<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Drew G.I. Hart</title>
	<atom:link href="http://drewgihart.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://drewgihart.com</link>
	<description>Taking Jesus Seriously...  A Black Theology and Anabaptist Dialogue</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 05:26:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Prophetic Priorities for the Poor and Democratic Duty Dichotomies: A Spin Off by Drew Hart</title>
		<link>http://drewgihart.com/2012/02/04/prophetic-priorities-for-the-poor-and-democratic-duty-dichotomies-a-spin-off/#comment-1044</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Drew Hart]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 05:26:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drewgihart.com/?p=961#comment-1044</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You are right on point! I think that the only explanation of such &quot;perplexing&quot; christian approaches, is the reality that Christians have taken Jesus out of the equation, and instead have chosen self-interest and self-preservation in replace of a cross-shaped perspective.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are right on point! I think that the only explanation of such &#8220;perplexing&#8221; christian approaches, is the reality that Christians have taken Jesus out of the equation, and instead have chosen self-interest and self-preservation in replace of a cross-shaped perspective.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Prophetic Priorities for the Poor and Democratic Duty Dichotomies: A Spin Off by Jason Grimes</title>
		<link>http://drewgihart.com/2012/02/04/prophetic-priorities-for-the-poor-and-democratic-duty-dichotomies-a-spin-off/#comment-1042</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason Grimes]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 02:31:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drewgihart.com/?p=961#comment-1042</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Drew,
I am in agreement with you concerning civil disobedience. Your point about the difference between disagreeing over tax polices versus an individual&#039;s complete failure to live up to there vocation highlights the way I make my stance on various issues known. I believe that the church has a responsibility to address those areas where it is very clear that a government position is in direct conflict with God&#039;s position on the matter.  We have the Word of God for consultation on such matters and we would do well to use it and stand by it.  However there are some issues, though while very troubling to me, I would say that the church would be wise not to take a public or official stance because we run the risk of damaging our prophetic witness. Many times we as Christians simply do not have the expertise nor the necessary information to make a thorough declaration.  So for me to answer the question I/we would need to take each issue individually. I won&#039;t take the time to go over each one here, but one current issue that is one my mind is our approach with Iran.  Again I think this is one of those issues where we simply do not have enough information to take an educated position.  My opinion, (which I would not express beyond this forum in any official capacity) based on the information that I have seems to be in direct opposition to our administration. I must admit I am very surprised that President Obama is taking a hard line approach here.  I am not necessarily a pacifist but I certainly lean toward making peace versus war. So I am   concerned why many professing Christians, with perhaps the same information that I have, insist that we should pursue military action. I am perplexed as to how one could come to that conclusion.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Drew,<br />
I am in agreement with you concerning civil disobedience. Your point about the difference between disagreeing over tax polices versus an individual&#8217;s complete failure to live up to there vocation highlights the way I make my stance on various issues known. I believe that the church has a responsibility to address those areas where it is very clear that a government position is in direct conflict with God&#8217;s position on the matter.  We have the Word of God for consultation on such matters and we would do well to use it and stand by it.  However there are some issues, though while very troubling to me, I would say that the church would be wise not to take a public or official stance because we run the risk of damaging our prophetic witness. Many times we as Christians simply do not have the expertise nor the necessary information to make a thorough declaration.  So for me to answer the question I/we would need to take each issue individually. I won&#8217;t take the time to go over each one here, but one current issue that is one my mind is our approach with Iran.  Again I think this is one of those issues where we simply do not have enough information to take an educated position.  My opinion, (which I would not express beyond this forum in any official capacity) based on the information that I have seems to be in direct opposition to our administration. I must admit I am very surprised that President Obama is taking a hard line approach here.  I am not necessarily a pacifist but I certainly lean toward making peace versus war. So I am   concerned why many professing Christians, with perhaps the same information that I have, insist that we should pursue military action. I am perplexed as to how one could come to that conclusion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Prophetic Priorities for the Poor and Democratic Duty Dichotomies: A Spin Off by Drew Hart</title>
		<link>http://drewgihart.com/2012/02/04/prophetic-priorities-for-the-poor-and-democratic-duty-dichotomies-a-spin-off/#comment-1041</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Drew Hart]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 16:21:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drewgihart.com/?p=961#comment-1041</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Good questions. I definitely agree that the democracy has been over seized because of money in politics, resulting in a few wealthy individuals and corporations practically determining our electoral process through their unlimited donations. I wish I had some great answer on how to respond best as a Christian, but I have no great inspiration on such things. All I can to is point to the prophetic Christian tradition and believe that the path forward relates to prophetic witness to the nation concerning idolatry and injustice. Jesus&#039; example is perfect. While we do not see any direct clash between Jesus and Caesar himself, Jesus certainly has a lot to say about the corruption of wealth and calling everyone (Jew and Gentile) from it. Scholars have also noted a fair share of political critique in the synoptic gospels that make sense when we understand both context and historical discourse that had been taking place, often we miss these critiques without such background.  Still, this is all so far talking about prophetic critique as God&#039;s mouthpiece.
