Tuesday, July 10, 2012

What Is America?

Here are the two "sermonic explorations" from this past Sunday at the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Church - Unitarian Universalist.

If you want to listen to the podcast it will be available here.

Pam Phillips’ Explorations
“Can we feel pride in America? Should we feel pride in America?”
The timing of these questions is perfect for me. Yes, we just celebrated the birth of our nation on the Fourth of July, but perhaps more to the point is that we are getting ready for the Olympics. When I think of pride and America, some of my most visceral experiences of pride go back to the Olympics.
I have strong emotional memories of crying joyful tears as I heard the Star Spangled Banner play and watched American athletes receive gold medals. I was a swimmer, so Mark Spitz gave me lots of opportunities to cry. Back then, our biggest competition was the USSR and other Soviet bloc countries, and I remember the East German women swimmers who looked more like men. When US swimmers won, they did it fairly—no steroids. US athletes were not taken from their families as children and indoctrinated to become symbols of the superiority of communism. To me, the Olympics were a symbol of what was right with America and what was wrong with the communists. My pride in the athletes who represented our country equaled my pride in my country.
As I got older, my understanding of the world got more complicated. The world changed, too, of course. There’s no longer a Soviet Union and Olympic athletes are no longer amateurs. It’s all gotten complicated.
Now when I watch the Olympic coverage, I admit to a certain amount of irritation at the media. I get tired of the constant references to the medal count—which country has the most medals—as if the prowess of the athletes really does represent the relative worth of their countries.
Just as my attitude towards the Olympics has changed, so too has my relationship with my country, and it has more to do with politics than with sports. I still have moments of intense pride in America. I think of the night Barack Obama won the presidential election. That was like a gold medal ceremony on steroids for me. (And yes, I cried.) But I have also had moments of extreme disappointment in my country.
I think back to the months after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The initial response, both in this country and around the world, was one of disbelief and unity against terrorism. We were all in this together, and I was proud to be an American. As time went on, though, and politicians’ statements became more stridently us versus them, and any questioning of our country’s policies or actions was met with “Either you’re with us or you’re with the terrorists.” Well, then it became more difficult to be proud to be an American. I felt like the flag and other symbols of patriotism had been hijacked by people who were afraid of the rest of the world, who suspected anyone who was “different.” I didn’t want to put a flag sticker on my car, because I didn’t want to be associated with “that” kind of patriotism—with jingoism.
This reminds me of the way the language of reverence, of religion, seems to have been hijacked by the religious right. When I tell people how involved I am in my church, they often get a very skewed idea of who I am because they assume “church” means conservative and orthodox. That’s why I think it is so important for Unitarian Universalists to take back the language of reverence and to do public witness. I want people to know that religion doesn’t necessarily mean “right” and that church can look like us. Just because I don’t want to be orthodox doesn’t mean I can’t be religious.
Likewise, just because I don’t want to be jingoistic doesn’t mean I can’t be patriotic, which is why my favorite July 4th tradition is to go up to Monticello for the Naturalization Ceremony. I first went years ago to watch a friend from South Africa become a US citizen, and I discovered then that it is the best antidote to jaded cynicism. The Charlottesville Municipal Band plays patriotic music and people make speeches (and this year it was Olympic gymnast Nadia Comaneci). The best part, though, is when the new citizens get the microphone and I’m reminded why I am so lucky and proud to be an American.
This year, I heard a woman from Zimbabwe explain why she had been so confused at American’s interest in politics. In her home country they had elections, but the results were a foregone conclusion. She urged us to vote. A woman from Brazil explained that if you don’t vote, they take away your passport! A man from South Sudan proclaimed that he had been born again in his new country. He said that Americans were very good people but encouraged us to follow the law. He explained that here the police are good; they are here to protect us. There is no 911 in Khartoum.
Listening to these newest citizens puts my own criticisms of America into perspective. Yes, I am sick of the political climate in this country, but I do get to vote. Yes, I am angered by stories of racial profiling, but our police are princes compared to those in many other parts of the world.
The newest Americans on the Fourth of July remind me of what I cannot know as keenly as they do, that this is a wonderful country, and if I hadn’t been born to it, I might want to go through the hardships they went through to become a citizen as well.
And yet . . . I just got back from General Assembly in Phoenix, Arizona—the Justice GA--where I was confronted with more sources of disappointment in our country. I stood witness with thousands to protest the Tent City detention center, where people are living in canvass tents in the desert. I learned more about how our immigration policies are broken and need fixing, but more especially how those policies are affecting the lives of people. I’ve just started learning about the Doctrine of Discovery—a doctrine established over five hundred years ago that is still used to deny the rights of indigenous people in America.
Can I feel pride and shame at the same time? I do, so I must. So how can I reconcile these conflicting feelings? How do I live with both/and? I find one answer in the words of yet another new citizen. He described choosing a new nationality as a deep and bold act. A deep and bold act. I like that, because it captures how significant it is to choose to become a citizen of a new country. Can you imagine making that choice? I can’t. I didn’t have to. The newest citizens of the US came here from other lands, many at great risk and great cost, but they chose to become Americans. I can take inspiration from our newest fellow citizens, then, and make my own deep and bold act: I can choose to learn what I can about what’s wrong in my country and do what I can to make it right. I can work, with all of you, to fulfill the promise of this country for all Americans, no, for all people. As one new American said, “I feel myself in the brightest and most resilient country.”                                            
May we make it so.


