What is the Peace of God?

Yesterday's Gospel text was the call of Peter, James, and John. As that my priest likes for the music to fit the readings (something I'd never heard of growing up ;)), our hymn before the Gospel lesson was "They Cast Their Nets in Galilee." I liked it a lot, but the last verse really gave me pause...and then it was a topic of discussion at lunch afterward. What do y'all think? Here's the whole song, but I'm bolding the last verse, and asking y'all: What is this peace of God?
They cast their nets in Galilee
Just off the hills of brown;
Such happy, simple fisher folk,
Before the Lord came down.
Contented, peaceful fishermen,
Before they ever knew,
The peace of God that filled their hearts,
Brimful, and broke them too.
Young John who trimmed the flapping sail,
Homeless, in Patmos died,
Peter, who hauled the teeming net,
Head-down was crucified.
The peace of God, it is no peace,
But strife closed in the sod,
Yet let us pray for but one thing –
The marvelous peace of God.

No Middle Ground?

I'm trying to get back into blogging again. I enjoy it, I just don't make a priority of it. Maybe if I did more narrative of my day I would, but I don't know that that's the direction of my blog life anymore. Sometimes things inspire me to make blog entries. Someone might say that my blogging about things rather than talking about them/confronting them head on is hiding online, but I don't necessarily think so. I think that some people need the screen for their own confidence; there are those not confident enough to stir pots online, or disagree online. There are others who are not confident enough to do either of those things in person. I think that being able to speak - in any capacity, even if it doesn't involve a face-to-face confrontation - should be applauded more than criticized. I do, however, think that there's a difference between speaking online (such as commenting on something posted in a public area or writing a response to something in your own area) and being passive aggressive by doing things like writing things directed at someone unnamed but using "you" repeatedly and then not sharing with them. This talk about speaking, however, isn't the point of this entry. It's just something on my mind.
This entry was inspired by a blog entry I read elsewhere this morning while cleaning out my Gmail inbox, although I'm sure it's made countless other places throughout time. One of the issues the author addressed had to do with for/against things - if you're not against something you're for it. I'm not entirely certain how I feel about that statement, although my initial reaction is that there isn't a whole lot of room for grey, I like shades of grey, and my worldview doesn't force me to see things in black-and-white. But then grey: the author tempers the statement to say that if you aren't working against something you are, if nothing else, passively working toward it. Tacitly approving, as it were. I greatly agree with that. To allow something bad to happen when you bear at least a small part of responsibility (like being the citizen of the US ergo the vote and keeping those elected responsible) is to not be working against it. I don't know that I'd say that it's "for," but it's not using voice to keep things from happening.
With that in mind I have some examples for people to think about, particularly those who say "I never did _____." By being in the US (and these will mostly be US examples since that's my primary context) we bear responsibility for things that we ourselves have never directly done. We also bear responsibility for not using our voice to change things that can be changed (while other things really can't be changed: what's done is done in some instances). Allowing the continued dehumanization of the US's indigenous peoples by sports teams and allowing the US to continue to not uphold a single treaty it's signed over the course of it's history with those same people is our fault. Were we signers? Did we elect the people who signed them? No, probably neither. Are we citizens now? Is the US still bound to its word? Do we have a way to ask the US to keep its word? Yes, we do. We elect. We can lobby. We can vote a different way.
We are guilty of whenever the US bombs innocent people just to make a point or to make things move more quickly. Certainly there are times when our rules of engagement allow or require fire to be returned to places that should be left alone (such as mosques), but if the people currently being opposed are using that as a base and are firing for it, I certainly see a rationale for returning fire. Air strikes against hospitals full of civilians, though, leads to guilt of a corporate nature for a corporate sin.  Are we giving the orders? Maybe not. Did we play a part in a)electing the Commander in Chief b)letting our elected officials (some of whom have oversight of the armed forces via committees, funding, and war resolutions) know how we feel about things? Maybe, maybe not. Either way we have a part to play and responsibility to bear.
Is there no middle ground? I don't think so. In case that's unclear (which I think it might be to me), I think there is a middle ground, however I think it's hard to maintain staying in the middle ground and still being an active part in society. If there isn't, whoa nelly. We, particularly those who were told to feed the hungry and care for the poor all around, have a whole lot of corporate guilt behind for not fighting it. If there's not a middle ground, the people who aren't fighting for poverty - are actually supporting it and saying that those on the margins of society should stay there (often so that they don't have to share). However, I do think there's a middle ground. I don't dare suggest that the majority of people not working to alleviate poverty support it. By the same token, though, by not working for its eradication I think they - we - are (if only nominally) guilty of allowing it to persist
As an aside, I was published today in Faith in Action, the weekly e-newsletter of the United Methodist General Board of Church and Society. The piece can be found here.

Well...

Sometime over the Christmas break (I think it was then) maybe later my mom and I had a discussion about my "Peace is the Church's Business" button that I wear almost every day. It lead to my expressing political opinions on a few topics that are polar opposites from hers, although I left some things more simplistic. Tonight I got a text from her that said (edited from TextSpeak, "Did you say you do not believe in a standing army? Tell me again what you said about abortion and army. Thanks."

I don't really know what prompted that. A little while later I got a text that simply said, "I lurve you." I think that was meant to reassure me that she wasn't judging me. I appreciate it. I know that she wasn't. I wasn't at my phone when she sent the first one. I replied to her text with, ""I lurve you, too. I don't remember what I said exactly, but i don't support a standing army or handguns, except for killing rattlesnakes. I support recognizing the sanctity of all human life from natural birth to natural death. I oppose abortion but support a woman's right to choose. That's a simplistic summary. I oppose government sponsored killing of any human life. Why?"

It really is a simple summary, but it's accurate. There's a lot that could be unpacked there (like thinking that the solution to end abortion is to work to eradicate poverty and better education, rather than making it illegal for doctors to perform). However, I figured now was as good a time as any to share some lyrics on here. I bought Derek Webb's Mockingbird on Tuesday on iTunes. Maybe it was last Thursday. I really don't know when it was, but I have it now and as I listened to it, I felt myself drawn to one song in particular. (On The Ringing Bell it's "This Too Shall Be Made Right.")  The title of the song is "My Enemies Are Men Just Like Me" The lyrics follow. I'm really not a big fan of the sex/gender specificity as that when looking at it it could become easily narrowing and is exclusive, but I grant that Webb is a man albeit "enemies" could be women.  Note that this is copied and pasted, hence the lack of capitalization.

i have come to give you life
and to show you how to live it
i have come to make things right
to heal their ears and show you how to forgive them

(pre-chorus)
because i would rather die
i would rather die
i would rather die
than to take your life

(chorus)
how can i kill the ones i’m supposed to love
my enemies are men like me
i will protest the sword if it’s not wielded well
my enemies are men like me

(Instrumental break)
Audio excerpt of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech: "nonviolence is the answer to the crucial political and moral question of our time -- the need for man to overcome oppression and violence without resorting to violence and oppression."

(vs. 2)
peace by way of war is like purity by way of fornication
it’s like telling someone murder is wrong
and then showing them by way of execution

(pre-chorus)


(chorus)

(bridge)
when justice is bought and sold just like weapons of war
the ones who always pay are the poorest of the poor