End of the Blog, A New Page

Since September of 2009, I have been blogging at this site on issues at the intersection of faith and law. It has been an interesting experiment. I have had many more readers and followers than I would have ever imagined. And I appreciate the time that each reader has devoted to stop by this site to read my posts and those of the guest bloggers. Thank you.

When I began this blog, I shared with readers my struggle to find an appropriate name. Ultimately, I chose “Progressive Christianity and the Law,” but I expressed that it was not a perfect fit. As time has gone on, I have felt less and less comfortable with the “progressive” moniker. I do think that term probably describes me fairly well in many respects, but not all. Many of my progressive friends think I’m pretty conservative in some respects.

But that is beside the point. The term “progressive” in this blog’s title is modifying Christianity, not me. And I have never believed my religion to be progressive, conservative or moderate, at least not in the political sense of those terms. Those politicized terms just don’t fit well with a faith based on the resurrection of the tortured Prince of Peace who ministered to outcasts, demonstrated respect for secular authorities but had no interest in acquiring their power, and instead taught about the Kingdom of God whose values were quite at odds with earthly priorities.

As I’ve contemplated this dynamic over time, I eventually felt that I needed to put this blog to bed and start anew. To that end, this is my last post on “Progressive Christianity and the Law.”

I will continue to blog on similar faith and law topics at a newly founded blog with a slightly simpler title: “Christianity and the Law Blog.” I invite you to join me at that new blog, which can be found at: http://christianityandthelawblog.blogspot.com/.

In the meantime, I thank all the readers, commenters, and guest bloggers of this site for your attention, your engagement and your contributions. Without you, this experiment in blogging would have been pointless. Without you, it would simply have been a personal journal. I encourage you to continue your engagement at the new blog.

Peace and blessings!

Ezekiel 36:11

And I will multiply upon you man and beast, and they shall increase and bring fruit. And I will settle you according to your old estates, and will do better unto you than at your beginnings; and ye shall know that I am the LORD.

Comments to this Blog

I welcome and encourage readers of this blog to comment on posts. The purpose of a public blog is to try to stimulate reflection and dialogue on different issues. It is interesting to hear the diverse reactions that various people have to the issues addressed in individual posts. If I were not interested in the dissemination and exchange of ideas, then this blog would be private with a password shared only with friends and family.

Moreover, I do not only welcome and encourage views that echo my own or those of my guest bloggers. Contrasting views are certainly welcome and encouraged as well. We learn from one another when we hear what our neighbors believe and what their motivations are for embracing particular positions.

Though I welcome and encourage reader comments, the comments on this blog are moderated. In other words, as the editor of this blog, I must approve reader comments before they are visible publicly. However, I take a permissive approach in what I approve to be published. I have no desire to be the thought police or cherry pick the comments that I find most compelling from a substantive perspective.

There have only been a few comments that I did not publish. Until recently, they were all spam for commercial pornography sites. Indeed, I take such a permissive approach in publishing comments that I inadvertently published one of those X-rated comments a while back. Fortunately, my husband soon flagged for me that a seemingly innocent reader comment had an imbedded link to a pornographic website. I deleted the comment immediately after he flagged the issue for me. (I apologize profusely to any readers who may have been inadvertently transported to a porn site because of that oversight!)

Because my moderation of reader comments is aimed primarily at screening out offensive spam, I have permitted reader comments to be published even when the words were rather repulsive to me and were ugly in tone. A difference of opinion is not threatening to me. I’m a lawyer by training. It comes with the job that others are going to disagree with positions I embrace. That is the reality of the adversary system. I’m used to it. Not a problem.

Indeed, I have expressed before my own belief that truth will eventually make itself known. As a Christian, I try to have a sense of humility and recognize that I do not have a monopoly on understanding the truth. I’m a mere mortal, and am grateful that God is tolerant when I just don’t get it. I’m sure that happens more often that is should. Heck, when you read the New Testament, there are numerous examples of not even the disciples understanding the truth initially. If those folks who spent so much time with our Lord when he was on this Earth didn’t always understand, it is comforting to those of us who are trying to discern truth two thousand years later.

