Rev. C. Douglas Smith

While traveling out of state recently, I found myself in an urban center where alcohol sales have been privatized. It was an ugly scene: corner stores selling liquor next to seedy bars; steel grates covering smokey windows lit only by the neon signs that beckoned people inside for cheap whiskey. The traffic was regular. Not far away a Salvation Army drop-in facility did its best to provide refuge for God’s children afflicted with life’s challenges — abuse, mental illness, addiction — and beset by struggle.

You have seen the newspapers and now know that there are those in state government who want to increase the number of liquor stores from around 300 to over 1000. While I am sure they are not interested in having our cities and towns turn into the kind of place I described, too often the unintended consequences of well meaning politicians become damaging and detrimental to families. If we truly believe that encouraging family values begins with valuing families we need to ensure communities are given every chance to thrive.

A few weeks back we reached out to you and asked what you thought about the Governor’s plan to privatize ABC retail sales and increase the number of outlets. Your response was overwhelming: 80% of you said “No.”  Since then we have heard directly from a number of leaders in the faith community: from bishops, rabbis and imams. We seem to be all in agreement that the state should not be in the business of selling liquor at all. But we also seem to be in agreement that having the state control the sale of distilled spirits in a highly regulated way is far better than multiplying the number of retail locations by 100, 200, 300 percent or likely more.

Today we are making our position on the issue clear in our report, Off the Wagon: Why ABC Privatization is a Bad Idea. Virginia does not need to privatize liquor stores. We are releasing a policy paper clearly outlining how other states have failed to benefit from store expansions; connecting the dots on previous research that shows the social downside to privatizing liquor sales; and showing how ABC is a well-run, efficient, and reliable revenue generator for the state and provides funding for important programs that address substance abuse and mental health.

We don’t need to turn every Sheets and Wawa gas station, every corner store, every roadside bodega into a cocktail motor-through. Our communities don’t need it. Our state doesn’t need it. And the risks are too great.

P.S.: To tell a friend about this issue and what we’re doing about it, click here!

The Rev. Donald Gibson

This is a guest post by the Rev. Don Gibson. Don is pastor of Basic United Methodist Church and Rayos de Esperanz congregation in Waynesboro. This article was originally published in the April 2010 issue of the Virginia United Methodist Advocate and is used here with permission from the Virginia Conference of the United Methodist Church.

“When the alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien.  The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.” Leviticus 19:33-34

“I assure you, when you did it to one of the least of these my brothers and sisters; you were doing it to me!” Matthew 25:40

In 2005, while gathered for a Sunday afternoon Bible study, members of Basic United Methodist Church were challenged to live in the realities of the ancient right of sanctuary. Cries for help, interrupting the persistent hum of the air conditioner, called to action the students of the Word, offering a dare to live the Word.

Felipe, a young, homeless, Hispanic man, stumbled helpless into the social hall and into the arms of strangers. Intoxicated and beaten, Felipe’s instinctive response was to remember the teachings of his childhood, the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) and of Paul and the slave Onesimus (Philemon 1:1-25).

Felipe’s childhood was one to be forgotten. Though deeply loved, he lived with and in the realities of stark and unchanging poverty. His persistent childhood dream was to one day leave behind the hardship of his homeland, Mexico, hoping to provide “more” and “better” for his family. “Dreams are not probable,” his mother would remind him, “however, the Word of God will lead you to true prosperity, a prosperity that this world cannot ever take from you.”

As Felipe lay bleeding in the arms of strangers, reality confirmed the well-known truths of his mother. What now would be truth for Felipe? Would he find strangers unable to love and receive him, strangers embattled in the immigration issues that grip the politics and opinions of his “dream-land?” Or, would he, as in the fondly remembered Bible stories of his childhood, be welcomed, bandaged, fed, offered shelter and loved?

