This past Sunday, July 22nd, I facilitated the "Questions & Responses" service we have annually in the congregation I serve. Congregants write questions on index cards, which are then collected, and to which I offer my in-the-moment responses. Over the next several weeks I plan to devote this page to attempts to offer written responses. If you'd like to see the entire list of questions asked, they're the bulk of my post-Sunday post on July 23rd.
For the most part I expect my responses to the questions I was able to play with on Sunday to be very similar to what I said them. (Although I reserve the right to have changed my mind in the meantime!) There are also several questions that were asked more than once (in slightly different ways). I'll group them together here. (And I'd remind readers that these are only my responses, and my responses today, at that.)
You love superheroes. What is a superhero with a particularly spiritual lesson?
I've just started reading what promises to be a fascinating book, The Caped Crusade: Batman and the Rise of Nerd Culture, by Glenn Weldon. (Simon & Schuster, 2017). I heard about the book when an article appeared on my newsfeed titled, "Meet the Professor Who's Going to Teach a College Course All About Batman." In that interview, the professor, Steven Levya of the University of Baltimore, talked about how Weldon's book had really inspired him to develop the course. Part of Weldon's premise is that, besides being a human with no extraordinary super power, the Batman is also different from his heroic colleagues in at least one other way -- over the years he has changed.
Superman, for instance, over his more than 70 year run has always been basically Superman, "the Big Blue Schoolboy." His personality, his way of being in the world has been pretty constant. So too, let;s say, Spider Man, who has been almost invariably angst-ridden. Batman, on the other hand, has been depicted in numerous ways, from the campy portrayal of Adam West in the TV show of the 1960s, to the quasi-fascist of Frank Miller's seminal (and truly awesome) The Dark Night Returns. He has been unshakably self-assured, and neurotic as all get out. And to a large extent, the various version of the Caped Crusader can be seen as reflecting the zeitgeist of the times.
Yet the many moods of the Batman can also be viewed as a mirror we can hold up to ourselves, for we're also filled with more than one version of ourselves. As Whitman famously wrote, "Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes." So the Batman shows us a hero with no special powers (except, perhaps, his fortune), who is able to overcome virtually any obstacle placed in this path, even while expressing a panoply of possible selves, a person who, like us, "contains multitudes."
How do we prepare for August 12th?
This is a hard one, because each of us had our own experiences of last August 12th which we'll be bringing to this August 12th. And none of us know exactly what is going to happen -- there are no planned events like the "Unite the Right" rally, yet it is virtually certain that there will be some kind of hate-fueled presence. It is likely that there'll be more than one "spontaneous" action popping up without (at least much) warning. So ... how do we prepare when we're not really sure what we're preparing for?
I'd say that one think we can do is double down on whatever it is that connects us to "that inner place of peace" and that outer experience of connection to others and to all that is. Call it Love, call it Community, call it The Interconnected Web of All Existence -- call it God, if you wish -- yet what we call it is not as important as being intentional about feeding ourselves with it. For love to conquer hate we must do all that we can to be in touch ourselves with that Love ("known by many names yet by no name fully known").
It's also really important to remember that we are always stronger together than we are alone. There a whole lot of people throughout Charlottesville who are also trying to figure out how best to prepare for this date -- both the way it will bring up memories of the past, and whatever may happen this year. The Charlottesville Clergy Collective is offering a number of events leading up to, and on, August 12th. (We have them listed on our website.) There's also the #resilientcville website, the city's effort to inform people of the constructive things being planned. Congregate Charlottesville, a group that began as a subset of the Clergy Collective membership and which favors nonviolent direct action, has also been making plans for the 12th of August. Each of these, all of these resources offer ways to connect with, and be with, others both as that anniversary approaches, and on the day(s) itself.
Our congregation is going to be proactively organized than we knew to be last year. We will be asking people who plan to participate in one or more of the events to let our leadership know so that we can spread the word -- "There'll be a group of UUs meeting at such-and-such a time, in such-and-such a place. Contact so-and-so for more information." This way folks can know that they do not participate alone, even in the midst of a crowd.
One last thought -- it may take a long time, it may not seem as though it is true, but love is always stronger than hate. Always.
Pax tecum,
RevWik
"We are one human family, on one fragile planet, in one miraculous universe, bound by love."
Showing posts with label questions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label questions. Show all posts
Thursday, July 26, 2018
Wednesday, July 25, 2018
Responses to the Questions II
This past Sunday, July 22nd, I facilitated the "Questions & Responses" service we have annually in the congregation I serve. Congregants write questions on index cards, which are then collected, and to which I offer my in-the-moment responses. Over the next several weeks I plan to devote this page to attempts to offer written responses. If you'd like to see the entire list of questions asked, they're the bulk of my post-Sunday post on July 23rd.
For the most part I expect my responses to the questions I was able to play with on Sunday to be very similar to what I said them. (Although I reserve the right to have changed my mind in the meantime!) There are also several questions that were asked more than once (in slightly different ways). I'll group them together here. (And I'd remind readers that these are only my responses, and my responses today, at that.)
Help me learn to pray, please.
Given that I've literally written a book on prayer, this feels something like a softball. (Simply Pray: a modern spiritual practice to deepen your life, Skinner House Books, 2005.) Yet before responding to this question specifically, I want to pull back and address the larger issue of "spirituality."
