RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

Faith is about Redemption: The Life of Ted Kennedy

by Jim Wallis 09-03-2009

I have never really trusted those who are intolerant and condemning of other people’s shortcomings. It makes me suspect they are likely hiding their own. This weekend was full of the story of redemption for me, as the nation said its good-byes to Sen. Edward Kennedy.

I watched everything — from the moving memorial service on Friday night to the amazing funeral Mass on Saturday, to the private burial that same evening, to much of the news coverage and comment on Sunday. The stories from Friday are worth listening to again, especially the touching tributes from Kennedy’s Republican adversaries who grew to respect and even love him, and the hilarious tales of sailing adventures. The Irish always say there should be lots of laughter at a good wake.

But it was the funeral on Saturday morning that most moved me. I don’t know what I was expecting — likely more speeches — but not a traditional Catholic funeral liturgy, complete with Holy Eucharist. Of course, what else should I have expected from such a Boston Catholic family? Here was the divine irony. At the funeral of the nation’s most liberal political leader of the last half-century, a watching nation was treated to a full Catholic Mass. And even more, the readings are what most struck me. When was the last time the whole country got to hear the 25th chapter of Matthew, with Jesus imploring us, “I was hungry … I was thirsty … I was a stranger … I was naked … I was sick … I was in prison … and you came to me.” And then the song of Mary:  “He will put down the mighty from their thrones, exalt those of low degree, fill the hungry with good things, and send the rich empty away.” Ted and Vicki Kennedy carefully chose those readings for this solemn and special occasion, and the whole nation listened to them.

Then I watched the greatest collection of national political leaders in decades from both political parties — 60 senators, countless congressional members, and four presidents — hug each other in the passing of the peace. Then they came forward to receive the body and blood of Christ, as cellist Yo-Yo Ma accompanied Placido Domingo in Cesar Franck’s “Panis Angelicus.”  I started changing the channels then, just to see who was watching. CNN, MSNBC, FOX!, NBC, CBS, ABC, and FOX again! were all tuned in to the Mass. Who could have brought about such a thing — a man with serious personal flaws who had experienced great pain in his life, who had been the greatest political lightning rod of his time, and who had, nonetheless, been the most successful senator both in forging a list of accomplishments like no other, and in bringing people together from both sides of the political aisle.

The Kennedy children’s prayers followed for grandpa, Uncle Teddy, or just “Teddy” — articulately summing up his life’s work and mission, and calling us to the same vision and values. As a father, the most emotional moment for me, and for many others, was when Ted Kennedy Jr. recounted a story about his dad helping him up a very icy hill with a sled, just after the 12-year-old’s leg was amputated. “I know you can do it,” he tearfully recounted his father’s words. “I know you can do it. There is nothing that you can’t do. We’re going to climb that hill together, even if it takes us all day.” I would ask each of you to read that very touching story right now, even before reading the rest of this piece.

Ted Kennedy’s now-grown son concluded, “He was not perfect; far from it. But my father believed in redemption and he never surrendered. Never stopped trying to right wrongs, be they the results of his own failings or of ours.” Doris Kearns Goodwin quoted Hemingway in saying “Everyone is broken by life. But afterward, many are strong in the broken places.” And she said of Ted Kennedy, “he had absorbed his broken places.” A letter was read at the private burial service at the end of the day, back at Arlington, that the dying Ted Kennedy had asked President Obama to give to Pope Benedict when the president visited the Holy Father earlier this spring. In the letter, Kennedy humbly asked the pope to pray for him as his health was declining and he was preparing for “the next passage of life.” It read, “I know that I have been an imperfect human being, but with the help of my faith I have tried to right my path.”

President Obama’s remarks at the funeral were almost pastoral in their tone, and one could feel the emotion he was feeling for himself and the whole country as he spoke of the loss we had suffered and the qualities of the senator, the father, the husband, the family rock, the colleague, and the friend that we would all now so sorely miss. He spoke both of the long list of public accomplishments that will likely gain Ted Kennedy recognition as the greatest senator in American history, but also, again, of the human weaknesses of the man, and how his beloved wife, Vicki, had likely “saved him,” something that everyone, including Ted Kennedy, seemed to agree with.

Obama was almost nostalgic for an earlier time in Washington, where adversaries still saw each other as patriots and political enemies still respected and even liked each other as friends. Sen. John Kerry remarked that although another Bostonian, former House Speaker Tip O’Neill, famously said that “all politics are local,” Ted Kennedy taught us that “all politics are personal.” Story after story came from people Kennedy had touched in just that way — by doing so many countless things so very personally for them.

