This is a review of Michael Lerner's new book
The politics of faith
The Left Hand of God Taking Back Our Country From the Religious Right Michael Lerner HarperSanFrancisco: 408 pp., $24.95
The review is by By Ed Bacon for the LA Times.
The Rev. Ed Bacon is rector of All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena.
February 19, 2006
RABBI Michael Lerner's "The Left Hand of God: Taking Back Our Country From the Religious Right" is his latest contribution to a long list of inspiring and practical writings. Here, Lerner contends that "the America we love" is threatened with destruction. His critique stems from the moral values, spiritual practices and political actions of the ancient speak-truth-to-power prophetic tradition.
Lerner's career of balancing social and political action with religious practice began in the Jewish Theological Seminary, where his professor Abraham Joshua Heschel held that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., in his preaching and his politics, was in effect the 20th century incarnation of the Hebrew prophets. In this book, Lerner — rabbi of San Francisco's progressive Beyt Tikkun synagogue and editor of Tikkun, a journal striving to "mend, repair, and transform the world" — updates this tradition for the beginning of the 21st century.
Lerner believes America is in the grip of a spiritual crisis.
On the one hand, there is what scholar Walter Brueggemann calls "the imperial consciousness." This right-wing mind-set worships its own power — an act of idolatry, according to Lerner. Its adherents ignore the groans of the poor, the oppressed and the marginalized, conducting business as usual as though no one were hurting and there were no groans.
On the other, an impotent liberal cohort lacks the moral courage and political savvy to resist a culture of imperial domination in both church and state. The compromises made by the left because of political expediency result in a political lassitude, which amounts to complicity with the forces of empire.
But Lerner is chiefly concerned with the millions of people who are not conservative ideologues but who have in recent elections voted that way because they yearn for the "purpose-driven life of meaning" promised by the communities of the religious right. There they find a sense of belonging, of dignity, of outrage at meaningless marketplace thinking — and (in Lerner's indictment of his own liberal tribe) a respectful absence of condescension. The irony that begs for explanation is the phenomenon of this group voting against its own enlightened self-interest.
Lerner's reflections are informed by his interviews with "middle-income working people," conducted over 28 years for the Institute for Labor and Mental Health, which he co-founded in 1977. "The psychotherapists, union activists, and social theorists who were working at the institute," he writes, "had one question we particularly wanted to answer: why is it that people whose economic interests would lead them to identify with the Left often actually end up voting for the Right?" What he and his colleagues discovered was "that many people need what anthropologist Clifford Geertz once termed a 'politics of meaning' and what I now call a spiritual politics — a spiritual framework that can lend meaning to their lives [and] allow them to serve something beyond personal goals and economic self-interest. If they don't find this sense of purpose on the Left, they will look for it on the Right." With consistent passion, Lerner insists on respect for this group of people. The left sabotages its efforts every time it views them as somehow less intelligent and evolved than, say, the liberal elite.
For Lerner, the key is something he calls "meaning needs." The left has to recognize "that people hunger for a world that has meaning and love; for a sense of aliveness, energy, and authenticity; for a life embedded in a community in which they are valued for who they most deeply are, with all their warts and limitations, and feel genuinely seen and recognized; for a sense of contributing to the good; and for a life that is about something more than just money and accumulating material goods." The right, he maintains, has supplied all this in a variety of ways. The left is clueless, unaware that such needs even exist.
At the core of Lerner's argument is his description of two competing theologies.
The theology of the "right hand of God" gives conservative ideologues their religious credibility. This theology "sees the universe as a fundamentally scary place filled with evil forces…. God is the avenger, the big man in heaven who can be invoked to use violence to overcome those evil forces, either right now or in some future ultimate reckoning….[T]he world is filled with constant dangers and the rational way to live is to dominate and control others before they dominate and control us."
The "left hand of God" theology sees God as "the loving, kind, and generous energy in the universe" and "encourages us to be like this loving God."
