Freedom Song Friday: "We Are America" - Esperanza Spaulding's New Music Video Protests Guantanamo Bay

Esperanza Spaulding — Grammy Award-winning singer/songwriter — released a new video which levels its aims at Guantanamo Bay by raising awareness of the Guantanamo Bay inmate hunger strike, and pleads with Congress to shut down the prison. In her words:

What motivated you to start this whole project to begin with, what was the spark?
It was the first time I heard about the hunger strike. I was touring in Europe and I was appalled and embarrassed about what was happening. I remember I started researching online to see what I could do about it and I saw that I could download this action pack. With that you had some important info to use to call your representative. And I did, I did call my representative and Senators. In fact, I got a letter back from one Senator who basically said that she was not going to proactively deal with it but that they would ‘keep my comments in mind’, or something like that. But I really wanted to do more. And my band actually came to me first and said they wanted to do something too.

[Read more: ACLU.org | Hat Tip: Colorlines.com]

Some Thoughts About Non-Violence

By Rachel Hester

I was talking to one of my friends about the burden in my heart about my friend Michael going to the military, and I noticed that one of the other things that came up was how some people genuinely feel like G-d is calling them to go to the military.

My main concern for Michael's not going is his spiritual wellness, and whether if going to the military or not would advance or detract from the Kingdom being furthered. Michael, although he doesn't want to be in combat, feels like the Lord wants Him in combat. My friend Laurel was asking me questions such as, do i believe that Christians who are going to the military and feel like they are called to be there by the Lord, are disobeying the voice of G-d? Is it fair for us to say that refusing to support the military is against G-d, and that a voice that tells us to go to the military is definitely not the Lord's? Or could we consider that maybe the Lord may call us to the military for other purposes?

I think one thing that we can do is to talk to our brothers and sisters about it, and why they feel the way they do, and also pray for them.

I think because of the fact that non-violence is hardly ever talked about in church, we feel like we don't have any options when it comes to opposing violence, and I think that is why non-violence is often seen to be synonymous with passivity. Usually when I mention non-violence, I always receive at least one remark saying that the Lord calls us to brutal, ugly war. But, I have always thought that the war we face was more of a spiritual war, and that non-violence is part of that spiritual battle.

She also asked me, that if we believe in using non-violence in real life situations, what should we do? She believes that violence can be necessary in being able to defend ourselves, and that there is a time for everything. She gave me scenarios, such as if a group were to storm a brothel, and rescue women there, and if there were crazy men who were threatening to kill everyone, should we kill those men to defend the women?

I told her that I really didn't know what to do, but I believed that there must be another way, but perhaps we just haven't figured out another way yet. These are hard questions, and it is hard to think of such a situation where innocent people are being threatened and killed, and whether we can allow someone who may not understand why some of us choose not to be violent to be threatened, because of the fact that we do choose non-violence. It would be wonderful for us to have a way where we do choose not to be violent, but we can also say that we didn't choose to do nothing, because we did do something to defend these innocent people.

All I know is that non-violent love is definitely not a passive love. And I think that when Christians teach Christians about non-violence, that that is definitely something that needs to be mentioned. By no means, if a man is hungry, will we just pray and not do anything about it, but we will feed the man himself. There are times, where we use common sense, and we know that we are the answer to our prayers.

This is so complex. But, now I'm thinking about how we are told, that nothing is impossible for G-d.

My other concern is that Christ's turning the tables (in the Gospels) is often used as a way to defend violence. But, I think Christ's turning the tables and forcing people out of the temple is not to be confused with violence and showing a lack of mercy.

Perhaps it is our definition of what violence is that is unclear. I think violence is whatever causes folks to live apart from mercy and peace and encourages destruction and or self-destruction. How do you define violence? How does PFC define violence?

