Responding to the Tucson Shootings
Gettysburg Presbyterian Church
David C. Wright
Eph. 4:25-32
January 16, 2011

         This past Thursday, I left the church office with my sermon all written for today.  It was to be the second part of our series on Jeremiah.  Friday is my day off, but throughout the day I felt vaguely uneasy about that sermon.  Finally, around 8PM Friday evening, while watching a news show, I realized that what I really wanted to talk about today wasn’t Jeremiah at all.  What I wanted to do was talk about how we can respond to the disturbing shootings last week in Arizona.  So, yesterday I put these thoughts together.
          Last Sat., at around 10AM, 22 year-old Jared Lee Loughner, opened fire with a Glock 19 semiautomatic handgun at a public meeting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and her constituents outside a strip-mall in Tucson.  Six people were killed, including a judge and nine year-old Christina Green,  and 13 others were wounded, including Rep. Giffords, who (thank God!) appears to be making some progress though she remains in critical condition.
          There was a lot of conversation this past week about these killings, much of it attempting to assign blame for them.  Three areas emerged in the national conversation.  Some wondered how such an obviously mentally unstable young man could legally purchase a semiautomatic weapon.  Others questioned whether high capacity clips, like the one Loughner used in the shootings, should be available to anyone.  Second, questions were raised about the failure of our mental health system to care for a person so obviously in need of help.  Both of these issues are important and I believe the church has something to say about each of them.  But for this morning, I would like to focus on the third issue which emerged this week- the toxic climate of political conversation in this country, fueled by the extremely partisan approach to politics that we see on national, state, and even local levels.
          Some have claimed that this atmosphere contributed to the killings.  Others disagree.  But the shootings have opened a national debate over the way in which we conduct conversations about divisive issues. 
We live in extraordinarily challenging times.  Our economy is still struggling to recover from the worst recession since the Great Depression.  Social Security and Medicare will run out of money if things continue as they are.  We are locked into two wars, neither of which may be “winnable.”  And we’re not at all clear on how we can get out of them.  Both wars are a tremendous drain on the federal budget and cost us dearly in human life.   We face threats from North Korea and Iran.  And continued instability in the Middle East threatens us all.  Add the additional challenges posed by environmental issues, and it is clear that we need our leaders to focus all their energy on solving the problems before us, not bashing one another.
          So this week a consensus seemed to be emerging that we need to change the way we work out our differences on issues which divide us.  I was heartened to see both President Obama and Senator McCain calling for changes in this area, for this is an issue that is near to my heart.  Last Fall I taught a course here entitled, “From Confrontation to Conversation:  A Course on Christian Ethics.”  In that course, we talked together about very difficult issues, like abortion, immigration policy, and war.  But we attempted to do so in a way that was not only productive, but also honored Jesus Christ.  You see, sometimes we in the church have been no better at dealing with hot-button issues than those in the secular world.  And we’re dealing with a deeply divisive one right now as our Presbyteries vote on a proposal from General Assembly that would allow for the ordination of practicing gays and lesbians.
          So, what do we do?  What would civil discourse around difficult issues look like?  Well it would begin with humility, which President Obama cited in his speech this week.  Humility is rooted in two biblical truths about ourselves- human sinfulness and human finitude.  The Apostle Paul puts the first one succinctly in Romans 3, “There is no one who is righteous, not even one;  For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.”  (Rom. 3:10, 23)  Or, as Jeremiah said, “The heart is devious above all else;  it is perverse- who can understand it?” (Jer. 17:9)  The biblical teaching about human sinfulness means that we must admit that our “take” on a given issue may be tainted by our self-centeredness and our capacity for rationalization and self-deception.  That admission leads to humility.
          In addition, we human beings are also limited in our understanding of the world around us.  I love the end of the book of Job.  Throughout the book Job has questioned God about the fairness of all the tragedies that have befallen him.  Finally God responds with chapter after chapter recalling the wonders of creation.  “Where were you,” God asks Job, “When I laid the foundations of the earth?”  The final answer to Job’s question about suffering in the world isn’t really very satisfying.  God basically says that his understanding is so far above Job’s that Job couldn’t possibly understand it!  “I am God, and you’re not,” God seems to say.
Even though we have come far with our scientific knowledge and understanding of human relationships, there is an awful lot that we just don’t know and understand.  For we are limited, finite beings.  To pretend otherwise is idolatry.  Understanding the limits of our knowledge should lead us to a sense of humility in our pronouncements!
