Tuesday, October 27, 2015

God, Guns, and Worship



Approximately fourteen years ago my family and I traveled to Houston, Texas, to visit my wife’s sister, Dorothy.  On Sunday morning we went to church with her.  It was a huge (by Lancaster County, Pennsylvania standards) Presbyterian congregation located somewhere in that concrete mess.  It was a very different experience for this country preacher.

Before I even entered the building I was taken by surprise when I saw a Hispanic woman sweeping the pavement.  I’m not referring to a church member lending a volunteer hand with a little spontaneous cleanup.  This lady was an employee dressed in a work uniform who was there for the exclusive reason of housekeeping.  On a Sunday morning.  As we walked past her to enter the building I offered a friendly greeting, which seemingly took her by surprise.

As we entered the building I thought we were in the wrong place.  I was certain we had entered some corporate headquarters by mistake.  There was a very large, commercial-looking welcome center complete with security monitors, an elaborate phone system, loads of buttons and lights and gizmos - - all very impressive and expensive looking.  Behind the panels that separated the lobby from the administrative area sat an attractive middle-aged woman finely dressed and looking very professional.  I correctly guessed she was the receptionist.  She greeted us and offered to help us navigate the facilities, apparently oblivious to the fact that we had our own guide with us who was a member of the church.  I suppose the rest of us looked so lost and overwhelmed that she assumed we were all “foreigners”.

All of this seemed so commercial; so cold.  It was not my idea of “church”.  I had to remind myself that I was in Houston.  This was Texas.  Yes, I told myself, that explains a lot.  Even this, however, could not prepare me for what I saw next.  The woman behind the barrier was not alone.  Coming out of a doorway and walking behind her was a gentleman whom I mistook as a police officer.  He was dressed in a neatly pressed dark blue uniform with some kind of patch on his shoulder.  There was an assortment of equipment attached to his body including some kind of walkie-talkie-something-or-other and a polished leather holster neatly tucked on his right hip.  I caught myself staring in disbelief as I realized that the handle protruding from that holster was attached to a handgun.  My jaw must have dropped so low I nearly tripped over it as we turned and walked down the long corridor.  Our two sons, then young teenagers, were as excited as they were scared.  My wife - even more stunned than I - struggled to ask her sister if that man back there had a gun on his belt.  Dorothy calmly assured her that yes, they had armed security guards in the Church building at all times.  This was not Lancaster County, Dorothy explained.  We were in the city and churches were not immune to crime.

I found it difficult to engage in worship that morning.  Somehow the thought of an armed security officer watching the door offered no security to me at all.  In fact, it made me insecure - - no, check that, it made me angry.  Yes I was angry that Houston Texas was so alien to the rest of the country that it never could get over the Wild West mentality, even in church.

But then again, we are talking about Texas.  This is a State that always did march to its own beat.  First it rebelled against Mexico and formed its own country.  Then it became part of the United States for a few years until it again rebelled against authority and joined the Confederate States.  Dorothy was right, this is not Lancaster County.  I might add, this was not a Church of the Brethren congregation, either. 

Within a few days I returned home and over the course of time managed to shove that image back into the crevices of my mind.  Most of the time.  Every now and again, as I prepared a sermon on nonviolence, I would be reminded of the Presbyterian Church in Houston.  For the most part, however, it remained a thing of the past.  That is, until recently.

On April 5, 2015 In Altoona PA’s Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament, a worshipper stood for the closing hymn at the end of the Easter Vigil and as he did, a handgun in his pants accidentally fired.  The man ended up grazing himself but fortunately not harming anyone else.  The event does, however, raise the question why anyone would bring a firearm to Church.  Not surprisingly it did set off a series of comments, debates, interviews and other sources of local discussion. 

I learned of this event through a “friend” on Facebook.  Like me, he is a Pastor in the Church of the Brethren.  Our denomination is an historic Peace Church that has consistently taught the doctrine of nonviolence and peacemaking as instructed in the New Testament.  Unlike me, my Pastor Friend is an avid gun rights advocate.  He was interviewed by the Altoona Mirror newspaper for his response to the Altoona incident.  I was saddened to read his comments supporting the right and even the need for firearms in church.  His comments stirred many like-minded remarks from various people.  One person said, “I will always be a sheep dog…NEVER a sheep!”  (Just for the record this is contradictory to the New Testament image of the Church.)  Apparently he sees himself as the guardian of the congregation.  Another commenter wrote, “ISIS would gladly bust into any church with an AK47 killing all they can…Do guns belong in church?  Absolutely!”

More recently I learned of another Church of the Brethren congregation that had a major dispute over whether or not to pass a gun policy with regards to the presence of guns on Church property.  The dispute arose when it was learned that one member of the Church regularly has a concealed hand gun on his person every Sunday morning.  The issue was so hot the congregation eventually decided not to pass any policy at all - neither for nor against guns in Church.  I guess it was the only way they could keep from tearing apart at the seams.

