RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

‘Jim Wallis Loves His Enemies’ (With a Little Help From His Friends)

by Ryan Rodrick Beiler 03-19-2010

When a Fox News pundit who has helped force the resignation of White House advisers is promising he’ll be “hammering hard and all through the night, over and over,” it’s good to have some friends standing beside you. Friend #1: Don Miller, who posted this wonderful encouragement under the headline, “Jim Wallis Loves His Enemies”:

Jim was a guest in my home last year when he released his most recent book. I invited area pastors over for lunch, and Jim addressed them and took questions. A few conservatives grilled him but mostly it was a civil crowd. What I found in him, though, was an incredibly gentle spirit that was at peace with himself and his beliefs. He wasn’t self righteous or angry. Regardless of whether you believe the church should help the poor, or Christians should help the poor through government, what can’t be debated is that Wallis’ spirit of nonviolent resistance is working. My suspicion is that Beck will grow tired of attacking an innocent man and move on. And my other suspicion is that Wallis and the folks at Sojourners will only come out stronger. …

But I’m not writing this blog to say Jim Wallis is right, though I believe he is. I’m writing this blog because I want to join Jim Wallis in praying for Glenn Beck. Even as I type this I feel a love for the man. It’s hard to keep your ratings up, and saying shocking things is a way to do so. But Glenn Beck is a child of God, a man who God loves, and while I disagree with him about whether the church should perform acts of justice, I don’t hate him for it. I want to cross this bridge with Jim Wallis, and love my enemy. It’s a much more peaceful way to live.

Equally encouraging are the statements that have been made by figures often on the other side of Jim’s debates. An excellent summary by Christianity Today includes several key quotes from conservatives criticizing Beck’s comments on social justice:

Al Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, remarked, the controversy’s public nature resulted in “far more heat than light.” …

Mohler called comments like Beck’s “nonsense.” While he acknowledged that some have used the term “social justice” for political purposes or to distract from the gospel, Mohler said it is important to work for justice.

“The Gospel is not a message of social salvation, but it does have social implications,” said Mohler. “Justice is our concern because it is God’s concern.”

Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, told the Associated Baptist Press that if Beck were right, Christians would need to leave Southern Baptist churches. The Baptist Faith and Message statement calls Christians to make Christ supreme in both society and their individual lives.

Like Mohler, Land said there will be disagreements over the best ways to achieve social justice, but there should not be debate over social justice as a goal.

The CT article also cites the importance of the core issue at stake — the definition of “social justice” — and quotes an article by David Gushee of the New Evangelical Partnership for the Common Good:

Social justice consists of human acts to resist social injustice by repairing such distortions of human community. We work today for social justice when we seek to create religious and political communities characterized by more economic justice, less domination, less violence, and more inclusive community.

Jonathan Merritt writes along similar lines in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, deconstructing Beck’s conflation of social justice with socialism:

Beck fails to recognize the vast difference between social justice and socialism. Social justice is a principle that attempts to shape the way people treat others. Socialism is a paradigm that attempts to control the way people govern themselves. One can attempt to combat today’s individual and systemic injustices without being a socialist.

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, of which Beck is a member, have also been quick to distance themselves from his comments. Joanna Brooks writes:

Glenn Beck is a Mormon. So am I. During the nineteenth century, my Mormon ancestors crossed the plains to live their faith without fear of attack from the mobs that had hounded them out of Missouri and Illinois. Watching Glenn Beck threaten to “bring the hammer down” on another person of faith makes my stomach turn. I could cite a host of scriptures from the Bible and the Book of Mormon about how Beck’s attack on Jim Wallis is not in keeping with faith-based values. Suffice it to say, Glenn Beck does not speak for the Mormons I know.

Still others are questioning the Fox network’s role, as in this post by Burns Strider:

Personal attacks aren’t uncommon from partisan commentators, but what is especially troubling about this most recent development is that Glenn Beck isn’t just planning to throw insults; he said that he has been using his FOX staff to research everything that Rev. Wallis has ever said or done and to dig up dirt on the people who work with the pastor. I know Rev. Wallis both professionally and as a friend. I’ve watched him coach my son in Little League baseball and prayed with him for the strength and success of our great nation. Beck’s attacks are contextually fictitious to the point of being imaginary. It’s quite sad, actually. He’s about to overcook my grits. …

Does FOX agree with Beck’s statements and command that Catholics, Protestants, and Mormons leave their churches? Will FOX allow Beck to continue to use staff and FOX airtime to conduct his promised week-long campaign to discredit Rev. Wallis?

Well, at least one Fox News representative is pushing back on Beck … a little:

(And a very special thanks to the team at Media Matters, who watch all of these shows so we don’t have to.)

Ryan Rodrick Beiler is the Web Editor for Sojourners and a photographer whose work can be seen at www.ryanrodrickbeiler.com.

Categories: Faith and Politics
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)

  • justintime
    Rick, I know why my comment was removed.
    But your comment was harmless - I took no offense.


