Connor Coyne

So I wrote the following letter as a response to Glenn Beck’s recent call for Christians to renounce any church, congregation, or parish that calls for “social justice” or “economic justice” because they are code words for “nazism” and “communism.”

First, let’s be honest; Glenn Beck is a straw man. His arguments are patently absurd, and he’s only dangerous because of his significant reach and influence. He is not representative of most religious Americans or even of most conservative religious Americans. Ordinarily, I wouldn’t waste my time writing someone so entirely devoid of reason and consistently unwilling to listen.

In this case, however, I felt it important to respond not only because the equation of progressive liberalism with regimes espousing eugenics, political purges, and genocide to be offensive and horrid… I felt that it was even more important to respond because there’s a deep and wrenching miscalibration in the way religious conservatives interpret and apply the Bible today. This may be unintentional, and in some cases it may not be conscious, but in effect it is ultimately self-serving. We don’t want to be made to give; we want to keep, and maybe to give of our own initiative. But how many of us do this? Not many. And many many others hunger and thirst as a result. This problem is the ethical struggle of a progressive and liberal Christianity. One of the most enduring themes of history is that the wealthy are always loathe to part with their wealth, but the enduring theme of religion in general, and Christianity in particular, is that wisdom and salvation almost always require such relinquishment.

So the letter I wrote below has been building up inside me for a long time, and it is a bit lengthy and quote heavy. The argument is very simple and direct. It is robust because its source material is robust. Unlike most Biblical arguments which might seem alien to our modernized, mechanized world, or which are based on a singular scriptural passage of difficult interpretation, the passages on poverty and social justice are numerous, and the problems today are similar to what they were millennia ago. I have never heard an argument adequate to counter what I’m claiming here:

---

Dear Mr. Beck,

Hi! I’m a Christian and I’m involved in social justice. In fact, giving aid to the poor is one of the least ambiguous points of the Bible. It comes up over and over, in book after book, and unlike passages referring to homosexuality or the social role of women, the message is easily interpreted from Genesis to Revelations. When you say that Christians should leave their churches if the churches espouse “social justice” as a code word for “communism” or “nazism,” you’re effectively asking Christians to renounce their Christianity.

A few quotes to support my point here.

Is social justice addressed in the Pentateuch? Check.

Deut. 15:11: The needy will never be lacking in the land; that is why I command you to open your hand to your poor and needy kinsman in your country.

(There are many other statements like this…)

Historical Books? Check.

1 Sam. 2:8: He raises the needy from the dust; / from the ash heap he lifts up the poor, / To seat them with nobles / and make a glorious throne their heritage.

(There are many other statements like this…)

Wisdom Books? Check.

Ps. 82:3-4: Defend the lowly and fatherless; render justice to the afflicted and needy. Rescue the lowly and poor; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.

Pro. 22:22: Injure not the poor because they are poor, nor crush the needy at the gate; for the Lord will defend their cause, and will plunder the lives of those who plunder them.

(There are many other statements like this…)

Is social justice addressed by the Prophets? Boy, is it ever!

Is 10:2: Woe to those who enact unjust statutes and who write oppressive decrees, Depriving the needy of judgment and robbing my people’s poor of their rights, Making widows their plunder, and orphans their prey!

Jer 5:26-28: For there are among my people criminals; like fowlers they set traps but it is men they catch. Their houses are as full of treachery as a bird-cage is of birds; Therefore they grow powerful and rich, fat and sleek. They go their wicked way; justice they do not defend By advancing the claims of the fatherless or judging the cause of the poor.

Ez 16:49: The people of the land practice extortion and commit robbery; they afflict the poor and the needy, and oppress the resident alien without justice.

(There are many, many, many other statements like this…)

And then there’s this SOCIALIST gem from the Acts of the Apostles:

Acts 4:32: The community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they had everything in common.

Letters of Paul? Check!

Gal 2:10: Only, we were to be mindful of the poor, which is the very thing I was eager to do.

(There are other statements like this…)

Other New Testament letter? Yup!

