LETTER TO A “WAR-NEUTRAL” PASTOR

[babylonsister]

Edit to add link:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/30104



LETTER TO A “WAR-NEUTRAL” PASTOR
Submitted by davidswanson on Tue, 2008-01-15 01:23. Media

By Martha Conte

On Sunday, Jan. 6, Martha Conte and three friends visited St. Matthew’s Lutheran Church in White Plains, N.Y., where, in the middle of the service, they held up a banner that enumerated some of the horrific costs of the Iraq War and asked “Why the Silence?” The pastor, the Reverend Eric A. Mathsen, objected to the witness by Ms. Conte and her friends. Here is her letter in response.

The Rev. Eric A. Mathsen, S.T.S.
Pastor
St. Matthew's Luetheran Church
3 Carhart Avenue
White Plains, N.Y. 10605

January, 12, 2008

Dear Reverend Mathsen,

This was the first church visit accompanying my 3 friends and I must admit I was a little uneasy about making a public statement during a service. When I mentioned that to one of my friends, she immediately pointed out that "this is what our troops have been doing for 5 years, entering the mosques, houses etc of people who did not invite us". So if you are angry about us entering your church with the truth about this immoral, illegal war in a country that was no threat to us (in violation of international law) I am sure that you will understand the legitimate anger of the people in Iraq and many others towards us, the invaders. This slaughter is being carried out in our name and with our money. We all have blood on our hands, and we are all responsible because we in a democracy choose our leaders. And at this moment our leader is a war criminal.

First I would like to say something about our action: we didn't disrupt the service and when asked sat down immediately and folded our banner. We chose the moment to display the banner carefully, during the sharing of the peace and offertory; we didn’t speak or distribute flyers. When Nick (Mottern, one of the other protesters) tried to give an explanation during announcements he was silenced. You could have invited us to discuss things further during fellowship hour. Several of your parishioners came over to thank us and showed their support for our action. Some asked whether we were part of a group. We are all peace activists but not part of any particular group. We believe there is a higher law, and we feel compelled to follow it.

When you came over to us after the service I had no intention of saying anything and had every intention of just listening. As I mentioned before, this was my first church visit. Your anger can be partly explained by being surprised. But you kept being angry and didn’t listen to what we had to say. I have been thinking this week about what to put in this letter. There are lots of things that I could say about my reasons for obviously participating in an activity that arouses anger or at least controversy, but I’ll limit myself to the following.

I have been living in this country for almost 30 years. I wasn’t raised with a religion; in fact I am a Humanist. From the start I have been puzzled that so much stress is being placed on the fact that this is a country based on “Judeo-Christian” values. To this day I find this a puzzling notion. Why is it that a society that considers itself to be better, more enlightened, more democratic than others, “a beacon of hope to the rest of the world” is not capable to have a national health care system, a national childcare policy, why there is a much bigger gap between the poor and the rich than other advanced, democratic, industrialized countries ? It is a disgrace that many seniors have to choose between food and medicine, in this the richest country on earth. These differences are the result of deliberate policies. In my view this country is not a particularly caring country when it comes to the treatment of this government towards its people. It is a militaristic society, a society with values that are not at all compatible with Judeo-Christian values. The Iraq war is not a separate issue but a symptom of much that is wrong with this society. A militaristic society needs a war. It takes away from all the good, decent, human things that we need in this world. I think that there is something very wrong with a country where so many citizens are too silent about the tremendous amount of suffering inflicted in our name on others.

If I remember well you kept mentioning the fact that our display had no place in a church and neither had politics and that we could agree to disagree about the war or the “just war theory”. I couldn’t help but think how American this way of thinking is. We, in this country can afford ourselves the luxury of a debate. We can, as you said “agree to disagree”. We can distance ourselves from “the issue of the war”. I strongly disagree and so would the victims of our violence abroad; why would they care about our debates? So, for many of us the murder of innocent people and the destruction of a country goes beyond politics. The time to be silent is over because being silent means being complicit in these crimes. If churches are our moral compasses it is their moral duty to speak out more forcefully. You mentioned the importance of hope several times in your sermon. We, the people who live in this country and other democracies are the hope of the oppressed and voiceless in this world. We expect more from the churches than from “The Beltway Boys” who only care about the war in so far as it affects the political life of the country. “All that is necessary for evil to exist is for good people to do nothing”. What better place to start than a place where people of good intentions come together ?

This is not a great nation, in my view, but we could be a great people.

I hope this letter helps explain our action better.

In peace,

Martha Conte

“Historically, the most terrible things – war, genocide, slavery – have resulted not from

disobedience but from obedience”. Howard Zinn, historian

CC: The Rev. Dr. Frederick J. Schumacher, S.T.S., Pastor Emeritus
Joanne Abrahansen, Deacon
William Curie, Deacon
David Drysdale, Deacon
Christopher King, Music Director
Teresa Tomas Adm. Assistant
Marcos Mortiel, Sexton
Ilse Hoffman, Eucharistic Assistant
Samantha Feola,
Claire Mathsen,
Kelsey Connelly
Robert Bormann
Iascelles Bond
Werner Faible
Peter Hoffman
John Leinung
Gary Williams
Jeffrey Williams,
Leori Ledyard
Toby Markey
Patricia Moser

[PaDem]

1. Can I ask why this particular church?

Was this pastor particularly outspoken in support of the war?