I think that the heart of "spirituality," shorn of any particular theological overly, is the universal observation that there are, let's say, two ways of living -- living in such a way that we are truly and deeply alive, and, well not that. Our Unitarian Transcendentalist ancestor Henry David Thoreau wrote in his classic book Walden that he wished to live in such a way that when he came to die he would not discover that he had not lived. (That's a rough paraphrase.) And this sense that there are two kinds of living can be found in nearly every religious tradition we humans have developed -- alive and dead, living in sin and living in the spirit, deluded and enlightened, asleep and awake. I could go on, but probably don't have to. "Spirituality," then, has to do with this living life rather than not-life. This would mean that spiritual practices -- like prayer -- are tools to use in the effort to be alive.
How, then, do you pray? I'd say that we should pray in the way that "works" for us. It's not necessary to believe in some anthropomorphic deity with whom we "talk." It's not necessary for "prayer" to involve "talking" at all -- either externally or interiorly.
[If, of course, this question was actually a specific request for help in learning to do the "talking to" kind of prayer, this response may not have been at all helpful. I would, somewhat modestly, recommend my book as one resource. There are many others I could suggest, and I know that I would be glad to talk with you directly if this is your question. (Whether you actually wrote this question or not.)]
I am trying to find my space in this liberal religion -- where there are more questions than anything else. Where do I start?
I'll begin my response by saying that, properly understood, Unitarian Universalism is filled with lots of answers as well as questions. It should! What would be the point of asking questions if we were never to find an answer to them? That said, our faith tradition encourages us to hold on to the answers we've found ... lightly. We're encouraged to be willing to let them go when new experiences lead us to new ways of thinking. There are two quotes I love which speak to this. The first comes from someplace I've never known, "if you're not willing (or able) to change your mind, how do you know you still have one?" The other, which I just heard a week or so ago, comes from the Trappist monk, Thomas Merton. He once wrote, "If the you of five years ago doesn't consider the you of today a heretic, you're not growing spiritually."
All that said, I think it's important to remember that there are not set answers for you to find. Unitarian Universalism invites us to look to our own lives as "sacred scriptures," as full of depth and meaning as any text revered by one of the world's great religions. I've often said that for UUs, "experience precedes theology." I mean that, in a great many other traditions, we are told what, for instance, God is like, and are then encouraged to go out and look for experiences of that in our lives and in the world. We, on the other hand, invite us to first look to our own lived experiences to identify what we would consider "sacred" or "holy" (whether or not those are the words we'd use). Then, after discovering our own experience, we can apply more traditional religious language, or not. (I once wrote what I think was a pretty good sermon about this. I'll see if I can find it, and I'll post it here sometime in the future.)
Well ... those two questions took up a lot of space, so I'll hold it here for today and come back tomorrow with more responses to more questions.
Pax tecum,
RevWik
For the most part I expect my responses to the questions I was able to play with on Sunday to be very similar to what I said them. (Although I reserve the right to have changed my mind in the meantime!) There are also several questions that were asked more than once (in slightly different ways). I'll group them together here. (And I'd remind readers that these are only my responses, and my responses today, at that.)
Help me learn to pray, please.
Given that I've literally written a book on prayer, this feels something like a softball. (Simply Pray: a modern spiritual practice to deepen your life, Skinner House Books, 2005.) Yet before responding to this question specifically, I want to pull back and address the larger issue of "spirituality."
I think that the heart of "spirituality," shorn of any particular theological overly, is the universal observation that there are, let's say, two ways of living -- living in such a way that we are truly and deeply alive, and, well not that. Our Unitarian Transcendentalist ancestor Henry David Thoreau wrote in his classic book Walden that he wished to live in such a way that when he came to die he would not discover that he had not lived. (That's a rough paraphrase.) And this sense that there are two kinds of living can be found in nearly every religious tradition we humans have developed -- alive and dead, living in sin and living in the spirit, deluded and enlightened, asleep and awake. I could go on, but probably don't have to. "Spirituality," then, has to do with this living life rather than not-life. This would mean that spiritual practices -- like prayer -- are tools to use in the effort to be alive.
How, then, do you pray? I'd say that we should pray in the way that "works" for us. It's not necessary to believe in some anthropomorphic deity with whom we "talk." It's not necessary for "prayer" to involve "talking" at all -- either externally or interiorly.
I'll digress here to make a plug for another book project I've been involved with. In 1999, Skinner House Books published the ground-breaking Everyday Spiritual Practice: simple pathways for enriching your life. It's an anthology which offers an extremely wide variety of understanding of just what could justifiably be called a spiritual practice. Earlier this year, Skinner House Books published something of a successor -- Faithful Practices: Everyday Ways to Feed Your Spirit. I was honored to have been the editor for this anthology, which includes examples of spiritual practices as wide ranging as sitting zazen, blowing bubbles, walking through your neighborhood, chopping vegetables, playing roller derby, and "playing" with action figures. (Guess who wrote that chapter?)To learn to pray, then, in it's most expansive understanding, is to (again) feel your way to the answer. What are you doing when you're feeling most alive? Most connected to the universe? I'd say that you could call that "prayer" and that, after defining it that way, paying attention to how your experience of it might change.
[If, of course, this question was actually a specific request for help in learning to do the "talking to" kind of prayer, this response may not have been at all helpful. I would, somewhat modestly, recommend my book as one resource. There are many others I could suggest, and I know that I would be glad to talk with you directly if this is your question. (Whether you actually wrote this question or not.)]
I am trying to find my space in this liberal religion -- where there are more questions than anything else. Where do I start?
