Deacon Dan Wright

How Easter Killed His Faith: On Lee Strobel Responding to Ricky Gervais' Easter Message

As we begin Holy Week and move toward the celebration of Easter, the news gets really interesting. This is especially true if you, like me, have your news feed set to let you see stories on religion. Maybe the religion news isn't that important to you. If not, I respect that, but for me it's part of where I live as a deacon. 

Any time of the year, not just Holy Week, the religion news setting will catch a plethora of negative articles. Particularly this is true in regard to those who are opposed to the faith or perhaps who are militant in arguing from the viewpoint of non-belief. Typically I like their articles because they challenge me to give a good answer.   

Recently I found the following piece from a former militant atheist, now an evangelical apologist, the journalist Lee Strobel. He is writing in response to an "Easter message" by atheist comedian Ricky Gervais. Strobel says it was Easter that killed his faith:

It was the worst news I could get as an atheist: my agnostic wife had decided to become a Christian. Two words shot through my mind. The first was an expletive; the second was “divorce.”

I thought she was going to turn into a self-righteous holy roller. But over the following months, I was intrigued by the positive changes in her character and values. Finally, I decided to take my journalism and legal training (I was legal editor of the Chicago Tribune) and systematically investigate whether there was any credibility to Christianity.

Maybe, I figured, I could extricate her from this cult.

I quickly determined that the alleged resurrection of Jesus was the key. Anyone can claim to be divine, but if Jesus backed up his claim by returning from the dead, then that was awfully good evidence he was telling the truth.

For nearly two years, I explored the minutia of the historical data on whether Easter was myth or reality. I didn’t merely accept the New Testament at face value; I was determined only to consider facts that were well-supported historically. As my investigation unfolded, my atheism began to buckle.

Continue reading

I don't know that I would necessarily take the same strategy or tactic as Strobel in replying to Gervais, or even to others who doubt or who are opposed to Christianity. While proofs, in the sense in which they are presented in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, are important to belief, and while faith and reason should not be opposed in any way, I don't really believe that traditional proofs are always effective tools for convincing nonbelievers, though certainly in the case of Strobel they amounted to something. However, if you read the comments that have been posted on Strobel's article, and can get past the haters, you can see that proofs mean very little to those who are convinced in their faith against God. 

Instead, I would look to my own experience of doubt and faith, and apply it accordingly.  Like Strobel, I too at one time was a nonbeliever.  Unlike Strobel, I went from being an evangelical Pentecostal as a teenager to being a questioning student of philosophy in my 20's who understood his Christianity best in terms of atheism.  That's right, at one time I defined myself as an atheist, albeit a Christian atheist. Bear in mind that this was many years before my journey to Catholicism.

Now this brings me to the point of Gervais, who in his Easter message says why he believes he is better at being a Christian as an atheist than believers are by being Christians. However, Gervais is making an attempt at humor rather than a true statement of belief. Gervais, in my opinion, is not a Christian atheist, rather he is relying on humorous irony to make his point.

Gervais says that he believes in the Ten Commandments and keeps all of them. To this I would point out, not so much in a judgmental way as much as an objective observation, that he sounds a little like the Pharisee in Jesus' time who went into the temple and prayed, "Thank you Lord, that I am not a sinner like that tax collector over there." Keep in mind that the tax collector, who wouldn't even come into the building all the way, stood back at a distance and prayed for mercy to God, of whose existence he surely had no rational proofs. Furthermore, out of the tax collector's situation of being aware of his sin, he was also probably acutely aware that he had no proofs. Rather, his viewpoint was from the sheer poverty of existence--the place I believe we are most likely to discover the sacred for ourselves. 

As Christians, should it matter all that much what we say about what we believe?  Are we really going to prove anything to anyone by way of talking?  Isn't what we do much more important, and isn't this the lesson of the story of the tax collector in the temple?  Did he not realize that in his life there had been an absence of justice?

The message to nonbelievers is that true religion isn't really about believing in things that are too big to grasp, things that can never be proven except perhaps subjectively. True religion isn't about fairy tales, nor is it about perfectly keeping the Ten Commandments. Rather, it's all about how you live and how you love others, even those who are most unlike you in what they do and believe.

Many years ago, back when I was a Pentecostal teenager, I heard a gospel song that went "If heaven never had been promised to me, neither God's promise to live eternally, it's been worth just having the Lord in my life." Sure it matters that we believe, but what's most important is that we learn to follow Jesus really.

Does Religion Lay the Foundation for Gender Discrimination?