  • NC77
    "When a Fox News pundit who has helped force the resignation of White House advisers is promising he’ll..."

    I am wondering who those advisors are that were forced to resign. Do you really think Glen Beck has that much power over the White House?

    How did Glen Beck help force them to resign? Just curious.

    I will take a stab at the answer someone might respond with. Because of the lies that Glen Beck is spreading about those advisors they were forced to resign. If that is the answer, I have another question.
  • justintime
    Hey Deke,

    I do know there's a difference between government and church
    redistribution of wealth.
    But I just have to object to standard libertarian buzz phrases like,
    "government redistribution of wealth".
    Yes, my libertarian critique was removed, oh well.
    Libertarians can be touchy about their ideology.
    In fact I was blocked for a few days.
    I was thinking maybe that's probably for the best.
    God's Politics can be a serious time suck.
    But then, for mysterious reasons, a few days later, I was unblocked.

    Go back home?
    I'm always at home.
    Since the Dems passed HCR, I'm in great spirits,
    stocked up on popcorn, watching the GOP self destruct.
    Will.I.am did a brilliant number on Boehner, eh?
    Yes we can,

    justintime
  • One of the primary purposes of economics is to describe reality. So you're dismissing centuries of science because it doesn't agree with your ideology?

    Sorry, but calling economics "pure science" doesn't fly, especially since the numbers don't mean all that much because even they can be subjected to ideological factors. Besides, based on what you've written I would say that your faith is in economics, not in God.

    It's a matter of degree. Yes, all stores suffer from theft. Some suffer more than others. Those in poor neighborhoods suffer the most.

    I see more security tags in stores in suburban locations. And that shouldn't surprise you, because they're the places where people have money. Oh, and as for crime, the suburban shopping mall I frequent most often has a terrible problem with car theft -- but few people know that because it's covered up.
  • earleenechilders
    I would say this about the Social Justice comments to everyone, God is the only One who has the authority and the power to claim what True Justice is. We do not make good judges, no one has the understanding, knowledge and wisdom to define what true justice is. When we try to justify our ideas, we loose the whole of the truth. God is the Truth, no you or me.
  • I hope this backfires on Beck like healthcare reform will also hopefully do to the rabid Teabaggers--outting the hate that has propelled them and inducing the conscience of good people duped by charlatans like Beck.
  • fundamentalist
    Pastor Jeff: "...which of them is producing anything?"

    I disagree with the idea that the poor are undeserving of helpt. God never said give only to the deserving poor. However, because of the sinful nature of mankind, charity that enables destructive behavior can be more harmful than good. That is one of many reasons why private charity is better than state redistribution. Private charity knows more about the circumstances of the poor to whom they give their money.

    Buffet earned his billions by investing the savings of others wisely. He didn't coerce anyone to pay him. The investors who trusted their money to him paid him willingly for the service. I may not value Buffet's services, but others do very highly. The fact that I don't place any value on what Buffet does shouldn't mean that he isn't entitled to the money others give him who do value it. I don't value the services of most actors and pro athletes. But the point of "just price" theory is that people value differently things and those who produce what others value will earn the most.
  • fundamentalist
    BlueDeacon: "I reserve the right to disagree, primarily because much of what you've mentioned on this blog flies in the face of not only reality but the Scriptures."

    One of the primary purposes of economics is to describe reality. So you're dismissing centuries of science because it doesn't agree with your ideology? As for Scriptures, you just need to learn hermeneutics so that you can interpret it correctly.

    BlueDeacon:"Then explain slavery."

    Slavery is the opposite of a free market.

    BlueDeacon: "Why else do you think many stores have all these security devices on their items?"

    It's a matter of degree. Yes, all stores suffer from theft. Some suffer more than others. Those in poor neighborhoods suffer the most. In addition, the crimes in the vicinity of stores, such as drug dealing, discourage customers.
  • PASTOR JEFF
    The assumption that I question is that the poor are undeserving because they don't work as manifested in the "If any man doesn't work, do not let him eat" rejoinder. I appreciate your acknowledgement of the hard work of the poor. In a broader sense, I am questioning the concept of work=worth. If Warren Buffet "works" the securities markets, how is that more worthy than a poor person working the Social Services network? In economic terms, which of them is producing anything?
  • Economics is not physics, but it is as hard a science as biology or medicine. And it's the only science for commerce that we have. It's still a science whether you like it or not.

    I reserve the right to disagree, primarily because much of what you've mentioned on this blog flies in the face of not only reality but the Scriptures.

    Wages are prices and the Church determined centuries ago that the only just price is determined in a free market and any price determined in a free market is just.

    Then explain slavery.

    BlueDeacon: "retail stores (and I've worked in them) have high rates of theft regardless of where they're located."

    That's simply not true.

    Oh, but it is. Why else do you think many stores have all these security devices on their items? (And it happens in the 'burbs, too.)
  • fundamentalist
    Pastor Jeff: "We could probably start with the Forbes 500 if you want to start big...."