Of course, all of this is heightened by the events in the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina.  I am sure you know the story all too well:  a lone gunman enters the church and joins in an evening Bible Study.  At the end of the evening he pulls out a firearm and proceeds to kill eight people, including the Pastor, before leaving.

The drama is intensified because the Pastor who died was also a State Senator who voted in favor of the law that made it illegal to have guns in church.  That measure did pass and became law prior to the tragic shooting.

Charles Cotton, a Board member at the National Rifle Association, placed the blame for these deaths on Pastor/Senator Clementa Pickney, saying “eight of his church members might be alive if he had expressly allowed members to carry handguns in church.”

I am appalled that anyone could be so calloused and cruel to make such a statement even before the victims were buried.  Not only is it highly insensitive and thoughtless but it also is completely irrelevant.  That doesn’t stop people from saying such things, however.  Again, my Brethren Pastor friend near Altoona suggested the same thing when he wrote: “…just pointing out, it is NOT legal to carry a gun in a church in South Carolina. So, once again the killer could confidently approach a soft target.”  The implication here is that Pastor Pickney got what he deserved because he successfully pushed for a law that made it illegal to have handguns on Church property, thus he and his church members had no defense against this deranged killer.  Others declare that the only way to overcome a bad guy with a gun is to allow some good guys to have guns.  I will respond to that crazy logic in a moment.  First, let us examine the larger picture.

Since the Charleston shooting the question of guns-in-church is becoming a hot topic.  I predict it will continue to intensify as time moves forward.  Gun rights advocates claim their Second Amendment rights, saying to restrict their ability to bring a gun to Church is to create a hardship for them.  It places them at risk, they say.  And it gives free reign to the bad guys.  But do their arguments hold up under examination?  Let’s take a look.

THE SECOND AMENDMENT

The very people who clamor for the separation of church and state can be quite selective in their application of it.  Those who want religion to stay out of politics must also agree to keep politics out of religion if they wish to be consistent.  That is, the “right to bear arms” ends at the door to the Church because the government has no jurisdiction within the ecclesiastical walls.  Many Conservatives had argued that religious institutions should not have to comply with all the conditions of the Affordable Care Act.  Specifically, they objected to being forced to include coverage for such things as contraceptives, including the so-called “morning after pill” which is viewed by some as another form of abortion.  Because these issues are deeply affected by closely-held religious beliefs the Supreme Court ruled in their favor, saying such corporations need not be forced to include these benefits.

Let’s consider another issue:  Same-sex marriages.  The Supreme Court recently ruled that same-sex marriages are legal and must be recognized in all 50 States.  However, it also allowed that ordained ministers cannot be forced to perform weddings for same-sex couples if the minister is opposed to doing so on his or her religious convictions.  Here again, a gay couple has the right to be married but an ordained minister has the right to refuse to be a part of the wedding or to allow the wedding to take place within the Church building.

In both of these scenarios the Church is granted the right to claim religious freedom to opt out of obedience to a civil law.  Conservatives love this, at times like the above mentioned examples.  I would submit, therefore, that they must also concede that the Church has every right to request that all guns be checked at the door, so to speak, and not be brought onto their campuses.  Schools have this right.  Airports have this right.  Courthouses and other government facilities have the right to refuse firearms on their premises.  I do not hear anyone complaining about not being permitted to bring their semi-automatic rifle into a courtroom.  Why, then, does it seem so odd for a Church to do the same? 

This is not unlike anti-smoking laws that prohibit the use of tobacco in restaurants and other public places.  Additionally, many property owners, such as hospitals and schools to name a few, are granted the right to declare their premises smoke-free.  What is the difference between a smoke-free property and a gun-free property?  I would argue that there is no difference.

Having said all this I must confess that while I like the South Carolina law prohibiting firearms in a Church building, I am forced to concede that it has inherent complications as well.  I would prefer if every congregation would declare their property gun-free rather than remaining quiet on the issue and letting it to the secular government to pass civil legislation governing religious matters.  That is not a healthy precedent.  As I said before the dagger of Separation of Church and State must cut in both directions.

THE DETENTE ARGUMENT

So, back to the argument that claims the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.  Historically, this does not seem to hold true.  Bad guys are by nature bad.  They do not become good just because someone else has a gun.  In fact, one could argue that the bad guys love it when the stakes are raised and someone challenges them, dares them to just try it.  From where I sit it would appear that these people who want to kill other people do not live in a realm of logic.  They are incapable of reasoning that they are not the only one in a room with a gun and therefore should change their plans and peacefully walk away rather than risk getting hurt or killed.  If that were the case we would not have cop killers; there would not be any home break-ins because the homeowner might also own a gun.  I could be wrong but I do not think a murderer’s mind works that way.