I'll begin my response by saying that, properly understood, Unitarian Universalism is filled with lots of answers as well as questions. It should! What would be the point of asking questions if we were never to find an answer to them? That said, our faith tradition encourages us to hold on to the answers we've found ... lightly. We're encouraged to be willing to let them go when new experiences lead us to new ways of thinking. There are two quotes I love which speak to this. The first comes from someplace I've never known, "if you're not willing (or able) to change your mind, how do you know you still have one?" The other, which I just heard a week or so ago, comes from the Trappist monk, Thomas Merton. He once wrote, "If the you of five years ago doesn't consider the you of today a heretic, you're not growing spiritually."
All that said, I think it's important to remember that there are not set answers for you to find. Unitarian Universalism invites us to look to our own lives as "sacred scriptures," as full of depth and meaning as any text revered by one of the world's great religions. I've often said that for UUs, "experience precedes theology." I mean that, in a great many other traditions, we are told what, for instance, God is like, and are then encouraged to go out and look for experiences of that in our lives and in the world. We, on the other hand, invite us to first look to our own lived experiences to identify what we would consider "sacred" or "holy" (whether or not those are the words we'd use). Then, after discovering our own experience, we can apply more traditional religious language, or not. (I once wrote what I think was a pretty good sermon about this. I'll see if I can find it, and I'll post it here sometime in the future.)
Well ... those two questions took up a lot of space, so I'll hold it here for today and come back tomorrow with more responses to more questions.
Pax tecum,
RevWik
Tuesday, July 24, 2018
Response to the Questions I
This past Sunday, July 22nd, I facilitated the "Questions & Responses" service we have annually in the congregation I serve. Congregants write questions on index cards, which are then collected, and to which I offer my in-the-moment responses. Over the next several weeks I plan to devote this page to attempts to offer written responses. If you'd like to see the entire list of questions asked, they're the bulk of my post-Sunday post on July 23rd.
For the most part I expect my responses to the questions I was able to play with on Sunday to be very similar to what I said them. (Although I reserve the right to have changed my mind in the meantime!) There are also several questions that were asked more than once (in slightly different ways). I'll group them together here. (And I'd remind readers that these are only my responses, and my responses today, at that.)
Why have Jews been hated/killed/ostracized for millennia (including, of course, in many quarters now)?
I think that there are at least two answers. From a traditional, orthodox Jewish theological perspective (as I understand it), I might say that it is in some ways "G_d's will." What I mean is that a tenant of Judaism is that the Jewish people are singled out, specially and specifically chosen by G_d -- "G_d's chosen people." And throughout the Jewish scriptures were told of a G_d who tests and challenges people. (Think of Job, for instance.) These "tests" are, in my understanding of the most orthodox thinking, a means by which G_d demonstrates G_d's magnificence and magnaminousn-ess. Individuals, and the people of Israel as a whole, go though untold persecution of many kinds, in order to demonstrate G_d's ability to bring them through it to safety. (I want to be clear -- this is far from a universally held understanding, and no doubt many Jews would find such thinking abhorrent. I also want to acknowledge that I may have this entirely wrong, and am viewing orthodox Jewish teachings through the lens of orthodox Christian teachings. I would be very happy to be corrected!)
The other answer that makes sense to me is that Jewish monotheism was in stark contrast to the polytheism which prevailed all around them. In places like Greece or Rome, for instance, worship of the gods was both assumed and expected. But the people of Israel wouldn't engage in the traditional practices, because their one G_d had specifically commanded them not to worship idols and false gods. This put them at odds with the prevailing culture, which is never a good place to be.
This alienation was further expanded as the early Christian church was being born. The earliest Christians were actually Jews who say no reason to give up their Jewish-ness, believing that Jesus represented the fulfillment of Jewish teaching. Most other Jews didn't agree, and these Jewish-Christians were pushed out of synagogues and denigrated as heretics. In their efforts to gain more converts to this nascent faith, Jewish-Christians (and, then, Gentile-Christians) needed to show how their religion was "better" than the Jewish faith from which they'd sprung. That, and perhaps an all too human impulse to attack those who've attacked you, led to a number of anti-semetic sentiments written into the New Testament and embedded in practice. Over time, this animosity became normative, and as Christianity developed into a temporal power as well as a spiritual one, it became increasingly acceptable to use the Jews as scapegoats for all sorts of imagined problems.
From a religious perspective, what does "community" mean?
"Community" comes from the same root as "common" and "communion," and as it applies specifically to human communities, it denotes a group of people who have something in common and who have with one another a deep connection (perhaps the underlying meaning of "communion"). A "community," then, is a group of people with whom a person can be their true self, knowing that they will be accepted, loved, and even celebrated for who they are in their wholeness.
Finding a place? Finding a passion?
Assuming that these are questions about how to find a place and one's passion, I would say that this isn't something you can think your way to. I believe that the path to one's place and passion is through feelings. When do you feel most alive? Where do you feel most yourself? Where, and to what, do you feel yourself drawn? More than making a list of pros and cons, tuning in to how you feel is most likely to lead you toward your answers. And they will be your answers. No one else can answer these questions for you ... although a lot of people may try. (I'd also note that attempting to passively "find" you place and your passion is not enough, and might not even have much chance of success. I think you need to be active in creating your place, and developing you passion. Waiting for them to come to you might make it a long wait.)
So ... there are my responses to the first three questions. I think I'll try to keep responding to about three questions a day.