I think, Jesus&#039; interaction with the Establishment in Jerusalem (echoes of Jeremiah 7) do demonstrate that at times, as the body of Christ must make judgement against centralized power through resistance. But this must not be done by whim, but prayerfully rooted in theological vision and imagination and cognitively founded in God&#039;s story and narrative, here and now in our 21st Century world. Therefore, I believe resistance is necessary at times, but that it must be a &quot;lamb&#039;s war&quot; that is faithful to the calling of bearing one&#039;s cross rather than the same violent tactics of our fallen and broken world. So I think Birmingham, 1963, is a great illustration of such possibilities. 
I don&#039;t think that we have the right to overthrow a government just because it is run by a dictator. The more important question for me is, is the government actually governing. Does it provide order and administer justice. Those are the responsibilities of government. If an individual is nothing more than an oppressive tyrant that produces chaos, they are not &quot;government&quot; in my eyes and one is needed. I would see a response in this case as more constructive than destructive, more about forming a true government, rather than replacing one. This option is not about agreeing or disagreeing with particular tax policies, but a very serious indictment on an individual or group&#039;s complete failure to live up to their vocation. 
Let me know if I didn&#039;t answer your question sufficiently. Those are my thoughts, what are yours?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good questions. I definitely agree that the democracy has been over seized because of money in politics, resulting in a few wealthy individuals and corporations practically determining our electoral process through their unlimited donations. I wish I had some great answer on how to respond best as a Christian, but I have no great inspiration on such things. All I can to is point to the prophetic Christian tradition and believe that the path forward relates to prophetic witness to the nation concerning idolatry and injustice. Jesus&#8217; example is perfect. While we do not see any direct clash between Jesus and Caesar himself, Jesus certainly has a lot to say about the corruption of wealth and calling everyone (Jew and Gentile) from it. Scholars have also noted a fair share of political critique in the synoptic gospels that make sense when we understand both context and historical discourse that had been taking place, often we miss these critiques without such background.  Still, this is all so far talking about prophetic critique as God&#8217;s mouthpiece.<br />
I think, Jesus&#8217; interaction with the Establishment in Jerusalem (echoes of Jeremiah 7) do demonstrate that at times, as the body of Christ must make judgement against centralized power through resistance. But this must not be done by whim, but prayerfully rooted in theological vision and imagination and cognitively founded in God&#8217;s story and narrative, here and now in our 21st Century world. Therefore, I believe resistance is necessary at times, but that it must be a &#8220;lamb&#8217;s war&#8221; that is faithful to the calling of bearing one&#8217;s cross rather than the same violent tactics of our fallen and broken world. So I think Birmingham, 1963, is a great illustration of such possibilities.<br />
I don&#8217;t think that we have the right to overthrow a government just because it is run by a dictator. The more important question for me is, is the government actually governing. Does it provide order and administer justice. Those are the responsibilities of government. If an individual is nothing more than an oppressive tyrant that produces chaos, they are not &#8220;government&#8221; in my eyes and one is needed. I would see a response in this case as more constructive than destructive, more about forming a true government, rather than replacing one. This option is not about agreeing or disagreeing with particular tax policies, but a very serious indictment on an individual or group&#8217;s complete failure to live up to their vocation.<br />
Let me know if I didn&#8217;t answer your question sufficiently. Those are my thoughts, what are yours?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Politics of Poor Plight and Prophetic Priorities: A Brief Response to Mitt Romney by DR</title>
		<link>http://drewgihart.com/2012/02/03/politics-of-poor-plight-and-prophetic-priorities-a-brief-response-to-mitt-romney/#comment-1040</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DR]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 21:24:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drewgihart.com/?p=952#comment-1040</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I believe Nadine and Jason brought it back to the important point which is that the Biblical mandate is to Christians.
