Thursday, April 6, 2017

EcoPreacher is now on!

I am thrilled to announce that has brought me on as a blogger on their Progressive Christian channel:!  

After five years of having my blog on this site, I will now be a genuine professional blogger writing for one of the most cutting-edge theological websites online.

What is Patheos?  As explained on their “About” page, “Founded in 2008, is the premier online destination to engage in the global dialogue about religion and spirituality and to explore and experience the world's beliefs. Patheos is the website of choice for the millions of people looking for credible and balanced information about religion. Patheos brings together faith communities, academics, and the broader public into a single environment, and is the place where many people turn on a regular basis for insight, inspiration, and stimulating discussion. Patheos is unlike any other religious and spiritual site on the Web today.”

If you’re wondering what Patheos means, it’s a fusion of two words: path and theos (the Greek word for God).  So this is a website that illuminates and explores different paths to God, however you understand the Divine, and whatever path(s) you choose to meander.  Within that framework, EcoPreacher will be following an environmental justice path within the Progressive Christian quadrant of the faith conversation. 

If you've been following me on this site - thank you for your support!  Please click on over to and follow me there.  And invite your friends!  Just as before, you’ll be seeing some hard-hitting pieces connecting the dots between religion, environmental issues and what’s happening on the national and global level in terms of politics, culture, and current events.  As you know, I’m very interested in the intersections of race, gender, sexuality, socio-economics, health, and community within the realm of religion and the environment.  I’ll also be drawing on my recent research looking at the juncture of politics and the pulpit through a survey I conducted of over 1200 Mainline Protestant clergy.  If you’re looking for a “green lens” for reading scripture and the news, and for viewing the state of the church today, EcoPreacher is your blog!

There will also be pieces focusing on practices of hope, resilience, and creative inspiration for facing the daunting environmental challenges in our world.  Many of these pieces will be adaptations of sermons that honestly name the “bad news” facing the Earth community (what I call the “eco-crucifixion”), while also proclaiming the Good News of what God is doing to effect what I call the “eco-resurrection.”

As I work on migrating the content over from this blog, there may be some gaps in seeing archived material.  But I'll be diligently working on the transfer over the next couple weeks.

Again, thank you for visiting this blog site and reading the final post here.  I'll look forward to seeing you on to continue the conversation about Earth, faith, politics and God!

Sunday, March 12, 2017

Announcing: The Purple Zone, New Website and Blog

I'm happy to announce the launch of my newest research and ministry project - The Purple Zone: Ministry in the Red/Blue Divide, equipping Christians and pastors during this divisive time in our nation.  I am exploring ways that pastors can preach and do ministry that is true to their gospel calling, while recognizing the many risks involved in courageous preaching and ministry.  

How can we be both pastoral and prophetic? This is one of the driving questions of my work.  The challenge of addressing controversial justice issues from the pulpit is fraught with risks, but also offers opportunities for proclaiming the gospel and building community in profound and contextual ways.

Drawing on data gathered from a survey I conducted of 1200 Mainline Protestant clergy serving congregations in the United States, this project surveys the landscape of preaching and ministry during this divisive time in our nation's history.  The goal is to help Christians and pastors think about how we can engage the gospel regarding controversial justice issues during this deeply divided time.

The Purple Zone is a resource for helping the church understand the challenges facing parish pastors and congregations, and establishing both scriptural and theological rationale and authorization for addressing contentious justice issues.

The Purple Zone aims to encourage and equip pastors and congregations to address the vital justice issues of our time by attending faithfully to God’s Word, listening intently to each other, navigating the risks, and attuning to the guidance of the Holy Spirit by prophetically “speaking truth in love” in ways that enable congregations to genuinely hear and respond to God's Word. Key to this endeavor is the use of a process called “deliberative dialogue” for finding hopeful avenues of action that engage both public theology and intentional civil discourse.

To learn more, visit 

And check out my new blog:

You can also "like" The Purple Zone Facebook page:

And follow the new Purple Zone Twitter feed for the latest on the intersection of religion, politics, preaching and the church:

Finally, stay tuned for an article about how preacher's rank the importance of preaching about God's Creation based on results of my survey.

And thanks for keeping up with the EcoPreacher!

