Howard's Sermons and Article Clippings.

Howard's Sermons and Article Clippings.

About Me

My photo
Im a Mainline protestant minister who loves serving in multicultural and urban contexts. I'm very interested in how liberation theology and existential-humanistic psychology are applied to the praxis of pastoral care and counseling. My most profound encounters with God come as we sojourn as brothers and sisters seeking the inbreaking of God's reign, here and now.

Friday, May 29, 2009

A better way of dealing with society's neediest


A better way of dealing with society's neediest

Steve Lopez
April 19, 2009

Reporting from Washington -- So what exactly am I doing on Capitol Hill? I'm at a congressional briefing, which wouldn't be entirely out of the ordinary, except that I'm not taking notes and not planning to beat up on anyone.

I'm the keynote speaker.

Yes, friends, the republic is in trouble.

I've been asked here to share what I've learned since meeting Nathaniel Anthony Ayers, a former Juilliard student who has taught me about this nation's triumphs and failures in helping those who battle mental illness and end up homeless.

I'm well aware that Capitol Hill briefings are a dime a dozen and that public policy is not likely to be greatly influenced by my testimony. But I was invited here by officials from the Corp. for Supportive Housing, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, the National Alliance to End Homelessness and other agencies.

My instinct was to decline the offer. It's not in my nature as a journalist to become personally involved in a story.

But that struck me as too convenient an excuse for avoiding my civic duty. There's a new administration now and stimulus money needing to be spent. Maybe there's finally hope for more programs to help the Nathaniels of the world.

So here I am, Mr. Lopez goes to Washington, and just as I'm beginning to experience an unwelcome sense of self-importance, I'm told the actual congressional representatives are in recess and out of town.

What? You mean they skipped out just as I got here and sent their minions to hear me?

I swallow my pride and look out on a few dozen congressional staffers, policy wonks and service providers. I've been given 15 minutes. I confess to listeners that I'm not the expert on housing and mental illness that my fellow panelists are, but I have a story.

I tell them about Mr. Ayers, who lost nearly everything at the age of 20 to schizophrenia. By the time I met him four years ago, he had been living on the streets for decades, with little to keep him going but his love of music.

In helping him find a home at Lamp Community in Los Angeles, I learned firsthand how permanent supportive housing is not only the humane approach, but often the cost-effective one too.

Lamp has rescued hundreds of people from lives of despair and saved taxpayers the cost of churning them endlessly through emergency rooms, criminal courts and prisons.

The homeless population is growing across the country because of the recession and returning veterans who are physically and mentally wounded. It's not that we don't know how to help them rebuild their lives, I tell my audience, but that we haven't provided nearly enough support for alternative courts and for programs like Lamp.

And so vets sleep in Santa Monica parks, not far from abandoned VA barracks; L.A. County Jail serves as a mental institution; and there's a waiting list at Lamp and other agencies with good track records but limited funds.

On behalf of Mr. Ayers, I urge my audience to support a better way of dealing with society's neediest, then step aside so the professionals can speak.

Bob Carolla of the National Alliance on Mental Illness talks about how, while working as an aide to former Sen. George Mitchell (D-Maine), he was overcome by debilitating depression and found himself in handcuffs near the Capitol.

"No one is immune from mental illness," he says.

Hyacinth King, a business school graduate, tells how schizophrenia left her homeless until Project HOME in Philadelphia gave her back her life, including a job as both an advocate and computer specialist, and a home with enough support services to help her thrive.

Deborah DeSantis, chief executive of the Corp. for Supportive Housing, lists a number of cities that have reduced homeless populations and asks congressional staffers to go back to their bosses and tell them how it was done.

"Study after study shows we're going to save money by putting people into permanent supportive housing," she says.

DeSantis and other speakers have a specific request: They want a budget allocation of $2.2 billion this year in the Housing and Urban Development Department's McKinney-Vento grants. That would be an increase of about $500 million over this year's funding, and it would pay for 15,000 new supportive housing units.

They also are arguing for $120 million to support programs that help keep formerly homeless people from ending up back on the pavement.