If you believe what Frances Kissling of the Washington Post blog says, it does:

When women of different faiths who are committed to women’s equality get together, there is little space between their views. They agree that official, internal discrimination against women which withholds the most important leadership roles from them is rampant. At the same time, no institutional religious leader accepts the premise that he or his denomination seriously discriminates against women. Heaven forbid! If it were not for religion, women would not be educated and would have minimal health care. Increasingly religious leaders speak out publicly against some human rights abuses women experience, but minimal efforts are made within the congregation to curb violence against women in the family.

The absence of a commitment to eliminating gender discrimination is most evident in the denial of opportunities for spiritual or congregational leadership. Whether it is the persistence of laws and practices that prevent Muslim women from leading prayers in many mosques or the fact that few women rabbis are heads of class A synagogues, or even the fact that Tibetan Buddhism, the branch led by the Dalai Lama has not yet fully ordained a single woman while Chinese, Korean and other branches of Buddhism have women know we are not equal. The kind of leadership that actually influences teaching and policy, the top “jobs”, are still reserved to men. I know this best in my own faith Roman Catholicism so I will discuss that, but let me be clear gender discrimination is pervasive within almost all religion.

Read the whole story

I recall years back when I was a student at the Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, I heard the argument many times that it all boils down to power.  While this was the main argument and concern that many women of the seminary presented to me in discussions on the topic, I failed to see the power/ministry connection.  Contrarily, true ministry seemed more to be service than power. However, I know there's many issues involved here.  I invite your discussion in the comment box.

 

Atheists in Foxholes

So it's true there are atheists in foxholes.  Though I never really doubted it, and I certainly never believed it was a good argument or proof for belief to say there are no atheists in foxholes.  Believing when bullets are flying over your head isn't the same thing as believing on a good and blessed day.

RALEIGH, N.C. – The cliche notwithstanding, there are atheists in foxholes. In fact, atheists, agnostics, humanists and other assorted skeptics from the Army's Fort Bragg have formed an organization in a pioneering effort to win recognition and ensure fair treatment for nonbelievers in the overwhelmingly Christian U.S. military.

"We exist, we're here, we're normal," said Sgt. Justin Griffith, chief organizer of Military Atheists and Secular Humanists, or MASH. "We're also in foxholes. That's a big one, right there."

For now, the group meets regularly in homes and bars outside of Fort Bragg, one of the biggest military bases in the country. But it is going through the long bureaucratic process to win official recognition from the Army as a distinct "faith" group.

Read the whole story

As one who believes in, and preaches, the value of tolerance it seems to me that those of us who are people of faith may stand to learn a lot by taking into consideration the viewpoint of those most different from us.  Although it's a challenge to do so, I've found that seeing through the eyes of others is a good method for understanding.  My hope is that tolerance will be reciprocal among all people.  The beginning is recognizing similarities and respecting differences, which isn't the same thing as buying into pluralism at all. All things are not equal, nor will they ever be.

Sunday Homily: On Being Salt

Jesus told his disciples, "You are the salt of the earth." Recently I put quite a bit of thought into what it means to be the salt of the earth. I feel that it's something important to consider because it comes to us somewhat as an imperative: we are to be the salt of the earth. We are to make a noticeable difference in the world.

For me this question comes as a particular personal challenge—as it should for all of us—because it addresses each one of us. We really do need to know how to be the salt of the earth in order for Christianity to be the difference the world needs.

Now as I began to explore the question of being the salt of the earth the first thing that came to mind was that to be the salt of the earth we must be good people. Certainly there's nothing wrong being good and undoubtedly as Christians we ought to be good. Being good goes a long way because God is good. However, is being good all by itself enough to make us the salt of the earth?

Something I've noticed recently among those who are unbelievers is the claim that it's possible to be good without believing in God. In fact, there's a popular book that bears the title Good without God. Aside from the more philosophical question of whether goodness is even possible without God, I wouldn't necessarily argue whether non-believers can be good without believing because my experience teaches me that there are, in fact, plenty of good, ethical, and honest people who dedicate their lives to the service of humanity, and yet who adamantly claim to have no belief in God. Obviously one can be good without being a Christian. Therefore, being good alone isn't sufficient to make us the salt of the earth.