Wednesday, March 1, 2017

Trump’s “Presidential” Speech: The Stockholm Syndrome Begins

Leah D. Schade

Trump’s “presidential” speech to the joint session of Congress on Feb. 28 was a brilliant move.  He stayed with his script, was calm and measured, and offered one gem of grace and dignity.  Both Republicans and even some Democrats gave high ratings.  The Dow Jones Industrial Average soared to new heights.  The bipartisan crowd went wild. And that’s why this speech presents a new kind of danger.

The problem is that this speech is but one – perhaps the only one – time in Trump’s political career when he had any modicum of decorum and propriety.  When the bar is set so low, anything looking remotely better than his typical blustery hate-speech can suddenly be characterized as “unifying” and “optimistic.”  The result is that even some who have been battered by Trump’s campaign (including the major media outlets) and targeted by the executive orders and rhetoric of his first six weeks in office are so grateful for a moment of relief, they appear to be lured into thinking that maybe this is the “real” Trump.  That he actually is a unifier.  That he really does have the country’s best interest at heart.  That maybe it’s time for a “reset.” 

How can this be?  How can we forget the relentless assaults against women, Muslims, the LGBTQ community, people of color, immigrants, refugees, public health, the environment, public education, and even reality itself that have been perpetrated by Trump and his team since inauguration day, and during the entire past year?  How are we so lulled by the siren song of faux-respectability that we ignore the actual message of the speech (which continues a xenophobic, heteronormative, white supremacist, militaristic, anti-environmental agenda)?  How can we be echoing the calls to “give him a chance” when the people he has put into cabinet positions are there specifically to dismantle the institutions of public good?  How can we so quickly forget the real damage this administration has done to this country in just the past six weeks, let alone the harm planned for the future? 

It may be helpful to view these contradictory reactions by understanding the phenomenon known as the Stockholm Syndrome. 

First coined in 1973, the condition derives its name from the paradoxical situation that arose when hostages of a bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden, developed sympathy for their captors and refused to testify against them in court.  Victims exhibiting Stockholm Syndrome irrationally and inexplicably come to defend those who abuse them.  At first, we may not understand how this can be.  But when we examine the pattern of mind-games used against the victims, we can start to see what’s actually happening.

Imagine a kidnapping victim who is periodically tortured, but is also shown moments of surprising kindness and humanity.  When this pattern is repeated enough times, a kind of brainwashing occurs whereby the victim clings to the delusion that their captor is actually beneficent, even as their wounds and bruises say otherwise.  Their insistence on defending their abductor is actually their psyche’s defense mechanism when survival is at stake.

Or imagine a spouse who sometimes threatens and abuses their partner, but other times appears charming and conciliatory.  In between the times of intimidation and bullying, the perpetrator punctuates the relationship with moments of grandiose gestures of goodwill and periods of relative peace.  This leads the victim to not only doubt that the abuse is happening, but also convince themselves that the “real” person they love is the sweet and kind persona shown on occasion, instead of the cruel monster who controls the relationship by gaslighting, manipulation and violence. 

When it comes to Trump, America – do not be fooled.  One “nice guy” speech does not a nice guy make.  The Stockholm Syndrome has begun, and we need to recognize that our collective fatigue weakens our resistance to the Bannon/Trump agenda. 

They know exactly what they are doing.  They are faking us out with this “presidential”-sounding speech, and all of a sudden even some of Trump’s harshest critics seem to be getting on board.  Employing Stockholm Syndrome tactics is enabling this administration to get away with a great deal of abuse that would never be tolerated under normal circumstances.  We need to be vigilant in identifying this pattern and recognizing it as a means by which to impose an autocratic rule.

As Dietrich Bonhoeffer said in his book, Ethics (which he wrote while resisting Hitler and the Third Reich), “It is worse for a liar to tell the truth than for a lover of truth to lie.” This is because “the liar contaminates everything he says, because everything he says is meant to further a cause that is false. The liar as liar has endorsed a world of falsehood and deception, and to focus only on the truth or falsity of his particular statements is to miss the danger of being caught up in his twisted world,” (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Dietrich Bonhoeffer,”

In other words, if we focus only on this one particular speech, we will miss the danger of being caught up in the twisted world of despotism that the Bannon/Trump Administration is creating. Make no mistake – this regime is in no way backing down.  Bannon/Trump intend to do everything they promised, so we should not feel any reassurance from this speech or any future instances of fake-presidentialism. 