As soon as we veer from that point, we get into &quot;that which seems good in our own eyes&quot;
Like &quot;FAIRNESS&quot;
What is fair?
Is taking property away from someone and giving it to another fair?
Obama speaks of having people &quot;paying their fair share&quot;
Adam and Eve seemed to think that disregarding private property rights was fair...
Who owned that tree?  Was He within His rights to demand them not to eat from it?  Or could they have argued that it was fair since they were underpriviliged and God is overpriviliged...?
I prefer to keep the mandates of God personal and on an individual Christian basis onless He spicificly states otherwise.
Politics holds no place in Christianity although Christianity should do all it can to influence Politics.
And not that anyone else would agree with me - but if Romney gets elected President and turns the economy around The rising tide will lift all ships and allow those of us who are Christians to have more money so that we can spend it on the underprivilidged.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe Nadine and Jason brought it back to the important point which is that the Biblical mandate is to Christians.<br />
As soon as we veer from that point, we get into &#8220;that which seems good in our own eyes&#8221;<br />
Like &#8220;FAIRNESS&#8221;<br />
What is fair?<br />
Is taking property away from someone and giving it to another fair?<br />
Obama speaks of having people &#8220;paying their fair share&#8221;<br />
Adam and Eve seemed to think that disregarding private property rights was fair&#8230;<br />
Who owned that tree?  Was He within His rights to demand them not to eat from it?  Or could they have argued that it was fair since they were underpriviliged and God is overpriviliged&#8230;?<br />
I prefer to keep the mandates of God personal and on an individual Christian basis onless He spicificly states otherwise.<br />
Politics holds no place in Christianity although Christianity should do all it can to influence Politics.<br />
And not that anyone else would agree with me &#8211; but if Romney gets elected President and turns the economy around The rising tide will lift all ships and allow those of us who are Christians to have more money so that we can spend it on the underprivilidged.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Prophetic Priorities for the Poor and Democratic Duty Dichotomies: A Spin Off by Jason Grimes</title>
		<link>http://drewgihart.com/2012/02/04/prophetic-priorities-for-the-poor-and-democratic-duty-dichotomies-a-spin-off/#comment-1039</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason Grimes]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 18:33:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drewgihart.com/?p=961#comment-1039</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Drew, well said.  I am in agreement.  As you said because we live in a republic, there are some inferred or implied responsibilities for the Christian and you have so eloquently  pointed these out. We should vote, keep abreast of the issues, work for just and righteous laws and hold our elected officials accountable which includes critiquing positions and policies as you addressed in your previous post concerning Mitt Romney.  All of this is to be tempered with prayer and respect as the apostle Paul illustrates in I Tim. 2:1-4.  So there is no question that we must both be involved in the political square and tangibly address the need as we have opportunity.  The complexity for me is the state of our republic.  Because of the corruptive effect lobbying is having upon our government (amongst other things) it is becoming increasingly more difficult to produce favorable effects on the plight of the poor through governmental policy.  So even though we have a voice through our vote it is not speaking as loudly as the voice of the people and corporations that have the most money.  Our government is looking more and more like ancient Rome.  What do we do in this case?  Also another area that I would like your opinion is: &quot;What are Christians to do in those areas where there is no democracy but rather a dictatorship?&quot; Are Christians to rise up and overthrow the dictator?  I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the &quot;Arab Spring&quot;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Drew, well said.  I am in agreement.  As you said because we live in a republic, there are some inferred or implied responsibilities for the Christian and you have so eloquently  pointed these out. We should vote, keep abreast of the issues, work for just and righteous laws and hold our elected officials accountable which includes critiquing positions and policies as you addressed in your previous post concerning Mitt Romney.  All of this is to be tempered with prayer and respect as the apostle Paul illustrates in I Tim. 2:1-4.  So there is no question that we must both be involved in the political square and tangibly address the need as we have opportunity.  The complexity for me is the state of our republic.  Because of the corruptive effect lobbying is having upon our government (amongst other things) it is becoming increasingly more difficult to produce favorable effects on the plight of the poor through governmental policy.  