[babylonsister]

2. I don't know why this church was selected.

I found it on David Swanson's website.

[gratuitous]

3. This is an odd way of saying "hello"

Can't say I would have reacted much differently than Brother Mathsen did. As the pastor for his congregation, he's responsible for putting on the weekly worship service, the focal point of his congregation's life together. And as the pastor, in a more pecuniary consideration, his very livelihood is dependent on maintaining good relations with his congregants - all of his congregants. To have the weekly worship service disrupted in this fashion by folks who don't participate in the life of the congregation is to invite chaos and risk his job. I wonder if Ms. Conte is similarly cavalier about doing her job? Does she routinely stop working to hold up banners and engage her bosses and co-workers in impromptu discussions about the war, health care, oppression and homelessness? Does she gladly interrupt her work activities to engage with strangers who drop by unannounced to harangue her about any issues that are important to them?

It sounds like the pastor declined to engage some guerrilla disruptors who were more interested in a hit-and-run bit of theater, pushing their own agenda than in participating in the life of a congregation. If some members of this congregation quit attending or stop giving because of their disruption, it surely matters little to Ms. Conte. But it definitely matters to the pastor.

[bean fidhleir]

4. If the purpose of religion isn't the construction of conscience, what is it?

You compare the writer's action to her job. But her job is unlikely to have anything directly to do with the spiritual and ethical standing of her co-workers. Churchgoing, on the other hand, is all about the spiritual and ethical standing of the congregants - or else it's nothing but a way to get brownie points with the neighbors.

[gratuitous]

5. If the issue is that important

Then it's important enough to build a relationship. What the writer was doing was argument by ambush. If she's serious about this issue in this congregation, then she should be willing to establish a relationship with the pastor and the congregation. The letter was a fine way of introducing the issue. Disrupting a worship service is a poor way of introducing the issue. Would you want to discuss something with a complete stranger who barged into your home or workplace and demanded that you discuss their pet issue with them on their terms? Even if that issue is really, really important?

[bean fidhleir]

6. "Then it's important enough to build a relationship"

That might make sense from a tactical, sales-oriented standpoint, but why should it be necessary? It's not as though the congregation is in Micronesia or Zaire. It's in a suburb of NYC. And it wasn't a home or workplace, it was a church. Ethical issues should be in the forefront of every congregant's mind in that setting. In effect, the "invaders" delivered an unscheduled sermon - what could be more appropriate?

[gratuitous]

9. Not just from a "tactical, sales-oriented standpoint"

From a standpoint of mutual humanity and common decency. Or are you saying that your front door is open to every Tom, Dick and Harry with a personal ax to grind in your living room? My church is an extension of my home: I spend hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars there every year, and I would be quite annoyed to have someone barge in unannounced and attempt to set the agenda. Do I and the three dozen other people in the sanctuary give up our right to assemble peaceably and worship freely because someone wants to deliver an unscheduled sermon?

You're very free with things that other people have built, maintained and paid for.

[bean fidhleir]

10. No, it's not "an extension of your home" except, apparently, in your mind

It's open to the public, meant for people to gather together and (ideally) reflect on their relationship to the divine. It's (again, ideally) not a private gathering for mundane purposes. The idea that your "thousands of dollars" gives you more rights than someone else to set the agenda is a very American one, I grant you. But that doesn't mean it should receive deference.

For all your "hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars" you don't sound very religious, and I say that in all honesty and more than a little dismay. Judging by what you've written here, I have no trouble imagining you asking "am I my brother's keeper?".

[gratuitous]

12. So if the cause is right

Anyone can barge into a church during a service, and have a captive audience for whatever agenda they want to peddle? Very free with other people's time, talent and treasures, indeed.

Our congregation pools its offerings to build a building, hire a pastor, and conduct our affairs. Yet we should hand that all over to any person or group who walks in the door unannounced so that we'll meet your test of what's religious? You're very amusing.

[AngryAmish]

7. Who the heck are these weirdos?

And why are they bothering these people?

[Richard Steele]

8. K&R

[TCJ70]

11. They couldn't have come up with a better way to do this...

...than just showing up with a banner and butting in? How could they not think this would cause a problem?

[gratuitous]

13. I don't know, either

But apparently, there are folks, even here at DU, who think it's perfectly acceptable for strangers to barge in unannounced and disrupt a worship service.

[Ikonoklast]

14. I wonder if the same DU'ers would stick up for

The Phelps family doing the very same thing?

After all, they are just putting forth their viewpoint on matters.