Instead, we need to remember these instructions for surviving an autocracy by Masha Gessen, a student of Russian totalitarianism:

* Believe the autocrat. He means what he says. 
* Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
* Be outraged.
* Don’t make compromises. 

On this point, Gessen’s words deserve a full quote, given the prescience of this piece [Autocracy: Rules for Survival”]:, which was written on Nov. 10, 2016, just two days after the election:

Democrats in Congress will begin to make the case for cooperation, for the sake of getting anything done—or at least, they will say, minimizing the damage. Nongovernmental organizations, many of which are reeling at the moment, faced with a transition period in which there is no opening for their input, will grasp at chances to work with the new administration. This will be fruitless—damage cannot be minimized, much less reversed, when mobilization is the goal—but worse, it will be soul-destroying. In an autocracy, politics as the art of the possible is in fact utterly amoral. Those who argue for cooperation will make the case . . . that cooperation is essential for the future. They will be willfully ignoring the corrupting touch of autocracy, from which the future must be protected.

The protection of the future is in our hands.  So keep your eyes open.  Understand the psychological tactics being used against us.  Check in with people you trust who can give you a reality check when the powers seem to be negating what you know to be true.  And keep reminding each other that the Stockholm Syndrome is already at work and must be resisted.

The Rev. Dr. Leah Schade is the Assistant Professor of Preaching and Worship at Lexington Theological Seminary (KY) and an ordained Lutheran minister (ELCA), though the views expressed in this post are her own and do not necessarily reflect the institutions she serves.  She is the author of the book Creation Crisis Preaching: Ecology, Theology and the Pulpit (Chalice Press, 2015).

Friday, February 24, 2017

The Preacher Persisted: Finding Courage in the Pulpit

The Rev. Dr. Leah D. Schade

I'm no stranger to push-back from people angered by a controversial sermon.  But a shift is happening in churches that is testing the mettle of even the most prophetic preachers.

I was recently invited to supply preach at a congregation to cover a colleague during his vacation.  I had been told by several different people that the congregation had a reputation of being a politically progressive church. So I crafted a prophetic sermon that engaged contemporary issues for the assigned lectionary readings for the day. In the sermon, I never referenced any political party or figure, but clearly named the systemic loss of an ethical and moral center in our country of late.  I also reiterated Moses’ call to follow God’s commandments to turn away from death and embrace life (Deuteronomy 30:15-20).  True to my commitment to include God’s Creation in my preaching where appropriate, I critiqued the ways we have abused this Earth in violation of the command to choose life.  But I ended by pointing out that God is still at work calling people to rise up in defense of the vulnerable and answering the call to justice along with people of other faiths and nonreligious people of good will (you can read my blog post based on the sermon here).

The reactions of the listeners in the days following the sermon revealed a much more politically diverse congregation than I expected.  The pastor told me he had received numerous emails and phone calls from his parishioners – some who had expressed appreciation for the sermon, and some who expressed strong anger at what I had preached.  So the pastor asked if I would be willing to come back to the church to talk about the sermon with anyone who wanted to discuss it further. 

I was open to this suggestion for several reasons.  First, my current research is exploring how Mainline Protestant pastors handle sermons on controversial issues, so I saw this as an opportunity to hear first-hand from parishioners about this very topic. Second, as a seminary professor of preaching and worship who requires students to receive constructive critique of their sermons, it’s only fair that I be willing to accept the same kind of feedback.  And third, my working hypothesis regarding preaching about controversial issues is that the process of deliberative dialogue is one way that we might heal our divisions, work toward civil discourse, and move the conversation forward in a productive way.  So in the spirit of scholarly inquiry, pastoral openness, and civic goodwill, I accepted the invitation to return to the church for a conversation.

The room was packed with over 20 people (they normally had just a handful of participants for these Wednesday evening “table talks”).  The pastor began by handing out a very helpful set of ground rules for discussion entitled “Touchstones for Creating Safe Space” from the Center for Courage and Renewal.  After leading us in prayer he then asked me to share with the group some opening remarks about how I had come to preach that particular sermon.  I explained that I had chosen to take a more prophetic approach to preaching the scriptural text based on my informed assumption that this congregation was open to sermons that directly addressed justice issues from a biblical perspective.  But, I continued, since then I had come to learn that there were strong reactions to the sermon, both positive and negative, and I was interested in hearing from those gathered what they wanted to share about the sermon.
From what I could tell, about half of the people in the room had a negative reaction to the sermon, and they shared the following kinds of responses:
* I don’t come to church to hear about political issues.  I don’t like to hear that.
* This sermon was just post-election whining.
* There was too much law and not enough Gospel.
* This sermon was too political.
* I was offended.  I feel you attacked me just because I voted for Trump.
Though there was not enough time for me to respond to these accusations, it was curious to me the kinds of things that were read into the sermon, especially the personalization of what was clearly a critique of systems and ethos, not individuals. (Exploring this phenomenon is a task for another time.) And I noted a general air of discomfort, indignation, and even scolding disapproval from those who offered their critiques.

