Adventist Health Message 2.0

As I mentioned below, I was in Sacramento yesterday doing some lobbying on behalf of children's health insurance. I'm always reluctant to use the word "lobbying" because of the negative connotations associated with that activity. The difference is, most lobbyists are paid to represent the interests of some powerful corporation than wants to influence public policy. Those same corporations are often donors to campaigns and so the whole thing gets mixed up with power, money and politics. The power of the PICO model of community organizing is that we are the people. We are not paid lobbyists. We are all volunteers, taking time off work to travel, sometimes all the way across the country. The other piece is this, at least for PICO, faith is the motivation for what we are doing, not profit or something else.

I had the privilege of giving the opening faith reflection at our Prayer Vigil, held on the capital steps. Here is the transcript of my faith reflection, if you care to read it.

Good morning!
My name is Ryan Bell. I am the senior pastor of the Hollywood Seventh-day Adventist Church. My congregation, along with 350 other congregations across the State of California, representing 450,000 California families, has worked diligently over the past several years to see that every child is covered by adequate health insurance.

We gather here today as leaders of a diverse group of faith communities, united in our concern, born of our faith, for the children of our communities. Many of us have traveled some distance today to be here in Sacramento, but our hearts are in our neighborhoods back home, where thousands upon thousands of our children cannot see a doctor or a dentist when they need to.

We live in a time when the dominant narrative of our lives is about consumerism and markets. Human beings have become commodities to be bought and sold; measured by their economic usefulness. But this was not always the economic rationality by which people lived. There were times when a more human narrative dominated the public discourse.

In the Torah, YHWH sets forth a different economic standard:

There will, however, be no one in need among you, because the Lord is sure to bless you in the land that the Lord your God is giving you as a possession to occupy….
If there is among you anyone in need, a member of your community in any of your towns within the land that the Lord your God is giving you, do not be hard-hearted or tight-fisted toward your needy neighbor. You should rather open your hand, willingly lending enough to meet the need, whatever it may be. (Deut. 15:4,7-8).

YHWH’s vision for human community is that no one would be in need; a vision of enough. It is a call to live open-handedly. It is an invitation to be an open-handed society. It is a vision, born of an equally important idea in the Hebrew Bible – that God’s creation is abundant. When women and men act justly, there are enough resources to care for each and every person. What is more often reality, from Biblical times until today, is that a few, who hoard the majority of the resources, are in positions of power and enact laws that benefit themselves.
We need a different kind of leadership in our state and in our nation. We need the kind of leadership that takes God’s vision of a just and equitable community seriously and enacts laws that prioritize care for the weakest and most vulnerable members of our human family – our children.

In the Christian New Testament, Jesus sets a similar standard. In a powerful depiction of the final judgment Jesus describes two kinds of people – those who act with compassion and those who do not.

Then the king will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?’ And the king will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.’

Those who are blessed by God – those who will inherit the kingdom, says Jesus – are those who act in compassion for the hungry, the naked AND THE SICK!

What will the King say when we explain that in the wealthiest state of the wealthiest country in the world we could not manage to care for our sick children? What will the King say when we tell him that the least of these, our children – and the poorest of our children, at that – were not that important?

The children of our state, our country, our world, are the ones Jesus calls, “my family.” Jesus was especially concerned about how the weakest and most vulnerable members of his family – those he called “the least of these” are treated.

All around the State of California nearly 800,000 children are unable to access one of the most basic of necessities of life – health care.

Why, in the richest nation on the earth, should our most vulnerable citizens be recklessly endangered like this?

We, the leaders of religious communities, are unwilling to sacrifice our children on the alter of some narrow understanding of free-markets. As a society, we long ago decided that our children should have access to free education, regardless of economic class. Why would we deny equally important access to health care for our children?

To limit access to health insurance to 200% of poverty (or approximately $41,000 per year) is not only reckless and irresponsible, it is immoral. In an increasing number of our communities an income of $41,000 per year does not make a family of four middle class! For these families, insurance is still a luxury these families cannot afford. [Reference: "Rules May Limit Health Program Aiding Children", New York Times, Aug. 21, 2007]

Covering all children in America is not heroic. It is not excessive or extravagant. It is human. Now is the hour for the richest nation on the earth to demonstrate its moral fiber by doing what is right because it is right and cover all children with health care insurance.

The health of our children is not a political issue – it is certainly not a partisan issue. It is a moral issue that demands our attention.
Therefore today, we stand united in prayer and in our resolve to care for the children of our communities who are being left behind by our health care system. The same God who inspired Jesus to say, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these," invites us to care for our children.