The next thing that came to mind was that perhaps it's faith that makes us the salt of the earth. Surely belief itself sets us apart from the rest of the world? I'm sure that faith as the criterion might appeal to traditional mainline Protestants, who believe that faith alone can bring about salvation. Or faith might appeal to Catholics who have a heightened sense of the spirituality belonging to faith and devotion. However this too failed to give me a satisfactory answer. There are plenty of faithful Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, even pagans and Wiccans right here in the Austin area. Just having faith by itself doesn't make us the salt of the earth. It puts us in a bigger group of individuals and communities who, as a central tenet, have faith as their defining characteristic.

"There must be something else that I'm missing," I thought. So I considered the lives of the martyrs and mystics. I considered whether it's possible at all to be salt without the supernatural help of God and whether salt might be a possible metaphor for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. I even considered that being salt might stand for having the courage to meet every trial, and to face the ultimate threat of ceasing to exist altogether.

Finally I considered love: love in the sense of caritas or agape, the love that is charity, love in deed or action, and I thought that perhaps I had found the definitive answer. Love makes us the salt of the earth, I reasoned, because God is love. It's love that compels us to act in a selfless or altruistic manner. It's love that's the source of mercy and forgiveness; it's love that compelled the martyrs to offer their lives; it's love that St. Paul tells us is the greatest of the three interrelated features of Christian life: faith, hope, and love.

Indeed, perhaps love is the salient difference that makes Christians stand out, that which lets our light shine; but we have to learn to see love in a way that's essentially different from what the culture and world of today tells us is love. Love, without qualification, is pretty common. Our love has to go beyond the ordinary understanding of love. Our love must be countercultural. Jesus tells us that if we love only those who love us there is no reward in it. Love, in its truest sense, is giving sacrificially of oneself and being at the service of justice—of righting the wrongs—as the first reading from Isaiah makes clear: Share your bread with the hungry, shelter the oppressed and homeless, clothe the naked when you see them. However, see justice not as an obligation but as love. Be willing to do and give beyond all expectation. Be at the service of the common good.

It's important in our modern-day world to note that the features intrinsic to justice, as with goodness, are something that people of other faiths and people of no faith may share with us. Being tolerant of others also belongs to justice. The fact that non-Christians are capable of justice doesn't take away from its salience. Ours is justice that is infused with God's love. It is action that expects nothing in return; it is that which loves its enemies and forgives the worst wrongs done to it.

The imperative to be salt comes with the injunction of not allowing salt to lose its defining feature: that is, we are not to allow Christianity to become diluted or watered down. However, knowledge of the injunction not to allow the salt to lose its savor only places a greater imperative on us. Is the faith we present to the world such that our actions toward the poor and marginal reveal it clearly? Does it give hope where there is little or is it diluted by our being opposed to reason, by superstition or false religiosity, by self-righteousness, or by our having condemning and judgmental attitudes?

Christianity is under the microscope of scrutiny more now than at any other time in history. More now than ever Christians have to be certain that if the world rejects us, it's not because of some evil done on our part. Therefore, the question that every Christian must ask himself or herself is, "In the way that I live my life, am I perceived as being the salt of the earth?"

Rejoice! He Comes Bringing Health and Salvation

This Sunday, the Third Sunday of Advent, is the Sunday we call "Gaudete," which translated from the Latin means "Rejoice." Rejoice in the Lord always. Again I say, rejoice. Today is the Sunday that signifies joy, both when we rejoice as we prepare for the coming of Christmas less than two weeks from now, and as we prepare and welcome the Kingdom of God already present in our midst, which will be fulfilled in its entirety when Christ returns in glory in the time when all things are finally complete.

Certainly we feel a heightened sense of excitement about things as we light the rose-colored candle of the Advent wreath and don the rose vestments for one of only two times in the liturgical year. This Sunday's celebration gives us a good opportunity to reflect on what there really is to be all that excited about, other of course than the imminent arrival of Christmas.

In order to meaningfully interpret the readings we have for today, and really any time we study scripture, there are at least two approaches we can take, and always--of course--we should seek the guidance of the Church's teaching. We keep in mind that what we look for is a living and dynamic encounter with the word of God. First, we might attempt to understand or step into the historical situation. What was it that Jesus or the prophets really wanted to impart to their audience at that time? What were the human authors attempting to affirm? Then next we can ask how the scriptures bear relevance to our lives in the world in which we live now? What does God want to reveal to us at the close of the year 2010?