Others, however, expressed thoughts that were exactly the opposite, with an overall tone of support, appreciation and even gratitude for the sermon.  They shared the following kinds of responses:
* The church should speak about these political issues.  Jesus never withheld himself from critiquing those in power.
* Moses was political and stood up to those who were abusing their power.
* I heard both Law and Gospel in this sermon because it invited us to find the center of our morals and ethics.
* I believe we are called to be caretakers of the environment as part of our baptismal vocation, and this sermon affirmed that for me.
* I found this sermon refreshing because it directly addressed issues I care about.
* The fact that so many of us have come together to discuss this sermon is a good thing.  We need to talk about these issues in the church.

Despite these positive rebuttals to the negative reactions to the sermon, the angriest voices were the loudest. There was one person in particular whose level of anger was so strong, my experience of her was that of being attacked.  She repeatedly interrupted me (breaking the agreed-upon rules of engagement) after she had demanded that I explain myself about a point in the sermon, and snidely ridiculed the safe space ground rules agreed upon by the group.  She also threatened that she would leave the church (which made no sense because this was just one sermon by a visiting preacher).  And she demanded to know if the pastor had vetted my sermon ahead of time, and if the synod (which oversees and coordinates the spiritual and organizational activities of its member congregations) didn’t have guidelines for what is allowed to be preached.  In other words (as I heard it), isn’t there some way we can silence this kind of preaching?  Can't we make her sit down and shut up?  I noticed several heads nodding in agreement with her.
At that point, I recalled what had happened to Senator Elizabeth Warren when Senator Mitch McConnell silenced her from reading Coretta Scott King’s letter when the Senate was debating whether or not to confirm Jeff Sessions as attorney general.  Warren was censured from speaking, and McConnell gave the following justification:  “She was warned.  She was given an explanation.  Nevertheless, she persisted.”
I know preaching during this time in our nation’s history is difficult, even painful.  The pushback can hurt. The consequences of people being angry, withdrawing their membership and their offerings, and threatening to shame you and even censure your proclamation of the scriptures are real.  I know because I’ve been hearing it from preachers around the country through my research, in conversations with pastoral colleagues, and because I’ve experienced it firsthand. 
But perhaps we preachers – especially those of us who are preaching while female – need to adopt our own version of this now-famous trio of sentences: 
The preacher was warned.

The preacher was given an explanation.

Nevertheless, the preacher persisted.


In the days since that lion’s den of a meeting, I am still committed to dialogue and hearing those with whom I disagree.  I know there is much to be learned and I remain steadfast in my hope that one way through this divisiveness is through honest respectful speaking and humble listening.
But here’s one thing I know:  I will not allow my prophetic preaching voice to be silenced. 