Laurel also argued that in the New Testament, when Christ returns, that he will be violent.  Since he'll be on horseback and wielding a sword, (she thinks) that he isn't about peace, but rather justice. I always thought that his justice would end in peace, but would require a lot of work. I don't know how I feel about assuming that his coming with a sword on horseback will result in violence and lack of mercy. I honestly don't know how I feel about this type of "coming back with sword on horseback" argument or rebuttal, as:

1. I'm not very educated on the book of Revelations and the way it is written and intended to be read, and

2. i know she's a huge fan of Mark Driscoll, and I typically don't know what to believe about some of the things he says about the character of G-d/Jesus. Furthermore, she said that as long as we live in a broken world, that violence will remain as a means of defense that we will have to resort to.

But I don't believe that we HAVE to resort to it. I do believe we can find another way, if Jesus did tell us to turn the other cheek. I feel like turning the other cheek is best explained by MLK's (statement, that) "We will wear you down with our love".

I told her that even the idea of applying non-violence in our lives as a means to follow Jesus Christ, is something that even I, which despite the fact that I want to believe that Jesus calls Christians to live in self-sacrificial love, cannot even fathom how non-violence makes sense, other than the fact that refusing to continue the pattern of violence may encourage others to put down the sword as well.

I think to follow Christ in a life of non-violence is something that requires a lot of faith and wisdom and lots of love.

I know that in the Old Testament, violent acts where done out of faith until Christ came and fulfilled the law and gave us all these new instructions. Paul even warns us later in the New Testament, that if we even have faith to move mountains, but have no love, that we are doing it in vain, and what we have is nothing.

Shouldn't our faith be motivated by love by power of the Holy Spirit? Because Christ has loved us, and shown his mercy to us, that we extend that to others, by committing to non-violence? Are we not to tell if our actions and decisions are of the Holy Spirit if they produce the fruits of the spirit, such as love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control – remembering “that against such things there is no law.” (Gal. 5:22-25)

I think that if we love our friends and enemies the same, that we will find that the non-violence, if done in love, will lead us to producing the fruits of the Holy Spirit.

I almost though, feel like believing that Christ calls us to non-violence in all situations, and not just certain situations, is seen to be very idealistic and unrealistic to most people. Maybe that is why it is such a hard topic.

I hope that my thoughts that I'm presenting can be productive, though. I really appreciate Laurel presenting to me these thoughts, as they really help me, too, and I hope they help you guys in being able to affirm what we believe, and have the courage to teach these ideas, with the ability to present common concerns and thoughts, and also the courage to live it out.

I was reading an article called "To Teach What Jesus Taught: A Call to Fidelity" by Rev. Emmanuel Charles McCarthy. He talks about why teaching non-violence is so difficult, and lots of other things.

Teaching non-violence, according to this article, is something that would result in many of us giving up a lot; a lot of us wouldn't have the income we have, which would trouble a lot of Christians who are not ready to bear such a discipline as voluntary poverty. I think that it is an interesting perspective to read in preparing for Pacifist Fight Club, especially because of the fact that you guys will be talking a lot about war and militarism.

You can read the article online here>

Violence tends to be more intertwined with economic situation and riches (or lack of) more than I thought.

What do you think? Do you think non-violence can be practiced in faith in all situations? Or do you think it should only be practiced in certain situations? And why do you think these things?

I want to believe that even though the non-violent life and committing to non-violent action in violent situations is tricky, scary, "impractical", and threatens our security, that it can do a lot to show the love of G-d; His mercy and patience.

I think that because Christ lived a non-violent life, that that says a lot about how grand his love and patience and mercy and grace for us is like.

I think our views on non-violence pretty much reveal how we see G-d, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit.

It is really hard. I pray that we can have the faith and wisdom to figure these things out together, not just within Pacifist Fight Club, but in the church as well.

I hope my thoughts aren't too jumbled and unorganized.

Your sister in the faith,

Rachel Hester

P.S. I've grown up not punching my sister when she punches me and beats me up, and i guess i'm still okay. ;)

JIM WALLIS: The American Bible

At an Evangelical Seminary in 1970, a man named Jim Wallis met in his dorm room with eight other new students and made a startling discovery. Although they all had been raised in mainline Evangelical Christian churches, not one of them could remember a single sermon about taking care of the poor.