Erik Wikstrom’s Exploration
One of the best reactions I ever got to one of my sermons was also one of the most unexpected.  It’s still surprising to me, over a decade later.  And it still makes me smile a subversive little smile.
I heard about the reaction on the Monday or Tuesday following the service.  I lived in the church’s parsonage in those days – right next to the church! – and across the street there was this hardware store.  Like I said, it was Monday or Tuesday and I had to go into the store for some thing or other.  And the owner, who’d come to know me over the years, greeted me with the question, “What did you say to your church on Sunday?”  I asked him why he was asking, and he said, “Because we had a run on flags!”
That’s right . . . the members and friends of the First Universalist Church of Yarmouth, Maine left church that June morning and bought out every American flag in the store.  And I tell you, I want to break out in a mischievous grin every time I think of it.
The sermon was an “auction sermon” – the payment of a debt to someone who’d coughed up some cash at the church auction for the right to choose one of my sermon topics.  The topic chosen was:  “Flag Day.”
Now Flag Day has never exactly been at the top of my list of holiday celebrations.  And, as I noted that June morning, the whole notion of preaching about it kind of creeped me out; made me feel a little queasy.  I wasn’t the only one, either.  There were a lot of folks in the pews that day who were visibly uneasy. 
And I think that Pam just named the reason why – “patriotism,” “flag waving,” is often viewed somewhat suspiciously by people whose politics can be described as “liberal,” or, perhaps even, “left of liberal.”  Like a lot of us.  Not all of us, of course, but a lot of us.  Folks like that tend to see that kind of patriotism – the kind that leads, for instance, to the hoisting of the “stars and bars” in public display – as something that’s been largely co-opted by the folks on the right; the folks who stand for . . . well, let’s face it . . . who seem to stand for just about everything folks like most of us stand against.
George Bernard Shaw once observed that “patriotism is a pernicious, psychopathic form of idiocy. . . .  the conviction that [your] country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it.”  And we obviously don’t want to be associated with that.  We don’t want to be associated with the kind of provincial, xenophobic, jingoism that is so often associated with . . . flag wavers.  Many of us, after all, think of ourselves as citizens of the world; not so much “Americans” as “members of the Human Family.”  The social psychologist Erich Fromm said,

“Nationalism is our form of incest, is our idolatry, is our insanity.  ‘Patriotism’ is its cult.  It should hardly be necessary to say that, by ‘patriotism,’ I mean that attitude which puts one’s own nation above humanity, above the principles of truth and justice . . .”

 “My country right or wrong,” in other words.  “America, love it or leave it.”