And what are the chances these pleas will be answered?

Gil Duran, a spokesman for Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), tells me the senator "supports these programs" and "will continue to work to ensure that California cities get the help they need." But it remains to be seen whether President Obama's budget will include the necessary funds.

A staffer for Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Beverly Hills) tells me that given the current fiscal crisis, it would help convince doubters in Congress if there were more hard evidence that supportive housing can save money over the long term.

I leave it to one of my fellow panel members to make that case. Sister Mary Scullion of Philadelphia is convinced beyond a doubt that with a combination of public investment and private support, investing in permanent supportive housing is humane and cost-effective.

The last time I visited Sister Mary in Philadelphia, she took me to a formerly devastated neighborhood that has been rebuilt by Project HOME, which she co-founded two decades ago. When I asked who did all the work, Sister Mary said, "our people," meaning formerly homeless, mentally ill people who were given homes and jobs rebuilding the neighborhood.

Sister Mary is the last speaker at the Capitol Hill briefing and no doubt the most compelling.

If Congress can find $80 billion to bail out the inept insurance giant AIG, she says, surely it can come up with $2.2 billion for supportive housing. As for the request for $120 million in support services, Scullion adds, that was roughly what AIG paid in executive bonuses.

"I'm not kidding," Sister Mary says as I scribble in my notebook, happy to be back on the other side of the podium.

steve.lopez@latimes.com

Sunday, May 24, 2009

President Obama Heads to Cairo

World Cititzen: Obama's Cairo Speech and the 57-State Solution
Frida Ghitis | Bio | 14 May 2009
World Politics Review



When President Barack Obama finally announced the location of his much-heralded speech to the Muslim world, the news came as a surprise. As a candidate, Obama had promised to give such an address during his first 100 days in office, as part of an urgent campaign to repair relations between the United States and Muslims.

Observers wondered where Obama would go for the potentially historic occasion. Many believed the U.S. president would choose a democratic, Muslim-majority country for the event. Favorites included Jakarta, where Obama lived as a child. Turkey, a U.S. ally, also seemed like a good choice. Even Morocco, one of the more open Arab countries, was considered a longshot.

The choice of Cairo proved controversial, as the White House surely knew it would. When it comes to democratic values, Egypt -- America's autocratic ally -- is something of an embarrassment. Critics pounced, highlighting Egypt's dismal human rights record. Why would the Obama administration choose for its speech a country where the president has ruled for 28 years, human rights are routinely violated, and democratic ideals are regularly trampled?

The White House is giving faint hints about the reasons and the strategy behind the choice.

Egypt, declared White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, is "the heart of the Arab world." Although it remains an eminently non-democratic country, Washington would like it to become an example to emulate for all Arab countries.

This signals that the speech to Muslims is gradually morphing into a speech to Arabs. Improving relations with Muslims is important. But when it comes to U.S. strategic interests, the more urgent item on the agenda is creating a strong coalition with Arab countries. The Obama administration has chosen Egypt because Cairo has taken a strong position on the two major crises brewing in the region: the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, and the conflict with Iran.

Obama will seek to boost Egypt's standing by placing it at the center of a coalition to isolate Iran and bring peace, not just between Israelis and Palestinians, but between Israel and the entire Arab world.

Egypt not only has relatively good relations with Israel. It has also confronted Iran openly and forcefully, especially after uncovering a plot by Iran-backed Hezbollah to attack targets inside Egypt. Egyptian officials have publicly accused Iran of trying to "conquer the Arab world."

In the coming months, the Obama administration will speak frequently and loudly about the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. In reality, however, it will push behind the scenes for a much wider agreement: something harkening back to the old Madrid Process, which sought to bring a comprehensive peace deal for the region. That subsequently went off the rails, pushed aside by the much narrower Oslo Accords between Israelis and Palestinians.

Jordan's King Abdullah, the first Arab leader to visit the Obama White House, is a strong advocate of the plan. He claims that Obama is reaching for a "57-state solution," one that would bring peace between Israel and all 57 member countries -- Arab and Muslim -- of the Organization of the Islamic Conference.