Our world is becoming increasingly globalized. This process has effects on culture, political systems, economic development and societal expectations. For many, this globalization offers an awareness of something better, something more. These seemingly “new” realities of globalization and the human inclination to draw battle lines are, in fact, nothing new at all. The story of the United States is the story of immigration. Ours is a history characterized by waves of ethnic groups arriving to these shores searching for freedom and prosperity. Each wave has brought with them hopes and dreams of a better life in addition to unique strengths and contributions. The U.S. has long been conflicted over the issue of immigration – both welcoming newcomers and resenting them. What is new, and desperately needed, is a fresh perspective of our own approach as Christians.

In a well-known and much-loved Bible parable, the Good Samaritan beckons us to remember and to ask, What is the current context of this story and how are we called to live in it? The parable says more than “It’s good to help people in need.” One if not the most important questions asked is, “Who is my neighbor?” Jesus, in teaching the expert in law, offers that whenever others are in need, God expects us to be a neighbor to them.

In our current context we must remember that neighbors can come in strange places, unusual situations and can be found in the most unexpected persons. This parable beautifully explains the commandment of loving God with all our heart and our neighbors as ourselves, without any reservations.  It also demonstrates the intensity of God’s love toward a sinful world. All of us were once like the suffering man, traveling through life sick, wounded and robbed, left to fend for ourselves at the mercies of the world.

As a Christian, I believe my faith calls me to view all people, regardless of citizenship status, as made in the “image of God” and deserving of my respect. I choose, based on the instruction of Christ, to show compassion for the stranger and love and mercy for my neighbor.  Is not our purpose to always be working to make His “kingdom come, His will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven?” As Christians we are called to love our neighbors. The Bible is explicit in instructing us to welcome aliens and strangers in our land, and to love them as we love ourselves.  In these times, we must learn to listen to the ever-present, still speaking voice of God. If and when we do, we will learn how to respond to our sisters and brothers, our neighbors, residing among us.

Many millions like Felipe are leaving their homelands because of economic necessity, war, famine and persecution, and are looking to acquire enough wealth to fund a new way of life here or for families back home. For many, sadly, this never becomes their reality. However, Felipe did, one very hot August afternoon, encounter the truths of his childhood imitated by those who dared to live the Word while defining a word – neighbor!

–

You can subscribe to receive the Virginia United Methodist Advocate by visiting their website online by CLICKING HERE.

Wise County from Blank Street on Vimeo.

My friend Sen. John Chichester used to tell me that Virginia’s hold on ABC stores resulted in the state drinking in both tax and profit. In other words, liquor stores are another example of a well run government program, this time as an actual business. And a very profitable one at that! And those general fund dollars have been put to excellent use over the years, particularly in the area of mental health. Though the irony of liquor sales funding mental health programs is not lost.

While it is not yet clear what cocktail of agreements Gov. McDonnell may serve up at his special session of the General Assembly later this year, what is clear is that he will need to show how privatizing ABC stores will gin up new dollars for transportation, a perennial campaign issue for all rising-star politicians in the state. Suggested windfall numbers are in the hundreds of millions of dollars but no one can agree on how to actually get to those numbers.

And he will also need to show how the benefits of privatization outweigh the broad social costs. If privatization comes to Virginia it will mean many more drink stands than we have right now. An early estimate puts the number as high as 800. And it is unlikely they will be located next to the neighborhood Nordstrom. More likely you’ll find the new stores near the payday lenders. As another friend recently said to me: in your neighborhood they sell “spirits,” in mine, they sell “liquor.”

We speak a great deal about moral budgeting at the Virginia Interfaith Center. We know that budgets speak to our values as a society. The jury is out as to how moral it is to take dollars from alcohol sales and put them toward substance abuse programs. But one thing is clear, many of the moral voices that one would expect to hear from, the ones that tell the rest of us how we should be acting, and what our kids should be praying about and where they should be allowed to do it, sure are quiet about Gov. McDonnell’s ABC privatization ideas. Maybe the buzz from last November hasn’t worn off yet.

Lloyd Bolt (center) "joined the great fiesta in the heavens one year ago," says the Rev. Greg West. Bolt is surrounded by some of his grateful amigos.