The Détente argument would bring about world peace, if it worked.  Virtually every nation has more weapons than they know what to do with.  If détente worked effectively this should translate into international peace.  Yet from the dawn of civilization there have been wars and rumors of war.  The United States has been in a constant state of war for the past 65 years, directly or indirectly.  Korea; Cuba; Lebanon; Viet Nam; Granada; Panama; Dominican Republic; El Salvador; Bosnia; Serbia; Libya; Pakistan; Iraq; Afghanistan.  This is the short list of U.S. armed conflicts since 1950, according to Encyclopedia Britannica and Ask.com.  The mighty weapons of the American military did not deter these violent scenes any more than they were able to cause the terrorists in Oklahoma, New York, or Boston to change their destructive plans.
Détente is no deterrent.

THE JESUS FACTOR

For the Christian, the strongest argument against the use of guns is found in the teachings and example  of Jesus Christ.  If in fact Jesus is our Lord, our Master, the One to whom we have pledge our love and devotion to, it follows that we ought to strive to be like him in every way.  Can you honestly see Jesus pulling a gun on somebody?  Seriously.  Not the Jesus I know and serve!  It is far beyond my comprehension.  The New Testament is exceptionally clear that Jesus was a man of peace, not violence.  To be sure he could be stern, but even in his sternest moments Jesus never once made any effort to harm another human being. 

The closest event that some have tried to use as an example of a demonstration of violence by Jesus was the cleaning of the Temple.  This event was recorded by all four of the Gospel authors.  (See Matthew 21:12-15; Mark 11:15-18; Luke 19:45-46; John 2:13-17.)  But even in these passages it is very clear that Jesus drove the livestock and the moneychangers out of the Temple without harming anyone.  The synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark & Luke) simply reports that he “drove out” all who were buying and selling animals, along with the animals themselves.  He also overturned the tables of the men who were exchanging money, though Mark does not mention this. 

Some argue that Jesus used a whip to clear the men from the Temple.  However, it should be noted that the whip was only mentioned in John’s Gospel and was only used to drive the sheep and the cattle from the sacred grounds (John 2:15). 

It is also important to ask why Jesus did this.  It was the time of the Jewish Passover, one of three pilgrimage holy days when every male Jew was expected to worship at the Temple in Jerusalem no matter where they lived.  Because the Jews were so scattered it was not practical for many to bring their own animal to offer as a sacrifice.  Therefore, ever quick to seize an opportunity to make money, numerous merchants set up a temporary market where they sold the sheep, cattle, and doves required by the Law.  Sadly, this market was established within the walls of the Temple.  It does not require much imagination to understand that hundreds of animals confined to tight quarters will create a natural mess!  This was not an atmosphere conducive for worship.  Furthermore, the merchants routinely sold their goods at inflated prices because they knew they had a captive audience.  The travelers had to purchase a sacrifice, thus the sellers could charge anything they wanted.  In many cases they had to exchange foreign currency for the local variety which led to greater abuse.  It is this kind of reckless, dishonest and unclean environment that Jesus was reacting against.  Yet even under these circumstances Jesus refused to use violence.

The ultimate example of Jesus is demonstrated at the Cross.  Our Savior rebuked all efforts at retaliation for the injustices done to him.  In fact, he did not even resist his attackers.  Instead, he prayed for them and expressed forgiveness to them even as he was dying.  This is the way of Christ.  This is therefore the way of the Christian, too.

Jesus could not stand the thought of turning God’s house into a market or a stock yard.  It was intended to be holy, separate, pure, honest, sincere, a symbol of the beauty and perfection of God the Father.  The world in which we live is broken and violent.  We know that all too well.  Our houses of worship, however, are to be the antithesis of that.  It is where we go to be made whole and to find peace.

David was a mighty King and a devout worshiper of God.  In his zeal for the Lord he desired to build a Temple, a permanent building to replace the Tabernacle as the centralized place of worship for Israel.  But God refused to grant David the honor of building the Temple.  Why?  Because David was a warrior and had shed much blood  (1 Chronicles 22:8).

For me the worship of God is a holy and sacred event.  It demands all that I am, all that I have.  I want as little distraction as possible so I may give my total concentration and loyalty to Jesus.  To have a gun on my person and to give my fullest concentration and attention to God would make me an irresponsible gun owner, because possessing a lethal weapon demands being alert to it.  Furthermore, in my opinion carrying a gun denies my total dependence upon God.  I am now placing my trust, my security on a manmade object, a piece of metal designed specifically to take human life.  For me, this becomes an idol taking the place of God.

Do guns belong in our churches?  Absolutely not!  Such a practice is an abomination to our God, for it denies the power of the saving, sacrificial death of Jesus the Son of God.  In him we live and yes, in him we die.  But let the blood not be on our hands, lest we be defiled.


George Douglas Gehr
PeaceAbility
October 26, 2017