I also understand that God often uses our brothers and sisters to help guide us to the truth. In that vein, I try to keep an open mind when others express a difference of opinion on this blog (or in other venues). Even if I typically disagree with the perspective a particular reader is expressing, I do try to discern if his or her comment might contain some truth that could be enlightening to me.

I find it interesting, however, that most of the reader comments left on this blog that have an ugly tone to them are left anonymously. In my opinion, anonymity is the hallmark of cowards. If one does not have the courage to take a stand publicly and to include one’s name, to me, that suggests a lack of conviction. At least in my eyes, that also diminishes the value and amount of respect owed to a particular (anonymous) individual’s position.

That having been said, I will admit that Blogspot’s format makes posting comments a little confusing. But it is easy to submit comments on a non-anonymous basis when a reader selects the “Name/URL” profile option, then specifies just his/her name. A reader does not have to specify a URL (whatever that is!). Indeed, a reader can submit a comment that way by providing only one name, e.g., his/her first name or his/her last name. To submit a non-anonymous comment in this fashion, it is not even necessary to leave one’s e-mail address or any other contact information.

Recently, a reader left a rather long comment anonymously on this blog that I opted to not publish. It was the first non-spam comment I have not published, and I did not reach that decision quickly or lightly. I shared the comment with my husband and a number of colleagues to seek their interpretation of the reader’s words.

The gist of the comment was that there are “wolves” in the modern Christian church and President Obama is not a Christian. Interestingly, the reader was not commenting on the prior blog post about the topic of Mr. Obama’s professed Christian faith; instead the reader was commenting on other readers’ comments from the January 12, 2010 post about “Janet Parshall’s America.”

The unpublished comment also expressed the (unsubstantiated) belief that Mr. Obama was not “born here,” and the anonymous reader referred to our president by including his middle name. It is interesting how those who argue he is Muslim often feel the need to include Mr. Obama’s middle name “Hussein.” The insinuation seems to be that Mr. Obama’s religious beliefs are dictated by his middle name. It had frankly never occurred to me that everyone bearing the name “Hussein” is an adherent of Islam. Interesting. I have known several gentlemen with the name “Jesús,” but I’m not sure they were necessarily all Christians. I have also known several women with the name “Gay,” but I’m pretty sure they have all been heterosexual. Indeed, each of their husbands would have been pretty surprised to hear otherwise.

If this particular anonymous reader had only included in his/her comment the points about wolves in the church, President Barack Hussein Obama not being a Christian and the allegation that our president was not “born here,” I would have published the comment though I would have disagreed with some of those views. (The anonymous reader may have had a point about wolves in the church.) However, this particular reader’s comment also included several additional statements that were open to different interpretations, but could be fairly read as veiled encouragements to violently overthrow our government.

I carefully reviewed the reader’s words with several learned individuals, whom I respect. We puzzled over the ambiguity of the statements. Several colleagues thought the comment was innocuous and could be published in good conscience. But others thought the reader’s words were veiled references encouraging violence. The reader’s statements were very ambiguous, but ultimately I opted to not publish them because I do not want this blog to potentially be a forum for the encouragement of violence, even if the encouragement is veiled. There are plenty of other sites on the web that will provide such a venue.

To be transparent, I want to try to be clear about my own guidelines for publishing reader comments. I will continue to publish comments with which I disagree (even vehemently) because I think there is value in an exchange of ideas. However, I will not publish what appears to be spam, particularly if it is sexually explicit. And I will not publish comments that can be fairly understood to encourage violence. So, I am pretty tolerant with respect to reader comments, but I don’t want to promulgate commercials for the sex trade or veiled encouragements of violence.