James 2:5-6: Listen, my beloved brothers. Did not God choose those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom that he promised to those who love him? But you dishonored the poor person.

(There are other statements like this…)

And what about the gospels? What does Jesus say about helping the poor?

Luke 18:18-24: An official asked him this question, “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus answered him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. You know the commandments, ‘You shall not commit adultery; you shall not kill; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness; honor your father and your mother.’” And he replied, “All of these I have observed from my youth.” When Jesus heard this he said to him, “There is still one thing left for you: sell all that you have and distribute it to the poor, and you will have a treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” But when he heard this he became sad, for he was very rich.

Matt 7:12: Do to others whatever you would have them do to you. This is the law and the prophets.

Matt 25:44-45: Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’ He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’

Now, as I understand it, Mr. Beck, you yourself are a Christian, or claim to be. If so, you may want to read the Bible (and I think the Book of Mormon would also support the points I’m making here). Sometimes things really are straightforward. My parish is helping people in Nicaragua and Afghanistan because… they’re hungry.

If you don’t get this, you either don’t understand Christianity, or you don’t care about it.

Sincerely,

Connor Coyne

It is also the feast of the three Archangels Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael.

You can read more about it here.

One of the wonderful ambiguities of religious tradition is the way that what may seem from the outside to be a simple “symbolic” allegory is, in fact, multivalent and complementary. Michael is most popularly considered as a warrior and in a military light. He led the angels against Satan and threw him from heaven. Yet earlier traditions associate Michael with curative powers and healing, and to this day he is the patron saint of the sick. This is conflated with the role of Raphael, whose name means “God has healed,” and who is cited in the book of Tobit which features miraculous healing. In that same book, Raphael accompanies Tobias on a great journey, which has caused him to be associated with travel and critical junctures. We might think that these qualities would be better suited to Gabriel, who is the messenger and angel of the Annunciation, who first proclaimed: “Hail Mary, full of grace…” But while Gabriel is both a traveler and a messenger, his own work does not stop there. Gabriel’s own name means “strength of the lord” and he has been associated with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

It would seem, then, that the qualities and roles of these three angels are somewhat mingled, and I believe that this is a reflection of the interaction of their themes in the real world. You cannot really separate testimony from struggle and from healing. They all combine and take each other on.

To step for a moment into a “political” issue, I want to consider the current health care debate here. It is political but it also touches on religion and spirituality. The Health Care debate might fall under the province of Michael, since it is a question of healing. But healing itself is a fight and a struggle; the body fights off infection. Right now we are in the midst of a great fight for the health of our nation, and too many Christians (and too many Catholics) are looking at the issue within the closely inscribed boundaries of their own self-interest. They may sincerely ascribe their views to concerns over abortion or patient rights, but these issues have been resolved for the discerning witness and listener. And isn’t that our responsibility? Isn’t that an aspect of the faith we are called to observe? To be a discerning witness?

So I call on my fellow Christians to consider the sharing of roles and responsibilities of these three angels, and to take a stand for the public option in today’s debate. This is a case where our faith must enter into the realm of politics, but the argument that faith should make, based on both tradition and scripture, is solidly on the side of robust reform.

Things are way different here from how they were when you were around.

Then again, maybe not so much.

A youngun’ is anyone who was not old enough to theoretically understand the significance of Kurt Cobain’s death in 1994. It doesn’t matter whether they actually do know or understand said death… however, they have to have been old enough (say eight or nine) to have had a conversation about this musician who made music that a lot of people liked, and he killed himself, and that’s that.

An elder is anyone who was old enough to theoretically understand the significance of James Brown’s performance at the Apollo in 1962. It doesn’t matter whether they actually do know or understand said performance… however, they have to have been old enough (say nine or ten) to have had a discussion about this musician who electrified an audience with a propensity to boo singers off stange, and brought about a whole new kind of music.

It’s interesting to me that the demarcations both result from music, and not from literature, politics, or science. But there it is.

This is what makes someone a youngun’ or an elder.