What I learned (or Confirmed) by posting about Same-Sex Marriage

A month ago I posted my thoughts on same sex marriage. To date it is the second highest number of views this blog has ever had (the first being my thoughts on the passing of my father-in-law). The same sex marriage post drew over 400 views. I'm thrilled that many people wanted to read my blog, since I, like any writer, want readers. However, that post has confirmed something for me - issues of a sexual nature bring out people in droves.

The typical post on this blog gets and average of 73 views. It doesn't much matter what the topic is. Gun control, 69 views, identity issues 50 views, racism 74 views, violence in Anchorage 73, racial inequality in the church 94, theology of imperfection 78... you get the picture. Then, BAM, same sex marriage 400+ (see the above chart of this blogs activity in the past month). This is a trend I have been noting in real life (non-cyber) as well. Christians, in particular Evangelicals, seem to only show up on social issues related to sex and sexuality. I wrote about it in a paper a few years back, here are those thoughts:

"In Anchorage one of the largest barriers to promoting justice at the city-wide governmental and institutional level is a phenomenon in which the church only becomes mobilized on issues of a salacious nature. This pattern of the church appears particularly among evangelicals, but is not limited to them exclusively. As a case in point allow me to contrast two separate meetings in Anchorage both advertised to evangelicals. The first meeting was one promoted and hosted by Parachutes Teen Club and Resource Center, Crosspoint Community Church and Grace and Truth Community Church. Pastors and the members of their churches were invited to come to hear Tali Hairston, Director of the John Perkins Center for Reconciliation, Leadership Training, and Community Development at Seattle Pacific University, speak on “Reconciliation, Forgiveness and Love: An Open Discussion of the Role of the Church in Reconciliation.” The intent of the meeting was to open up a dialogue about racial reconciliation. The meeting was attended by the organizers and a couple more people. By contrast, in the spring of 2012, in response to an initiative from a group calling itself "Christians for Equality" that was pushing for a change in Anchorage’s discrimination law to include language making it unlawful to discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation, local evangelical leaders filled a 250 seat theater for their meeting. The difference between the two issues is striking. The more well-attended meeting was about an issue that is sexual in nature and offers little risk for pastors in conservative congregations to protest. The meeting that was poorly attended was about an issue that makes people uncomfortable and would offer a risk to pastors from the evangelical churches in question (largely wealthy white churches) were they to become involved in protesting racism. So, in the end, opening up a dialogue in Anchorage on issues of race, poverty, and justice is impacted by the climate of the politics involved and will not be able to move forward until the leaders in the evangelical community discover the ability to take a stand on issues that present a personal and professional risk. While barriers to a discussion on poverty, diversity and justice exist in Anchorage there are hopeful signs as well. One evangelical group, Churches of Anchorage, has recently decided to focus its attention on the prevention of domestic violence and sexual assault, poverty and homelessness. One hopes that the influence of this respected group will foster conversations in the future that move beyond the tabloid fodder currently mobilizing the evangelical church in Anchorage." (1)

So as I reflect back over the past month and the "success" of my post on same-sex marriage I'm thrilled to have had so many readers, but curious/conflicted over the nature of the response. Why do we as a people, as Christians, as evangelicals(?), seem to care more about salacious issues than we do other social issues? I know when I posted about same-sex marriage it was the hot button issue of the day and that everyone was looking for something to hold on to - timing is important - and I also have heard that people appreciated the perspective offered.  In that sense I am grateful for the response.  But I'm still left wondering...Why is it that we are so obsessed with issues that are in some way sensual, sexual or at the very least sensational?  For years evangelicals have shown up to support marriage laws, fight against abortion, and to make sure that homosexuals don't have equal rights.  But when have those same social warriors addressed poverty with the same veracity?  or US Imperialism? or a Living wage?  or Corporations buying elections (Citizens United, now there is a Supreme Court ruling to protest!)?  Racism?  Low-income housing?  

There is a dilemma here.  Maybe two dilemmas.  The matter of what social issues the church engages in, and a quandary for me as a writer.  

For Christians as a group, I feel the matter is simple and scary.  The Body of Christ needs to be engaged with a broad range of social change in the world, not just when it is convenient politically or risk-free personally, but rather specifically when there is a risk involved.  The role of the people of God in the world is to bring hope, and "Hope is the refusal to accept the reading of reality which is the majority opinion; and one does that only at great political and existential risk." (2)  What hope is there for the world, for us, when we appear to choose our issues in the same way as a supermarket tabloid?  

As a writer I'd love to have far more than 400 readers, but at what cost?  Do I choose a sensationalized tabloid approach to blogging?  Does sex sell even obscure blogs?  What is more important, issues and explorations, or exposure?

"But let justice roll on like a river, 

                             righteousness like a never-failing stream!"
                                                                              Amos 5:24

(1) Joel Kiekintveld,  Identity and Community: A Ministry Philosophy.  Seattle, WA: Bakke Graduated University.  Master's Thesis, 2012.  Pg. 94-95

(2)  Walter Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Press.  2001 - 2nd Edition.  Pg. 65

Thoughts on Dip Net Fishing, Parables & Justice.

It is fishing season in Alaska. While I sit at my kitchen table in the States largest city writing this post, my wife and oldest daughter are down on the Kenai Peninsula dip netting for Red Salmon (1). In fact it seems like most of South Central Alaska is standing at the mouth of the Kenai River netting fish.  So I've had fishing on the brain all week, but not because I have fish fever, but rather because of a parable.