And from this weekend, I received a final insight: that the roles of being a prophetic advocate who stands passionately for social justice, and the vocation of being a bridge-builder and convener who brings diverse people together are not, perhaps, so mutually exclusive after all. Most people tell me they are, but feeling called to both, I have often struggled to reconcile them. But here was Ted Kennedy, the fiercest fighter for the poor and vulnerable in the U.S. Senate over the last half-century and yet when fellow senators on both sides of the aisle were asked who they most wanted to work with, it was always him. Why? Because they liked him, he never let his sometimes profound disagreements keep him from caring personally about them. He was a man of his word, and he was lots of fun!

As many remarked over the course of this amazing weekend, Ted Kennedy was the classic American success story who, though sorely tested by adversity and plagued by his own moral shortcomings, found a way to overcome his personal flaws and pain to achieve extraordinary things. But Kennedy was even more than that. His life was also the classic Christian story of redemption, of being saved from sin by faith, grace, and love, and by being faithful to the commands of Christ: “As you have done to the least of these, you have done to me.” As the casket of Edward Moore Kennedy climbed up the hill toward his final resting place next to the eternal flame at Arlington National Cemetery, one could almost hear those words of Jesus, “Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world, for I was hungry and you gave me food.” Rest in peace, ye flawed, faithful, and redeemed warrior for the kingdom of God.

Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • letjusticerolldown
    "I received a final insight: that the roles of being a prophetic advocate who stands passionately for social justice, and the vocation of being a bridge-builder and convener who brings diverse people together are not, perhaps, so mutually exclusive after all. Most people tell me they are, but feeling called to both, I have often struggled to reconcile them."

    Maybe your experience is more one of paradox than of conflict. Was Jesus a uniter or a divider? Does the truth unite or divide. Is conflict sometimes the path to peace?

    Hold onto your calling! Treasure the paradox--it is a fundamental piece of your calling. Let wisdom be born in the 'long obedience' of what seems divergent callings. It will be a wisdom that has found a much deeper level of both the prophetic and bridge-building call through the willingness to engage paradox.
  • ando
    "I have never really trusted those who are intolerant and condemning of other people’s shortcomings. It makes me suspect they are likely hiding their own."

    Isn't this the same Jim Wallis who loves to skewer conservatives!? Talk about hypocrisy. I will be waiting with bated breath to hear a Jim Wallis eulogy of a conservative on a par with this one. Principle over politics...I don't think so.
  • Wallis was actually very charitable toward Falwell -- who had insulted him directly -- on this very website upon Falwell death. And you best believe that he will lionize Billy Graham when he meets his reward.
  • ando
    I heard an interview with Billy Graham where he considered himself a Democrat. I don't that one will work. Try somebody else.
  • Billy Graham is a Southerner, and when he was coming up virtually all Southerners were Democrats -- the Republican Party was virtually non-existent in the South until the 1960s. Unlike most, however, he found no need to change his registration.
  • Good example to the contrary (and I agree with you about Graham), but that doesn't disprove his point. Wallis is on record oftentimes saying he doesn't like Sarah Palin, John McCain, and typically does talk down to conservatives.
  • I never once heard Wallis denounce McCain. When he criticizes conservatives, however, it's not just because he disagrees with their policies, although he does -- it's more their arrogance and unwillingness to work with those who disagree with them, and in fact he's right about that. Contrary to what people may believe, he's not at all being divisive; he's only exposing the divisiveness that has already existed for over 30 years. (Similar to the things MLK Jr. was accused of during the civil-rights movement.)
  • Eric77
    When he criticizes conservatives, however, it's not just because he disagrees with their policies, although he does -- it's more their arrogance and unwillingness to work with those who disagree with them, and in fact he's right about that.

    At times I think Wallis is right about that too. It still doesn't explain the odd statement that Wallis made - that he doesn't trust people who condemn other people's shortcomings. People's shortcomings are condemned all the time on this blog.
  • It still doesn't explain the odd statement that Wallis made -- that he doesn't trust people who condemn other people's shortcomings.

    Well, when you consider that the people who do that gained power in the first place by scapegoating others in that fashion, I think he's standing on solid ground. For example, "bashing 'big government'" -- which, essentially, is code for using the political process to help the poor -- was in vague in the 1980s and used for the sake of polarization, and I personally denounced that. More to the point, if you identify yourself as a Christian your faith was questioned; five years ago Wallis published on this very blog an insult that Falwell had delivered -- that he was "as evangelical as an oak tree."
  • Eric77
    It sounds like what you're saying is that its not inconsistent for Wallis to say he doesn't trust people who condemn other people's shortcomings even though he, himself, condemns other people's shortcomings because the people he's condemning (even though he never names who they are in his piece above) gained power by condemning other people's shortcomings. So basically, it's not inconsistent because it's a tit for tat thing.
  • No -- the conservatives use the "shortcomings" of others for the sake of the kind of power that Wallis doesn't have or seek, all the while ignoring their own; examples are far too many to mention here. I remember well the 1980 general election campaign, which from the Republican side was pretty nasty (the Democrats never knew what hit them); things simply haven't changed because, frankly, they won with it. They got upset with Bill Clinton only because he wouldn't go down like the rest.