But why is this what so many of us think of when we think of being patriotic?  When did all these negatives come to be associated with pride in our country and its symbols?  When did the flag become a blindfold rather than a banner—requiring us to be “blindly” patriotic in order to be patriotic?  Was it in the years following 9-11?  Has it been happening for longer than that?  I don’t know, but it certainly does seem as though the Right and the Left have split things up, and the Right has gotten “patriotism” while the left has gotten . . . what? . . . maybe “cynicism.”
To be sure, there has been much said and done in the name of patriotism of which I am not proud.  There is much this country has done, is doing, and no doubt will do with which I disagree and, at times, of which I am deeply ashamed.  But that does not mean that I don’t love this country, as well.  That doesn’t negate all that is good—all that is great and might be great—about it.  That doesn’t invalidate the things Pam talked about hearing at Monticello on Wednesday.  Those things are real, too.  And, in fact, President William Jefferson Clinton once declared, “There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured with what is right in America.”
What I told those Unitarian Universalists in Yarmouth, Maine over a decade ago is that the flag is one of the symbols of the ideals of this country, that it stands for all that is right and might be right, and the fact that we have not always lived up to the promise is not the fault of the symbol.  I told them that I, for one, was tired of ceding to the religious and political right all of the really good symbols!  I told them that I didn’t want to accept defeat in the rhetorical struggle to determining the future of the United States by allowing someone else to dictate the framework within which the conversation would be had . . . to define all the terms of the debate.  I told them that on that Flag Day I was planning to raise the flag at my house.  And, apparently, more than a few of them decided to join me.
The quote I read earlier from Erich Fromm—the one that began, “Nationalism is . . . our insanity [and] ‘patriotism’ is its cult . . .”—continues by offering a positive description of patriotism: 
“. . . the loving interest in one’s own nation, which is the concern with the nation’s spiritual as much as with its material welfare—never with its power over other nations.  Just as love for one individual which excludes the love for others is not love, love for one’s country which is not part of one’s love for humanity is not love, but idolatrous worship.”
Just because we extend our love to all of humanity doesn’t mean we shouldn’t love our own families, as well.  And we can love our own families, while still recognizing their shortcomings.  We can love this country while still recognizing its failings, while still holding it accountable for its failings. 
In his powerful speech at the March on Washington the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke stirringly about the “promissory note” which the United States had written at its founding and which was then coming due – the promise that here all people are “created equal” and have “certain unalienable rights.”  He said he’d come to cash that check at “the bank of justice.”
Well, some of those funds have been dispersed.  Some of the value of that note has been redeemed.  But not all of it.  Nowhere near all of it.  And in the years since Dr. King’s speech we’ve realized that there are some folks who are covered by that note that we weren’t even thinking of then.  The promise has not yet been kept.
Still, “not yet” is not the same as “not ever.”  And it seems to me that we have only two choices.  One is to burn ourselves out or up in cynical struggle; fighting, perhaps, to reclaim what we see as lost, yet inwardly believing – or, at least, fearing – that the cause is hopeless, that too much has already been destroyed.
The other is to keep believing in the promise and to keep raising it up – like a banner, like a flag – so that it can guide the building of our future.   That’s the path that I choose.  That’s the path I recommend to you.  Maybe, on your way home, you might want to go buy a flag!


Introduction to Final Hymn:  When I preached that Flag Day sermon all those years ago I wanted to end with something really patriotic.  Now I don’t know how well all y’all know our hymnal, but there’s no section of “patriotic” hymns in the index.  There are no entries for “national pride,” and nothing whatsoever for “flag day.”  And then I realized that the most truly patriotic song I’ve ever heard – patriotic in the Frommian sense – is in there.  It’s the song we’re about to sing, #159, “This is my Song.”


Closing Words:  In the liner notes to the CD we’re about to hear a song from as our postlude, Ray Charles is quoted as saying that for years he resisted doing a version of America the Beautiful.  People kept asking him to, but he always declined because he felt that he had to really be able to get behind a song if he was going to do it right, and he just couldn’t do it with that one.  He did finally include the song, however, on his 1972 recording A Message from the People.  Of his decision to record the song he said that what he was trying to communicate is, “Listen, you’ve got to clean up some of this shit, America, but I still love you.”  It reminds me of the Christian maxim, “God loves you exactly as you are, and loves you too much to let you stay that way.”
I wish that more of us liberal and progressive folks could adopt a similar attitude toward—well, towards many things but this weekend following Independence Day I’m thinking about our country:  let’s love America exactly as it is, and love it too much to let it stay this way.  Let us love our promises, and our possibilities, and our ideals, and love them too much to let them go unfulfilled for so many; let us love our freedoms, and love them too much to let them be trampled under foot; let us love our flag, and love it too much to let it become a weapon of intolerance. 
So ‘though we now extinguish our chalice, let the flame of freedom burn ever brighter in our hearts.