“Porque nuestra ciudadanía está en los cielos, de donde también esperamos ardientemente al Salvador, el Señor Jesucristo” — (Filipenses 3:20).

“But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ. — (Philippians 3:20).

After being appointed to start a church in north Suffolk in 2002, I often drove around praying for the people who might be a part of this new ministry. Some of the first people I saw were Hispanics working in the fields at a nearby tree nursery. I pulled in and introduced myself to some of the supervisors. They were helpful and eager for me to meet the workers. They also shared, “You’ve got to meet Lloyd Bolt. He works with the Hispanics around here.”

Friendships with the amigos happened quickly as they are so appreciative of any “gringo” who speaks some Spanish; and a partnership with Lloyd, a faithful Quaker brother, began.

The majority of our amigos come from Mexico and Guatemala on a government H2B visa, which enables them to work in the United States about nine months of every year. Over the last seven years we have gathered with them for fellowship, worship, teaching both the Scriptures and English. One of our goals in mission at Grace Harbor is to establish long-term relationships with brothers and sisters and churches in Latin America. I didn’t know exactly how this would work, but I knew it was God’s heart.

We have had a faithful team of friends who found it a blessing to share life together with the amigos. Lloyd Bolt often led the way as we connected the amigos with doctors and dentists, fought bedbug infestations, helped when the Hispanics were victims of crime, and met various other needs. Lloyd traveled to some of the cities and pueblos where the workers lived, always receiving a big welcome. He brought video greetings from their husbands, sons, brothers, cousins and friends. These always turned into large gatherings and celebrations. Then Lloyd would film the families in Mexico and play those videos here to a full house.

These were beautiful, moving and sometimes agonizing moments. I watched as fathers saw their newborn children for the first time via video. I saw expressions of love and caring touching the hearts of these men so far from home. I witnessed a broken-hearted wife with children in her arms appealing to her faraway husband to break off the affair. While mission was a strong focus of mine in seminary, I underestimated the power of simple acts of love to accomplish God’s mission in the world.

Our ministry with these hardworking amigos has sometimes brought controversy with people unconnected with Grace Harbor. When people say, “They should have to learn our language,” I reply, “First-generation immigrants to this country rarely master the language — whether they are Italian, Hmong or Latino. However, the second generation has no problem with English.” When people say, “They shouldn’t be here,” or “They are taking our jobs,” I ask them to try to imagine being in their shoes. “If you could move north to Canada and earn in one day what it would take you two weeks to earn in your country if you could even find a job, then would you go to Canada? What if also you saw that your children were hungry because of your inability to earn money, would you travel then, even if it were illegal?”

These are difficult issues, and as followers of Christ we cannot forget the command to “Love your neighbor as yourself.” A passage from the Old Testament that I lift up is:

“The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the Lord your God.” (Leviticus 19:34)

One of the greatest joys in being with our amigos is experiencing how the gospel transcends cultures, nationalities and geography! When a young man from Chiapas, Mexico, with dark skin and Mayan features trusts in Jesus to rescue him from his sins, new life comes just as it happens with all who trust in Christ! If we would see the sovereignty of God as well as the systemic injustice in so many of the people movements around the globe, then the church would mobilize to offer them Christ in word and deed.

—

You can subscribe to receive the Virginia United Methodist Advocate by visiting their website online by CLICKING HERE.

Corey Stewart, the Chairman of the Prince William County Board of Supervisors, has been making news headlines over the past couple of months. Mr. Stewart became prominent in the national media particularly after Arizona signed the notorious immigration bill SB1070 into law. This is because Mr. Stewart is very outspoken in his desire for Virginia to follow in Arizona’s footsteps and pass nearly identical immigration legislation in the Commonwealth.

The particular legislation for which Mr. Stewart is advocating is called The Virginia Rule of Law Act. The Rule of Law Act would take a similar law that was passed in Prince William County in 2007, add a few new provisions to give it striking resemblance to Arizona’s SB1070, and make the entire Commonwealth of Virginia an unwelcoming place for immigrants, whether legal or illegal, to live. As is evident by the Act’s name, all this would be for the sake of upholding “the rule of law.”