“One of my colleagues decided to try an experiment,” Wallis remembered. “He took an old Bible and a pair of scissors and began to cut, literally, every single reference to the poor. So, when my friend was done, this old Bible was in pieces. It was literally falling apart in my hand.” Soon after this, Wallis started publishing a magazine called Sojourners to specifically address the biblical mandate of Christians to serve the poor and help the oppressed.

“If the Bible is the word of God, if Jesus is Lord, what does that mean? We need to remember the biblical tradition that we give lip service to, but don’t often pay attention to. That first year of seminary where we made a study of everything the Bible said about poor people, wealth, poverty, injustice and oppression, we found several thousand verses on the subject. It is the second most common theme in the Old Testament. The first being Idolatry, and the two are often connected. In the New Testament, one of every sixteen verses is about this subject. In the first three synoptic Gospels, it’s one of every ten verses. In Luke’s Gospel, one of every seven verses is about the poor,” Wallis stated.

Wallis continued, “I still have that Bible, by the way. I take it out to preach with me and I hold it high above my head and I say, ‘Brothers and Sisters, this is our American Bible. It’s full of holes from all we’ve taken out, ignored, and paid no attention to. We each, might as well, get out a pair of scissors and begin to cut.’” Thirty years later, Wallis is still raising the question of poverty in the Church.

“Whatever else the Gospel may be, it may clean up your marriage, it may solve your drinking problem, it may do all kinds of other wonderful things, but if it isn’t good news to poor people, it’s not yet the Gospel.”

Jim Wallis was raised in an evangelical Brethren church in Detroit. In the early ’60s, at the age of 14, Wallis began to notice that the way he lived in “white” Detroit was drastically different from the way people lived in “black” Detroit. “I asked questions of my little church like, ‘How come there are people missing meals, going hungry, without jobs right here in Detroit?’” The answers Wallis got from asking those questions sent him spiraling away from the church and into a pursuit of social justice outside of the Church. “The answers I got were ‘When you get older you’ll understand’ or ‘We don’t know why it’s that way, it’s just always been that way’ or, as one honest elder informed me, ‘If you keep asking these questions, you’re going to get into a lot of trouble’, and that proved to be true.”

Wallis soon found himself repulsed by the attitudes of those in his church and felt drawn to the people around him in need. He spent time walking around downtown Detroit and exploring a world he never knew existed. A world of poverty and struggle was just beyond his world of comfort and plenty. “I took jobs in the city at old factory assembly lines or janitorial jobs and all my money was being saved for college and all the young guys I’m meeting, their money is going to help their family survive. I met a lot of young guys my age who were just like me except they were black in Detroit, and I was white,” he said.

After making connections with people around him who needed the help of the church, Wallis returned to his church hoping they would share his excitement for this new opportunity to be salt and light. Instead he found a great opposition that was worse than he ever expected. “I was told one day by another elder that ‘Christianity has nothing to do with racism, that’s political and faith is personal.’ At that point, these questions were tugging so hard at my heart as a teenage kid, I decided that if Christianity had nothing to do with these questions then I wanted nothing to do with Christianity. My church agreed with that sentiment; they wanted nothing more to do with me either.”

Wallis found a new home in the civil rights and anti-war movement of his generation. For years he did a lot of work organizing protests at Michigan State that numbered over 2000 people. “I was into some heavy movement organizing and politics, but that still didn’t answer all my questions about why these things were still happening, and what the foundations were for all these things,” shared Wallis.

“I was reading, in those days, Karl Marx and Ho Chi Minh and Che Guervara and all that kind of stuff, but I didn’t find the answers there either. Then, I went back to the New Testament. During all that time, I don’t think I ever got quite shed of Jesus, even though I’d left the church. Looking back now, I’d say that Jesus stayed with me through that whole time. I was pretty angry at the Church, I felt betrayed by the Church, and a lot of young people feel that way. Not only was the Church not doing anything about these issues (of poverty) it was on the wrong side of these issues,” he said.