Pax tecum,
RevWik
For the most part I expect my responses to the questions I was able to play with on Sunday to be very similar to what I said them. (Although I reserve the right to have changed my mind in the meantime!) There are also several questions that were asked more than once (in slightly different ways). I'll group them together here. (And I'd remind readers that these are only my responses, and my responses today, at that.)
Why have Jews been hated/killed/ostracized for millennia (including, of course, in many quarters now)?
I think that there are at least two answers. From a traditional, orthodox Jewish theological perspective (as I understand it), I might say that it is in some ways "G_d's will." What I mean is that a tenant of Judaism is that the Jewish people are singled out, specially and specifically chosen by G_d -- "G_d's chosen people." And throughout the Jewish scriptures were told of a G_d who tests and challenges people. (Think of Job, for instance.) These "tests" are, in my understanding of the most orthodox thinking, a means by which G_d demonstrates G_d's magnificence and magnaminousn-ess. Individuals, and the people of Israel as a whole, go though untold persecution of many kinds, in order to demonstrate G_d's ability to bring them through it to safety. (I want to be clear -- this is far from a universally held understanding, and no doubt many Jews would find such thinking abhorrent. I also want to acknowledge that I may have this entirely wrong, and am viewing orthodox Jewish teachings through the lens of orthodox Christian teachings. I would be very happy to be corrected!)
The other answer that makes sense to me is that Jewish monotheism was in stark contrast to the polytheism which prevailed all around them. In places like Greece or Rome, for instance, worship of the gods was both assumed and expected. But the people of Israel wouldn't engage in the traditional practices, because their one G_d had specifically commanded them not to worship idols and false gods. This put them at odds with the prevailing culture, which is never a good place to be.
This alienation was further expanded as the early Christian church was being born. The earliest Christians were actually Jews who say no reason to give up their Jewish-ness, believing that Jesus represented the fulfillment of Jewish teaching. Most other Jews didn't agree, and these Jewish-Christians were pushed out of synagogues and denigrated as heretics. In their efforts to gain more converts to this nascent faith, Jewish-Christians (and, then, Gentile-Christians) needed to show how their religion was "better" than the Jewish faith from which they'd sprung. That, and perhaps an all too human impulse to attack those who've attacked you, led to a number of anti-semetic sentiments written into the New Testament and embedded in practice. Over time, this animosity became normative, and as Christianity developed into a temporal power as well as a spiritual one, it became increasingly acceptable to use the Jews as scapegoats for all sorts of imagined problems.
From a religious perspective, what does "community" mean?
"Community" comes from the same root as "common" and "communion," and as it applies specifically to human communities, it denotes a group of people who have something in common and who have with one another a deep connection (perhaps the underlying meaning of "communion"). A "community," then, is a group of people with whom a person can be their true self, knowing that they will be accepted, loved, and even celebrated for who they are in their wholeness.
Finding a place? Finding a passion?
Assuming that these are questions about how to find a place and one's passion, I would say that this isn't something you can think your way to. I believe that the path to one's place and passion is through feelings. When do you feel most alive? Where do you feel most yourself? Where, and to what, do you feel yourself drawn? More than making a list of pros and cons, tuning in to how you feel is most likely to lead you toward your answers. And they will be your answers. No one else can answer these questions for you ... although a lot of people may try. (I'd also note that attempting to passively "find" you place and your passion is not enough, and might not even have much chance of success. I think you need to be active in creating your place, and developing you passion. Waiting for them to come to you might make it a long wait.)
So ... there are my responses to the first three questions. I think I'll try to keep responding to about three questions a day.
Pax tecum,
RevWik
Labels:
antisemetism,
bliss,
community,
creating,
developing,
finding,
passion,
place,
questions,
responses
Monday, July 23, 2018
Questions & Responses 2018
These are the Opening and Closing words I offered for the "Questions & Responses" service at the congregation I serve in Charlottesville, Virginia on July 22, 2018. I responded to as many of the questions as I could, as best I could in the moment. This post also includes all of the questions to come out of the congregation.
The Questions:
Opening Words:
It is common in a great many Unitarian Universalist congregations for the settled preacher to offer what’s often called a “Question Box Sermon” – congregants write questions on index cards, which are then collected and which the preacher does her best to answer. I first encountered this practice in our congregation in Yarmouth, Maine, where it was known instead as “Stump the Minister Sunday.” It had become the tradition there to ask questions so complex, so erudite, or so niche that it was unlikely that the preacher would be able to answer. It was also a chance to have some fun. In my first year, for instance, I was asked for the average air speed velocity of an unladen swallow, to which I replied, “African or European?” (I have since learned that the average air speed velocity of an unladen European swallow, at least is roughly 11 meters per second, or 24 miles an hour.)
It is common in a great many Unitarian Universalist congregations for the settled preacher to offer what’s often called a “Question Box Sermon” – congregants write questions on index cards, which are then collected and which the preacher does her best to answer. I first encountered this practice in our congregation in Yarmouth, Maine, where it was known instead as “Stump the Minister Sunday.” It had become the tradition there to ask questions so complex, so erudite, or so niche that it was unlikely that the preacher would be able to answer. It was also a chance to have some fun. In my first year, for instance, I was asked for the average air speed velocity of an unladen swallow, to which I replied, “African or European?” (I have since learned that the average air speed velocity of an unladen European swallow, at least is roughly 11 meters per second, or 24 miles an hour.)