Overall, something that stands out clearly in the readings today, which has the power to transcend history and time, is the theme of transformation. There is a clear prophecy of and fulfillment of transformation. Jesus says, "Go tell John what you hear and see: the blind regain their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have the good news preached to them." The prophecies of Isaiah were being fulfilled. Transformation and the dawn of a new era were beginning. Healing was taking place, as well as a new way of thinking about those who needed it, but not without challenge. We know that Jesus challenged the attitude and beliefs of his contemporaries. His challenge is for us too in our times. I've learned that the message is right when we feel that it makes us question our attitudes and beliefs us in some way. Often I feel challenged myself during my own homily because the message applies to me as well as everyone else.

During the time of Jesus there was a prevalent punishment concept of disease and disability. It was thought that if someone had a disease or disability it was because he or she had sinned, or even because his or her ancestor or ancestors had sinned. We might think that in our enlightened times we have moved far away from this kind of thinking. However, a good bit of modern scholarship has been devoted to understanding the punishment concept of disease in relation to, for example, the AIDS epidemic. Another example is how the word previously used to describe intellectual disability has come to be used as an insensitive insult. Unfortunately, the punishment concept is still with us and sometimes we aren't aware that it remains in our attitudes though not necessarily spoken or even fully realized.

Without a doubt, Jesus came to do away with such notions as the punishment concept of disease. He challenged the attitudes about sin and sickness. It's part of what we rejoice in this Sunday, and certainly the source of joy through the ages, that Jesus really is a savior in that he not only heals us and makes us whole, but he sets us free from the shame and guilt that binds us. Each of us has the opportunity to leave the weight of guilt behind and be reasonable, rational beings who part company with unreasonable and unhealthy ways of thinking.

A good friend of mine recently, actually it was my wife, asked me to consider the possibility that in our times the true miracle in healing, as promised by Jesus, will take place in our attitudes when we encounter people who have disabilities. Rather than seeing them as different or "other" than us, or even as "special," in the healed or transformed world we accept disability as natural. Also our attitudes change in that we don't mind so much adjusting our environment so that people of all levels of ability can be included. Perhaps we will come to see that fair does not always mean equal but that it requires us to go above and beyond the expectations of equality.

As I was growing up, and at a time when I began to seriously consider things of the faith, I came across the idea that salvation has mostly to do with health, or put another way, health is the metaphor for salvation. We're all familiar with the tent revivals where the main attraction is to see people healed by faith. Now certainly the healing ministry of Jesus, even in our times, should not be undervalued, even though we understand salvation as entailing much more than just health. Still, there's a lot of validity for us in our times in understanding health in the context of salvation and as part of the Church's mission. Health is so important that the Catholic bishops speak of healthcare not just as a commodity but as a basic human right that they say is included in "the first right of the human person, the right to life."

From a scriptural point of view, health and healing stand for the kind of transformation that we celebrate in the joy of Gaudete Sunday. It's a sign of mature faith to see salvation as an overall picture of a transformed world in which there is true progress. However, undoubtedly, in our times there are great challenges and obstacles to overcome. Often these obstacles are within us in the form of a particular mindset, attitude, or belief system—especially as it has to do with the way we experience and treat others.

As we move into Christmastime and a new year we have the opportunity not to become distracted but to become intent on healing the wounds of disunity and distrust that abound. More than ever before we are in the place where we may counter the forces of unbelief by embracing joy, healing, forgiveness, transformation, and the progress that forms us into the full, mature, stature of Christ who comes to save the world and make all things new.

Pope Benedict XVI's 30-year campaign to reassert conservative Catholicism - CSMonitor.com

In the past 30 years, the Vatican has moved strongly to reassert the authority of a traditional, even orthodox Roman Catholicism – to bring the notion of a "one true church" to Europe and then the larger world. The intent was to reverse the "open" or liberalizing trend of the church represented by Vatican II.

via www.csmonitor.com

If reasserting conservative Catholicism were to mean connecting to the richness and tradition of the faith, and it meant making the faith present in a clear and understandable manner to the world today, whose moral paradigms often differ sharply from those of the Church, then I would support it wholeheartedly. 

However, we need not look far to see a world ready to abandon what it may see as a religion that has not borne fruit. Any move that involves the Church retreating into its own system is sure to bring only further misunderstanding. My original embracing of Catholicism nearly 20 years ago came about because I saw a positive force at work in the Church, a force that held the potential to fulfill the deepest longings and questions of life. For me, it was an experience that I understood as somehow--perhaps mystically--connected to the experience of the first Christians. For me it was, frankly, a pentecostal experience. There was something in the Church that had the power to transform my life.

