self-preservation for the benefit of another. I remember the classic goodbye from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, after Mr. Spock entered an area flooded with deadly radiation to save his crewmates at the cost of his own life,

Spock: Do not grieve, Admiral. It is logical. The needs of the many, outweigh...

Kirk: The needs of the few.

Spock: Or the one...

This logic is certainly utilitarian, but it doesn’t impose the demands of such reasoning upon another. It is a cruciform utilitarianism that lays down one’s own life and rights for those of others—as many others as possible. This is certainly not what would occur through democratic eugenics unless it was in the form of guilt-tripping the minority to “do their duty” to sacrifice for the majority. Such coercion would again reveal an ethical corruption was in play. [Such social pressure to conform also brings to mind Shirley Jackson's 1948 short story, The Lottery, and the 1969 film based on it. The line, "Hesh-up Tessie, be a good sport!" is a scene I haven't forgotten since I first saw it in Elementary School.] 

In the movies, Admiral Kirk learned a lesson through this and subsequent events that led him to risk his "everything" in the sequel for the life of the “new” Spock. Was this biological or something more? Later in explaining why he was willing to lose his ship and even his own son to save Spock, Kirk reversed Spock’s reasoning, “Because, the needs of the one... outweigh the needs of the many.” Yet, even in this reversal, there was no top-down self-serving demand upon another. This is just a scene from a sci-fi movie, not actual history, but I wonder if as a metaphor it might provide a challenge to those of us safely situated in the dominant culture.

What if we began to see the marginalized and devalued as more worthy of being saved than we are of being comfortable? What if the structures of power oppose such advocacy and shared honor? There is more on the line than we think. Kirk, for all his flaws, might have been on to something as we see in his encounter with the grateful Ambassador Sarek (Spock’s father),

Sarek: Kirk, I thank you. What you have done is...

Kirk: What I have done, I had to do.

Sarek: But at what cost? Your ship. Your son.

Kirk: If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul.

Certainly, those immersed in eugenics would fail to recognize that all people (regardless of race, class, education and intelligence, attractiveness, physical capabilities, and overall health) are made in the image of God. If we are not made in the image of God what could we possibly mean when referring to the soul? The psalmist quoted above concluded his song with a request that the Lord, would not allow him to continue in corrupted thinking, social behavior, or ethicizing...

Search me, O God, and know my heart!
    Try me and know my thoughts!
And see if there be any grievous way in me,
    and lead me in the way everlasting! (Psalm 139:23-24)

Disney's Autopia may be OK for a while, all it takes is putting your foot on the gas and going with the flow, but it is not really driving and gets old in a hurry. It is certainly not the “way everlasting” although the lines to get on the ride may have seemed like it! We need to be in a loving relationship with our Creator-Redeemer for he will not only lead us well, but he will make us new!
  

“Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.” (2 Cor. 5:17) 

---

[1] E. O. Wilson, Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, 25^th Anniversary Edition (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1975/2000), page 4.