Fun though this was, I have always that these “Question Box Sermons” shouldn’t be a challenge to the congregation to come up with ever more esoteric questions for the minister but, instead, an opportunity for a congregation to “test” their ordained minister and to see how their mind works (in situ, as it were). In some of the schools within the Zen Buddhist traditions there is something known as “dharma combat. “ As I understand it, a student who is preparing to become a teacher comes before the sangha which then questions him to test the breadth of their knowledge and the depth of their understanding.
“Question Box Sermons” also provide an opportunity for both the ordained minister – and the congregation itself – to learn just what questions members are wrestling, or dancing, with. What’s on your minds? What questions, what concerns, what issues are “uppermost on your minds and deepest in your hearts”? What, if you could ask me anything, what would you ask?
One other thought: I have learned that the author Brian McLaren no longer offers Q&A sessions after his talks. He used to, but he no longer does. Instead, he now offers a time for “Q&R”. He’s said that he now realizes that he will have answers to people’s questions may be a little presumptuous– especially if they are deep and meaningful ones. Now he promises only to offer his most considered response.
- Why have Jews been hated/killed/ostracized for millennia? (Including, of course, in many quarters now?)
- From a religious perspective, what does "community" mean?
- Finding a place? Finding a passion?
- Help me to learn to pray, please.
- I am trying to find my space in this liberal religion, where there are more questions than anything else. Where do I start?
- You love superheroes. What is a superhero with a particularly spiritual lesson?
- How do we discourage harmful "group-think" bandwagons?
- How do we explain the evil in the world, such as terrorism, to our young children?
- I'm 77. My grandchildren are grown. What do I do with the rest of my life?
- What was your most spiritually fulfilling moment?
- What is your least favorite thing about Unitarian Universalism?
- Sometimes there are questions that ministers wish they were asked. Is there a question you wish to be asked and to answer?
- Define "prayer."
- How do you discern when a decision is selfish or healthy self-care? Particularly regards limiting contact with family members with mental health issues?
- As an atheist, with no belief in an afterlife, reward or punishment (eternal or otherwise), what is the point of being virtuous or "good"?
Those were the questions I was able to answer during the service. Here are the rest:
- It breaks my heart to see the dissension here these days. How can we come together again -- respecting our differences and honoring mutual love again?
- What can Unitarian Universalists learn from Christianity (or from Jesus) that can help guide our lives?
- How do different religions in the world offer support for those who are persecuted?
- We love TJMC and all who work in it so arduously. Is it possible that the anxious disunity fostered by current political establishment might undermine Unitarian Universalist's attempt to unify everyone?
- How do you stay in community with family members who have racist views?
- Where can I find hope or joy? I used to find them in nature. Now I am saddened by man's destruction of the earth. I used to have faith in the goodness o humans. It is overshadowed by evil. How do we face despair?
- In this world, this hurting world, both large and in my small world, where the needs are huge and often conflicting, how do I choose where to put my energy, and how do I find peace in myself in the midst of so much?
- How much would could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
- Is he church available for hosting U.S. Chess Federation sponsored chess tournaments (on occasional weekends)?
- "Love" and "Spirituality," are they the same thing?
- How does racial justice work and social action affect you in your day-to-day life?
- I once heard a minister say that Unitarian Universalists do not believe in an afterlife. Is this a universal doctrine for UUs? I want to believe that there is something next!
- Please translate your closing words. Thank you.
- Why do so many choose to follow religious beliefs based on impossible miraculous and likely mythical events, rather than use critical reasoning to form their belief systems?
- Why does racism exist in Charlottesville? Or anywhere?
- Why is music an important part of many different religious services?
- How can I soothe myself and others when there is so much pain in our world?
- How can we deal, spiritual, with our sense that this country is heading into an existential crisis?
- What hymn do you love or think is particularly meaningful?
- How do we encourage more volunteers?
- Would you be willing to take a pay cut to stay?
- Could we have more music?
- Tell me just shy I am here when Tiger Woods and Jordan Spieth are both in contention at the British Open?
- What would you like us to know about the many challenges of [being] lead minister?
- When your child (who is 6) asks you if there is a god, and her parents don't agree on the answer, how do you answer her? Explain how Unitarian Universalism can help her figure it out?
- What can an atheist say as a pre-meal "grace" when asked to do so by conventionally religious persons?
A lot of really good questions, no? I've never done this before, but I think that I will write responses to these on this blog over the next several weeks. Stay tuned!
Closing Words:
For closing words how could I not offer this well-known passage from Rainer Maria Rilke’s 1903 book, Letters to a Young Poet:
“...I would like to beg you dear Sir, as well as I can, to have patience with everything unresolved in your heart and to try to love the questions themselves as if they were locked rooms or books written in a very foreign language. Don't search for the answers, which could not be given to you now, because you would not be able to live them. And the point is to live everything. Live the questions now. Perhaps then, someday far in the future, you will gradually, without even noticing it, live your way into the answer.”
Pax tecum,
RevWik
Pax tecum,
RevWik
Tuesday, April 17, 2018
How Do You Want to Bloom Here?
This is the text of the reflection I offered to the congregation I serve on Sunday, April 25th, 2018. (If you prefer, you can listen to it.)
I want to thank those of you – both here and not here this
morning – who have taken the step of formalizing your membership in this
community. The two things I like to say
to new members are: congratulations
(because you’ve joined a wonderful congregation), and thank you (because by
your joining, and by bringing the gifts and spirit only you have, you are
making it more wonderful still). So,
congratulations and thank you.