Obama cannot be accused of holding modest aspirations. The plan may be extremely ambitious, but it is also very clever. If it works, it could break the knot that has tied up the prospects for peace between Israelis and Palestinians, as well as play a key role in breaking the impasse with Iran.

Ever since Benjamin Netanyahu became Israel's prime minister, much ink has been spilled noting that he has so far refused to accept the two-state solution. But that is not the main obstacle to peace today. Eventually, Netanyahu will accept two states. When he does, Israel will have seemed to have made a major concession, even though several Israeli governments have already signed on to the plan, and Netanyahu himself has agreed to accept previous agreements.

The biggest obstacle to peace between Israelis and Palestinians lies in the strength of Iran-backed Hamas, relative to Fatah. Israelis and Palestinians know that if Israel withdraws all its forces from the West Bank, Hamas will take over with the same ease with which it took over Gaza in 2006. A Hamas-ruled West Bank is an existential red line for Israel. Obama knows, understands, and accepts this.

Rather than waste energy on a goal that is unachievable in the immediate future, Obama's plan to bring peace between Israelis and Arabs would help isolate Iran, along with Hamas and Hezbollah, two armed groups that vow to fight Israel's existence until the bitter end. By building such an alliance and imbuing it with popular support -- hence the high-profile speech -- Obama would tell Arabs that he is offering them a new path: a path to the future.

Pressure is already being brought to bear on Syria to jump on the peace bandwagon and leave Iran behind. Simultaneous with overt efforts to reach out to Damascus, the U.S. has also just renewed sanctions, charging that Syria's actions "supporting terrorism, pursuing weapons of mass destruction [pose a] threat to the national security" of the U.S. This was the stick. The carrot may have come delivered by the hand of King Abdullah, who visited Syrian President Bashar al-Assad after meeting Obama.

Pressure on Hamas is also mounting. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who will meet Obama later this month -- as will Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak -- has reportedly decided to form a new government without Hamas.

Obama will try to build a front for the future, one based on two pillars: peace between Israelis and Arabs, and rejection of Iran's regional goals. If he succeeds in building the foundation for that new edifice, he will have a strategically placed megaphone to speak to the region -- not about platitudes, but about concrete steps for peace. Arab and Muslim countries will hear the presumably persuasive message that they can stand with the U.S.-backed alliance, or remain on the wrong side of history.

Frida Ghitis is an independent commentator on world affairs and a World Politics Review contributing editor. Her weekly column, World Citizen, appears every Thursday.

Photo: President Barack Obama during a press conference following the G20 Summit, London, April 2, 2009 (White House Photo by Pete Souza).

Monday, May 18, 2009

White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships

Obama Announces White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships
THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

Obama Announces White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships

Washington (February 5, 2009) – President Barack Obama today signed an executive order establishing the new White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. The White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships will work on behalf of Americans committed to improving their communities, no matter their religious or political beliefs.

"Over the past few days and weeks, there has been much talk about what our government’s role should be during this period of economic emergency. That is as it should be – because there is much that government can and must do to help people in need," said President Obama. "But no matter how much money we invest or how sensibly we design our policies, the change that Americans are looking for will not come from government alone. There is a force for good greater than government. It is an expression of faith, this yearning to give back, this hungering for a purpose larger than our own, that reveals itself not simply in places of worship, but in senior centers and shelters, schools and hospitals, and any place an American decides."

The White House Office for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships will be a resource for nonprofits and community organizations, both secular and faith based, looking for ways to make a bigger impact in their communities, learn their obligations under the law, cut through red tape, and make the most of what the federal government has to offer.

President Obama appointed Joshua DuBois, a former associate pastor and advisor to the President in his U.S. Senate office and campaign Director of Religious Affairs, to lead this office. "Joshua understands the issues at stake, knows the people involved, and will be able to bring everyone together – from both the secular and faith-based communities, from academia and politics – around our common goals," said President Obama.

The Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships will focus on four key priorities, to be carried out by working closely with the President’s Cabinet Secretaries and each of the eleven agency offices for faith-based and neighborhood partnerships:

The Office’s top priority will be making community groups an integral part of our economic recovery and poverty a burden fewer have to bear when recovery is complete.
It will be one voice among several in the administration that will look at how we support women and children, address teenage pregnancy, and reduce the need for abortion.

The Office will strive to support fathers who stand by their families, which involves working to get young men off the streets and into well-paying jobs, and encouraging responsible fatherhood.
Finally, beyond American shores this Office will work with the National Security Council to foster interfaith dialogue with leaders and scholars around the world.
As the priorities of this Office are carried out, it will be done in a way that upholds the Constitution – by ensuring that both existing programs and new proposals are consistent with American laws and values. The separation of church and state is a principle President Obama supports firmly – not only because it protects our democracy, but also because it protects the plurality of America’s religious and civic life. The Executive Order President Obama will sign today strengthens this by adding a new mechanism for the Executive Director of the Office to work through the White House Counsel to seek the advice of the Attorney General on difficult legal and constitutional issues.

The Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships will include a new President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, composed of religious and secular leaders and scholars from different backgrounds. There will be 25 members of the Council, appointed to 1-year terms.

Members of the Council include:

Judith N. Vredenburgh, President and Chief Executive Officer, Big Brothers / Big Sisters of America
Philadelphia, PA

Rabbi David N. Saperstein, Director & Counsel, Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, and noted church/state expert
Washington, DC

Dr. Frank S. Page, President emeritus, Southern Baptist Convention
Taylors, SC

Father Larry J. Snyder, President, Catholic Charities USA
Alexandria, VA

Rev. Otis Moss, Jr., Pastor emeritus, Olivet Institutional Baptist Church
Cleveland, OH

Eboo S. Patel, Founder & Executive Director, Interfaith Youth Corps
Chicago, IL

Fred Davie, President, Public / Private Ventures, a secular non-profit intermediary
New York, NY

Dr. William J. Shaw, President, National Baptist Convention, USA
Philadelphia, PA

Melissa Rogers, Director, Wake Forest School of Divinity Center for Religion and Public Affairs and expert on church/state issues
Winston-Salem, NC

Pastor Joel C. Hunter, Senior Pastor, Northland, a Church Distributed
Lakeland, FL

Dr. Arturo Chavez, Ph.D., President & CEO, Mexican American Cultural Center
San Antonio, TX

Rev. Jim Wallis, President & Executive Director, Sojourners
Washington, DC

Bishop Vashti M. McKenzie, Presiding Bishop, 13th Episcopal District, African Methodist Episcopal Church
Knoxville, TN

Diane Baillargeon, President & CEO, Seedco, a secular national operating intermediary
New York, NY

Richard Stearns, President, World Vision
Bellevue, WA

# #

Saturday, May 16, 2009

Love is Radical

Love is Radical John 15:9-17 Sunday May 17

9As the Father has loved me, so I have loved you; abide in my love. 10If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love. 11I have said these things to you so that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be complete. 12“This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. 13No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. 14You are my friends if you do what I command you. 15I do not call you servants any longer, because the servant does not know what the master is doing; but I have called you friends, because I have made known to you everything that I have heard from my Father. 16You did not choose me but I chose you. And I appointed you to go and bear fruit, fruit that will last, so that the Father will give you whatever you ask him in my name. 17I am giving you these commands so that you may love one another.