At my ordination, I made a vow to “preach and teach in accordance with the holy scriptures and the creeds and confessions” of the Lutheran church.  Thus I follow Martin Luther’s lead of calling out abuse of power when I see it and being willing to accept the consequences of my commitment to justice.  In that ordination vow I also promised that I would “lead God’s people by my own example in faithful service and holy living, and to give faithful witness in the world, that God's love may be known in all that I do.”  Thus, following the lead of another Lutheran minister – Dietrich Bonhoeffer – who took a bold prophetic stand against a dangerous and powerful regime, I am committed to ministering to those most vulnerable, and holding myself accountable to “the least of these” whom Jesus has identified as his own embodiment in this world (Matthew 25:31-46).      
As my good friend and colleague Emily Askew has reminded me, sometimes being prophetic entails loss.  If people threaten to leave because they are gnashing their teeth at the gospel, we may have to let them go in love, entrusting them to God’s care.  But if you’re avoiding preaching the hard stuff because you’re afraid of dividing the church, remember – those divisions are there with or without you.  You are simply called to witness to the reality of what is . . . and share the vision of what God is calling us to be.
This does not mean you should be partisan in your preaching, as in giving endorsement of a specific party or political individual.  But you have a protected right to offer a prophetic critique of words, policies, executive orders, and actions of any person, government, corporation or organization that holds power.  Remember – you are called to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ who never shied away from “talking politics,” which, in its truest sense is that which concerns the polis, the citizens.  Thus Jesus' ministry and preaching were absolutely political, which authorizes our ministry and preaching to address the concerns of the citizens as well.  
The key, of course, is how you preach politics.  One piece of advice I can offer at this point is to find a group of colleagues with whom you can share your sermons before you preach them, so that you can help each other navigate the Scylla of partisanship and the Charybdis of cowardice.  You do not have to be, nor should you be, a lone ranger in your ministry.  Find and cultivate trustworthy preaching partners and hold each other accountable while offering mutual gifts of wisdom and prudence.  (I'll be offering more guidance and best practices as my research on "preaching in the purple zone" continues, so I invite you to subscribe to this blog to see future posts.)  
So attend to your biblical exegesis with skill.  Apply your study of theology with integrity.  Let your pastoral heart beat for those you serve both inside and outside your church.  Pray with fierce trust in the God who called you.  And preach the gospel with persistent courage!

Leah Schade is the author of the book Creation-Crisis Preaching: Ecology, Theology and the Pulpit (Chalice Press, 2015). She is the Assistant Professor of Preaching and Worship at Lexington Theological Seminary in Kentucky, and an ordained minister of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.

Tuesday, February 14, 2017

Getting Local with Rep. Andy Barr: Environment, Health, Immigration All Connected

The Rev. Dr. Leah D. Schade

Andy Barr (R) is the United States Representative for Kentucky's 6th congressional district since 2013 and offers "mobile office hours" every second Tuesday of the month. Today, less than a month after Trump's inauguration, 30 people showed up at his Lexington office in Hamburg to share their concerns about what is going on in Congress, with Trump, with our country, and with our state. Mr. Barr wasn't there, but his staffers were, and they got an earful from a room filled with concerned citizens who were well-informed, articulate, passionate, respectful and firm in their convictions that he must listen to his constituents. Some of us were from Together We Will Bluegrass, others were from the group Indivisible-Bluegrass, and some were citizens who showed up on their own.  We shared many of the same concerns during the hour-long meeting.  

Mr. Pat Melton, seated in light blue shirt,
was Mr. Barr's spokesman at the meeting.
We began by expressing our appreciation that Mr. Barr was willing to open his offices to his constituents at all, given that his counterparts in the Senate (Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul) refuse to meet with citizens, do not answer phone calls or allow for recorded messages, and offer no way for our voices to be heard.  Nevertheless, our questions began with inquiries as to when Mr. Barr would be holding a town meeting, since he has not done so since 2014.  The staffer representing Mr. Barr, Mr. Pat Melton, had just started his position two weeks ago and, while gracious, amenable to our concerns, and not hostile in any way, was understandably not up to speed on his boss's schedule, positions or policies.  Nevertheless, he insisted that Mr. Barr was committed to listening to his constituents and keeping our best interests at heart.

We pointed out that Mr. Barr's actions indicated otherwise.  For example, many of us filled out the constituent survey on Mr. Barr’s website. We wondered who designed the survey, and why are there so many false choices presented that are skewed toward a conservative agenda?  If Mr. Barr is supposed to represent all constituents – progressive and conservative – wouldn’t it be prudent to listen to those who do not agree with him, but whose votes he needs to be reelected?

Another example of Mr. Barr's apparent lack of concern for his constituents has been his push for deregulating banking.  As Jane Eller from Indivisible Bluegrass pointed out, Mr. Barr has sponsored or cosponsored 9 pieces of legislation to deregulate banking.  How can we be protected from credit and mortgage scams and other scurrilous banking practices that led to the 2008 crash if Mr. Barr insists on deregulating banks?

There were also pointed questions about Mr. Barr's attacks on the Affordable Care Act, and serious concerns about the lack of access to health care that would result from abolishing health insurance for Kentucky citizens.  