I must say, though, that you’ve picked an … interesting …
time to take this step. There’s
supposedly an ancient Chinese saying, “May you live in interesting times,” said
not as a blessing, but a curse. “May you
live in … interesting … times.” It turns
out that it isn’t
a bit of ancient Chinese philosophy, yet we certainly can understand using the
word “interesting” as an ironic euphemism for … well … for the kind of times we’re
living in. And while I could be talking
about “the times we’re living in” in relation to this time in our nation, or this
time in our city, this morning I’m most interested in the … interesting … times
we find ourselves in here in our congregation.
This is a time when many people are questioning whether or
not this is the right congregation for them, or who don’t know if they want to,
or even if they can, go with it in the direction it seems to be going. This is a time when people are even wondering
about whether Unitarian Universalism, as a faith tradition, is what they’d
thought it was, and whether they can honestly and with integrity continue to
call themselves UUs. As I said, this is
very much an … interesting … time to be joining TJMC. You’re joining just as a lot of people are wondering
about, and fearing for, the future of the congregation. There are those who are saying that we’re in
a time of crisis.
Not me. Not me. I believe firmly that his disconcerting disquiet
and disequilibrium we’re experiencing right now is not a problem. I think it’s a good thing, something to lean
into it. I see it as an opportunity.
My Mother-in-Law,
herself a retired Methodist minister (and well versed in the ways of congregational
life), asked me just the other day if what has been happening at our church had
“calmed down” at all. I told her that I
certainly hope things haven’t calmed
down too much. I reminded her of the
Rev. Dr. King saying that there are some things to which we all should be “maladjusted.”
I want to be clear that I don’t think being uncomfortable
just for the sake of feeling uncomfortable is a good thing. Nor have I forgotten that while the famous
description of religion’s purpose is about “afflicting the comfortable,” it
also says that our work as a faith community is about “comforting the afflicted.” I know that; I do. Yet don’t we all know how easy it is to move
from comfort to complacency? And sometimes
it can be hard to keep track of who, in our culture, needs comforting and who’s
in need of some afflicting. This isn’t another
sermon about our racial justice work, or even about the current controversies
surrounding us. I’m really talking this
morning about how our faith invites us to live our lives, you and me.
Unitarian Universalist unequivocally calls us to reject
complacency in all its forms. At its
best, and perhaps more than any other of the organized religious responses to
life we humans have developed, it calls on us to refuse to be too settled, too
satisfied. It calls on us to question …
everything … and to keep on questioning.
As one of our hymns puts it, we believe that, “to question is the
answer,” or as an old bumper stick said, “Unitarian Universalism – leaving no
answer unquestioned.” We are famously
not bound by creed or dogma; we are charged with searching for truth and
meaning – on our own and in community – and understand this to be a life-long
search.
One of my favorite spiritual teachers is the astrophysicist
Neil deGrasse Tyson. (If you’ve never
seen the video of him giving a talk that’s usually described as “the greatest sermon ever,” it’s well
worth Googling when you get home.) He
has said that for a real scientist is kind of disappointing if an experiment
proves their hypothesis, because then it’s all over and done with. The excitement comes when an experiment doesn’t prove your hypothesis and opens
up a whole new host of questions. According
to Tyson, it’s the questions, not the answers, which drive the scientific
enterprise; scientists are much more interested in exploring the currently-still-mysterious,
rather than simply creating a catalogue of the known.
I love this so much because I think that it’s the purpose of
our Unitarian Universalist faith as well.
When we’re at our best, it’s the enterprise our congregations exist to
help each of us, and all of us, engage.
We are not supposed to be satisfied with the answers we found ten years
ago, fifteen years ago, twenty years ago, or even, necessarily, last year. We believe in evolution not just in biology,
but in our understanding as well.
Years ago, while serving another congregation, I had a sign on
the board in front of the church for several months. It said: “If you can’t change your mind, how do
you know you still have one?” The
Christian theologian, and Catholic Saint, Augustine of Hippo said way back in
the 5th century, si comprehendis
non est Deus. (One of the few bits
of Latin I remember.) That translates as, “If you understand it, it’s not God.” And I’d say that whatever terms or images we
use to describe Ultimate Reality, that Spirit of Life we sing about most Sundays,
our faith calls us to have that same awareness and attitude: if we understand it, it’s not … It. That’s why we’re called to the search for truth and meaning, and not to
the celebratory party for truth and meaning discovered.
But this is hard. It
is hard to keep questioning our answers.
It’s hard to keep looking for new ways of seeing, listening for new ways
of hearing, finding new ways of being in the world – especially when the
laundry’s been piling up, and the fridge is getting a little empty. With so much … chaos … swirling around us it
would be nice to have something solid
to hold on to. Yet just as comfort can
change to complacency, something solid can easily become something stagnant.
This is why I think that this … interesting … time of disquiet
and discomfort is not a crisis but an opportunity. It is an opportunity, for us as individuals
and as a congregation, to really wrestle with – or, as I prefer to say – to dance
with our principles, our values, and our understandings of things. It’s an opportunity to re-examine what we
really believe, something our faith doesn’t dictate to us but, rather, invites
us to discover for ourselves. It is an opportunity
to ask questions: What does it mean to
be truly welcoming if in welcoming some people we unavoidably exclude others? What does it mean to be committed to being a truly
safe place for people who have historically been, and are being still,
marginalized if it means things we’re accustomed to have to change? What does it mean to disagree with others,
risky though that might feel, yet still be one community? (Can we trust each other enough to do
that? What does it mean if we can’t?) What does my “belonging” to this community
mean? What expectations can I reasonably
have, and what can be expected of me? Do
my wants, my perceived needs, my desires, my preferences have to be met for me
to say that things are “going well”? (What
is the measure of the “success,” if
you will, of our mutual ministry?) What
are the limits – or are there limits –
to my commitment to this place and these people? Do I really belong here?