Quotations marks are around “the rule of law” because I wonder what law(s) Mr. Stewart seeks to uphold? The growing consensus is that the current laws that make up our current immigration system are ineffective in promoting legal immigration into the United States. This is especially the case for unskilled immigrants who have no family relations in the US.

Furthermore, as Andrew Wainer discusses in his article “Settler, Immigrant, Alien,” laws change:

But even as fear of immigration grew, legal restrictions against the entry of Europeans were minimal, even for the poor. Ellis Island immigrants were so successful at adhering to U.S. immigration law largely because it barely existed. Of the 12 million immigrants who passed through Ellis Island, only 2 percent were denied entry to the United States. Upon arrival, the vast majority of immigrants — most of them poor and uneducated — spent several hours at Ellis Island before they were legally admitted to America.

The legality threshold for 19th- and 18th-century European immigrants is incomparable to the gauntlet of restrictions facing contemporary immigrants. The immigration bureaucracy has increased so that today’s immigrants—perhaps more educated and skilled than Europeans arriving a century ago—face unprecedented barriers. It can take years for a immigrant with family already in the United States to gain legal entry.

Mr. Wainer specifically demonstrates how laws concerning immigration have radically changed since our country’s beginnings. Often, these changes were a result of the exaggerated perception that the United States was subject to an “invasion” of immigrants of undesirable ethnicity and/or religion. As is common today, nativists during each previous episode of large flows of immigrants were inclined to blame these newcomers for causing an array of social ills. The result is that our immigration laws have become increasingly restrictive.

So, the question remains: Is it really worth passing an (immoral) law in Virginia that will further human suffering for the sole purpose of upholding a set of laws that are not properly functioning?

Yes, America is a country of laws. However, the purpose of these laws is to protect freedom, promote civil rights and equal treatment under the law, and to ensure that justice reigns throughout the land. When a set of laws fail to achieve these ideals, they must be challenged and changed. To uphold laws simply because they exist is short-sighted and can lead to unnecessary suffering or injustice.

In this spirit, I hope Virginians can see through the appeal to uphold “the rule of law,” oppose  The Virginia Rule of Law Act, and continue to urge their elected officials to seek a comprehensive, and just, solution to the challenges facing our very broken immigration system.

Rev. Crystal Sygeel

Rev. Crystal Sygeel wrote a moving op/ed which was published in the Richmond Times-Dispatch on July 23, 2010 about her Native American roots and the current struggle of Virginia’s tribes to get federal recognition.

The only surviving photo I have of my great-great-grandmother, on my mother’s side, hangs in my parents’ house. She was a Native American. In the aging photo she stands next to her white husband on a windy hillside, her long braids slightly lifted in the wind.

Very little has been passed down through the oral history of our family about this woman. I understand that her presence in the family was awkward at best and avoided when possible. Despite this awkwardness she raised several children whose children’s children raise families of their own. However, in comparison to my Euro-American ancestors, her life stories are all but unknown. Amid the wealth of blessings and lessons passed through the generations of my family, I have no way of knowing which gifts can be traced to her.

The lack of information and prevalence of whispers in our oral history suggest my mostly white family struggled to incorporate my great-great-grandmother authentically. Their lack of pride must have created a disparaging environment that sought to hide the truth or remake the reality that a neighbor could be Native American. I count this lack of recognition as a loss on all fronts — to them, to the family then and now, and today to my own sense of personal identity.

I sense a similar loss to Virginia and the United States in the federal government’s inability to recognize the Native American tribes of the commonwealth. We know they exist but our government refuses to recognize them as valid. We continue a lack of understanding of ourselves and a history of sometimes tense and sometimes peaceful co-existence across the centuries. We hide the truth that our settling ancestors shared trade and agriculture, and embodied the earliest glimpse of the melting pot our country would eventually become. We enjoy the fruits of our historical relationship without acknowledging the native people who taught us how to grow the very roots of democracy.