So even though we have a voice through our vote it is not speaking as loudly as the voice of the people and corporations that have the most money.  Our government is looking more and more like ancient Rome.  What do we do in this case?  Also another area that I would like your opinion is: &#8220;What are Christians to do in those areas where there is no democracy but rather a dictatorship?&#8221; Are Christians to rise up and overthrow the dictator?  I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the &#8220;Arab Spring&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Politics of Poor Plight and Prophetic Priorities: A Brief Response to Mitt Romney by Drew Hart</title>
		<link>http://drewgihart.com/2012/02/03/politics-of-poor-plight-and-prophetic-priorities-a-brief-response-to-mitt-romney/#comment-1037</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Drew Hart]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 21:00:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drewgihart.com/?p=952#comment-1037</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey everyone thanks for the discussion, some good stuff. The one area which I have some varying perspectives is in the area of Christian responsibility for the poor, especially in the context of a democracy. I agree with the sentiment that Christians are the one&#039;s who are called with the task, but I think about what that means a bit differently than most. I see it as a bit more complex than whether or not we ought to expect our politicians to do right or not. Especially given as Kyle talked about, the existence of systemic and structural realities that negatively affect people&#039;s lives. What responsibility does the Christian have in relationship to unjust policies and laws that make it hard to escape generational poverty? That is worth wrestling over in my eyes.  Given that, I decided I would write a second blog as a spin off of this discussion. Feel free to read it, and if you disagree (or agree) with what I say, I would love to hear your thoughts and perspectives.     

And just to be clear, I do agree that the Kingdom will not come through government. This will hopefully be more evident in my next post. Glad we all agree that Mitt Romney was out of pocket!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey everyone thanks for the discussion, some good stuff. The one area which I have some varying perspectives is in the area of Christian responsibility for the poor, especially in the context of a democracy. I agree with the sentiment that Christians are the one&#8217;s who are called with the task, but I think about what that means a bit differently than most. I see it as a bit more complex than whether or not we ought to expect our politicians to do right or not. Especially given as Kyle talked about, the existence of systemic and structural realities that negatively affect people&#8217;s lives. What responsibility does the Christian have in relationship to unjust policies and laws that make it hard to escape generational poverty? That is worth wrestling over in my eyes.  Given that, I decided I would write a second blog as a spin off of this discussion. Feel free to read it, and if you disagree (or agree) with what I say, I would love to hear your thoughts and perspectives.     </p>
<p>And just to be clear, I do agree that the Kingdom will not come through government. This will hopefully be more evident in my next post. Glad we all agree that Mitt Romney was out of pocket!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Politics of Poor Plight and Prophetic Priorities: A Brief Response to Mitt Romney by Jason Grimes</title>
		<link>http://drewgihart.com/2012/02/03/politics-of-poor-plight-and-prophetic-priorities-a-brief-response-to-mitt-romney/#comment-1036</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason Grimes]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 04:30:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drewgihart.com/?p=952#comment-1036</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pastor Drew, I agree whole heartedly with your assessment of Mitt Romney&#039;s comment but if you don&#039;t mind I would like to hijack your post and change the focus a bit.  There is no question that constitutionally the government is suppose to represent the people (all people).  However the Biblical mandate rests upon the people of God.  Certainly God&#039;s Biblical principles and truth applies to everyone saved and unsaved.  So if everybody would yield to the dictates of the scripture this world would be a better place.  But can we really expect the unregenerate world to uphold Biblical truth?  I remember when I was young my mother quoted to me this proverb/story:

&quot;There was once a little boy who was about to cross a river and a rattle snake came up beside him. The snake looked at the boy and said, Would you be so kind to take me across the river? The boy looked at the snake and said no way, you bite! The snake said, No, I promise, I will not bite you. So the boy trusted the snake, picked the snake up and took it safely to the other side. As soon as the boy put the snake down, the snake rattled and bit the boy. The boy said, Hey you promised not to bite me! The snake said, You knew what I was when you picked me up, what did you expect?&quot; 