My question had to do with environmental issues, which are very much a matter of public health.  I addressed my question from a faith perspective as Lutheran clergyperson:

I am distressed that Mr. Barr voted to overturn regulations that protect citizens from coal industry pollution.  Coal mining interests have invested $435,000 in his campaign committee and political action committee since his first run for Congress in 2010, making the sector his top supporter.  For the 2016 election cycle, Barr tops all of his House of Representatives and Senate colleagues in coal industry contributions, with almost $44,000 as of the end of September.  There’s no war on coal.  There is a war on public health.  And he is receiving half a million dollars to wage that war.

These were commonsense protections that did not harm the industry in any way.  Having a 100-foot buffer between coal mining and streams is about the length between two bases on a baseball field.  That is barely enough land to put between the harmful coal pollution and the sensitive streams that feed into the drinking water supplies for thousands of Kentucky residents.  And the requirement for coal companies to restore streams and return mined areas to conditions similar to those before mining took place is simply being a good neighbor.  We’re taught as children in Sunday School – if you make a mess, you must clean it up. 

I know that Mr. Barr is attends an Episcopal church.  The Anglican/Episcopalian document, “Stewardship of Creation” (2002) says that a goal for the church is to:  “encourage all members of our congregations to understand that God calls us to care for the creation by making our communities and environments better places for the next generation than they were in our lifetime.”  I’m interested in how Mr. Barr, who is a Christian, and an Episcopalian, can rationalize his actions while still claiming to be a Christian?  

Mr. Melton had no response for this.  And my question was followed by inquiries from others around the room about Mr. Barr's stance on climate change, if he would protect the EPA, and why he doesn't draw on the wisdom of scientists in his district on these issues. It was also pointed out that the immigration ban is keeping much-needed foreign doctors from our rural areas where they are desperately needed, and that doing away with the ACA would eliminate health care for coal miners suffering from black lung.  We as citizens were unanimous in our demand for the strongest possible health and safety protections for our state, our land and waterways, and each other.

Several other concerns were raised and issues addressed:
* An impassioned plea from the group not to defund Planned Parenthood (even from those in the room who oppose abortion).
*  Urging Mr. Barr to support efforts to remove Steve Bannon from the National Security Council.
* Concerns from a local elementary school teacher whose students from immigrant families are scared that their parents will be taken away and they will be left alone.
* Genuine fear about the state of our country due to President Trump's executive orders, chaotic leadership, and constant barrage of lies.

Valentines for Mr. Barr.
At one point a question was asked if Mr. Barr would be willing to stand up for the people of Kentucky - even if it meant standing against the Republican Party and even losing financial support from big donors.  Mr. Melton insisted that his boss's heart was in the right place.  

I ended by asking what Mr. Melton would like to see from us, what we could do to be helpful as concerned citizens.  He encouraged us to make appointments to speak with him, to keep showing up for events, and to maintain our level of engagement in this process.  And he promised to share our concerns with Mr. Barr.

I cannot speak for everyone who was there, but for me, the level of energy that room, the fact that people had done their homework and were so well-informed about the different bills and policies in our government, and that this many people took time on a Tuesday afternoon - Valentine's Day even - to share their concerns, was incredibly heartening.  

Indeed, this is what democracy looks like!

Leah Schade is the author of the book Creation-Crisis Preaching: Ecology, Theology and the Pulpit (Chalice Press, 2015). She is the Assistant Professor of Preaching and Worship at Lexington Theological Seminary in Kentucky, and an ordained minister of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.

Back to Basics: Advice for Christians in the Trump Era

The Rev. Dr. Leah Schade presenting at the Teach-in, Lexington Theological Seminary, Jan. 20, 2017
On January 20, 2017 -- Inauguration Day -- the seminary where I teach, Lexington Theological Seminary in Kentucky, held a Teach-in entitled "Now What?  Empowering the Church in the New Political Age."  We had planned for around 20-30 participants, but were surprised when the room filled with nearly 50 with 10 viewing the event online.  LTS President Charisse Gillett, Richard Weis, Jerry Sumney, Emily Askew, Barbara Blodgett, and I planned the event to foster a discussion on how Christians who are concerned with justice and goodwill should live out their faith in the current political environment. The feedback we received from participants is that more guidance is needed from church leaders going forward.  Because this is a new country we're living in now.
A full house for the Jan. 20 Teach-in at Lexington Theological Seminary.

Then and now I start with a little pastoral-care check-in.  Because, let’s face it – this has been a rough couple of weeks, and in fact, a tough couple of months.  Have you been experiencing any of these since the election (and maybe even before)?

