The Coat of Many Colors

The story of Joseph is one of the best known stories in the Bible (Genesis 37-50) and in the Quran.  Every Jewish and Muslim child and every Sunday school student is familiar with it.  Andrew Lloyd Weber and Tim Rice made the story known to an even wider audience a few years ago in their popular operetta Joseph and the Technicolor Dreamcoat.  

The story began in today’s Palestine, Syria and Israel around 1650 BC.  Joseph was the 11th of 12 sons of a nomad named Jacob and his second wife Rachel.  Jacob doted on Joseph because Joseph was a product of his old age and the firstborn of his beloved Rachel.  (Rachel also gave birth to second son, Benjamin). Joseph was spoiled.  This was demonstrated when his father gave him that coat of many colors. His ten “half” brothers were jealous, not only of the many colored coat, but offended even more by Joseph’s arrogance and egoism (he had weird dreams that always put him on top of everybody else).

The “half” brothers took revenge by selling Joseph as a slave to a passing caravan.  They faked his death by rubbing goat’s blood into the coat of many colors and thought that would be the end of the story.  But it wasn’t.  

Joseph got to Egypt somehow or another and became an important figure, interpreting the dreams of the Pharaoh, and eventually became Prime Minister.  There was a famine in the land and Joseph’s “half” brothers needed food.  They went down into Egypt to get it.  There they discovered their brother.  Joseph gave them food, but told them that on their next visit they must bring Benjamin, Rachel’s second son, who had remained at home.  (I’m trying to make a long story short.  Jacob and his family, at Joseph’s invite, finally moved to Egypt. That’s how, years later, the Hebrews became slaves there, but that’s another story).

Now when Joseph told his brothers the terms of their receiving further help to save them and their families from the famine in their country (they must bring their younger brother Benjamin) he said, in words that God may be speaking to us today:  “Except you bring your brother with you, you shall not see my face.”

It seems to me that is the most important part of the whole story.  You must bring your brother with you.  It echoes an earlier question posed in the Book of Genesis when God inquired of Cain:  “Where is your brother?”  “Am I my brother’s keeper?” Cain responded.  “Yes” seems to be the divine answer and that answer is reiterated in the story of Joseph. “Except you bring your brother with you, you shall not see my face.”  We must bring our brothers and sisters (as varied as that coat of many colors) with us!

"It was King’s dream to build what he called “the beloved community” in America—a society based on simple justice that values the dignity and the worth of every human being." (John Lewis)

The Dangers of Growing Tired

Just a few days ago we as a people celebrated our nation’s independence from tyranny.  That happened only two hundred and forty-three years ago—a very short time in the scheme of things.  Democracy is not an easy road.  There are many twists and turns, obstacles and road blocks.  Democracy requires the participation of a committed and educated people who “mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor.”  Without that kind of “mutual” dedication, that kind of commitment, a democracy cannot endure.  History tells us this is so.

The city of Athens lived under a radically democratic government from 508 BC to 322 BC.  It endured for only 186 years.  In those years the people governed themselves—there was no legislative representation—the people debated and voted on all the issues.  They had checks and balances and despite its moments of imprudence, injustice, and indecision, it was a remarkable experiment.  But it only lasted for 186 years—and then the people became tired, lost the vision and without a vision (a dream, an understanding, a commitment) the people perish.

I think it was Winston Churchill who wrote something to the effect that the test of a nation is what it can do when it is tired.  Are we in our American democracy so tired, fatigued, exhausted, weary, and drained that we no longer care about those democratic ideals set down in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution?  Are we content with lies, people-bashing, arrogance, and division?  The test for America today is what we can do as a “tired” people.  Have we decided against the truth and caved in?   Alfred the Great warned, “Power is never a good, except he be good that has it.”

One of the biggest dangers at the moment besides what seems to be our “tiredness” (which causes us to sleep through all that is eating away at our democracy) is the attempt to politicize our military.  We honor those who serve in uniform, but we also, with our founding fathers, worry about a “standing army,” especially one that becomes politicized.  In 1787, James Madison, (sometimes called the “Father” of our Constitution) warned the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on the dangers of a permanent army.  “A standing military force with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty.”  

Let us not become so tired that we no longer care about the character, the behavior, and the honor of an “overgrown Executive!”

Brightly beams our Father's mercy from his lighthouse evermore 

But to us he gives the keeping of the lights along the shore 

Let the lower lights be burning, send a gleam across the wave 

Some poor fainting struggling democracy, you may rescue you may save

Every Child is “The Child”

When Howard Thurman was growing up (1899-1981) in Daytona, Florida, the city did not provide public education for black children beyond the seventh grade (there were only three public high schools for black children in the entire state).  Fortunately Thurman had a cousin who offered him room and board in exchange for chores so that he could attend the Florida Baptist Academy in Jacksonville and continue his education.  