You see Mitt and all of the political elite (obviously not all but allow me to paint with a broad brush for a moment) are simplying doing what comes natural to them... protecting their own and lining their pockets. What more could we expect?  The truth is that God has given the church the mandate to uphold His Word and take care of the poor.  Could it be that we (I am part of that collective we) have fallen down on the job... fallen asleep at the proverbial wheel?  Many times in our church services we quote 2 Corinthians chapter 9 in an effort to encourage the saints to give.  Perhaps this giving is targeted toward the building fund or some other endeavour.  But a careful look at the scripture says that the purpose of this particular offering, outlined in the aforementioned text, is to send to the church in Jerusalem mind you the poor in Jerusalem as they had fallen on hard times.  I can only imagine what would happen if the church began taking up collections for the sole purpose of alleviating some of the suffering of others.  Yeah I know we have our benevolence fund and we give a certain percentage to missions, but in the grand scheme of things how much does this compare to the amount that is collected? I don&#039;t have insight into any church budget but I am going to go out on a limb (and I am confident it will hold) and say that the bulk of the money that is collected goes toward purchasing buildings, building upkeep, programs, all sorts of overhead, but nothing really to do with helping the poor. I am afraid there is something seriously wrong with this picture.  Judgement must first begin at the house of God.  You see the problem in Washington, the world and the church is a heart issue, and no amount of public policy will fix it.  I am not against Christians participating in the political square. In fact I am for it and believe that we should work for laws that are just and hold our public officials accountable. However we must not get caught up in what Chuck Colson calls &quot;the political illusion&quot;, (the idea that politics is going to solve all of our problems).  The kingdom does not come through Washington, but rather through the people of God as we uphold is Word and put it into practice. Romney and others will only speak and do what their flesh dictates, but let us, the people of God speak and do what God&#039;s Word dictates.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pastor Drew, I agree whole heartedly with your assessment of Mitt Romney&#8217;s comment but if you don&#8217;t mind I would like to hijack your post and change the focus a bit.  There is no question that constitutionally the government is suppose to represent the people (all people).  However the Biblical mandate rests upon the people of God.  Certainly God&#8217;s Biblical principles and truth applies to everyone saved and unsaved.  So if everybody would yield to the dictates of the scripture this world would be a better place.  But can we really expect the unregenerate world to uphold Biblical truth?  I remember when I was young my mother quoted to me this proverb/story:</p>
<p>&#8220;There was once a little boy who was about to cross a river and a rattle snake came up beside him. The snake looked at the boy and said, Would you be so kind to take me across the river? The boy looked at the snake and said no way, you bite! The snake said, No, I promise, I will not bite you. So the boy trusted the snake, picked the snake up and took it safely to the other side. As soon as the boy put the snake down, the snake rattled and bit the boy. The boy said, Hey you promised not to bite me! The snake said, You knew what I was when you picked me up, what did you expect?&#8221; </p>
<p>You see Mitt and all of the political elite (obviously not all but allow me to paint with a broad brush for a moment) are simplying doing what comes natural to them&#8230; protecting their own and lining their pockets. What more could we expect?  The truth is that God has given the church the mandate to uphold His Word and take care of the poor.  Could it be that we (I am part of that collective we) have fallen down on the job&#8230; fallen asleep at the proverbial wheel?  Many times in our church services we quote 2 Corinthians chapter 9 in an effort to encourage the saints to give.  Perhaps this giving is targeted toward the building fund or some other endeavour.  But a careful look at the scripture says that the purpose of this particular offering, outlined in the aforementioned text, is to send to the church in Jerusalem mind you the poor in Jerusalem as they had fallen on hard times.  I can only imagine what would happen if the church began taking up collections for the sole purpose of alleviating some of the suffering of others.  