If your talking about fishing with a net there are some parables and stories of Jesus that are natural fits. The parable of the dragnet (Matthew 13:47-50) springs to mind or the story of Jesus telling the disciples to let their net down on the other side of the boat (John 21) known as the "Miraculous Catch of Fish" (what fisherman doesn't what that?).  However, I have been thinking all week about the parable of the bumper crop (Luke 12:13-34)(2).  In that parable a man has a huge harvest and wonders what to do with it all since it is more than his barns can hold (3).  So he builds bigger barns to hold it all.  He then sits back to enjoy life.  Then God comes to him and says he is a fool because he will die that day.  Following the parable Jesus reprises the Sermon on the Mount telling his listeners not to worry about what they will eat, drink, or wear and to trust that God will provide for their daily needs.

As I read this parable a couple things prompt thought.  One the parable seems tied to the Exodus story about not taking more manna than you need.  The parable also seems to me to be, at least in part, about storing up more than you need, or greed.  It also appears to be a parable about generosity since the parable portion, before the Sermon on the Mount bit, ends with "This is how it will be with those who store up things for themselves but are not rich toward God."  We know from other points in Jesus' ministry that how we treat others is how we treat God.  So to be generous toward God is being generous with our fellow humans.  In the parable if the bumper crop we have a story about greed and generosity, but what does this have to do with dip netting for salmon?

As Alaskan residents, my family of 5 is allowed to dip net a total of 65 fish.  If we limited out, that is more fish than we could use.  We are not alone.  I have heard people for years say, "I have more salmon than I can use" or speaking of their personal or family limit "it is more fish than I could ever use."  This is clearly the case because I have witnessed many times people with fish in their freezers that went unused from the season before, or even years before.  In essence they took more than they used.  When I read the parables I often try to think of what the contemporary equivalent of the story is.  I am not a farmer, and if I were I don't think I would be at risk of a bumper crop.  But my family is participating in dip netting - an activity where there is a strong pull to take more than you need or can use.  Is it possible that dip netting has a component of greed?  Is there a chance we can misuse the bumper crop of fish?  Is our personal use dip net fishing an modern parable?

While I think dip netting is an opportunity for us to reflect on what it means to take what you need and how that relates to not worrying about what you will eat or drink - trusting God to provide - it is not the issue with dip netting I have been thinking about the most.  What I have been thinking about is a matter of justice.

This is gonna be a bit journey, but stay with me I am going somewhere.  

I often hear people talk about the dip net fishery as getting "free fish."  This is simply not the case.  Dip net fishing has a cost.  You must have a fishing license and permit to dip net.  Since it is a really hard activity to do alone, you likely are buying two licenses.  That is $48.00.  You will need to drive down to the river.  If your traveling from Anchorage to the town of Kenai that is 160 miles.  At 20 miles per gallon using $3.50 a gallon gas you will spend $56.00 round trip - and likely more since the drive is through a mountain pass.  You will need a cooler or two.  If you need to buy one or two that will be around $50.  You will need chest waders and boots, another $100.  You will also need a net - $200.  So with just these basic numbers (I know you can borrow stuff and you don't need to buy gear every year and you can make a net...) the cost of the "free salmon" is $454.00 (if you need a freezer the cost is going to be much more).  If you have everything and just need a license and gas its $104.  But the real cost is much higher, and this is where the justice issue shows up.

Dip net fishing is a fishery based on privilege.  While it is open to all Alaskans, not all Alaskans are able to access it and those in the most need of a pile of fish are shut out.  Half the State population lives just 3 hours from the Kenai River in Anchorage, but in order to get to those fish you need a few things that those in poverty have little access to: reliable transportation, disposable income, and the ability to drop everything and get to the river when the fish are in.  

In simple terms, if you work a minimum wage job ($8.75 per hour) the $454 cost calculated above reflects 52 hours of work.  That is more than a weeks pay, not taking into account taxes.  Even if the cost is only $104, it would take a minimum wage worker 12 hours to raise the cost and that is assuming that they have a car that can make the 160 mile mountain pass drive to the fishing hole and then make it back.  It also assumes that when you get home you have some place to put the fish, like a big freezer.  Then there is the matter of time off.  You have to fish when the fish are in.  If you are working a minimum wage job it is not likely that you will get time off for fishing at the prime time or even be able to miss work because you need to work to survive.

The more I think about dip netting the more it appears to me that you have to be middle class or higher to participate.  It is because of this matter of privilege that dip netting becomes a justice issue on some level and a parable on another level.  Rather that those who are able participate in the fishery (people with the means to do it) packing their freezers with fish they may not be able to use, can't we figure out a way to help people who could really use those fish - those in poverty - get to the beach and get some fish?  What if instead of packing more fish into our "barns" we figured out how to help others access that same resource?  What if instead of joking in the lobby at church that we should have had services on the beach in Kenai because that is where everyone is anyway the church spent a few weekends each summer filling a bus with people and gear who would never go dip netting and helping them provide for their families?

The Kingdom of God is like a person that went dip netting...

(1)  That's how we do in our family...the girls go fishing and the guys stay home.  GIRL POWER!  

(2)  Your Bible likely calls it the Parable of the Rich Fool.  That name does a disservice to the story by giving you a set lens in which to read the parable.

(3)  As a kid that grew up in a farming community I can't for the life of me figure out why this guy is storing grain in a barn. Silos are where you store grain.

Recent Sermon (sort of)

I had the privailige to lead the discussion of The Parable of the Vineyard Manager (Matt. 20: 1-16) a few weeks back at Crosspoint. The audio of the discussion can be found here.

Joel K