Lerner readily admits that the right-hand theology exists in the scriptures of the world's major religions, but he objects to its use by the religious right to promote a kind of imperial dominion, à la Pat Robertson's 1986 stated goal "to rule the world for God." The scriptural passages often used to justify a dominionist position — in both Judaism and Christianity, Lerner points out — were originally written to empower the oppressed with assurances that God would hear their cries and come in power to liberate them and establish a reign of justice and peace. Thus, he argues, the hard-core religious right has perverted religion: They distort scriptural texts and ancient theologies written for the powerless and use them to theologically undergird the powerful. Lerner sees this core as a relatively small part of American society. The much larger populace that votes with the religious right does so in support of what it sees as "a community that gives priority to spiritual aliveness and is affirming and loving. That is the experience they are looking for, and for that they are willing to hear God's voice in the way the Religious Right hears it."
Lerner's solution is to call for the redemption of religion in the thinking of the secular left, along with the establishment of a politics that refuses to allow the values of the commonwealth to be trumped by the powers protecting private wealth. He advocates the development of a "spiritual left" as a coherent alternative to religious triumphalism. Were we to adopt this "spiritual-political alternative" and bring together three groups he has identified on the left — the secular, the "spiritual but not religious" and the "progressive religious" — then America could be rescued.
Like Rabbi Lerner, I am a clergyman in a faith community rooted in the prophetic tradition. I share his concerns about the health of the United States and of the world, as measured by our care for one another in a context of peace. I share his hope that there is abundant spiritual energy available to individuals for effective social action over the long haul. That energy is accessed when people are meaningfully rooted in communities where their dignity (along with that of every other human being) finds warm affirmation and where prayer leading to vigorous social action is the norm. These communities can, as Lerner insists, be empowering oases of hope in the midst of the politics of fear in which we now live.
Rabbi Heschel taught that in every moment something sacred is at stake. His student, Rabbi Lerner, has written a book that sends a clear call to everyone who cares about the future of America to take part in the transformation of our history into something of beauty, meaning and justice — a work that, whether we think of it that way or not, is intrinsically sacred.
Copyright 2006 Los Angeles Times


Comments: 20
Thanks for posting this. I agree with you. This is an important book and an important message.
It seems to me that part of the problem today...the reason people feel a need to "belong" and to be valued, is caused by the urbanization of our society. As you know, I grew up in a small rural town. There was a sense of community, a feeling of belonging that is lacking in big city life...where I now live. We have established our own little "community" of friends over the years, but I think many city dwellers don't do that, so they feel isolated.
without living love we have no hope!" clc
The left-handed moral voice is not being heard and the political left seems to have lost its moral authority during the "freedom days" of the 60s and 70s – free sex and free drugs. They regained some moral authority during civil rights days. I've always found it interesting that traditionally the left favored individual freedom and the right freedom of the marketplace. Too much freedom – freedom without responsibility or a counterbalance – in either sphere is not good.
The promise of the new religious (moral) movement is easy grace (lift up the name of Jesus), a purpose driven life (driven by church authority), and worldly pleasure now (God's blessings) and in the hereafter. The problem that we are confronted with is that the promise of God's left hand is tough grace (carry the cross), live a purpose driven life of loving your enemies and seeking justice for all, and worldly persecution. A tough sell. Tough to fit into a five acre suburban lot, a six passenger mini-van/SUV, and a 64-acre church campus.
In truth, there is nothing to fear from itinerant evangelists, or othodox Jews -"itinerant"= unassociated with "reglion"...in particular, associated with some paranoid imagining of a "religious right wing".
Regarding religious right wing, anyone who was brought up Muslim, and decides to convert to Christianity, or even want to leave the Muslim Faith...is supposed to be immediately summarily executed by a family member.
Honestly now...do you know of any Christian who would kill you if you insulted Jesus?
By merely using the term "religious right wing" automatically qualifies you as woefully, and egregiously misinformed.