Wednesday, July 04, 2012

Interdependence Day

I originally preached this sermon to the good folks of the First Universalist Church in Yarmouth, Maine, on July 8, 2001.  (Roughly two months before the terrorist attacks of September that year.)  I pulled it up recently to see if there was anything in it to use in my sermon this past Sunday, yet decided that it really stands up nicely on its own.  So I decided to write new thoughts to preach and would recycle this sermon here on A Minister's Musings.  Happy Interdependence Day everyone!




The Fourth of July always conjures up very vivid images for me.  Every year, when I was a kid, my family would drive to Eisenhower State Park, watch the fireworks, and then try to get out of the parking lot through a traffic jam so bad that people actually got out of their cars and milled about while they waited to move forward.  And every year, as we came to understand anew why it’s called a parkway, the American humorist Jean Sheppard would come on the radio, and every year he told the same wonderful story.  So, for me, the Fourth is fireworks, crowds, traffic jams, Jean Sheppard and the story of Ludlow Kissle.

For some of you it might be backyard barbecues—hot dogs, hamburgers and charcoal briquettes.  Or maybe it’s a trip to the beach, or a picnic, with mountains of potato salad.  Or maybe it’s homemade ice cream.  An afternoon at Two Lights.  A trip to the Eastern Prom.  I don’t know what it is for you, but it seems that everyone has their own rituals for celebrating the Fourth.

I know of families who, at Christmastime, traditionally read the nativity story from the Gospels of Matthew and Luke.  How many of us, on the Fourth of July, even consider reading the Declaration of Independence, the nativity story of our nation?  (Or, as my father does, get up early enough to hear the good folks of NPR do it for us?)  I think that a lot of us forget that this day is more than just the last holiday until the Labor Day weekend, that this day is, in a very real sense, the birthday of our country.  And birthdays are a time for taking stock.

The Declaration is, in the preamble at least, as much a theological document as it is a political one.  Hear those words again:  “We hold these truths to be self evident:  that all men [we’d now say, “all people”] are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inherent and inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  What are these but theological statements expressing beliefs about our place in, and relationship to, the Universe?  All human beings are made by God, having certain rights—we are born with them, and no one can separate us from them.  Among these are the right to live, the right to be free, and the right to pursue our happiness.  [Note that it doesn’t guarantee happiness, just the right to pursue it.]  That, friends, is theology.

The Declaration, of course, is also a document of political theory.  Governments, we are told, are created for the purpose of ensuring that these God-given rights are secured, for this purpose and no other, and that the only power governments have is the power given to them by the people governed.  Governments do not exist in and of themselves; they are created by people to serve people.  When Walt Whitman wrote, “Those who govern are there for you, it is not you who are there for them,” he was saying nothing that the Founders of our nation hadn’t said themselves.

And that’s just what astonishes me most when looking back over these words—how modern and radical they are.  “[W]henever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government . . .”  That’s really what the whole document is about.  The colonists looked at their government, the Monarchy of England, and declared that it no longer served them and that, therefore, it was their right and their duty to abolish it and start on a new path.
This is my next-to-last sermon for this church season, my penultimate possibility for play in this free pulpit that you so generously give me week after week.  It’s said that every preacher has, at most, a couple of sermons that she or he keeps preaching over and over again in ever-so slightly different forms.  That is certainly true of this preacher, and today’s sermon is unquestionably one of my Top Two.  You’ve heard it’s major themes before, yet I feel compelled to repeat myself.  I’ve even found a way to put the whole thing into one sentence—the Chinese proverb at the top of your Order of Service:  “if you do not change your direction, you will likely end up where you are headed.”

If Jefferson and the others in the Continental Congress were right 225 years ago, if we are “endowed by our Creator with certain inherent and inalienable rights among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” then I think we’re in serious trouble.  

Read the paper, turn on the evening news and it is painfully apparent that we live in violent times.  And, while it’s clear that the media plays up the violence and danger around us for the sake of ratings, it is also clear that you can be killed simply because you were in the wrong place at the wrong time.  There is often a randomness to the violence which defies our attempts to make sense of it.  By the age of 18 most children will have seen hundreds of killings and thousands of violent acts on TV and in the movies.  And there’s a growing chance that they’ll have seen it firsthand, as kids shoot kids in classrooms.  In the United States today our right to life does not seem so secure.