Yeah I know we have our benevolence fund and we give a certain percentage to missions, but in the grand scheme of things how much does this compare to the amount that is collected? I don&#8217;t have insight into any church budget but I am going to go out on a limb (and I am confident it will hold) and say that the bulk of the money that is collected goes toward purchasing buildings, building upkeep, programs, all sorts of overhead, but nothing really to do with helping the poor. I am afraid there is something seriously wrong with this picture.  Judgement must first begin at the house of God.  You see the problem in Washington, the world and the church is a heart issue, and no amount of public policy will fix it.  I am not against Christians participating in the political square. In fact I am for it and believe that we should work for laws that are just and hold our public officials accountable. However we must not get caught up in what Chuck Colson calls &#8220;the political illusion&#8221;, (the idea that politics is going to solve all of our problems).  The kingdom does not come through Washington, but rather through the people of God as we uphold is Word and put it into practice. Romney and others will only speak and do what their flesh dictates, but let us, the people of God speak and do what God&#8217;s Word dictates.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Politics of Poor Plight and Prophetic Priorities: A Brief Response to Mitt Romney by Kyle</title>
		<link>http://drewgihart.com/2012/02/03/politics-of-poor-plight-and-prophetic-priorities-a-brief-response-to-mitt-romney/#comment-1035</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kyle]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 02:22:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drewgihart.com/?p=952#comment-1035</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So many directions to go with this topic but overall this seems to be the season of disdain for the poor.  It is assumed by many that poor people are in their condition because of their own doing or because of a personal decision to be poor.  Unfortunately, poverty can run from generation to generation because of structural inequities tied to class, race or ethnicity and not simply a personal decision to be poor.  In a sense Mitt may be a key part of the reason there are real structural inequities in American society--he is a member of the American oligarchy, a son of privilege. Privilege demands priority and preservation.

From my vantage point Mitt has simply echoed the words of Newt on this topic. The narrative follows this direction, &quot;If those poor folk would develop a work ethic then they wouldn&#039;t be poor.&quot; The condescending gaze of these powerful men are reminders that the colonial experiment of those other &#039;sons of privilege&#039; is alive and well. This is the gaze of the colonialist who wrote so eloquently about liberty as they enslaved generations of families who worked without the freedom to own anything except the hope of death and freedom tied to the afterlife. It is also the gaze of preachers who utilized the Scriptures to shape &#039;virtue&#039; in their own favor ignoring many of the words and works of the Messiah.

It&#039;s amazing that one corner of American society has high jacked the concept of &quot;values&quot;, &quot;valor&quot; and &quot;integrity&quot; and everything associated with &quot;good ole...&quot;  Some of the hardest working, most trust worthy people I know are poor, dirt poor. Christ intended to be born into poverty--it could be said that Christ would fit in well in societies less desirable communities and not so much in our &#039;gated communities&#039;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So many directions to go with this topic but overall this seems to be the season of disdain for the poor.  It is assumed by many that poor people are in their condition because of their own doing or because of a personal decision to be poor.  Unfortunately, poverty can run from generation to generation because of structural inequities tied to class, race or ethnicity and not simply a personal decision to be poor.  In a sense Mitt may be a key part of the reason there are real structural inequities in American society&#8211;he is a member of the American oligarchy, a son of privilege. Privilege demands priority and preservation.</p>
<p>From my vantage point Mitt has simply echoed the words of Newt on this topic. The narrative follows this direction, &#8220;If those poor folk would develop a work ethic then they wouldn&#8217;t be poor.&#8221; The condescending gaze of these powerful men are reminders that the colonial experiment of those other &#8216;sons of privilege&#8217; is alive and well. This is the gaze of the colonialist who wrote so eloquently about liberty as they enslaved generations of families who worked without the freedom to own anything except the hope of death and freedom tied to the afterlife. It is also the gaze of preachers who utilized the Scriptures to shape &#8216;virtue&#8217; in their own favor ignoring many of the words and works of the Messiah.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s amazing that one corner of American society has high jacked the concept of &#8220;values&#8221;, &#8220;valor&#8221; and &#8220;integrity&#8221; and everything associated with &#8220;good ole&#8230;&#8221;  Some of the hardest working, most trust worthy people I know are poor, dirt poor. Christ intended to be born into poverty&#8211;it could be said that Christ would fit in well in societies less desirable communities and not so much in our &#8216;gated communities&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Politics of Poor Plight and Prophetic Priorities: A Brief Response to Mitt Romney by Darryl P.</title>