Even though I did not publish this particular reader’s comment, I thought it important to mention its existence to readers. In my mind, this unpublished anonymous comment demonstrates that there is sometimes a fine line between the anti-government rhetoric we are often hearing in public discourse these days and a call to embrace violence to achieve political change. Regardless of one’s political beliefs, I think it is important to avoid crossing that line.

Indeed, even in the recent past, at times of bitter division in this country, we have avoided crossing that line. For example, in January 2001, some earnestly believed that the presidential election had been “stolen” and George W. Bush was illegally installed as president. Those individuals protested at President Bush’s inauguration parade, but I’m not aware that there was a left wing call to install Al Gore in the White House by means of violence. As I recall, the rule of law was respected by those on the left though they were bitterly disappointed by the outcome, and though some even believed the law had been abused to achieve that outcome. That hesitancy to embrace violence as a means to achieve political ends is not always present in other countries. In some nations, if the military or other powerful elites do not like the outcome of an election, they seize control of the government through violence. I am grateful we do not live in that type of political climate and I pray we never do.

Nonetheless, in the current political climate, some have openly begun to call for “Second Amendment remedies” as a sort of Plan B in the event they are not successful in the political arena. In a country that is supposed to be a model to the world that the rule of law works and should be respected, such calls are horrifying, deeply repulsive and frankly unpatriotic.

Moreover, in a country that some have asserted is founded on Christian values, such calls are particularly incomprehensible. Jesus lived at a time and place where there was truly brutal political repression and rampant corruption. Yet Jesus did not opt to lead a violent campaign to overthrow those in power. That was not his way. It would have been fundamentally at odds with his teachings. That is apparent from even a cursory reading of the New Testament.

The links below provide some background on this recent unfortunate suggestion of “Second Amendment remedies.”

http://www.statesmanjournal.com/article/20100909/OPINION/9090313/1049/OPINION

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/06/sharron_angle_floated_possibil.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/16/sharron-angle-floated-2nd_n_614003.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20008167-503544.html

Exodus 23:1

"Do not spread false reports. Do not help a wicked man by being a malicious witness.”


Matthew 26:49-54

Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, "Greetings, Rabbi!" and kissed him. Jesus replied, "Friend, do what you came for." Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. With that, one of Jesus' companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear. "Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?”

About the Blog Editor—Part 2: Professional Journey

Both my husband and I come from fairly humble backgrounds. Our parents were all public school teachers. And as school teachers, they were the professionals in their families. Many of our relatives never had the opportunity to go to college. After undergraduate school, I idealistically followed my parents into teaching. By choice, I taught in schools situated in tough neighborhoods, where students had few prospects. I think that I aspired to live out the film Stand and Deliver, but that did not quite happen. Having grown somewhat disillusioned, I decided that becoming a lawyer would be more interesting. In particular, I was interested in some type of international business law. It was the late 1990s, and my thought was that one could best bring economic justice to the downtrodden by bringing commerce to their communities.

Law school was extremely hard. It was one of the most difficult, but ultimately most rewarding challenges of my life. Had I not gone to law school, I’m not sure who I would have become. My work ethic and my confidence in my own abilities were deepened tremendously. After completing a student clerkship, I was fortunate to get a terrific offer to work after graduation as an in-house corporate tax lawyer for a large multinational in the petroleum industry. The work was fascinating in many respects.

After a number of years, however, I eventually began to feel the pull of academia. I love to write and explore policy issues. But of course one does not get a chance to do that much in the corporate world. I also thought I had a lot I could share with would-be lawyers and could do some good by helping people transition into the legal profession. In 2008, after about eight years of corporate tax practice, I became a professor. I currently teach courses on Federal Income Tax and Criminal Law. I particularly enjoy working with first year students who are getting acclimated to the challenges law school, as well as upper division students who have seen the light and understand the ubiquitous importance of tax law to any legal practice. My scholarship interests include the application of evidentiary privileges in the tax context, children and the law, and the role of religion in shaping law (particularly the scope of criminal law).