I believe that the same potential still exists, but we won't get it--and we won't be able to share it with others--by embracing ideology. Our world, both in the Church and outside it, tends to see religious conservatism as having a connection or kinship to the politics of the Right, and this worries me. It worries me not because my views differ from those of the Right--and they often do--but because of something I've known a for long time, and something that I've lived out in my own life, namely that being orthodox in one's religion doesn't mean that we have to buy into a political system that staunchly shuts the door in the face of whatever doesn't fit into the system. Orthodoxy, or conservatism, in faith does not necessarily equate with conservatism in politics.

Of course Christians are free to choose whatever system of politics they feel comfortable with, but we have an obligation to allow our faith to inform our politics rather than letting politics force itself on our faith. The Christian faith that I embraced long ago hasn't changed--it's still the same positive force in my life that it has always been. It's the forward-looking and open-minded love of my fellow human beings that compels me to desire fruitful dialog aimed at overcoming the biggest challenges of living in the world today: the differences between ourselves and others. It compels me to reach out to the world with the positive power of healing life's biggest injustices and wounds.

If purity and truth of faith are what the Church desires, the realization of such will be obtained not by prohibition but transformation. Many years ago I recall a sermon given by an Episcopalian priest on the marks of true Christian faith. Essentially she said that true faith can be easily recognized because it informs you of what it is for, rather than what it is against.

True faith may certainly be interested in the preservation of its most cherished values: It may be for the value of chastity for example, but does this necessitate a statement against anything in particular? Does the Church's definitions of what it values, say marriage, or perhaps ordination, need to be demanded of others before dialog or explanation occur? Especially this is true if the desire of the Church is to win others over to being receptive to the power that can transform life. If a religious system is truly universal then it needs to stand ready to embrace a universe of difference--a universe that may appear to be at odds with what it holds as sacred in some respects. Here, again, the obligation of faith is to better inform, and to do it in a clear and cogent manner.

We Catholics have a tendency to leave things up to the hierarchy--especially in matters of faith and morals--but I believe there is an obligation for every Catholic, every Christian, to enter meaningful dialog and explore the difficult questions and real-life issues that exist. If the Christian religion is going to survive it will be because individual Christians will begin to shed the mask of ideology and embrace life completely with all the baggage that comes with it.

Intolerance, Broken Religion, Fear, and the Faith of Anne Rice

Ever since I added religion to my news feed I've been tempted to return to blogging my thoughts on stories more frequently. For a long time the majority of what I've posted has been Sunday sermons and occasional reflections--just mostly innocuous stuff with an interest limited perhaps to the parish. Seems that back during the presidential election year not all my opinions on the news were appreciated by everyone, and I was busy with other things, so I backed away from commenting on news--with the intention of it being temporary. With that being said, I'll go ahead and take the big risk of not keeping my thoughts and opinions to myself. 

I noticed recently that a friend remarked how the "Angry Bearded Catholic Bloggers Club" (ABCBC) were "going nuts" with Anne Rice's rejection of the faith that she returned to after having rejected it once upon a time long ago (I have to admit: I'm not a member of the ABCBC). I hope the title of my post today isn't too much, but I feel like it encapsulates what I've been seeing in the religion news.

Whatever the news brings us, or what others might comment in its regard, the response from people of faith shouldn't be driven by intolerance or fear. These are actually the antitheses, among innumerable others, of true faith. If we are secure in what we believe, we don't have anything to be afraid of. On the contrary, we ought to be willing to let others be who they are in their belief, and in their choice of how they practice it, or even the total lack thereof.

Having true faith, in my opinion, means striving toward what is positive and best in life, and it also means rolling up our sleeves and working to change what is negative or broken. True faith means taking a risk and reaching out to other people. For me, this doesn't include my having to get you to believe the same thing that I believe in terms of religion, and it certainly doesn't mean losing touch with sanity in order to recognize that life on earth is sacred.

Unfortunately, all too often people's experience of religion is that of something broken. Often they struggle within themselves and they feel that the bad relationship they have must be ended. It's like coming away from bad love relationship or a marriage that didn't work. You can give up on the relationship without giving up on love, and this is really where I think Anne Rice may be coming from. Her experience of religion is one that is broken. However, she still recognizes the validity of what was at the basis of it to start.

Where I want to end this, without it becoming too long, is by saying that Christians have an obligation to enter each others' struggles in a positive way. We have an obligation to apply the healing balm of friendship and acceptance, and always we have an obligation to meet people just where they are in life without any expectations of making them be like us in any way. In other words we have the duty to reach out with tolerance, to fix what is broken, to cast out fear, and to make the world a truly positive place by struggling to overcome its greatest challenges.