What of our right to liberty?  Well, it, too, seems to be on shaky ground.  There are more people imprisoned in the United States today than in any other country.  And what of the rest of us?  When racism still runs rampant, when a woman is more likely to be beaten or killed by a family member than by a stranger, when homosexuals are forced to hide who they are because they fear reprisals . . . how free are we?  To paraphrase the Rev. Dr. King, “Oppression anywhere is a threat to freedom everywhere.”

And as to our freedom to pursue our happiness . . . ?  For many of us life consists of going back and forth from work, work that far too often does little to feed the soul.  When we come home we turn on the television or the radio.  We settle for giving, and getting, “quality time,” as if the best we could hope for is a taste of it now and then.  Sadly, for many of us, it is.  

Let me ask you:  did you pass any flowers on your way here this morning?  What was the last thing you said to your loved ones last night?  What did you have for lunch on Friday and how did it taste?  Our fast-food, fast-lane, fax-it-to-me-yesterday lifestyle is not conducive to being present to our lives.  We’re told that we must keep moving onwards and upwards, that more is always better and new is always best.  We’re told to pursue the trappings of success, to pursue the accumulation of things, but where in all of this is our happiness?  Where is the time to really be with our children and others that we love; where is the freedom to be with them when they need us, not only when we can fit them it?  Where, in our consumer oriented society is the freedom to pursue the things which really fulfill us, which feed our souls and help us to grow deeper, more loving, more alive, more free, more joyful?

If the United States really is based on documents like the Declaration, then it is based on thoughts like this:  “Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it . . .”  I would go further to say that whenever any social structures become destructive of these ends, then it is our right and obligation to change them.

Now it’s true, Jefferson did include this caveat: “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes . . .”  Yet I recently saw a paleontologist explain that if you plot the history of the earth on your outstretched arm, the history of humanity would begin here, at the tip of your fingernail.  If we then charted the history of human existence on our outstretched arms—expanded the fingernail if you will—our modern so-called “civilized” societies would start at about our wrists.  July 4, 1776 would be somewhere around our fingers. This particular experiment in human community is relatively new.  The course we are on is not inevitable.  We chose it.  We can change it.
The Wampanoag elder and lore keeper Medicine Story wrote in his book Return to Creation, a book I highly recommend,

“It is time for us to go beyond where we have been.

It is time for us to transform ourselves, transform our relationships, transform our communities, and transform our society and all its institutions.  It is time for us to go beyond power over and power against, and discover power with each other and all Creation. . .

It is time for us to go beyond.”

I believe that we can.  I believe that we can wake up from our deep sleep behind the wheel and change our suicide course.  I believe that we all are born equal, and that each and every one of us—here and around the globe—has the right to live a life which empowers rather than pacifies, that fulfills rather than deadens; I believe that each and every one of us has the right to be free to be who we are and to follow all of the potential within our souls; I believe that each and every one of us has the right to pursue our dreams and our destiny, to pursue that which brings joy to our hearts and through us to the world.  

What’s stopping us?  A Lie.  A Lie that tells us that we are independent of each other and separated from the world in which we live; a Lie that tells us that we are all essentially alone in the Universe and that we must struggle against one another for our very survival; a Lie that tells us that there isn’t enough to go around and that whatever someone else gets means less for me; a Lie that tells us that what I have determines who I am; a Lie that tells us that the world’s problems are too big and that we are too weak and powerless to make any real changes.

225 years ago Thomas Jefferson wrote,“All experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.”  We, today, can decide that our patriarchal consumeristic society is insufferable; we can decide that we will no longer live according to the Lie.  Once we see that the predominant culture in which we live is destructive of our “inherent and inalienable” rights, then it becomes not only our right but our duty to work toward its abolition.  

And we can.  There is within each of us infinite capacity for beauty and creativity; there is within each of us the power of all Creation.  We can declare today “Inter-dependence Day” recognizing that, contrary to the Lie, we are part of one family, and we are all in this together—what harms you, what harms a homeless woman in New York City, what harms a farmer in China harms me.  If we were to act on this belief, if we were to live our lives from trust rather than fear, if we were to believe in ourselves and our ability to make an impact, we could change the world.  We have within us and around us all that we need; we’re not alone, and we don’t have to do it all ourselves, or overnight.  But if we each took responsibility to make the part of the Universe we inhabit more joyful and loving, there is no telling what we could accomplish together.  

