Occupy Wittenberg?

It started with one man, a pastor. Fed up with watching the poor in his community get taken advantage of so that those who were wealthy could get even wealthier, he protested publicly in the town square. Making use of the latest technology, his ideas spread. What was a local protest became a worldwide movement, spread farther than could ever have been imagined before. Those in power, those with the most to lose, dug in their heels and refused to hear the very real critique against the corruption and abuses of the current system, but the protest only grew stronger.

Looking out over the past few weeks, and the growth of the Occupy movement, this story is familiar. It started with one blog post, and grew into a movement making use of social media to spread the word. Concerned with the well-being of the poorest in the US, they have lobbed some very real critiques at the current political and economic systems of the US; but those in power have not listened.

But this is not the story of Occupy Wall Street, this is the story that we recount every year on this day, the story of the Reformation. While Martin Luther's critique of Rome and her power structure had a profound theological motivation, he appears to have been compelled to act - above all else - out of pastoral concern for his flock. Watching the poor families under his charge hand over what little they had only to have that money go into the pockets of bishops who already had more wealth than they could possibly spend, Luther could not remain silent. And, thanks to the new technology of the printing press, Luther's ideas spread farther and faster than anyone could have anticipated.

Am I overstating the case? Am I seeing connections where there are none? Have a listen to Martin Luther himself, in the 95 Theses he posted on the evening before All Saints Day, in 1517:

46. Christians are to be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they must reserve enough for their family needs and by no means squander it on indulgences.

And as he later explains what he means by this thesis:

There are many who have neither bread nor proper clothing and yet, led astray by the din and noise of the preachers of indulgences, rob themselves and bring about their own poverty in order to increase the wealth of the indulgence sellers.

Certainly, Luther is not opposed to wealth. He goes on to argue in other places that the princes and public officials have an obligation - in their public office - to acquire and accumulate a certain amount of wealth ... But that wealth is to be acquired and accumulated for the public good. That is, certain members in society as Luther envisioned it had an obligation to acquire wealth so that they could make sure that everyone else in the town/province had enough. How different would our conversation be today in America if this was how we viewed wealth?

Martin Luther saw the poor being exploited by the wealthy, and he attacked the underlying theological system that allowed such exploitation to take place. At the end of the day, the truth our current system believes in is this: Those who have the most deserve it, because they have worked the hardest. Make no mistake, this is a theological claim. But the Reformation truth is this: "Work" and "deserving" are not a part of the gospel lexicon, but grace and mercy are. On Reformation Day, in a country with a predominantly Protestant Christian population, I cannot help but wonder: Where is the grace and mercy of our political and economic systems?

Secret Millionaire (aka Hidden Poverty)

I watched Secret Millionaire for the first time yesterday. I had seen that it was going to be in Houston, so I hit the record button on my DVR. I have resisted watching the series until now. The whole concept seemed gimmicky to me, and it made me uncomfortable for reasons that I couldn't put my finger on. So I didn't watch. But watching this most recent episode, I think I am a little more capable of putting my finger at what disturbs me about the concept of this show.

Ok, yes. It was moving. It was heart-warming to see the good work done by the social agencies featured in the show (Lazarus House, No More Victims, and the Sean Ashley House). It was heart-breaking to see the poverty in the neighborhood visited by the "secret millionaires." It was touching to see the millionaire couple appear genuinely moved by what they saw, and respond with generosity. All that is true. And, if that is all that matters, then it was good entertainment.

But this is not just entertainment. This is life - life in our country, life in our culture. When Kevin & Diane Hearn arrived in Houston's 3rd Ward - a neighborhood that Kevin had grown up in - they were shocked at what they saw. In their daily life, they don't encounter people who live in that sort of poverty. They live in a different America. In the 3rd Ward, the average annual income is around $5,500. In the Hearns America, that is on the low side for a daily income.

• How about instead of asking people like the Hearns to help in communities like the 3rd Ward for entertainment, we say that no one should have to live in that sort of poverty in our America?
• Wouldn't it be a great America if organizations like the Lazarus House, the Sean Ashley House, and No More Victims didn't have to scrape by on shoe-string budgets?
• How is it that a show like "Secret Millionaire" - and the generosity that it highlights - does well in the ratings at a time when we are cutting our funding of social services for the poorest people in our country?

Maybe a show like Secret Millionaire is good entertainment, good television. But when I watch it, I can't help but feel like it is a symptom of a very deep-seated illness. A reflection of our twisted thinking about wealth, the Gospel, and what it means to love and care for our neighbor. We seem caught in in a mindset that our first priority is to look out for ourselves, take care of ourselves, and close our eyes to how our actions affect anyone else.

Should a nation that calls itself Christian, that claims a Christian heritage and values, be able to close our eyes to the suffering of any of God's children? Should there be an option for us to live a comfortable life where we never have to see the "other America" - the America that struggles below the poverty line?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not just talking about the extremely wealthy, like the Hearns. It's us in middle-class America too. I've never been to the Houston's 3rd Ward, and I live just down the road. But what would happen if we spent the $30 a month to help lift people out of poverty, instead of on our membership to a gym like Curves? What if we spent $50 a month to provide healthcare for those special needs children, instead of on our satellite tv subscription? What if we spent $5 a day on education for children from troubled homes, instead of on another latte? What if we really start to look at the affects of poverty in America, instead of letting the poor be hidden from our eyes?

I'm just asking the questions. I don't know that I have the answers. But they are questions that I think that we need to ask together. Or, we could just change the channel.