Anxious.               Unsettled.           Distracted.          Unfocused.         Angry.   Confused.
Afraid for yourself or someone else.         Wondering about your own sanity.            Overwhelmed.

Maybe you haven’t felt any of these things.  But whether you consider yourself to be a blue dot in a sea of red, or a red dot in a sea of blue, the events of the past year have left very few untouched.  You may have noticed that no matter how hard you’re trying to be positive, make a contribution to the good of the world, and align yourself with acts of resistance to the evil at hand, you just can’t shake this feeling that something is off, something is amiss.  If you’re feeling that way, you’re not insane, and you are not alone.  Because something is terribly wrong. 

Fortunately, we have solid biblical and theological resources to help us understand what is happening.  Consider this passage from Deuteronomy which was the lectionary reading in many churches on Sunday, Feb. 12:

Deuteronomy 30:15-20 -- See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, death and adversity. 16If you obey the commandments of the Lord your God that I am commanding you today, by loving the Lord your God, walking in his ways, and observing his commandments, decrees, and ordinances, then you shall live and become numerous, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to possess. 17But if your heart turns away and you do not hear, but are led astray to bow down to other gods and serve them, 18I declare to you today that you shall perish; you shall not live long in the land that you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess. 19I call heaven and earth to witness against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live, 20loving the Lord your God, obeying him, and holding fast to him; for that means life to you and length of days, so that you may live in the land that the Lord swore to give to your ancestors, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.

These verses come at the end of Moses’ speech to the Israelites before he is about to step down and allow Joshua to become his successor.  They are getting ready to enter the land of Canaan, and Moses is giving them the laws of God – the commandments –  that are meant to guide them, help them manage the boundaries of rights and responsibilities, and to provide the basis for their relationships interpersonally and as a community of faith.

At the end of this very long set of instructions come these words:  “See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, death and adversity.  If you obey the commandments of the Lord your God that I am commanding you today, by loving the Lord your God, walking in his ways, and observing his commandments, decrees and ordinances, then you shall live and become numerous, and the Lord your God will bless you.  But if you turn away . . . you shall perish.”

My friends, a great turning away has occurred in this country.  A turning away from the most fundamental commandments of God has gotten us to this point where something vital to our very survival is perishing.  When something or someone perpetuates harmful stereotypes based on gender, sexual orientation, race, religion or country of origin; messes with your sense of reality; manipulates your perception of truth; and uses techniques and strategies to disorient you to the point where you question your own sanity – and does so in a way that affects an entire nation, this means that something wicked is at work. 

The Israelites understood what it meant to live in a time when something wicked was a work, when things were fundamentally not right.  Deuteronomy was actually written after the time of Moses.  The book was written over a period of 200 years when the Israelites were reeling from the conquest of two hostile conquerors – first, the Assyrians, and then the Babylonians.  The Israelites knew what it was like to have a foreign government messing with their sovereignty.  They had first-hand experience with polarization amongst their people.  They knew what it was like to live in a time when lies become normalized and reality itself seems to crumble around you.  They knew what it meant to live with brutality. 

Now we, too, are living in a time I call The Age of Disintegrationism.  Because what we’re experiencing in our country and our culture is like an auto-immune disorder, where the very systems that have served human society (flawed though they were) have turned against humanity itself and are resulting in self-destruction.  Something sinister has overtaken us and is attempting to unravel the fabric of human community, like a flesh-eating disease that is attacking us at the cellular level. 

The Israelites were also subjected to that kind of societal unravelling.  And so the authors of Deuteronomy knew it was important to write down Moses’ words – these commandments of God – and teach them over and over again to the people. Because the ancient commandments were in danger of being forgotten and lost in the midst of a very chaotic time.  So they set down this fifth book of the Torah to keep the traditions alive because they were essential for revitalizing their nation and restoring the foundation upon which their society could function. 

My friends, we have a Deuteronomic task before us today. It’s a big word because it's a big job. The Christian church has duty and a responsibility to remind ourselves and our society of these things:

There was once – and still must be – a moral and ethical center.
There were – and still are – standards for responsible leadership.
There was – and still is – accountability to truth.

Our Deuteronomic task in the face of this latest iteration of chaotic wickedness is commensurate with Moses' instructions to choose life and resist death.  We need to do two things: 1) re-establish a moral and ethical center based on resistance to evil and, at the same time, 2)  support life-giving values shared with other religions and non-religious people of good will.   