1 Corinthians 4:12 (New International Version)

"We work hard with our own hands. When we are cursed, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure it."

About the Blog Editor—Part 1: Faith Journey

As a lawyer, I am constantly trying to discern an individual’s biases as he or she expresses opinions. This happens when I read a book or an article, when I listen to a lecture or presentation, and even when I engage in casual, one-on-one conversations. I want to identify the life experiences that may have shaped the beliefs that are being shared. As a result of this preoccupation, I know that if I were a reader of this blog, I would be looking for any clues in blog posts that might shed more light on the key aspects of the editor’s faith journey and professional experience to understand better her perspective and biases. Wanting to avoid such distractions for readers of the Progressive Christianity & the Law Blog, I thought it would be helpful to take time at the beginning to shed some light on these topics. I offer the following biographical sketch in that spirit, not because I’m an egomaniac who has a burning desire to talk about herself. Indeed, I am rather a private person, so my initial inclination was not to share any personal information about myself. However, upon reflection, I think that would ultimately be a distraction to some who might be preoccupied with discerning my cultural and denominational biases. Hopefully, the following information will shed some light on those biases so they will not be a distraction when reading later posts in this blog.

I am Caucasian, and my family is mostly Protestant and from the South. I was raised in Central Texas and Northern Virginia. My father’s side of the family is mostly Southern Baptist. My mother’s kin have belonged to a variety of Protestant denominations--Methodist, Lutheran, Episcopal, etc. As a child, I had more exposure to the Southern Baptists than other denominations, but it never quite felt like home to me. As a teenager, I eventually came to consider myself a staunch atheist, who in essence thought she was too smart for religion.

Nonetheless, Christianity was ever-present in my life. Somehow, in high school and college my closest friends were always Christians. I was also always drawn to the courage and nobility of those who risked their personal safety and their livelihoods as activists in the Civil Rights Movement. Dr. King was a particular hero of mine. It was perplexing to me as an atheist that his life’s work was rooted in his Christian faith. I had tremendous respect and admiration for Dr. King, but at the time my attitude towards Christianity was much less positive. I was amazed and awed that Dr. King told his followers to love those who were treating them with such complete disrespect and inflicting violence on their communities. Around the same time, I had a good friend who was an ardent fan of punk rock and Jesus Christ. She was incredulous that I was not a Christian, and gave me a copy of C.S. Lewis’s Mere Christianity, which she dared me--the smug atheist--to read. Somewhere in all that, during undergraduate school, I decided that there was something to this Jesus fellow, and I believed what he had said. It is hard to put into words exactly how this came to be. The best I can do is to say that Jesus’ teachings touched my heart and I had a profound sense of truth in what he said.

After that important milestone, I tried out several different denominations. There was a lovely group of Congregationalists near my university, as well as a dynamic Christian (Disciples of Christ) church. But again, neither quite felt like home to me. In different years I attended each of these two churches regularly, but I never became a member. By chance, at the end of my senior year in college, I went to church one Sunday with a Catholic friend of mine. If I had not overslept that morning, I would have never gone to mass. Growing up with Protestant relatives and friends, I had never had a particularly high opinion of Catholics. (All those candles and indulgences!) But to my utter surprise, I loved the meditative nature of the mass. I was a little alarmed by the sanctuary’s graphically violent artwork with bleeding hearts and a tortured Jesus suffering on the cross. Nonetheless, I was interested enough to do some more research about Catholicism and the church’s teachings. Over many months, I learned a good deal about Catholicism, and was deeply drawn to the church’s emphasis on social justice. (As many already realize, Catholics are not at all a homogeneous bunch; I myself was drawn more to the St. Francis of Assisi and Dorothy Day view of Catholicism.) The following Easter, after months of preparatory classes, I was baptized a Catholic. It was one of the most moving events in my entire life, and I felt very grateful that God had found a way to speak to my heart. Eventually, I met my husband in the Catholic church. For many years, we were very active in the parishes, in which we lived. We were Eucharistic ministers, ushers, Sunday School teachers, and volunteers in several marriage ministries.