    This quoted started your list of people who don't "work." You're right that the poor work much harder for their income than do the rich, but both the Church and economic science determined about two centuries ago that it would be disastrous to society to reward people by the amount that they worked because that work encourage people to use slower, more labor intensive methods in production. For example, a ditch digger with a shovel works much harder than a ditch digger with a backhoe. Do we want to punish the worker with the back hoe and reward the one with the shovel simply because he works harder? I don't think so. The worker with the back hoe earns more because he is more productive, not because he works harder.

    The Church decided in the 1500's, long before economics became a science, that wages are a price and the just price is found in a free market; and if the price is determined in a free market it is just. Church scholars arrived at that after more than a millenium debating the "just price".
  • fundamentalist
    BlueDeacon: "Which is why I don't consider economics a hard science."

    Economics is not physics, but it is as hard a science as biology or medicine. And it's the only science for commerce that we have. It's still a science whether you like it or not. To disagree without even knowing the science isn't very enlightened.

    BlueDeacon: "Not true, especially when labor outstrips the available job openings."

    Yes, it is true, according to centuries of church doctrine. Wages are prices and the Church determined centuries ago that the only just price is determined in a free market and any price determined in a free market is just.

    BlueDeacon: "retail stores (and I've worked in them) have high rates of theft regardless of where they're located."

    That's simply not true.
  • And as I have written before, that flies in the face of econoic science. Education is a result of increasing wealth, not a cause. And contacts are not necessary, but if they were it would be a sign that the state had intervened in the economy and stopped the process of job creation, as it has in France, for example.

    Which is why I don't consider economics a hard science. It's a known fact that, in this country, the more education you have the more money you make. (Now, to be sure, certain high-earning occupations require a college education and even a graduate-level degree.)

    No one is exploited in a free market.

    Not true, especially when labor outstrips the available job openings.

    That's usually because the crime rate is so high.

    Again, suspect -- in general, retail stores (and I've worked in them) have high rates of theft regardless of where they're located. It's just that the stores in poorer neighborhoods don't have enough paying customers to keep them open.
  • fundamentalist
    jesusistheway: "Please cite personal examples where rich people don't work."

    If anyone wants to know about the rich, they should read the works of Dr. Thomas Stanley. His latest book is "The Millionaire Next Door." Dr. Stanley has made a career of studying the rich. According to him, 85% of millionaires/billionaires earned their wealth by growing a business. Almost all started out poor or middle class and it took them 30 years on average to grow their business to the point that it is worth $1 million.

    Only about 3% inherited their wealth and the other 2% are rock stars, pro athletes, CEO's, etc.

  • prgrs_ev
    I was a youngster during this era.  My father was a local GOP politician (we lovingly diverged later in life) and I was aware of McCarthy's activity from radio of which I was an avid listener (remember Gabriel Heatter?); we lived in rural upper Michigan and I don't think we grasped the total significance of his projected paranoia.  Thanks for the clarification.
  • Guest
    I'm assuming the ????? means that you did not understand the meaning of my original comment. If you were not alive during the early 50s (as I was), or perhaps if you were absent when the 1950s was discussed in your American History Class, then you missed the famous Joe McCarthy hearings in which he painted a number of loyal Americans as "Communist." He had the power of subpoena and people were basically scared shitless of him. his speciality was guilt by association. I simply borrowed one of his pet questions with which he regularly assaulted witnesses before his committee and applied it to the Democratic Party.

    McCarthy was eventually censured, but that era will be remembered at least partially for the excesses and abuse of power.
  • PASTOR JEFF
    In my line of work, I am continually running into them. JK
  • PASTOR JEFF
    In your and the venerable Fundy's words, there are too many to enumerate. We could probably start with the Forbes 500 if you want to start big then we could comb the halls of Congress move on to the entertainment industry (including media and televangelists) and finish off the introductory tour on Wall Street.
  • Jesusistheway
    Please cite personal examples where rich people don't work. People you know, how they got their money, etc. etc.
  • Jesusistheway
    WHERE did I even say that they're undeserving of help? I have not. In Guatemala, the overwhelming number of people in rural areas are victims of racism because they are people who descended from the Mayan culture. In Ethiopia and other parts of Africa many, many, many die because of malaria, lack of access to food or safe drinking water.

    The poor in this country are much more well-off relatively to the poor in the rest of the world. But, no, my piece was not about discrimination against anyone. But it is about how liberals have a one-size-fits all philosophy to solving problems: if somone's poor, it's because someone else is rich. Not necessarily the case. I can also cite personal cases where Mexican or other Latino families have come here, worked hard, and their children have excelled in school through perseverance and hard work. The families tend to stay together. The parents aren't looking out for themselves but rather their children first. That's ALWAYS the piece missing from Sojo blogs: the personal responsibility link to escaping poverty. So, indeed, let's feed the poor and clothe the naked. But let's also make sure that people work and take responsibility over their actions.
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