In other words, we have to get back to basics – the basics of the Ten Commandments that give us the non-negotiables when it comes to human decency and what it means to live without fear of the strong overtaking the weak. The basics of the teachings of Jesus that give us the bottom line of radical integrity, and a sacrificial love that puts your life and your body on the line to protect those most vulnerable.  The basics of prayer and worship and service in order to neutralize this evil and begin to return ourselves, our churches, and our world to a place of centered sanity and re-integration. 

This means that when we hear “alternative facts” and fake news – we have to call that what it really is: lying.  And what commandment is it breaking?  You shall not bear false witness.

And when executive orders are handed down that will endanger the lives of people, we have to remind the Powers that the commandment, You shall not kill, means we must resist when they are trying to push through legislation that is, in fact, life-threatening. 

Not only that, but we are being held accountable by heaven and earth itself.  In verse 19, God calls on heaven and earth to bear witness to the choice – obedience and life, or turning away and perishing – that God has set before us.  The skies and the planet itself are watching to see if we obey God’s commands.  And I have to say, if we were in a cosmic courtroom, I cannot imagine that any reasonable resident of earth would say that dumping coal pollution into streams that feed the drinking water for human and other-than-human communities is choosing life.  That choice leads to perishing. 

I cannot imagine the rivers of Pennsylvania where I used to live, and the rivers of North Dakota where they want to put pipelines with dangerous, toxic gases and oil – I cannot imagine the rivers are testifying that we are choosing life.  No, the choice leads to perishing.
Sissonville, WV, Natural Gas Pipeline Rupture, Explosion, & Fire
If the atmosphere itself could take the witness stand, I can only surmise that the testimony provided would let the record show that the human species polluted this planet with enough carbon dioxide and methane to drive it into a raging feverish demise.  This is not choosing life.  This choice leads to perishing.

And so over and over in Deuteronomy we hear the words command and obey reiterated again and again.  Obedience – it’s not a word we use very much.  It’s not a word we like very much.  Obedience is a word that has accumulated a negative aura because we don’t like be told what to do, that we must obey.  Obedience – isn’t that what we expect of dogs and children? 

But the Hebrew word has much deeper spiritual and religious sense.  The word is shama, which means to hear, to listen deeply, and to let the voice of God resonate so profoundly within you that you can feel your very soul resonate with the truth that is being proclaimed. 

When is the last time you felt the truth of something so profound and so real that it made your body just hum with resonance?

For me, it happened on January 21, just a few weeks ago.  As I stood among the crowd of 5000 people gathered in downtown Lexington listening to the speakers calling for justice and equity, looking at all the different signs, and marching in solidarity with people I had only just met but I knew shared my values, I felt my whole being resonate with the down-deep-in-the-bones realization that the Spirit of God was still at work in the world.  And when I came home that evening and saw that what I experienced was actually one of hundreds of marches all over the country – all over the world – I felt the resonance vibrating me to my core.  I felt for the first time that the world was taking on the Deuteronomic task of choosing life, standing against the forces of tyranny and standing for their fellow sisters and brothers, and even with Earth and heaven, standing for equality and justice, especially toward the weaker members of society.  This command – to stand on the side of life – is one I am happy to obey.

My colleagues in faith, our Deuteronomic task is not an easy one.  You will get push-back.  You will be mocked and smirked at and patronized and politely dismissed.  And some of us will feel the wrath of the powers because of our work for justice.  But you will be heard.  Because you do not do this alone.  Your voice, speaking for the voiceless, is being amplified across this nation.  You are following the command of God to choose life, answering the call to justice.

So be encouraged in your Deuteronomic task today. Know that you stand in a long line of faithful people who take their religions and traditions outside their houses of worship and out into the world, helping to create on the outside what we preach on the inside.  Attend to your Deuteronomic task with confidence, good humor, with purity of thought, word and deed as Jesus commanded us, with perseverance, fierce advocacy for justice, and great joy knowing you have colleagues in this place, and in houses of faith, and in the homes and classrooms and on the streets and in the forests and across the skies to support and encourage you in doing this Great Work of our time.  Amen.

Leah Schade is the author of the book Creation-Crisis Preaching: Ecology, Theology and the Pulpit (Chalice Press, 2015). She is the Assistant Professor of Preaching and Worship at Lexington Theological Seminary in Kentucky, and an ordained minister of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.