When we think of love we remember all those diamond commercials we see on Valentine’s Day and Mother’s day. Many of us brought our Mom’s out to dinner for Mother’s day last Saturday. When we think of love we remember all the songs on our airwaves. When we ponder such deep topics we can feel like we are at a coffee shop on the West bank of Paris with berets on. Do we really know what it means to love one another as Christ loves us? Let’s pull up a chair, order another cup of coffee and engage this deep question. Is Christ’s love too radical for us?
Yes, Christ’s love is radical. This notion of compassion, solidarity and sacrifice takes us out of ourselves. We are stretched to love the stranger among us, not just our family and small circle of friends. As Christians, we are called to love as Christ loves us. This can seem like a really tall order! Surely we can never measure up to what the Son of God is capable of. We want to do our best to approximate, but sometimes we feel like it is too pie in the sky for us to live this out in our daily lives. These Hallmark card slogans are nice and all, but is this really realistic in our daily lives?
Jesus’ life and ministry challenges us to love our neighbors, near and far. Jesus meant it when he told us to turn the other cheek and to love our enemies. We are branches of the true vine, who sends us out to our communities to bear the fruit of his love. God’s vineyard is always expanding to reach out to our brothers and sisters who live on the margins. We are not called to merely love the holy huddle of the few. We too are called to lay down our life for our friends, and embrace the strangers among us. Our sense of family and parish are to be ever expanding. In spite of the barriers and prejudgments that society too often creates, we reach beyond the fences to open our hearts and hands to our brothers and sisters who feel isolated and misunderstood.
If we are to embrace the least among us, then we will need to deconstruct some of the social barriers that continue to divide us. As American Christians, we have inherited many of the race and class issues that continue to burden us. It can be hard and sobering for us to be students of history. We can grow depressed and dejected when we see how often we have failed to live up to the radical love that Christ calls us to.
The good news is that we can always transcend the past, and reconnect with God’s vine of love. Our branches have always been there. For every painful chapter, we can find the faithful few who understood how radical God’s love is. Instead of dwelling on how many ways have we failed, we can seek out the beacons of hope who stayed true to our calling as disciples of Christ. There will always be a remnant who get it. They have the courage to live out the gospel of love and grace. They can endure the social isolation, and the hammer of public opinion.
Growing up here in the Western suburbs of the Twin Cities in the 70s and 80s, race relations were framed in the black-white paradigm. The new neighbors, “the strangers” among us were the new black families moving into the neighbourhood. My eyes were opened to their journey when I became friends with my new classmates who lived down the street. I saw how they endured life on the margins of our community. Did they experience the radical love that Christ calls us to in our community?
Several years later, my eyes were opened wider in college when I spent a semester as an exchange student in San Antonio. I began to see America in new terms. I had never seen so many Latinos before. As a wet-behind-the ears Yankee, this was a new learning for me. San Antonio is often called little Mexico. I began to understand that is was not only blacks who endured racism and discrimination in America.
This was a learning for me that our nation as a melting pot was broader and wider than the black and white paradigm of my childhood. As Christians living in one of the most diverse nations, we remember our call to love our neighbours as ourselves. We are called to open our hearts and minds to the journeys and the dreams that our new neighbours have to share with us.
For generations, the Eastside of St Paul has been an Ellis Island for waves of immigrants, the Swedes, the Italians, the Poles. This heritage continues today. Every day I drive Payne Ave and see that many of the shops and signs are Latino. The main drag of the Eastside has been transformed by our new Latino neighbours. How has this been received in the wider community? Are we ready and willing to embrace our new neighbours with the radical love of Christ? Yes there are language and cultural barriers, but Christ’s love transcends any and every obstacle!
As many of you know the Latino community is very religious, the vast majority are Catholic. There is also a growing store front Pentecostal presence. As mainline Protestants, have we fully embraced this sacred connection we have with our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ?
As disciples of Christ’s radical love, we need to take to the time to learn the stories of our brothers and sisters who have travelled north. What did they experience in the Americas before they made the journey? We can’t lose Christ’s grace and compassion in the midst of the immigration debate.
We have something to learn from our Hebrew Bible. The Jewish people have long understood what it means to be a stranger in another land. The Ancient prophets in the Bible remind us that we too were once strangers in Egypt. Therefore, we are to embrace the stranger among us, and extend hospitality and treat them as one of us. This is the radical love Christ is pointing us to.
The next time we see a Latino family, I want us to take the time to look for the face of Christ in their lives. I was moved by a story in the current issue of Christian Century of the Fortin De las Flores, a small town at the foot of mountains in Vera Cruz. They see the Central American migrants making their way north on the freight trains. Many people have lost limbs and some have lost their very lives trying to making it to better life. The local residents in Fortin de Las Flores have established a home for the victims of these rail road accidents. The residents also extend radical love, by breaking their loaves and fishes to share with the pilgrims. They have opened their hearts and minds to the stories of what people have endured on this journey north. Are we too willing to keep our hearts and minds open to their stories?
In recent months we have seen the raids in the Iowa. We have 12 million people in our midst who live out of status, and endure the fear and anxiety that ICE will come knocking and separate their families. What does Christ’s radical love call us to do in these difficult times? Our eyes and ears are to remain open to their story and their journey.
How will we embrace the stranger among us? How will the branches of Christ’s love envelope our brothers and sisters from the south seeking their daily bread? As branches from the true vine, we bear the fruit of Christ’s love. When new neighbours join us in St Paul, let us listen with grace and compassion to their testimonies. We remember our prophetic calling to embrace the stranger among us.
We remember the miracle of the loaves and fishes. God is still with us. The manna from heaven will fall again and again. Many of our new neighbours are pilgrims coming out of their own journey through the wilderness. They have joined us in search of a promised land, a land of milk and honey.
With radical love, we will embrace our brothers and sisters in their quest for their daily bread. We will take the time to hear their story. With radical love, we set aside prejudgments and prejudices. We remember how our ancestors came here with similar hopes and dreams. We share this common dream for our children and grandchildren. With Christ’s radical love flowing in and through us, we lift up the common loaf and trust that it will divide again and again. God’s abundant grace and compassion will provide for us all.
As a fellowship of Christ’s radical love on the Eastside, may our community know the fruit of the Spirit flowing through us. This is the radical love that we are called to share with every child of God.

