OPENING REMARKS ON THE MISSION OF THE CHURCH AND THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

TRINITY CHURCH, CONCORD, MASSACHUSETTS
22 FEBRUARY 2009
The Rt. Rev. Arthur E. Walmsley

We begin the season of Lent with Ash Wednesday, three days from now. The evening news on Tuesday will probably include a segment on the Mardi Gras parade in New Orleans, as that city continues to struggle with the impact of Hurricane Katrina, and the extravagant carneval in Venice, Rio de Janeiro and elsewhere. The name Mardi Gras literally means Fat Tuesday, a time of partying and feasting prior to the beginning of Lent which had its origins in mediaeval Europe. Globally, we are today in a sober time of belt-tightening, not an exuberant one of celebrating. If anything, the proper meal is a modest pancake supper in the parish house.

That is probably a good place to begin the six week discussion of the Millennium Development Goals in these forums. It is a great privilege to be the keynoter of the series, and I want to try to supply a rationale for why Christians are engaged in this agenda at all. Beginning next Sunday, you have a series of speakers with special expertise on the subject. Take advantage of the opportunity.

Think of the series this way: Does the global vision it represents speak with power to the current crises we face in the global economic meltdown, and to possible roles for Trinity Church as a parish and individually for you as Christian believers. Let me give a thumbnail history of the MDGs, and the experience of the Episcopal Church with this global initiative. In the year 2000 the United Nations convened a Millennium Summit. All 192 member nations pledged to commit themselves to eight specific goals, and to do so in a startlingly brief period -- by the year 2015 – to:

1) eradicate extreme poverty and hunger;

2) achieve universal primary education;

3) promote gender equality and empower women;

4) reduce child mortality;

5) improve maternal health;

6) reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases;

7) ensure environmental sustainability; and

8) develop a global partnership for development.

They did so by pledging 0.7 percent of their national budgets to the effort, and by calling on religious bodies and other non-governmental bodies to do the same. In the year 2000 and again in 2003, the Episcopal Church’s General Convention urged dioceses, parishes, and church members to do the same, pledging 0.7 percent of their resources (that’s less than 70 cents on every $100 to projects which seek to serve one or more of the goals.) More important than the money is the building of global relationships in a common effort. Partnership, not charity.

Beginning in 2002, four of us set out to create within the Episcopal a grass roots, bottom-up movement to respond; eventually we named it Episcopalians for Global Reconciliation. One of the founders, Harvard economist Richard Parker, will be here as part of the series, as will John Hammock, Lallie Lloyd, and Massachusetts priest Arrington Chambliss, who serve on its continuing Board. And next Sunday, Trinity is privileged to have Rob Radtke, President of Episcopal Relief and Development, our church’s nation agency supporting the MDGs financially. (There is more on the series in today’s bulletin).

More than three quarters of the dioceses have committed themselves to working on the goals, countless parishes large and small have done the same, as have individual members and their families. My wife Roberta and I recently looked at our charitable giving on our last year’s IRS form, and right behind our pledging to our parish and other church bodies, we recognized that something like 20.7% percent of our giving went to respond to needs identified by the MDGs. You might begin Lent and the exploration of this subject by doing your own family arithmetic.

If you think seriously about the eight goals today, they apply not only to Africa and other segments of the world confronted by massive suffering from hunger, disease, and lack of access to basic services. Eight years ago, that might have seemed a way of looking at the goals: rich nations, privileged people seeking to serve their most distressed global neighbors. Today, the global economic meltdown has propelled millions of people in every country, including our own, to face life below the poverty line and without meaningful access to one or many of the services the MDGs address. Katrina opened a window for many Americans how racism and poverty in New Orleans and Mississippi make those areas the equivalent of third world countries on our shores. Nick Morris-Kliment was good enough to send me a list of the outreach activities of Trinity Church; your priorities are clearly directed to a range of programs which target both overseas needs and others here at home.

It is important that we not treat the MDGS as some sort of supranational program foisted on the world by the United Nations. Rather, we face the challenge of radically reordering our own domestic life as well as our place in the world community. Call this a vision of a world restored and reconciled, a world of shalom, peace, a movement to redirect how the world understands and uses its resources. Recognize it for what it is: a vision at odds with those scenarios which describe the global reality as a clash of cultures, which pit people against one another in violent confrontation, which depend on a constantly-escalating arms race and a nebulous "war on terror" as the means to remain secure in a troubled world. A world in which the economic system has been manipulated by risky ventures which threaten the financial system with ruin. Is the vision of global collaboration hopelessly idealistic, or is it grounded in a hard-headed and realistic understanding on which the very survival of the human community may depend? Is it achievable? And how does it fit into your efforts and mine to live a dedicated Christian life, which is, after all, the emphasis of the Lenten season?

The vision of the Millennium Development Goals is not new. For people who draw their faith from the Bible, it is as old as scripture. What I want to do in the rest of these opening remarks is remind you of the Biblical mandate to serve God’s mission, how scripture offers us an understanding of the global crisis which has the potential to move us beyond the paralysis of the present to an affirmation and a way of being grounded in hope.1 This will, I trust, provide the undergirding for a more detailed discussion of the development goals which takes place over the next several Sundays.

The doorway to this understanding starts with Jesus. And as with him, it is important to begin where he began, with scripture. For him, that was of course the Hebrew scripture. Beginning more than a thousand years before his birth, a number of texts became definitive for Jews, notably the first five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch, which sought to establish the Torah, the Law. Then came the accounts, more or less historical, of the judges and kings of Israel. Beginning in the 7th century, the pronouncements of the various prophets were added to the generally accepted canon of readings. In addition are books which reflect spiritual struggle, like the Books of Psalms and other so-called wisdom literature.