I am not a Mormon, but it is one of their precepts that there will be no Mormon on welfare. Their policy is to do exactly as you espouse above.
Do you consider them a powerful religious organization determined to persecute you and deprive you of your rights? I think you are confusing them or the larger Chrisitan Community of what Islam would do given the chance. The worldwide violence regarding the cartoon of the prophet Muhammed should be a big clue to you.
No Christian will have you publicly flogged or tortured and killed for insulting Jesus...for you do that already. No one is coming after you. But try that under Muslim rule, and I promise you you will be dead meat.
I suppose what you are really in fear of is something you recall from world history courses at university, where we learned about those bloody Crusades, and the Reformation/Counter Refomation, Spanish Inquisition, etc. Again...that was religion, not the Christian Faith.
This is what is driving the "separation of church and state" zeal we all have, including we Evangelists. But understand the term "separation of church and state" is not verbalized as such. It says that "Congress shall make no law regarding religious beliefs". It's a nice concept, but the simple truth is the "thin blue line" is only barely holding back total anarchy. It IS okay to put in place numerous safeguards to help save us from wholesale rape and pillage from our very own " beloved fellow man" who has no code of ethics like you have. I don't care how loving and tolerant you claim to be.
Thus we of the Christian faith Are tolerant of opposing belief systems. We tolerate the teaching of evolution. All we ask is for the liberal community, which theoretically prides itself on "tolerance" to tolerate the teaching of Creation.
No one is going to kill you for rejecting the Judeo Christian faith...but I assure you the Muslims will kill you for rejecting their faith.
Let's get our "religious right wing thinking caps" on straight. And let's start this dialogue over again............................................................................. There is no Chrisitan religious right wing.
And we are NOT here by chance confluence of elemental particles.
If you are truly open minded, as I am now that I am not a blind follower of the "Liberal Religion." ( yes, I see clearly in hindsight now, that is is a "belief system".).....then read what the other side has to say on these matters. Then decide.
That is what any fair minded judge should do...consider both sides of the story first. I have some far better books for you to read than that" throw the liberals a bone- swill" identified above.
I am asking you...adjuring you...to think outside the liberal box. It all sounds so good on the surface of it..."love thy fellow man and care for him"..."the real Jesus way".....it is very enticing, to be sure. Please, I beg you to study all the viewpoints very carefully...."Liberal" is not 100% wrong...i didn't say that....but neither are conservatives 100% wrong. We do have a huge acreage of common ground. Let's meet there. Because we DO have a common enemy!
Well, let's start with this:
The point is, you can find things in either the Koran or the Bible, both ancient documents that nobody believes today. Oh, well the fanatics do.
And BOTH religions have lots of those.
I just don't want it here.
They are viewed by many within Islam in the same way many Christians view people who bomb abortion clinics. Violence is abhored by both religions, in their mainstream modern incarnations.
The idea that you can post that "Muslims will kill you for rejecting their faith" shows me that you don't know any. This is much the kind of ignorant scree we used to get in the 30's about Jews. Please do a little research, go to your local Mosque if you have one, find some people to visit -- and visit them not with evangelical zeal or with xenophobic fear, but as fellow human beings.
I grew up as a New England Unitarian. We're an odd, nonevangelical, mystical Christian set, a bit like the Hicksite Quakers except we can't shut up. ;)
I know Muslim folks who are very kind, good, ethical, modern -- some liberal, some conservative -- people. Reach out!
I hope you'll be surprised.
Actually what it says is that Congress shall make no law "respecting the establishment of religion." The key is the word establish and what it meant when this was written. I will not give a tutorial on the word here, but I invite you to research this for yourself. Basically, it says the gov't cannot take an action that shows preference for one religion over another...which is why posting the Ten Commandments in a courthouse is unconstitutional...and therefore unlawful. As all the courts in the land have agreed.
Teach creation all you want - in your homes, in your churches, in your comparative religion classes, in your religious schools - you already have that right. Just don't try to teach it in public school science classes.
