Reading: Mt. 10:34-42
Proper 8A
July 3, 2002
The Rev. Karen Siegfriedt
St. Jude the Apostle Episcopal Church, Cupertino,
CA
When I was in grammar school during the late 50's and early 60's, school life was very predictable. When the bell rang each morning, we would line up in the school yard according to grade, spacing ourselves "one arm's length" from each other. Then each grade would file into its perspective classroom, line by line, in an orderly fashion. The day would start off with the Pledge of Allegiance (which by then included the phrase "under God"). This was followed by the singing of one verse of "My Country Tis of Thee." At least one of my teachers would then read the KJV of Psalm 23. This routine occurred each morning for six years. No one seemed to object or to be offended by this patriotic-religious ritual. Afterall, we were either American Christians or Jews. None of us were aliens holding green cards (although once we had a temporary student who was from Japan.)
When I entered Jr. High School, the Pledge of Allegiance was no longer said. I am not sure whether this was because Jr. High Schools didn't do that kind of thing or whether it was because of the unpatriotic fervor of the 1960's. Anyway, I didn't give much thought to the Pledge of Allegiance until some 35 years later when I attended the Cupertino Rotary Club to give a presentation on the War College. At the beginning of the meeting, the members of the Rotary Club stood up, faced the American flag, and recited the Pledge in unison.
I was surprised at first and thought, "Oh, this is a group of very patriotic citizens." But as the pledge continued, questions began to go through my mind. Questions like: 1) Why does a group (who is not directly involved in military and governmental concerns) publicly pledge its allegiance to a flag and to the republic for which it stands? Are these people concerned that there may be a terrorist or anti-American among them or are they just saying the pledge out of tradition? 2) When I pledge my allegiance, what does that exactly entail? What am I signing on for? Does it mean that I can not be a conscientious objector when my conscience calls me to resist? Does it mean that I am prohibited from engaging in civil disobedience? Does it mean that I agree with the policies of the nation or with the particular president or party who is in office? 3) Finally, I asked myself, what happens if one's allegiance to God contradicts one's allegiance to one's country. Can someone honestly pledge two allegiances?
Well these were some of the questions that I struggled with for a few weeks and then forgot about. That was of course until this week when the court ruled to prohibit the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance with the words "under God." Since then, several parishioners have asked me about my thoughts regarding this ruling and its impact on the Church and our nation. So what I would like to do today, is to talk about what it means to pledge one's allegiance, the costs involved, and the role of religion in the public square. I will use the reading from the gospel of St. Matthew as my text.
Today's gospel is a continuation of Chapter 10, where Jesus commissions his twelve apostles and then instructs them on the cost of discipleship. Today's reading is one of those "difficult" passages in the Bible that many people would like to ignore. It is not the kind of passage that those who pledge their allegiance first and foremost to the family unit, like to hear. In fact, it is an offensive passage, especially for those who come to Christianity equating the practice of the faith with the attainment of a comfortable and peaceful family lifestyle.
The reading begins with Jesus saying: "Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother….Whoever loves father or mother or son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me." For Jesus, allegiance to God is first and foremost. Often times, it involves personal or family sacrifice. This means that one's allegiance to religious principles and demands, personal conscience, and active discipleship comes before any allegiance to the family unit. This is quite an advance in New Testament Thought. Think of the context in which it was written! In first century Palestine, it was the father of the household who determined the religious habits of the family. Total allegiance to the patriarch who headed the family and to the family itself, was expected first and foremost. This centuries-old tradition was beginning to be challenged as individuals (other than the father of the household) were drawn to Jesus and his teachings. Conflict resulted when the demands of the faith where at variance with the demands of the nuclear family.
Such sentiments of pledging one's allegiance beyond the family can be seen in the commitment of the early American patriots. In 1775, Patrick Henry spoke before the Virginia Convention. He tried to convince other colonial leaders to cut their ties with England, knowing that this decision would result in war. In his presentation, Henry said: "Gentlemen may cry, peace, peace-but there is no peace. The war is actually begun… Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand here idle? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death."
It is this spirit of allegiance and self-sacrifice that characterizes those who signed the Declaration of Independence. These 56 courageous patriots mutually pledged their lives, their fortunes, and sacred honor for liberty and justice. All of them were hunted as traitors by the British Crown. Some lost their homes, their families, and their fortunes while others lost their lives. But no one lost his sacred honor.
While allegiance and self-sacrifice for the common good is an integral part of the religious life as well as the patriotic life, we must not equate patriotism or nationalism with Christianity. As a patriot, one's allegiance is to the common good of the nation. But as Christians, we are called to a higher standard. Christians pledge to strive for justice and peace among all people and to respect the dignity of every human being. This includes Jews, Muslims, Christians, and atheists as well as Iraqis, Afghanis, and Americans. This allegiance to love and serve our neighbor is much more global than what is demanded of us as U.S. citizens. It means that when we spend money and resources to fight the War on Terrorism to protect the common good of the United States, we also fight the World War on Hunger with the same commitment of money and resources; a war where 6000 children die each morning from hunger. It means that when we expend energy and resources to uncover the unjust financial decisions of Enron, WorldCom, and Xerox, that we also spend energy and resources to examine the unjust impact of our economic decisions on Third World countries. In other words, for the Christian, our commitment is not limited to this nation, our family, or the individual. Rather, our allegiance puts God at the center. This means that our compassion, our resources, and our concern extend to all of our neighbors, not just Americans. So what about the Pledge of Allegiance? Well, I am not so concerned about eliminating the phrase "under God." That alone will not make our nation more ungodly, (although it will reflect our tolerance and the new demographics of our nation.) What will make our nation more ungodly, is the refusal by religious people to voice their commitment to justice and dignity in the public square. The First Amendment was not written to take religion out of the public square but rather to prevent the government from imposing its particular brand of religion on the people. Religious people, conservative or liberal, need to speak up. The conservative voice tends to focus on the transformation of the individual while the liberal voice tends to focus on the transformation of public institutions and policies. We need both voices. The only thing that is required for evil to flourish is for good people to say nothing. We as Christians need to look at the actual problems existing in our society: jobs, schools, housing, and health care. Then we need to make sure that love and justice is being served in all of these arenas.
It was the Quakers who from the 18th century on, fought for the abolition of slavery. It was the many Churches, both Protestant and Catholic, who in the 19th century fought against the terrible conditions in the factories endured by men, women, and children alike. It was the National Council of Churches who created a grass roots movement to fight against the civil right abuses of Blacks in the 1960's. And it was the mainline denominations who in the 1970's & 80's advocated and worked to change public institutions and policies to ensure justice for citizens of all economic classes. Where is that religious voice today? And is your voice participating in the dialogue?
While I may be sad or nostalgic that the words "under God" may be stricken from the Pledge of Allegiance, my greater concern is that we as mainline Christians have become quieter in participating in public dialogue. Justice suffers because of that. I know that we are a busy people and that our time is precious. Our futures are uncertain in this world of terrorism and financial upheaval and we are feeling that stress in our emotional lives. It is a challenge as well as a spiritual discipline to care about the common good. To move beyond ourselves and our families requires a sacrifice of time, money, and effort. Such sacrifice may require a significant change in lifestyle. But then again, isn't that what we signed on for when we pledged our allegiance to love God and to love our neighbor as ourselves?
| Updated 7/4/02 |
|