Friday, May 8, 2009

Evangelical Church of Torture and Jack Bauer

Jonathan L. Walton is assistant professor of Religious Studies at the University of California, Riverside. He teaches courses in African American Religion; Religion, Media & Culture and Religion & Political Discourse. His new book is: Watch This! The Ethics and Aesthetics of Black Religious Broadcasting (New York University Press).
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Last week the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life released poll data revealing the relationships between religious commitment and support for the use of torture against terror suspects. Those who rarely attend religious services are the least likely to support torture. The more one attends religious service, the greater the level of support. And white evangelical Protestants offered the greatest amount of support for torture with a majority (62%) of respondents believing that torture can at least sometimes be justified.

I am sickened but not terribly shocked.

This glib view of the brutality and inhumanity of torture is bound up in a particular strand of American Christian theology that’s been a growing force for over a century.

Muscular Christianity in America has minimized the vice of torture and extolled the virtue of the Heroic One who endures for a greater cause. The crucified body of Jesus is held up as a paragon of strength, virtue and virility.

This is true not because Jesus offered an alternative conception of society where the first shall be last or the last shall be first. Not because Jesus found virtue rather than vice in the “least of these” among us. And not because Jesus inverted assumptions about authority by his willingness to humbly wash the feet of those who would otherwise worship him.

Rather, Jesus is a moral exemplar because “he was wounded for our transgressions, by his wounds we are healed, and by his blood we are made whole.” Jesus is worshiped as the ultimate “strong man” who could overcome the pain and sting of death for the sake of righteousness. The horror of inflicted suffering is theologically interpreted as an efficient cause toward bringing forth the greater good and thus torture becomes divinely utilitarian.

Is it a wonder why, then, on Sunday morning it is often hard to tell the difference between Jesus and Jack Bauer on Fox’s megahit “24?” Like a long list of American messianic masculine archetypes (John Wayne, Clint Eastwood, and Mel Gibson), Jesus is situated in this tradition of bulletproof heroes who mock the machinations of torture.

What is more, like Jack Bauer, anyone who is willing to endure torture for others is that much more justified in dishing it out. And, unfortunately, since muscular evangelicals so identify with the mutilated body of Jesus who “suffered for the sins of the world,” it is only right that they, too, would condone the suffering of others in order to purge our world of “evil.”