In a Peanuts comic strip, Charlie Brown and Linus are sitting in a children’s Sunday School class, listening to the harangue of a teacher.  Linus raises his hand and says, “May I ask a question, sir?  I don’t really want to interrupt…”  Charlie Brown, fearing the worst, gets up out of his chair, saying “I think I’ll leave.”  Linus continues, “I also don’t wish to be rude…just as a matter of curiosity, sir…has it ever occurred to you that you might be wrong?”
          Linus understand that a sense of humility should flow out of a biblical understanding of human nature.  In humility we admit to ourselves that we could be wrong.  As we celebrate Martin Luther King, Jr. Day tomorrow, just remember how wrong many of us were regarding our racial attitudes and beliefs in the past.  All of us, including our leaders, need a sense of humility as we debate the issues of the day.
          Secondly, the Bible calls us to honesty in our dealings with one another.  In Ephesians 4, Paul says, “So then, putting away falsehood, let all of us speak the truth to our neighbors, for we are members of one another.”  (Eph. 4:25)  Civil discourse on vexing problems requires integrity on the part of the participants.  Too often, folks from one side of an issue distort the positions of those on the other side so as to make them virtually unrecognizable.  We have seen this demonstrated often during the debates about the wars, health care, and immigration.  Christians are called to a higher standard- integrity and honesty. 
          I saw this trait demonstrated by Rev. Richard Hutcheson, who was my Sr. Pastor while I was the youth director at the Vienna Presbyterian Church in the 1980’s.  Dick was not afraid to tackle difficult, emotionally freighted issues from the pulpit.  I distinctly remember a sermon he gave on abortion.  I felt very anxious as he talked about this charged issue, wondering what it might do to our church.  But Dick carefully and fairly outlined the position of both pro-life and pro-choice Christians.  In fact, he outlined their positions so well that I honestly didn’t know where Dick was going to come down on the issue until the very end of the sermon!  He demonstrated the Christian virtues of honesty and integrity in doing so.  And that is a requirement for civil discussion of issues in society and in the church.
          Third, we need refrain from attacking those who disagree with us.  In Ephesians 4, Paul says,  29Let no evil talk come out of your mouths, but only what is useful for building up,* as there is need, so that your words may give grace to those who hear. 30And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with which you were marked with a seal for the day of redemption. 31Put away from you all bitterness and wrath and anger and wrangling and slander, together with all malice, 32and be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ has forgiven you. (Eph. 4:29-32)  Ultimately, the goal of our discussions on difficult issues is to promote the common good, “building up one another,” as Paul says.  Unfortunately, as we saw in the 2010 election campaigns, a lot of political speech is designed to tear down one another, rather than build one another up.  “Attack ads” have become the norm.
          Civil discourse requires that we stick to the issues and refrain from attacking others and questioning their motives.  Those who take opposing views on the issues of the day are not our enemies; they are our fellow citizens!  Those who take opposing views on issues in the church are not our enemies; they are our brothers and sisters in Christ!  We may passionately disagree with others over a particular issue, but we must always remember that our opponents are creatures made in the very image of God and have just as much value as we do.  Therefore, they deserve to be treated with respect. 
          Finally, I am calling us to be open to compromise.  During New Testament times, the church was deeply divided over a number of critically important issues involving Christian beliefs and practice.  (Just read I Corinthians if you doubt me!)  In many of these debates, Christian leaders worked to find a compromise solution.  For example, in Acts 6, there was a serious conflict between Gentile and Jewish Christians over the fair distribution of bread to the hungry.  A compromise was reached and the ministry of deacons was born!  Compromise shouldn’t be a dirty word for Christians.  It was common practice in the early church!
          Humility, honesty, respect, and openness to compromise.  These are the marks of civil discourse.         Jesus tells us that those who work for peace are blessed.  Some of our radio and TV hosts and commentators are not peace-makers.  They deliberately stoke the fires of discord and dissension, sometimes slandering the character and motives of others, distorting their positions, all without a trace of humility.  I think Christians should be wary of a steady diet of such fare.  I don’t think it’s good for our souls!
I know I’m swimming against the larger cultural tide on this.  In the recent elections moderate Democrats and Republicans, those who used to form the political center of this country and who were able to work out compromises in our legislatures, did poorly in the 2010 election.  We appeared to be moving toward an even more partisan, bitter approach to public discourse.  But perhaps the Tucson shootings are opening a door for us to a more civil, and yes, Christian approach to political and moral conversation in this country.
          Rev. King always taught those who worked in the civil rights movement that they were required to love those who disagreed with them- even those who maligned and abused them.  In doing so, he was echoing the words and example of Jesus.  We should too.  And that’s where I’ll end these thoughts on civil discourse.

Return to the Sermons Menu