The schools that my taxes pay for teach science classes. They do not teach Bible classes. Your church does that, or you do it at home for your kids. I have absolutely no objection to you filling your kids brains with whatever you want to fill them with. It's a free country. What I object to is filling MY kids brains with religious dogma without my permission and using my tax dollard to do it. Worse yet, the current push to inject "Intelligent Design" into biology classes suggests that this religious doctrine...which is what the court in Dover PA called it...is science. There is absolutely no scientific evidence to support Creation Theory.
If you have some, please present it. Nobody else has done so yet.
And how many real Muslims have you had a personal conversation with? You do not know anything about them if you can make such sweeping statements putting all Muslims in these categories.
Hugh Hefner was onto the dangerous
Reverend Robertson twenty years ago.
I personally posted numerous rants on the
old Salon.com "Table Talk," hoping to
somehow spread the exposure.
Masquerading as a man of the cloth.
My word, is there no ends to which these
right wing crackpots will no travel.
Loved "The Politics of Meaning," though.
quotes in your post, I might have thought this
book would pack as much punch as a wet
noodle. "Spiritual crisis?" What else is new?
I am glad to hear Rabbi Lerner has been vocal
on the subject of the New Right, though. I
don't follow his literary career too closely, but
the last I had heard, Rabbi Lerner was busy
patching things up between Israel and Palestine.
Have a reference or two handy to document the
history of the Rabbi's critiques of the Christian Right?
WASHINGTON POST BOOK REVIEW
Sunday, February 26, 2006;
Two years ago, Thomas Frank's blockbuster What's the Matter with Kansas? posed a question: Why do so many blue- collar conservatives vote for Republicans at the expense of their own economic interests? Liberals everywhere immediately responded with vigorous head-nodding. Although Frank made a few stabs at answering his question -- Democrats haven't taken seriously parental concerns about our garish popular culture, and some conservatives favor cultural issues over economic well-being -- his frequent references to these Americans as "deranged" (eight times in the first chapter alone) implied that the real solution was to cure their irrational behavior.
Fortunately, Michael Lerner has weighed in with another take on the question in The Left Hand of God: Taking Back Our Country From the Religious Right (HarperSanFrancisco, $24.95). A social thinker with impeccable liberal credentials -- he's a Berkeley-based rabbi, sometime Hillary Rodham Clinton guru and the editor of Tikkun magazine -- Lerner has studied this question for three decades while conducting psychotherapy research. He's concluded that America is in the midst of a " real spiritual crisis," one that has been recognized and exploited -- but not solved -- by the Republican Party. For the first half of the book, Lerner diagnoses the symptoms and causes of this crisis and argues that "the search for meaning in a despiritualized world . . . leads many people to right-wing religious communities" and politics. Among the thousands of people Lerner and his colleagues have interviewed, some common concerns surfaced time and again: eroding societal values, America's troubling emphasis on money and greed, unstable families, the attempt to place monetary value on everyone and everything, and spiritual isolation. Right-wing religious institutions appeal to these concerns by providing communities of comfort and instructions on how to change this status quo; right-wing politicians promise to fix the problem by imposing their own solutions. No wonder voters of modest means are attracted.
But as Lerner expertly details, the proffered solutions don't eliminate the concerns so much as they trade on their political value. Concerned about unstable families? Just outlaw gay marriage. Worried about popular culture? Impeach those activist judges.
And it's there, he argues, that liberals have the opportunity to craft a progressive "Spiritual Covenant with America," a blueprint that composes the second half of the book. From economic to family to national security issues, Lerner outlines a politics of meaning that connects traditional liberal values to what have been inaccurately defined as conservative concerns. The Left Hand of God is ambitious, sprawling and sometimes rambling, but it serves the vital purpose of articulating a progressive religious alternative to the conservative flavor of religion that has dominated American politics and society for the past 30 years.
-- Amy Sullivan
© 2006 The Washington Post Company