LA Voice delegation with Assembly Member Mike Feuer of the 42nd Assembly District where the Hollywood Church is located.

Comments

[Scott McCoon]

I appreciate the the focus on the children. It is an issue that does not get the publicity it deserves. I am interested in what the organizations plan is for bringing healthcare to the children. I am not convinced that the government should be solely responsible to make this happen. As I read your speech I couldn't help but think it was also appealing to everyone in the religious community to do their part. We need to reach out to the children in our own communities and churches and help them get the necessary insurance. Don't get me wrong I think our government health care dollars could be allocated in a much more effective manner. I currently work at a government health care facility and it is extremely inneficient. We need to realize that "we the people" need to first organize and meet this challenge ourselves. We have a mentality in this country that our government should take care of all our needs. The government is becoming increasingly powerful and many responsibilities that church's historically took, the government is now taking. Maybe one of the reasons the church seems irrelavent to many people in today's society is that we are unwilling or unable to help them in practical ways. I wonder what the percentage is of children sitting in church pews every weekend without any sort of health care coverage. many people in that same church would probably be willing to help out but that's a taboo topic at most churches I have visited. Your supposed to put on your best face and have your life all figured out when you show up every week. I'm sorry about that last part, that was extremely synical. regardless of the way it is accomplished though, it is very important that children have health coverage in today's society.

[Ryan Bell]

Hey Scott! I actually do think it is the government's responsibility. The US is the only developed country that has not taken responsibility for the health of its citizens. There is actually a single-payer bill before the California Assembly or Senate (can't remember which) which will most likely pass but get vetoed by the Governor. With the cost of health care going up, and for-profit health insurance companies getting a huge proportion of the profit, it is harder and harder for individuals to afford it. That's why so many go without. There is no way churches can provide health insurance for their members. It's just not practical. To say nothing of the fact that 50-80% of people don't go to church.

[Monte Sahlin]

Scott, your history is somewhat dated. It is true that if you compare 2007 with 1920, there is more responsiblity assigned to the government, but if you compare 2007 to 1970, there is decidedly less responsiblity assigned to the government today. For about 15 years America has been in a mode of shifting responsiblity away from government to families and private organizations. At the same time, the U.S. is out of sync with the rest of the world. We are reducing our expectations of government, when all the rest of the world sees government as the most effective manager of health care and other basic essentials. The tragedy is that although this anti-government view of things seems to work better for the more affluent families, it leaves big holes in the safety net which is life and death for the poor. The proposal that Ryan and others were in Sacramento to support is addressed to the needs of those who will have nothing if government does not get involved. I have been involved in organizing free clinics operated by local charities since the early 1970s in communities across the country, and I can tell you that these efforts will NOT meet the need without additional support from government.

[Neville]

Ryan,

Great job, great speech! Don’t be apologetic for “lobbying” for a good cause; why should corporations, big business and moneyed interests, labor unions and professional associations have a monopoly on advocacy in public policy? Lobbying, advocacy, evangelism …it’s all about persuading others that there is a better way of being/doing.

Why should the political and religious right reserve the labels of “patriotic” and “Christian” to themselves? What you did in Sacramento a couple days ago was truly patriotic (vigorously participating in the “We, the people” democratic process) and Christian (public policy advocacy informed by a faithful reading of the biblical text)!

I especially liked the references to Jewish (Old Testament) scripture and the Christian New Testament, thus outlining a compelling, historically-consistent Judeo-Christian narrative thread for caring for “the least of these” --a good reminder for people of faith who say our country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles; but then revert to “rugged American individualism”/self-reliance (an accurate cultural history), free-market capitalism (an efficient economic system), and Darwinian “survival of the fittest” principles (a dominant scientific position) when it comes to living out their “faith” in the context of government policy. I have no quarrel with cultural, economics or science; just don’t confuse or equate these with ones Judeo-Christian “faith.” As Adventists, we are sometimes too wary of mixing church and state (much less economics and culture), we often don’t know how to do it in the integrated context of our private lives as we “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and unto God that which is God’s.”

You are continuing a rich and long tradition of God’s people, Joseph (in Egypt), Daniel (in heathen Babylon, under four different kings), Esther (deliberately choosing to wed a tyrannical king!), and other biblical characters, who lived out their faith in the arena of government, under less-than-ideal political and spiritual settings---it’s definitely not the easy path!

Continue to do justly, love mercy and walk humbly with God in Hollywood, Washington D.C., Sacramento….