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Finding a vision for the future by discovering the past

Finding a vision for the future by discovering the past
Presbyterian church first established in 1846 to be demolished to provide affordable housing for seniors
by Paul Seebeck
Associate for Mission Communications

Editor’s note: This is the 17th in a series of stories about congregations engaged in significant outreach and evangelism ministries, reflecting the General Assembly’s commitment to “Grow Christ’s Church Deep and Wide.” ― Jerry L. Van Marter

QUEENS, N.Y. — Pastor Don Olinger of the Presbyterian Church of Astoria in Queens wears his favorite baseball cap religiously these days.

A friend found it at a garage sale and thought it would be perfect for Olinger when he saw these words: “The only thing worse than being blind is having sight but no vision.”

For Olinger, who is legally blind and uses a cane to get around, it is a sacred reminder of what he has experienced.

“All things work together for good for those who love God,” he said, quoting Romans 8:28. There’s a sense of wonder in his voice even though the congregation he serves was down to 25 members at one point.

The Presbyterian Church of Astoria, where Olinger has been a pastor for 15 years, is about to be demolished. All of the stained glass windows on the gray stone building have been removed. The gas has been turned off. Temporary windows keep the building secure as the congregation waits for the month-long demolition process to begin.

In existence since 1846, the church began construction in this place and space in 1922. Nearly a century later, building maintenance expenses were getting to be too much for the church. The building needed updated wiring and new heating and plumbing systems, and the church was trying to cope with rising utility costs.

Looking forward

In 2002, the church’s session empowered Olinger to begin to explore options for the future.

“All of this started off simply with the idea, ‘What should we do?’” Olinger said. “To save the building would’ve cost us anywhere from $1 to 3 million. Our session said, ‘Pastor, go find out what we should do.”

Olinger began talking with a city council representative and community board, asking them what they would like to see happen to the church. Out of those conversations Olinger went back to the church seeking permission to put together a feasibility study to determine if it might be possible to do some sort of affordable housing on part of or all of the property.

The congregation’s response was clear.

“They didn’t want to lose this place,” Olinger said. “They wanted to serve the community here.”

But at the time, lucrative New York commercial real estate developers kept saying it wasn’t worth their while to develop part of the property.

“They wanted all of our space,” Olinger said. “They wanted us to take the money and get out of the way.”

That’s when Olinger found a “crazy zoning law” that said the church could build a larger facility if it was a “senior domiciliary.”

Even the zoning board wasn’t quite sure what that meant. But research that went back to the 1920s and ’30s told a story of what life was like for senior citizens during those boom and bust years. Before Social Security, there were a lot of indigent seniors with no pensions and no way to support themselves.

Once Olinger understood that this “crazy law” written during the Great Depression could’ve just as easily have been written for today — senior domiciliary is the 1920s phrase for senior affordable housing — he had a moment of understanding.

Olinger remembered what the community planning board had told him in that initial exploratory meeting — that affordable housing for seniors is what the neighborhood and New York City need most because it took most seniors three years to find affordable housing.

Olinger found out the Hellenic American Neighborhood Action Corporation (HANAC) was interested in partnering with a developer that might have interest in affordable housing for seniors. Then out of the blue, the Enterprise Foundation called. The non-profit organization creates opportunities for “low- and moderate-income people through fit, affordable housing and diverse, thriving communities,” according to its Web site.

“‘Don, if you’re still looking to develop your property, we have a group here that is interested in doing an affordable housing for seniors,’” the foundation told Olinger. “God just steered everything in this direction. There were all these serendipitous moments during the time of discovery of that crazy law.”

Olinger could literally see that God’s spirit had been at work through the history of time and space from one economic boom and bust time to another. He had a sense that all things in the church’s time and space were connected, as if he was discovering the future by re-engaging the church’s past.

He went back to the congregation and to the Presbytery of New York City and said, “Listen, we have a sanctuary that seats 500 people and there are only about 50 of us. This isn’t good stewardship. God has put us here for a reason.”