Are you familiar with Howard Thurman?  He was a Christian clergyman, an author, philosopher, theologian and civil rights leader.  He was a mentor to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and many others, including me.  In his little 100-page book, Jesus and the Disinherited, he asks “What does our religion say to the poor, the disinherited, the dispossessed?” In another book, The Mood of Christmas, he wrote:  “Every child is The Child, the one with whom God is well pleased.  Every mother is a treasure to be treated with dignity and care so that she knows she carries a new possibility for the human race.”  This, he implied, is the teaching of Jesus and it is what religion ought to be saying to the poor, the disinherited, the dispossessed.  (Who are the poor, the disinherited, the dispossessed in our time?)

“Every child”—whether black, brown, or white, every child whether born in El Salvador or Yemen, whether citizen or migrant—“every child is The Child, the one with whom God is well pleased.”  For me, it follows:  every person “is a treasure to be treated with dignity and care,” so that each person knows she/he carries a new possibility for the human race.   

Harry Emerson Fosdick wrote in his autobiography, For The Living of These Days, that many people thought public schooling was an infringement upon individual rights and gave a gratuitous education to those “who are better suited to their station without it,” and that it would “not meet the nation’s real need for an adequate reserve of laborers who could very well dispense with education.”  In fact, in those early days, public schools were considered a form of “creeping socialism.”  Sound familiar?

A prominent educator in the early 1900’s  heard Susan B. Anthony make a speech.  “Miss Anthony,” he said to her afterward, “that was a magnificent address.  But I must tell you that I would rather see my wife or my daughter in her coffin than hear her speaking, as you did, before a public assembly.”  Is it possible the very same attitude continues to be expressed today?  Have we moved any at all?

What does our religion say to a young Howard Thurman today, to the children in Clint and El Paso, Texas, to women, to health care as a human right, and to underpaid teachers in our public schools?  

The 98 Percent Also Serve

I’m not quite as exuberant as John Adams was on this day in July 1776, but I am celebrating that historical moment—the birth of American independence and the eventual formation of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.”  Adams proclaimed that this day, July 4th, ought to be commemorated, “as the day of deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty.”  I agree whole-heartedly.  Thank God for America in spite of all its flaws and plead for God to mend them--every one of them!  Adams also thought the day “ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shows, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and illumination from one end of the continent to the other from this time forward and forever more.”  He didn’t mention family barbecues in the back yard and a beer or two, but if he were with us now, I know he’d support the barbecue—I’m not so sure about the beer!

We hear a great deal these days about the one percents.  One percent of our American population have a household income above $434,458.  Another nine percent of the population aren’t doing badly with a household income above  $179,000.  That leaves ninety percent of the population making less.  

Another one percent of that ninety percent serve in the United States military.  Donald Trump wants to honor that one percent today with his “Salute to America.”  There is nothing wrong with that except for the fact that we have other holidays to honor our military.  The Fourth of July is about our independence from tyranny, as demonstrated in the summer of 1776, when some colonists celebrated the birth of independence by holding mock funerals for King George III, as a way of symbolizing the end of the monarchy’s  tyrannical hold on America.  (I’m not suggesting we do that now).

What I want to say is that the birth of our independence was not for just the top one percent, or the top 10 percent, or the military one percent—but for all the people regardless of income and regardless of whether or not they ever served or are serving in the military.  

Retired four-star general Stanley McChrystal pointed this out in an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper this week when he suggested that the values of citizenship and service could also be observed by honoring Peace Corps volunteers.  On Independence Day there can be no honoring of the one percent (no matter how much our military deserves such honor) or of the one percent at the top in terms of income.  

We often speak of the military these days as giving us our freedoms.  This is a fallacy.  Thomas Jefferson was not in the military, neither was John Adams or Thomas Paine, but they served and built the foundation upon which our independence was born and on which it depends.  Teachers, pastors, priests, professors, fire departments, ambulance services, doctors, nurses, writers, artists, technicians of all kinds and types, community organizations (the list is endless) also serve in providing us our independence.  

The Fourth of July is for the 100 percent!  It is to honor our independence, our national life—an independence provided by all citizens, because all citizens serve in a government “of the people, by the people and for the people.” 

The Fourth of July Parade

The weeds had to be pulled in the family garden before the Owens’ kids were allowed to go to the Fourth of July parade.  Unless, of course, we happened to be participants in the parade—the Elementary school “Drum and Bugle Corps,” or perhaps the High school Band.  Oh, it was a grand parade!  The local school bands, the fire trucks, the American Legion, and other groups made it grand—and it felt to us like:  “Seventy-six trombones led the big parade, With a hundred and ten cornets close at hand.  They were followed by rows and rows of the finest virtuosos, the cream of ev’ry famous band.”  Normally the big day ended with a fireworks display at the local airport.  Yes, I remember the Fourth of July in our little town.