This year the Library of Virginia recognized eight women who made outstanding contributions to their communities. Mollie Wade Holmes Adams of the Upper Mattaponi was among the honorees. The Library of Virginia had this to say about her:

Raising her twelve children, Adams faced the bigotry of Walter A. Plecker’s management of the Virginia Bureau of Vital Statistics. Plecker systematically worked to reclassify all Virginia Indians as “Negro” or “colored” and therefore relegate them to the same racist laws to which African-Americans were subject. In a counter move to Plecker’s claims against the Indians, several white men signed a statement certifying Adams’s Indian ancestry.

Despite this adversity, Adams was a tribal elder and passed on the almost-lost skill of feather weaving. She aided anthropologists by allowing her picture to be published in one study and by explaining her herbal remedies to researchers. Adams built a strong base for the modern Upper Mattaponi through her church and tribal activism. Her son Andrew Washington Adams was chief of the Upper Mattaponi from 1974 to 1985, and her grandson, Kenneth Adams, is the current chief.

In Mollie Wade Holmes Adams we see the contributions of a mother, activist, professional collaborator, naturopath, and civic leader. While her story is powerful, it is not unique. In her story we find recurring themes that reflect the collective legacy of the tribes: peaceful relationships maintained since the treaty of 1607, ongoing military service, and numerous societal contributions. Like my peoples, the contributions of the Chickahominy, the Chickahominy Eastern Division, the Upper Mattaponi, the Rappahannock, the Monacan, and the Nansemond continue to be hidden away as long as the tribes are not recognized by our federal government. It’s as if they don’t exist; distant relations whose stories we fail to see as part of our own.

With a long-overdue act of Congress, we have an opportunity to grant recognition of these Virginia tribes. In doing so we ensure them the kind of help and support — the kind of dignity — that was denied my great-great-grandmother. It is the dignity of recognition.

In my family that spans two continents I have gone in search of my ancestor in order that our family’s story might be more complete. Imagine what it would mean for our story as the commonwealth, and the United States as a whole, if we sought to recognize the 3,398 members of the tribes of Virginia and their ancestors. On our nation’s mantel is an empty frame representing an incomplete history and all of the blessings it portends. It is time that we finally expose the family portrait.

Holladay from Blank Street on Vimeo.

Virginia’s Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli, announced recently that Virginia will be joining eight other states in filing an amicus brief in support of Arizona’s tough immigration law SB1070.

In his statement, Attorney General Cuccinelli discussed his amazement that the federal government has decided to sue Arizona. While discussing the “joint federal-state cooperative immigration enforcement program” that Congress has created over the years, the Attorney General failed to address any of the troubling aspects of Arizona’s new law, such as the potential for racial profiling that SB1070 creates.

Fortunately, not all Virginians are in agreement with Attorney General Cuccinelli. Shaun Kenney, who is currently the Vice-Chairman of the Fluvanna County Board of Supervisors, and an active blogger, opposes Arizona’s law on the grounds of both conservative and faith principles.

Mr. Kenney explains that as a conservative, he places America’s free market system and the commitment to individual liberty above any other principle. He states that we should not punish individuals who take the risk to get to America seeking to work hard and enjoy our freedoms. Especially when the current system is failing to properly function. Instead, Mr. Kenney recognizes the need to reform the current immigration system as the only solution that will maintain the commitment to the free market system and to personal liberty. As he states, “Let the solution be something other than that which treats symptoms without addressing cures.”

More importantly than his commitment to conservative ideals, in my opinion, is Mr. Kenney’s commitment to the values he upholds as a Catholic — I too am Catholic, so his second explanation especially resonates with me.

Mr. Kenney explains that as a Catholic, he is very much committed to social justice. Therefore, if an illegal immigrant came knocking on his front door, his Catholic-influenced instinct would be to provide the individual with “food, water, warmth, and safety. The last thing on [his] mind [would be] calling the cops.”

For Mr. Kenney, this is not because he would be seeking to break any laws, but rather that a high authority demands he respect the dignity of every person. He states, “After all, an unjust law is no law at all.”

As a fellow Catholic, I could not have said it better myself.