When we became parents a few years ago, we were saddened to feel we were drifting away from the Catholic church. Theologically, we continue to agree with much that is taught in Catholicism. However, for a variety of reasons, for our family, it was no longer a good fit. At the suggestion of (formerly Catholic) friends, we reluctantly tried several non-denominational churches, and ended up attending them regularly for several years. Those congregations were dynamic. Our family learned a lot and experienced tremendous spiritual growth. But again, they did not really feel like home and we never formally became members. Last summer, however, we joined an Episcopal congregation. It has been a good fit for our family on many levels. We feel like we are home.

Luke 15:20 (New International Version)

“So he got up and went to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him.”

Progressive Christianity?

Readers might be confused by the use of the term “progressive” in the title of this blog, and might question what it means to be a “progressive Christian.” I am confident that many will initially be convinced that the term is simply an oxymoron. Others might question why the term “progressive” is necessary and whether the title shouldn’t simple be the “Christianity and the Law Blog”—period. Still others will instinctively understand the decision to add the term “progressive.” For those who do not, an explanation will be helpful.

Technically, the term “Christian” simply means “a person who believes in Jesus Christ; adherent of Christianity” or “a person who exemplifies in his or her life the teachings of Christ.” However, in the United States in the early twenty-first century, the term has become burdened by connotations that are not necessarily accurate for everyone who believes in the divinity of Jesus and attempts to follow his teachings. I have heard many non-Christians describe “Christians” as a homogenous group that is politically conservative, anti-Darwinist, old-fashioned, homophobic, and/or preachy and disrespectful of other faiths. Sadly, many non-Christians even view terrorists who bomb abortion clinics or who protest the funerals of soldiers with violent, hate-filled anti-gay slogans as typical examples of Christianity. Less extreme, the “Christian vote” is often cited by media pundits as a cohesive block in the electorate that ensures victories of GOP candidates and/or coordinates the passage of ballot initiatives to enact state constitutional prohibitions against same-sex marriage. Indeed, in some circles the term “Christian” has begun to have certain political connotations; it is now being used by some as a proxy for the term “conservative.”

In truth, there is actually a huge divergence in theology, social values and culture within Christianity. There are Quakers, Roman Catholics, Pentecostals, nondenominationalists, African Methodist-Episcopalians, Russian Orthodox, Amish and a host of others. There are mega-churches with thousands of members who meet in stadium-like facilities, mid-size neighborhood churches with a modest sanctuary and a few Sunday School classrooms, as well as very small congregations without a permanent church building who meet in homes or school cafeterias. There are Catholic churches whose parishioners are almost all African American. There are congregations of Methodists who have services only in Spanish, and Baptist churches with services in Vietnamese. There are congregations composed mostly of gay and lesbian members. Some churches are composed of members who are very wealthy; other churches are composed mostly of the homeless. There are adherents of Christianity who support the decriminalization of abortion, and others who do not. Some work hard for the abolition of capital punishment in our country; others believe it is an important governmental tool to deter crime. Although in recent years many have viewed Christians as a cohesive voting block, it should be noted not all adherents of Christianity align themselves with the Republican Party.

Because of the modern political connotations, some American “Christians” have begun to distance themselves from that traditional moniker and are beginning to use the descriptive term “Christ follower” instead. Alas, I didn’t think “Christ Followers and the Law Blog” would roll off the tongue very well. But I did want to clarify that this blog will not be an exploration of the role of a particularly conservative view of Christianity on the legal system and the legal profession. I will leave that to others who are better suited to represent that perspective. Instead, I am more interested in an exploration of the rest of the Christian spectrum, which is often overlooked in the media and in society. For those who are not Christ followers and who have been deceived by the popular misimpression of what a “Christian” is, I would like to help raise awareness of the truly progressive nature of Christianity. For those who are Christ followers, but have felt embarrassed and/or alienated by the popular caricatures of our faith, I hope this blog will be a source of encouragement.

