Ah, Billy Joel, you rascal you. You just wanted to take Virginia Callahan’s
virginity, that’s all. Instead, you got yourself a Top 25 Billboard hit out
of “Only The Good Die Young”. Sing us a song, Piano man:
Come out, Virginia, don't let me
wait
You Catholic girls start much too
late
But sooner or later it comes down
to fate
I might as well be the one
They showed you a statue and told
you to pray
They built you a temple and locked
you away
But they never told you the price
that you pay
For things that you might have
done...
Joel says about the song, “"When I wrote 'Only the Good
Die Young', the point of the song wasn't so much anti-Catholic as pro-lust."
Either way, Joel gives us an excellent backdrop for understanding the Radical
Center.
We are used to the classic protagonist-antagonist struggle.
Classic literature, and indeed, the history of human life, itself, has amply
illustrated this struggle. In this case, a young man operating on his own moral
code of having sex at will is locked in strife with a young woman with a moral
code of preserving her virginity. Black and white. Good and bad. Catholic and
[whatever the singer of the song styled himself as]. These are classic opposing
positions in battle against one another. Most of us understand a world in which
there is good and there is bad. Hopefully we care about those polarities and
try to orient ourselves to a life with those opposites in mind.
Mack Reynolds introduces us to “a third way” - the Radical
Center in which notions of black and white are mocked to the extent that
they are not deemed reliable positions any more. The goal of Radical Center is
to generate apathy and hopelessness in which a few (who have generated the
apathy) can shape the moral, political, and economic direction of a nation. As
long as there are people strongly believe in black and white, good and bad,
there is hope - there is a goal to be achieved. But when a culture becomes selfish,
apathetic, and non-judgmental, the people are mindless sheep to be led by
shepherds with their own personal agenda.
“Only The Good Die Young” is a good illustration of a moral
compass informed by religion (at least in Virginia’s case). No Radical Center
issue there. Have sex or don’t. But what happens when religion itself begins
advancing the Radical Center approach - that we really can’t be sure about what
we think we’re sure of? I have a perfect example!
In a recent sermon, Adam Hamilton (senior pastor at Leawood,
Kansas’ United Methodist Church of the Resurrection) tackled the oft-heard “Christian
cliché” of “Love the sinner, hate the sin.” You can watch the entire
message here. Throughout the message Hamilton engages in a clever
rhetorical device call “deconstruction”. He identifies multiple Bible verses that
people think they understand only to
squash the passage as misinterpreted and offer is own interpretation that suits his goal. (This can only happen when people are so confused by rhetoric that they become apathetic and non-judgmental.)
Imagine looking at a map and every time you try to give
directions someone else turns the map 90 degrees. North is now West, South is
East and the old instructions are no longer valid. That is the method of
deconstruction. Take what people thought they knew and pull that foundation out
from under them.
At 29 minutes into the sermon, Hamilton does what he does what
he does best… he muddles the issue. He uses the prop of homosexuality to prove
that we can’t judge. (I've told you that non-judgmentalism is a key doctrine of RC. Hamilton demonstrates it.) Hamilton refers to “five, maybe six” passages in scripture
that speak against homosexual behavior and then asks “were they [Moses and
Paul, writers of those five or six passages] even talking about what we’re
talking about today? Did they understand things like sexual orientation?” In
other words, science has brought us to this wonderful age of enlightenment
while Moses and Paul wrote in heavy darkness… disregard what they have to say.
This is classic deconstruction and it is the surest path to
the Radical Center. Hamilton suggests that because the Bible was written long
ago, by people with a particular (peculiar) agenda, it can’t be used - as a whole - as a
guide for modern living.
Everyone agrees that America is
polarized, with ever-hardening positions held by people less and less willing
to listen to one another. No one agrees on what to do about it.
One solution that hasn’t yet been
tried, says Adam Hamilton, is for thinking persons of faith to model for the
rest of the country a richer, more thoughtful conversation on the political,
moral, and religious issues that divide us. Hamilton rejects the easy
assumptions and sloppy analysis of black and white thinking, seeking instead
the truth that resides on all sides of the issues, and offering a faithful and
compassionate way forward.
He writes, "I don't expect you
to agree with everything I've written. I expect that in the future even I won't
agree with everything I've written here. The point is not to get you to agree
with me, but to encourage you to think about what you believe. In the end I
will be inviting those of you who find this book resonates with what you feel
is true, to join the movement to pursue a middle way between the left and the
right - to make your voices heard - and to model for our nation and for the
church, how we can listen, learn, see truth as multi-sided, and love those with
whom we disagree."
Here’s the key sentence: “I expect that in the future even I
won't agree with everything I've written here.” There is an old saying - a
liberal is someone so open-minded they won’t even take their own side in an
argument. Hamilton boldly proclaims just that! Since there is no black and
white, he must remain gray even with respect to his own viewpoints. What
greater way to advance the Radical Center mission of non-judgmentalism than to
propose that one cannot even be certain about his own world view? How
convenient for those who would color in that world view for us since we can’t
be sure of our own.
And here’s another conundrum, a self-opposing concept.
Hamilton wants to have “a richer, more thoughtful conversation” that leads to
discovering “the truth that resides on all sides of the issues.” Truth on all
sides of the issues? “Multi-sided truth”? What is that? Radical centrists want to convince you that there is truth everywhere and that's why you can't be judgmental of another's person's "truth". That's right, at the Radical Center personal opinion and preference (and according to SCOTUS Justice Kennedy add "self-expression").
Sure, I guess if you’re talking, for example, about nuclear
energy, there is a truth that we need more electricity and there is a truth
that there are some risks to creating that electricity with nuclear power. Yes,
those are two sides both with some truth in them. But Hamilton has so
deconstructed his own source of truth (the Bible) he is left with no truth at
all except his own experience and wishes… and those may change! Is Adam
Hamilton’s truth your truth?
Billy Joel depicts a church which has established a black
and white morality (specifically on the subject of premarital sex).
Adam
Hamilton depicts a church of confusion-based non-judgmentalism.
Billy Joel illustrates
moral definity.
Adam Hamilton illustrates moral ambiguity.
The rock’n’roll
singer is the poster child for the struggle between good and evil.
The man of the cloth is the poster child for the
Radical Center.
Funny, I would have expected it to be the other way around.
I guess I don’t know what to expect anymore.