I also remember back then, seeing, hearing and reading about other parades in scary places like the old Soviet Union, China and North Korea.  It was scary because we often practiced a drill at school as to what we would do if one of those nations dropped a bomb on us (and from the parades we knew they had those bombs).  These parades featured the military—hundreds, even thousands of armed troops marching, large contingents of armored vehicles, bombs and missiles and military airplanes flying overhead.  Hitler also had such parades. It seems to be the “thing” for authoritarian nations—tyrants threatening their adversaries with overwhelming military might.  These types of parades also serve as instruments of domestic repression. 

Military parades continue to this day in China—in a 2017 parade marking the 90th anniversary of the Chinese Army there were over 100 planes flying and about 600 different types of weapons displayed.  North Korea likes parades, too.  In a 2018 parade,  KIm Jong Un had hundreds of military jets shooting out fireworks, along with thousands of troops and military hardware.  (They must have sound infrastructure in Russia, China and North Korea, because their parades include “moving” tanks).   Saudi Arabia also has a military parade with one of its major features being demonstrations of the military’s  “spectacular explosions.” 

I don’t like military parades.  I don’t think such parades represent the values of this nation and it seems to me to degrade the Fourth of July emphasis of independence.  I stand with retired four-star Army General Stanley McChrystal who recently suggested that the values of citizenship and service could also be observed by honoring Peace Corps volunteers.  “Tanks, planes, they are things, they are not the sinew of the nation.”  Donald Trump’s “Salute to America” misses the point (in fact, changes the meaning) of Independence Day.

Sand Sculpture

Why the Fly Theology

I recall our son Luke, when quite small, asking his first theological question.  “Why,” he asked me, “did God create the mosquito?” I had a ready answer.  God made the mosquito to feed the bats!  My answer did not stifle Luke’s curiosity.  “Does God care more for the bats than for us?  Why does God have the mosquito feed on me before the bats get to it?”  Why, indeed, did God create the mosquito?

Mark Twain asked the same question about the fly in his essay, “Thoughts of God:”  

“How often are we moved to admit the intelligence exhibited in both the designing and the execution of some of His (God’s) works. The planning of the fly was an application of pure intelligence, morals not being concerned.  No one of us could have planned the fly, not one of us could have constructed him; and no one would have considered it wise to try, except under an assumed name.  It is believed by many that the fly was introduced to meet a long-felt want.  In the course of ages, for some reason or other, there have been millions of these persons, but out of this vast multitude there has not been one who has been wiling to explain what the want was.  At least satisfactorily.  A few have explained that there was need of a creature to remove disease-breeding garbage; but these being then asked to explain what long-felt want the disease-breeding garbage was introduced to supply, they have not been willing to undertake the contract.

There is much inconsistency concerning the fly.  In all the ages he has not had a friend, there has never  been a person in the earth who could have been persuaded to intervene between him and extermination; yet billions of persons have excused the Hand that made him—and this without a blush.  Would they have excused a Man in the same circumstances, a man positively known to have invented the fly?…  

When we reflect that the fly was not invented for pastime, but in the way of business; that he was not flung off in a heedless moment and with no object in view but to pass the time, but was the fruit of long and pains-taking labor and calculation, and with a definite and far-reaching purpose in view; that his character and contact were planned out with cold deliberation; that his career was foreseen and fore-ordered, and that there was no want which he could supply, we are hopelessly puzzled, we cannot understand the moral lapse that was able to render possible the conceiving and the consummation of this squalid and malevolent creature.”…Who made the fly?  The mosquito? And Why?

A Tidbit of History Can Go A Long Way

I’m impressed by several Facebook posts in recents days regarding “history.”  So many ignore history—being concerned only with the present—the now.  It is history that helps us understand change and how our present day society and world has been shaped by those changes.  History is really inescapable because the past causes the present, and thus our future.  Just a tidbit of history can go a long way in helping us understand our world.

The first tidbit of history showed up on a Facebook post about homosexuality in the Bible.  The person posting was flabbergasted to learn that there was no word in ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek for “homosexual” or “homosexuality.”  (These words weren’t invented until the end of the 19th century when psychology began to discover and understand sexuality as an essential part of the human personality).  How then, this person wondered, does the word “homosexual” show up in the 1946 Revised Standard Version of the Bible?  Now, that little bit of history (you can read further about it online) seems to suggest that the use of the word “homosexual” was more an ideological and cultural thing than it was a “translation,” especially since there is no word for “homosexual” in either ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek.  Little bits of history can go a long way—affecting attitudes and beliefs.  The important thing is, to know the “tidbit of history” which can help in getting to the truth.

This doesn’t mean that homosexuality was not known in the ancient world.  Jesus must have been aware of it,  and yet, as Jimmy Carter recently pointed out, Jesus never said a word about it.  “In all his teachings about multiple things — he never said that gay people should be condemned.”

Another little bit of history showed up on several Facebook posts about whether or not our nation was founded upon Christianity as many people seem to insist these days.  Just a few tidbits of history prove just the opposite—especially when these bits of history are the very words (thoughts) from the lips of our founding fathers.  Tidbits of history can go a long way to help us understand and become aware of a few kernels of truth.