A clarification on the title of this blog. I acknowledge readily that the phrase “Progressive Christianity” is imperfect. Unfortunately, it was the best phrase I could evoke. To be clear, by using this phrase, I am not trying to delineate between Republican Christians and Democratic Christians. That sort of delineation would be too simplistic and frankly it would be irrelevant. Jesus Christ was not a politician. I would certainly never claim that Jesus would have us all join and swear allegiance to one political party or another.

To be clear, I also don’t intend the term “progressive” to be synonymous with “liberal.” In my experience, the term “liberal” also has come to have unfortunate connotations. In many segments of society, that term is now often associated with sexual promiscuity, a disdain for any type of traditional faith values, and an inclination to (over)indulge in legal and/or illicit substances. For better or worse, I have observed that many also associate the term “liberal” with a haughty, even dismissive condescension towards anyone who is viewed to be less enlightened on certain hot-button issues, as well as anyone who is viewed as being less educated in general.

In truth, by using the term “progressive” in the title of this blog, I’m primarily trying to distance my use of the term “Christian” from its own unfortunate, modern political connotations. However, in doing that, I do not in any way reject or condemn any of my sisters or brothers who fall on the more conservative side of the wide spectrum of modern Christianity than I do. In a family, disagreements are bound to happen because we are all uniquely made. Respect and love can prevail; unity does not have to be broken due to disagreements.

Because the concept of a progressive view of Christianity is quite foreign to many, this blog will initially spend a good deal of time developing the concept more before exploring the influence of progressive Christianity on secular laws and the legal profession.

Psalm 139:14 (New International Version)
“I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well.

Matthew 19:21 (King James Version)
“Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.”

Welcome!

Thank you. I’m delighted that you have taken time out of your busy day to visit the Progressive Christianity & the Law Blog. I’ve started this blog as a way to explore the intersection of two important aspects of my life--Christianity and the American legal system.

I am a Christian. My faith informs how I view the world. Because I see the face of God in my sisters and brothers, I believe in the inherent, unalienable dignity and sanctity of all human beings. Related, I also believe in the unique preciousness of the planet our Creator gave us to enable human life. Ideally, my faith guides me as I conduct myself in various contexts. But I humbly acknowledge that I often fall short of that ideal. In a spiritual sense, it is a comfort to know that each of us is a work in progress.

I am also a lawyer. As is true for most adults, my work consumes most of my waking hours. A tremendous amount of my life is spent doing legal work of one type or another. I am very proud of the legal profession. In my experience, lawyers are generally a very intelligent, hard-working, and compassionate slice of society. Nonetheless, I am quite cognizant that the profession suffers from a dearth of positive PR and is much maligned in many quarters. My own belief is that situation is largely due to the high visibility of a few extremely unflattering examples, and a lack of familiarity with the rank and file.

The Progressive Christianity & the Law Blog is an effort to explore the influence of religious faith on lawyering and the law. Specifically, I am interested in the role that Christianity has on those who practice law. I want to explore the influence of religion on law from both a descriptive and a normative perspective. It is my fervent hope that this blog will be thought-provoking and engaging to readers who work in any segment of the legal profession (e.g., paralegals, practicing lawyers, legal secretaries, law school faculty and administrators, law clerks, law students, etc.). However, because the legal system touches everyone’s life either directly or indirectly regardless of their occupation, I would also aspire that this blog would even pique the interest of those whose work is not in any way affiliated with the legal profession.

Again, welcome!

Matthew 7:12 (New International Version)
“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”

Philippians 1:6 (New Living Translation)
“And I am certain that God, who began the good work within you, will continue his work until it is finally finished on the day when Christ Jesus returns.”