    A conservative columnist for my newspaper bashed Ted Kennedy this week for his role in the Robert Bork SCOTUS hearings, blaming him for the bitter partisanship we see today. The piece, however, ignored Bork's consistent record of overt judicial activism, and after he lost Bork even suggested that the U.S. pass a Constitutional amendment that would allow a super-majority of both houses of Congress to overrule any SCOTUS decision. (And then the conservatives have the audacity to accuse "liberals" of such.)
  • Eric77
    You're making a distinction that Wallis never made - between those who condemn other's shortcomings to gain personal power and those who condemn other's shortcomings for other reasons. Perhaps this was Wallis' distinction and would explain his inconsistency, but he never said this, so it's only surmising on your part.
  • That's the overriding context to whatever Wallis writes; I don't have time to go back and document everything. It's one thing to admit to your shortcomings, as Kennedy does in his upcoming posthumous memoirs, and virtually everyone knows what they are. OTOH, it's another thing entirely to disregard them, to react defensively to any whiff of criticism while slamming enemies all over the place for disagreeing with an ideological agenda -- that's just what Palin does consistently.
  • lumens
    Nobody is arguing whether it's right or wrong to point out shortcomings. The point is that Wallis is saying he doesn't trust people who do as he does.

    That's hypocrisy, pure and simple.
  • That's not what he was taking about. More to the point, he was talking about people who made themselves into household names with sheer demagoguery, throwing red meat to a hateful, spiteful audience and, in some cases, telling them outright whoppers and refusing to be confronted about them. Sorry if you don't think that's legitimate.
  • lumens
    He was pretty clearly talking about those who criticized Kennedy for his shortcomings. Nothing else makes sense in this context. Wallis does the same. Again, hypocrisy.
  • calledme
    And on and on it goes...you skewer Jim Wallis and become guilty of the same thing you accuse him of.

    That whole speck in someone else's eye vs. the log in our own gets so inconvenient sometimes -- the minute we accuse someone else of some shortcoming we generally are doing the same thing we criticize.

    And just an aside -- just once, I would love to see a challenge to our perspectives of Christianity and social justice go anywhere -- anywhere -- besides arguments about who should rule the country -- liberals or conservatives. In the end, I don't even think our political affiliation will be anywhere on the list of questions Jesus poses to us.
  • ando
    calledme,

    Are you criticizing only the critics of Jim Wallis? He set himself up for this by attempting to turn Ted Kennedy into a saint. Perhaps the whole blog was a useless exercise on both sides...
  • calledme
    No, I'm using the criticism of Jim Wallis as an example. There is no hidden agenda here.

    Thoughtful reflection even with opposing opinions isn't a useless exercise. Reading a blog and commenting only about how much you dislike the author does strike me as pretty useless.

    Whether or not I agree with Jim Wallis, it's just nice to reflect on something positive without poisoning it by trying to find flaws 'cause you despise the author.
  • lumens
    "That whole speck in someone else's eye vs. the log in our own gets so
    inconvenient sometimes -- the minute we accuse someone else of some
    shortcoming we generally are doing the same thing we criticize."

    I don't have a problem with pointing out people's shortcomings, and don't
    claim to. So, no, I'm not doing that which I criticize.

    "And just an aside -- just once, I would love to see a challenge to our
    perspectives of Christianity and social justice go anywhere -- anywhere --
    besides arguments about who should rule the country -- liberals or
    conservatives."

    So would I. That's why I bought Wallis' book in the first place. Alas,
    this organization isn't about that.
  • calledme
    So if you dislike Wallis's book and find it a great disappointment, why not switch to a blog from which you get some good feelings?

    You make criticism of others sound like an intramural sport where the most powerfully insults win.
  • lumens
    "So if you dislike Wallis's book and find it a great disappointment, why not
    switch to a blog from which you get some good feelings?"

    I don't visit blogs or glean political opinions for the purpose of "getting
    some good feelings". The name of this blog (and the book) is God's
    Politics, as in, these are the politics of God.

    "You make criticism of others sound like an intramural sport where the most
    powerfully insults win."

    I don't know what you are referring to, here. Jim Wallis unleashes plenty
    of insults. Does it give you good feelings when he does that?
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertise here
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008