		<link>http://drewgihart.com/2012/02/03/politics-of-poor-plight-and-prophetic-priorities-a-brief-response-to-mitt-romney/#comment-1033</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Darryl P.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 18:00:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drewgihart.com/?p=952#comment-1033</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank you so much for posting this. It is so true. When listening to the rhetoric of the religious right you would think that Jesus&#039; ministry centered around the rich and powerful. You would never know that his ministry centered around, as you said, the &quot;least of these&quot;.  While I agree that neither party has it totally right...statements like these really enrage me concerning the republican party due to the fact that they claim such a high degree of piety yet they miss the mark completely when it comes to what it truly means to work out your salvation.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you so much for posting this. It is so true. When listening to the rhetoric of the religious right you would think that Jesus&#8217; ministry centered around the rich and powerful. You would never know that his ministry centered around, as you said, the &#8220;least of these&#8221;.  While I agree that neither party has it totally right&#8230;statements like these really enrage me concerning the republican party due to the fact that they claim such a high degree of piety yet they miss the mark completely when it comes to what it truly means to work out your salvation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Politics of Poor Plight and Prophetic Priorities: A Brief Response to Mitt Romney by Nadine</title>
		<link>http://drewgihart.com/2012/02/03/politics-of-poor-plight-and-prophetic-priorities-a-brief-response-to-mitt-romney/#comment-1032</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nadine]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://drewgihart.com/?p=952#comment-1032</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I agree, and I think Romney&#039;s paradigm of &quot;we choose who we focus on&quot; is misguided from the start.  I don&#039;t believe that any presidential candidate is supposed to focus on &quot;certain kinds of people,&quot; regardless of who they are.  If Romney said he was only focusing on poor people for his election, I think that would have been wrong as well.  Your job is to focus on everybody.  That&#039;s why you become president of the entire country.  Furthermore, it&#039;s problematic to imply that we can split up Americans into three groups of poor, middle class, and rich and affect one group at a time.  Certainly, class distinctions are not packaged that nicely and these policies will affect everybody in some way, regardless of social standing.  I get that he needs his soundbite, but it makes him sound simple-minded.  

But, MUCH more importantly, I think this should remind us as Christians to not wait on the government (and, yes, that includes you, Obama) to help those most in need.  The Bible commands believers (not politicians) to take care of the poor.  As individual Christians and as the global church, we need to take that burden upon ourselves, while Romney and his cronies do back flips into their golden swimming pools full of money.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree, and I think Romney&#8217;s paradigm of &#8220;we choose who we focus on&#8221; is misguided from the start.  I don&#8217;t believe that any presidential candidate is supposed to focus on &#8220;certain kinds of people,&#8221; regardless of who they are.  If Romney said he was only focusing on poor people for his election, I think that would have been wrong as well.  Your job is to focus on everybody.  That&#8217;s why you become president of the entire country.  Furthermore, it&#8217;s problematic to imply that we can split up Americans into three groups of poor, middle class, and rich and affect one group at a time.  Certainly, class distinctions are not packaged that nicely and these policies will affect everybody in some way, regardless of social standing.  I get that he needs his soundbite, but it makes him sound simple-minded.  </p>
<p>But, MUCH more importantly, I think this should remind us as Christians to not wait on the government (and, yes, that includes you, Obama) to help those most in need.  The Bible commands believers (not politicians) to take care of the poor.  As individual Christians and as the global church, we need to take that burden upon ourselves, while Romney and his cronies do back flips into their golden swimming pools full of money.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