Different points of view

But conflict had broken out in the congregation. Church leadership was very interested in pursuing affordable housing for seniors, but anonymous letters attacking Olinger began to appear and were sent on to the presbytery. Nothing ever came of the attackers’ charges — they were all dismissed by a Presbytery Judiciary Council.

“Presbyteries are overwhelmed by all these churches that just want to survive,” Olinger said. “But Jesus said ‘Those who want to save their life will lose it, those who lose their life for the sake of the gospel will save it’ (Mark 8:35). The majority of us decided we would take that quite literally.”

The decision to replace the church with housing for senior adults though was difficult for the congregation. The final vote was 17-13 in favor of building 94 apartments for 100 seniors.

Community board members believe more than 4,000 people will apply to live here once the two-year project is complete.

There was “creative tension” within the congregation and presbytery as this senior affordable housing project was put together, said the Rev. Arabella Meadows-Rogers, executive presbyter of the Presbytery of New York City.

“It is a remarkable story,” she said. “There were real small congregations with very big economic possibilities. They are usually larger than any one church can fathom or manage. The scope, the breadth, the depth, the mammoth of possibilities makes them afraid.”

The church’s engagement in its community reflects the 218th General Assembly’s commitment to “Grow Christ’s Church Deep and Wide,” focusing on the four areas of evangelism, discipleship, servanthood and diversity.

Developers were ringing doorbells saying, “I want your building. I’ll give you $40 million for it,” said Meadows-Rogers. The current economic crisis “has been very helpful for all of us. It was very easy in that climate for churches and presbyteries to see gold. Astoria kept its mission at the front. It’s not always easy to do,” she said.

While the presbytery tries to partner with its small churches, Meadows-Rogers said that “inevitably it is the tenacity of the small church and its pastor, its faithfulness and sense of hope that keeps things moving and gets them done.”

‘Defining what we’re about’

The Presbyterian Church of Astoria is being paid $4.25 million for its property. Part of this expense is being paid for out of HUD tax credit. In 15 years, the deed for the property reverts back to the church. At that point, the housing project will in all likelihood be managed by HANAC.

In 40 years, the church will have control of 94 units of housing that can be used for anyone; the HUD enforcement mortgage that demands it be used for senior housing will be done.

Once the project is built, the church will have a 5,000-square-foot condominium in the senior affordable housing project that will be used for office space and worship. It will cost the church about $1.5 million to create and outfit this multi-purpose space that will become the sanctuary.

“All churches don’t have to go this model, but I believe we have to be good stewards,” Olinger said. “Zoning and community defined the best mission for our church.”

The congregation at The Presbyterian Church of Astoria is gradually beginning to move forward. Half of their members left because of the conflict. But already the church is back up to 40 people on Sunday mornings. Worshippers who come from their neighborhood are from seven different countries: Ghana, Trinidad, Philippines, Japan, Indian, Portugal and Italy. That diversity doesn’t surprise Olinger because the neighborhood has always served immigrants.

The congregation is worshipping in what was an old doctor’s office and then a non-profit organization near the site where their church will be demolished. Computer equipment was left behind, and the church is trying to resurrect the equipment so that it can offer computer skills lessons to help members get better jobs.

“God is providing us with guidance and resources,” Olinger said. “Through all of what has happened for this church — in the conflict, in everything — as a result, we are defining what we’re about, and who we’re going to be.”

Recently, a young woman the church hadn’t seen in more than a year came to worship. She went over to talk to Olinger, saying that she was sorry to be late but that she had gone over to the other building.

“Why is it all boarded up?” she wanted to know, with tears in her eyes. Olinger told her that it was being demolished so that 94 units of affordable housing for 100 seniors could be built.

Now the woman began to cry. “At that point I told her, ‘Look, we’re all going to miss the building.’’’ Olinger barely got the words out because the woman was interrupting him. “That’s not why I’m crying,” she said. “I’m crying because at last a church is doing it right. You’re serving the community. You’re getting it right.