These are the kinds of questions people say that they’re dancing
with these days precisely because of the … interesting … times in which we find
ourselves. Yet the truth is, these are
the kind of questions we ought to be dancing with all the time!
Mickey ScottBey Jones, an anti-racist organizer, has written
about real, deep, transformative relationships with perhaps a surprising
metaphor. Deep, transformative
relationships are the kind I hope we’d agree we ought to be striving to create
here, and we might think of them as cool and comforting, soothing and
supportive. Yet Mickey ScottBey Jones
wrote:
[R]elationship
is the sandpaper that wears away our resistance to change. Relationship is the
abrasion that agitates enough to make a way forward … it smooths the way for
the sacred, even as it rubs us raw.
Relationship is the sandpaper of life.
We are being offered an opportunity – again, as individuals
and as a community – to ask ourselves deep and fundamental questions about our faith
tradition, our own faith, the purpose of this community (and others like it),
and about the meaning of our membership in it.
At its best, a faith community offers us an opportunity to discover the
way into our fullness, an opportunity to truly bloom. In our faith tradition we are challenged to
discover that way for ourselves, and to keep discovering new dimensions of that
“way,” so that our blooming can become ever more beautiful and fragrant.
For me, the most important question in all of this is
whether we will make good use of this opportunity. The question to that is something that only
you, and all of us together, can answer.
[The Parting Words were the well-known quotation about question by Rainer Maria Rilke from Letters to a Young Poet. They are well worth remembering in just about any times, be they ... interesting ... or not.]
Pax tecum,
RevWik
Monday, March 21, 2016
Liberation Theology
This is the text of the sermon I preached at the congregation I serve -- Thomas Jefferson Memorial Church Unitarian Universalist. As always, you can listen if you prefer.
I want to tell you a story about a guy named Frankie. That’s not his real name, actually. He came from a pretty wealthy family and had one of those long, aristocratic sounding names, but all of his friends called him Frankie. And Frankie had a lot of friends. He had an outgoing personality, and an extremely charismatic spirit; he told great stories, and even better jokes; he could sing all of the popular music of his day; and, as I said, he came from a pretty wealthy family so he could throw some really awesome parties. Which he did. All the time.
On a Friday or Saturday night Frankie would get in his Bugatti Chiron and cruise around town, calling out invitations to everybody he saw. Well, almost everybody. There was a pretty large homeless population where Frankie lived, probably because of the encampment they’d made just outside of town, and Frankie just couldn’t stand the sight of them. He probably never really thought about it this way, but for him they represented the complete opposite of everything he saw himself as. He wouldn’t even, couldn’t even, look at the ones standing on the median strips asking for help as he drove by. He tried to not even think of them at all.
When the time came, Frankie volunteered to join the army and go off to fight. He expected to be as successful in this realm as he was in everything else, and had visions of honor and glory. But that’s not the way things turned out, and he came home different. He was quieter, more serious. His parties weren’t quite as much fun, and he didn’t throw them as often. He spent more time driving his Bugatti in the hills and woods that surrounded his town … thinking. He always seemed to be thinking deeply.
He’d seen such horrible things in the war, experienced such horrible things, and he was having a hard time reconciling these with the privileged life he’d been leading. He’d seen people who were so very unlike the friends he’d gathered together on Friday and Saturday nights, and he’d seen how many people had problems and challenges he could never have even imagined. And as he thought about what he’d seen he felt a growing need to do something about it, to do something about the unfairness he now saw everywhere he looked.
What he thought most about was how far to take this new sense of urgency. He made sure that he always had bottled water in his car to hand out of the window to the people on the medians. And he began to take some of the money he used to spend on parties and give it to various charities. He volunteered a bit of his time rebuilding some of the dilapidated buildings around town, even using some of his own money to pay for supplies. He started going to church … and not just on Christmas and Easter! But always the question echoing, how far to take this.
It had been a couple of months since Frankie had stopped driving his Bugatti around town and had begun walking or taking public transportation. Better for the environment, and he could give his gas money to people who needed food. He was walking down the main street in town and saw a homeless man on the median. The man was everything Frankie had despised – he was dirty, his clothes were dirty, his hair was unkempt, his teeth were bad. And yet … and yet on this day Frankie found himself looking beneath or through all of that and seeing the human being within. And that person he was now looking at was what we all are when we’re really seen – beautiful. And without even thinking about it, Frankie walked up to the man who just a few years ago he wouldn’t have even looked at, and hugged him. And at that moment he realized he that knew the answer to his question of how far to take things – he moved out of his house and moved into the encampment, and he lived there for years.
How far to take it? This feeling, this urge, to do something, to do something to address the inequities we see all around us, to make the world a better place – how far should we take it?
I know that this is a question I wrestle with a lot. Maybe some of you do, too. After I change out all of the halogen bulbs in the house for LEDs (which, I’ll confess, I haven’t quite done yet), and I make sure I diligently turn off all the power strips when I’m not using the things that are plugged into them (which I don’t), and I buy only sustainably raised foods, and wear only organic cotton clothing (washing them with non-toxic biodegradable soaps, of course), and … well … how far should I take it? How far can I take it? And, honestly, how far do I want to take it?