For Israel, the defining event of its history was the Babylonian exile, a time of unrestrained grief and dislocation, of exile and persecution, which yet gave rise to the vision of an order of fulfillment, of community, and accountability. Isaiah declares the generosity of God as an encounter of a living God and a living people, in which all are invited to enjoy the rich abundance God had fashioned out of the preexisting void:

I am creating new heavens and a new earth; the past will not longer be remembered nor will it ever come to mind. . . The wolf and the lamb will feed together and the lion will eat straw like an ox. . .Neither hurt nor harm will be done in all my human mountain. (Isa. 65)

In short the Old Testament God yearns for the fulfillment of human community.

It is in this reality that Jesus begins his preaching, which he does powerfully and with no mincing of words. All four Gospels move quickly as they begin their accounts of the adult Jesus. His first sermon at Nazareth, right after his baptism in the Jordan River, is from another text from Isaiah (Isa 61):

The Spirit of the Lord God has taken control of me! The Lord has anointed me, and sent me to announce good news to the poor, to proclaim release for prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind; to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.

Jesus then rolls up the scroll, gives it back to the attendant, sits down. All eyes in the synagogue are fixed on him.

Today in your hearing this text has come true.

Initially, they marvel at how words of grace should fall from his lips. But not for long. He challenges their faith, and they turn on him, drive him out of town. And then the split begins, between those who come to see him as uniquely living out the promises of God and those who see someone undermining traditional Jewish values or stirring up the Roman authorities. Even his own mother and brothers come to him, questioning his sanity or at least his judgment. It then begins slowly to emerge among the growing band of his followers, that in him God has taken a decisive step in respect to the world. God has entered the world in our flesh, confronting in person the human sense of alienation and exile – Father, take this cup from me, he pleads, and from the Cross, My God, why have you forsaken me? Yet he takes there responsibility to bring about the healing and restitution for which the world longs. Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do. It is finished. Into your hands I commit myself.

The reality of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection is not a departure from the mission of reconciliation, justice, and peace entrusted to Israel. Jesus did not come to break down the Law but rather to fulfill it. In the text with which he began his preaching, in the extraordinary ways he reaches out to outcasts, the sick, the poor, those on the edges of society, he demonstrates solidarity with them. His is a living demonstration of God’s transforming power to bring together those who are separated, what some Liberation theologians in Latin America call God’s "preferential option for the poor."

We need to see, then, that the Old Testament vision is one of restoration and renewal, lived out in hope, as God’s mission to restore the creation through a public process that curbs the raw exercise of power. It is yet unfulfilled, the not-yet-future to be sealed by the sending of Messiah, the anointed one, who will be God’s sign of the deliverance from exile and alienation. Where Christians differ from their ancestors and partners in faith is that Jesus is the Christos, the anointed one:

For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. God sent the Son into the world not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him. (John 3:16-17)

When Jews are truest to their tradition, and we to ours, the promise of faith is not only that our personal lives are to be transformed by encounter with the living God, but that we are swept up into God’s mission for the creation, called to be bearers of the vision of a restored, reconciled world of shalom, peace as it is understood in scripture and in theological teaching through the centuries as the presence of justice and right order, not simply the absence of war and violence.

My friend, the late Bill Coffin puts it very well in a collection of his writings, titled Credo.

Credo – I believe – best translates "I have given my heart to," he begins. "However imperfectly, I have given my heart to the teaching and example of Christ. . . .To learn from one another and to work together towards common goals of justice and peace – this surely is what suffering humanity has every right to expect of believers of all faiths.2

No sermon on love can fail to mention love’s most difficult problem in our time – how to find effective ways to alleviate the massive suffering of humanity at home and abroad. What we need to realize is that to love effectively we must act collectively, and that in collective action personal relationships cannot ignore power relations. Until Christians learn this truth of a technological, complex world, we shall be in this world as lap dogs trying to keep up with the wolf pack.3

Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, describes the effect of Jesus’ self-emptying as creating

a pathway or an open door between earth and heaven that no turn of events in the world can ever again close. A place has been cleared where the act of God and human reality are allowed to belong together without rivalry or fear: the place where Jesus is. It is a place where human beings have only to be open to what is offered and where God demands nothing and imposes nothing but simply abides in unceasing love, a love that can only be imagined in the human world and human language in terms of vulnerability. It is thus a place where human competition means nothing; a place where the desperate anxiety to please God means nothing; a place where the admission of failure is not the end but the beginning; a place from which no one is excluded in advance.4

Which shall it be? People immobilized by fear, or people empowered by hope who dare to join together for the welfare of the globe, which is, after all, our own welfare writ large. Halfway through the last century, when the world was staggering through the Great Depression and later a devastating world war, a President foresaw the possibilities of both peace and justice, drawing on his faith as an Episcopalian. From it, Franklin Roosevelt had the political courage to conceive of the Four Freedoms, to support the creation of the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, to challenge the Congress to develop Social Security and other examples of a national social net. Our times are different but the challenges are remarkably similar. The eight areas of the Millennium Development Goals offer a means to understand global issues, and support and deploy resources to address them. That agenda must begin at the grass roots, the local level.

Roberta and I belong to a small congregation in New Hampshire. Holy Cross Church in Weare has a part-time Vicar and a budget of $90,000 a year. Two years ago, after several months studying the MDGs, the Vestry voted the 0.7 % asking, something over $600, and divided it between a micro-enterprise in Cameroon which makes loans to women, one objective of which is to provide the income to send daughters to school, the other a contribution to support a library and computer resources to a facility for young people in a township outside Capetown, South Africa. Both programs were started by lay persons from the Diocese. A small effort, perhaps, but one which has transformed the way our congregation thinks and prays about its part in God’s mission for the world.

That’s a good place to begin.