Where Teaching and Diaconate Meet

It's not often that I find myself in the news. Certainly with the kind of news we might see nowadays this can be considered a good thing I suppose. 

However, recently I was honored to have been selected to be profiled on one of the local Austin news programs for my work as a teacher. During the interview I was asked to explain what a deacon is and does. My comments about it were somewhat brief, so I was delightfully surprised to find that once the editing was done my role as a deacon took the forefront. 

I share this positive human interest story with you, and as always I seek your continued prayers that the work I do truly will always make a difference. Again, I am honored--but perhaps even more I am humbled and called to an even greater degree of Christian service.

Pope on Priests and the Digital Media

I was delighted today to discover that the pope is asking priests to begin making wider use of digital media such as blogs in order to evangelize. For several years now I have strongly held that the Internet provides one of the best means ever to take the gospel to the entire world.  

Electronic evagelization is something that all of us can take part in--I note the numerous blogs by Catholic laypeople and certainly the good number already in existence by priests (many fewer by deacons such as myself)--but the priest has a special call to take the gospel to all the world. Therefore, it is very encouraging to see the pope's support for priests in this area.

A number of years ago I recall hearing someone with far-reaching insight say that with the Internet we have to avoid the mistake we made with Television in terms of not using it to it's fullest potential. Of course there are notable efforts, such as EWTN and televised Masses, in existence already in terms of television, but there's room for much more.  

The pope speaks of the Church exercising a "diaconia" of culture, and of course this is something that we can all be involved in bringing about. I pray that whatever efforts I put in here on this blog will be an inspiration to all people--lay, religious, and clergy--to take a greater role in bringing the gospel to all the world. However, even more we should all pray that the media may be used to spread Christian values and culture in a world where more often than not the media serves purposes that are opposed to the gospel.

Here is a direct link to the Pope's message. 

The Lesson of Meeting Hate With Love: Reflecting on Martin Luther King Jr.

Recently a coworker asked me what I thought the significance is of celebrating Martin Luther King Jr. Day.  Too often those of us who get the day off from work—teachers, government employees, students and others—may tend not to think all that much about why we have the day away from our work, but instead we may treat it as just another day off. 

I believe it’s a mistake for us not to reflect upon and consider the significance of this holiday.  In fact, we really ought to find some way to celebrate it actively.  We ought to find some action by which we can incorporate the meaning of the holiday into our lives.  I want to offer a suggestion: we can allow Martin Luther King Jr. Day to be the occasion for a renewed commitment to making peace in our world.  In the name of Martin Luther King Jr., that is, in the name of all the good that he stood for, we can commit to a daily act of peacemaking in order for the world to be a better place for everyone, a place of true freedom and mutual respect; a place of true justice and hope.

Martin Luther King Jr. Day is about the dream that he had, and a dream for us to share.  His was a dream of peace; a dream of cooperation and equality.  Dr. King’s dream included all Americans—no, more than that.  His dream is a dream for every man, woman, and child of planet earth.  It is a dream that I find to be in keeping with everything that I’ve been taught about the true significance of living the life in Christ.  It is a dream where I see in the faces of all people my brothers and sisters, my family, and my friends.  Dr. King’s dream is a vision of a world free from oppression and hostility; free from hatred, inequality, injustice, and ignorance.  How could we not make it our own?  How could we not live it today?

The lesson that I take from Dr. King, and that I commit to live, is the lesson of meeting hate with love.  In a conversation with a friend recently I mentioned that Dr. King taught that we must meet hate with love.  I went on to say that to do so is certainly not the “natural” thing to do.  Much to the contrary, it’s natural to meet hate with repulsion, and often with aggression.  My friend told me that meeting hate with love is supernatural, and indeed to do so requires that we tap into God’s reservoir of grace.  Something I want to emphasize here is that it’s far from impossible to meet hate with love.  In fact, meeting hate with love should be the habitual Christian stance.  It’s the real way that each of us will change the world one person at a time.

Take a few moments today to consider the significance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day.  Incorporate it into your prayer life if you will.  Ask God to make you a vessel of peace.  Consider today the significance of this great Christian leader who asked us to share his dream.  Consider the value of peacemaking and nonviolence as a way of bringing about a transformed world.  Moreover, reflect on the real responsibility that each of us must take to do something to make peace a reality.

Let us go forward together and always meet hate with love.  Love has the power to transform, and all who encounter true love will remain forever changed by it.