Do you ever wonder about things like this? Maybe you do only after a Sunday morning when you’ve felt guilted from the pulpit about all there is to do to heal this all-too broken world, or after you’ve read a book about racism like Ta-Nehesi Coates’s Between the World and Me, or listened to people talking about income inequality, or … or maybe you’ve woken up some night, in the middle of the night, and thought about the world your children, or your grandchildren, are going to inherit from us and you wonder – shouldn’t I be doing something more? Couldn’t I be doing something more? And then there’s the real question – how far am I supposed to go? How much sacrifice? How much am I supposed to give up – of my things, the way I live? How much?
After all, we’re learning – we as individuals and we as a religious movement – that it’s not enough to show up and offer our help to those people who are in need. That’s pretty easy, actually, but it really does nothing to address the underlying systems that perpetuate the problems we see around us and feel called to address. When we stay up here and reach down to help, no matter our intention we reinforce those relative positions. So we know that we can’t stay in our safe spaces and reach out our hands to give someone some assistance without having to be really touched by their problems. We know that that’s not enough. But what is enough? How far out of our comfort zones do we need to go?
As I say to my kids all the time – I have good news and I have bad news. The bad news is that that story about Frankie? It’s a true story. It’s an updated telling of the story of a young man named Giovanni di Pietro di Bernardone, who lived in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries in Italy, the true story of a rich kid who had it all and then gave it all away to move from the center of society to its outermost margins and throw in his lot with those who had almost nothing at all. The good news is that today we know that young man by a different name: Saint Francis of Assissi. So the bad news is that the story tells us just how far some people have been willing to go to answer that deep soul urging to make a difference; the good news is that the guy was literally a saint. Both will be important to keep in mind through the rest of the sermon.
Liberation theology, the ostensible topic for the morning, is a theological framework that appeared in modern Christianity in the Catholic Church of Latin America in 1950s, although that name wasn’t used until the Peruvian priest Gustavo Gutiérrez wrote one of the movement's defining books, A Theology of Liberation in 1971. (It should be noted that the concept of “liberation theology,” or “a theology of liberation,” has spread far from its Latin American Catholic roots and can be seen as the foundation of Asian, Black, Womanist, and Palestinian liberation movements, to name just a few.) The simplest summation of this theology is that the God of the Gospels and the early Christian church has a “preference” for those people who are “insignificant," "marginalized," “unimportant," "needy," "despised," and "defenseless." Gutiérrez called this “a preferential option for the poor.”
Of course, liberation theologians would argue that this theological framework didn’t begin in Latin America in the 1950s but, rather, in Palestine in the 1st century, and that it was already really well established by Hebrew Prophets like Isaiah and Amos, Micha and Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Nehemiah. These theologies don’t say that God’s love is limited to the poor and the oppressed, just that God has a soft spot for those who have been marginalized and mistreated. “Blessed are the poor,” not because all people aren’t blessed but because the poor are so often treated as though they’re not that it bears highlighting.
St. Francis wasn’t part of the movement known as liberation theology, but he definitely saw that the place of the church was with the disenfranchised. The current Pope, not coincidentally named for the earlier saint, has said as much today. “Poverty is the flesh of the poor Jesus,” he has said, “in that child who is hungry, in the one who is sick, in those unjust social structures.” He also said, “A way has to be found to enable everyone to benefit from the fruits of the earth, and not simply to close the gap between the affluent and those who must be satisfied with the crumbs falling from the table, but above all to satisfy the demands of justice, fairness and respect for every human being.”
And good social justice minded Unitarian Universalists that we are we say, “Yes!” “Right!” “Absolutely!” Yet if you’re anything like me, while you’re affirming that ideal you’re also asking yourself, “How far do I have to take this? If I go down this road, how far will I need to go? Where will be the end of it? Will there ever be an end of it?” I ask these questions, and you may too, because I know how insatiable the needs of the world are, and I am afraid … afraid that if I set out on this path it’ll soon be one of those “slippery slopes” and I sure don’t want to end up at the bottom on … well … my bottom, all muddy and bruised and unable to get back up to where I’d been.
Remember, Giovanni di Pietro di Bernardone, and hundreds … thousands of people like him, prove that it is possible to go all the way, to so care for the poor and the oppressed as to become poor and oppressed oneself in solidarity. That is the answer he ultimately came to after wandering the hills of Assissi wondering how far to go. All the way; no holding back. And if his, and their, testimony is to be believed, rather than some kind of regrettable burden this going all the way opened the way for a joy that had been previously unimaginable to him. Giving up his wealth, he asserted, brought him to a richness incomparable.
Remember too, though, that young Francesco was a saint and that we – again, if you are anything like me – are not. So how far should we go? How far can we go? And, let’s be honest, how far do we want to and are we willing to go? I don’t know. I don’t know the right answer to that for you; I can’t say that I’ve yet figured out the answer for myself. I can say, though, that I don’t believe the answer is, for me or for most of you either, as far as St. Francis went, but I do believe it’s farther than I have gone so far. I do believe, I know as a certainty, that I need to go farther than I have so far, and I know that it’s not going to be easy. I know that I’ll take most of the steps kicking and screaming. But maybe, just maybe, if we help one another, it’ll be easier. And maybe that’s part of what it means that we Unitarian Universalists are a people of liberation. It means that none of us have to be about this work on our own. We can walk this path together. In fact, it's really the only way we can.
Pax tecum,
RevWik
Pax tecum,
RevWik
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)