“I had some deep questions. I would’ve liked some Christians to try to figure out how to help. We were kids. We were young students who made a lot of mistakes, (and we) weren’t getting any help from conservative churches, or moderates or liberals.”

Wallis finally decided to take one last look at Jesus for himself and went back to the New Testament. After years of being chased by police and tear-gassed at rallies, he read the Sermon On The Mount and discovered a Jesus he had never met before. “I’d never heard a sermon on this in my entire life growing up. In my church, this was for the Kingdom dispensation, it wasn’t for now. It was for when we all get to heaven. But, I mean, ‘Blessed are the peace makers,’ what’s the point of that if you’re already in heaven? (This was) the cathetical Scripture for all new converts in the early church. It was the Magna Carta, the Constitution of the new order in Jesus Christ. This was it. This was the way of life.”

Reading the words of Jesus as an adult, Wallis found his view of Christ, and Christianity itself, transformed. “I was mesmerized by it. This was the most radical thing I’d ever read. More radical than Ho Chi Minh and Marx put together because this was going to change everything. It was meant to change the personal, the social, the economic and the political. It turned the world upside down. It turned the values on their heads. This was a whole new order of things. This was a revolution if there ever was one.”

Wallis read until he got to Matthew chapter 25 and began to understand that he and Jesus had a lot in common when it came to taking care of the poor. “My conversion text was this chapter of Matthew. Here is the Son of God standing in Judgement over all of those who think they belong to Him. Both sides name His name. He’s saying, I’ll know how much you love me by how you treat the poor. I had never seen anything as radical as that. This is the God of the universe saying that in some very special, particular way, you’ll find me dwelling ‘in the distressing disguise of the poor’ as Mother Theresa puts it. I was just blown away by that,” admitted Wallis.

“The people who had raised me were just like those who said, ‘We didn’t know it was you Lord’. I realized that they had been keeping Jesus at arms length all those years, while sincerely thinking that they were following Him. So, I hearkened back to that little talk with the elder who told me that ‘Christianity has nothing to do with racism’ and I realized at that moment, God is always personal but never private. That has been a personal theme for me ever since. If we don’t have a personal God, we don’t have any faith. I don’t want just a social teaching of Jesus, I don’t want a Liberal agenda for politics, I don’t want just a philosophy or wisdom to follow. If I don’t have a personal God, I don’t have any faith that means anything. God is always personal, but never, ever, private. When we privatize God and the Gospel and our faith, the truth is we’re committing a heresy.”

Wallis is adamant that the Church needs to do more than give money to their favorite charity when it comes to following the teachings of Jesus in regards to the poor. “It’s not enough to write a check and throw money at your favorite faith-based organization, it’s also not enough to roll up your sleeves and get on the ground and work directly with and alongside the poor. You can’t keep pulling bodies out of the river, and not send someone upstream to find out who’s throwing them in. For the last thirty years I’ve been banging the drum and brother Campolo’s been banging the drum, and Ron Sider, and John Perkins, and a whole generation that’s not so young anymore has been banging the drum, and we began talking about an Evangelical social conscience, and now I see a whole new generation of Evangelicals who are ready to apply that for a 21st century world,” he said.

Having spent the better half of his life on a crusade to awaken the Church to the needs of the poor around us, Wallis sees light at the end of the tunnel. “The audiences are larger and younger and more energetic than ever before. I think we have made enormous gains in the churches. I know younger people today can feel some of the frustration that I felt thirty years ago. But, back then we had no elders, no mentors, we had almost no one to teach us. We had to create our own communities, our own magazine, our own everything. I made a commitment a long time ago, that when the hearts of Christian young people turn in the direction of Justice, that they would have support. I want them to have mentors and somewhere to go for answers. I want them to have a movement to join and not one to begin,” vowed Wallis.

To find out more about Jim Wallis and Sojourners Magazine, go to http://www.sojo.net/

Taken from the book, [Subversive Interviews] by Keith Giles, available
HERE