May it be so.



In Gassho,

RevWik

Monday, May 14, 2012

Longing or Gratitude

The other night I watched TV for the first time in a long time.  No anti-boob-tube righteousness in that hiatus . . . I've been busy.  But I did get a break the other night, and I tuned in MythBusters, and . . .

I was amazed at all commercials for food!  It seemed as though food were being shoved in my face over and over again with a break only to tell me about how there was more food in another room somewhere.  I was reminded of an experience I'd had at a wedding reception -- after half an hour or so of eating at the most splendiferous buffet you could ever imagine, it was announced that the appetizers were finished and it was time for us to go in to dinner!

For anyone who's not been following this blog, yesterday was Day 30 of a fresh vegetable and fruit juice fast.  (See the movie Fat, Sick, and Nearly Dead to get an idea of what and why.)  And today is 36 days since processed foods, fast foods, sugar, or the like have passed my lips.  So maybe you can imagine the reaction I was having to this visual smorgasbord.

Or maybe you can't.  Maybe you'd imagine that after a month of eating (drinking?) really healthfully all of this excess would have been unpleasant.  If so, you'd be wrong.  A Double Quarter Pounder from McDs?  Heaven.  A pepperoni pizza which cheese sticks for a crust?  Seventh Heaven!  I watched each and every image of food-like product that was being flashed before my eyes and I coveted it!

And what made this longing even worse was the fact that I know the changes I am making in the way I eat are permanent.  I am not juice fasting so that I can return to eating poisonous food facsimiles.  I am trying to heal my body and save my life.  So I intend to finish this fast and switch to a nutrient-dense, whole-food, plant-based diet.  As of this moment I think I'll be following the kind of diet advocated by Dr. Joel Furhman (among others), author of such books as Eat to Live and which he describes in great detail at his website.

But this means no more ribs.  Ever.  No more KFC.  Ever.  I will never taste the fabled deliciousness of Pizza Hut's Royal Crown Pizza.  Even if it ever gets to the United States.

I love popcorn shrimp.  (Heck, I like any kind of shrimp!)  I love the aroma of barbecuing meat.  And I could look at the changes I'm trying to make from a perspective of deprivation:  I could focus on all of the things that I love to eat that I will never eat again.

Or, I could look at this from a perspective of opportunity:  there is a world  of amazing tastes out there just waiting to be discovered!  Vegan food; raw food; unbelievably tasty things that I've never eaten because instead I've been filling up on fast food.

How do you look at your life?  Do you focus on the things you don't have, on your longings?  Or do you celebrate the things you do have, your gratitude?  This choice makes all the difference.

In Gassho,

RevWik

Saturday, May 12, 2012

Open Source Church, continued . . .

Back in the summer and early fall I wrote about the concept of "the open source church."  This is a phrase to describe a new model of thinking about and "doing" church that seeks to take the best of the new ways of interrelating that have been developing in this Internet Age and apply them to the venerable institution of The Church.  It's pretty exciting stuff, I think.  Challenging, but exciting.

My own Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations is conducting what I see to be an experiment in this direction during our upcoming General Assembly in Phoenix, Arizona.  General Assembly is our annual business meeting and conclave -- Unitarian Universalists from all over the country, and the world, gather in one place for about a week of meetings, worship, workshops, reunions, and introductions.  A friend of mine likes to call it "the eight-day coffee hour," but I've always really loved going.

But here's the rub.  Those who attend GA are a rather self-selecting group.  There are a core of folks who attend General Assembly year after year after year -- GA Junkies we are called.  Then there are the folks who attend because this year GA is located geographically close to where they live and worship (and they've always wanted to be able to go).  One thing these two groups have in common is that they can afford to go -- the commitment of money and time is considerable.

Which puts the UUAofC into an interesting predicament.  On the one hand, we are committed to democratic principles.  In fact, it's one of the principles enshrined in the UUA's bylaws as one of the seven principles all Unitarian Universalist congregations covenant with one another to affirm and promote:  "The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large."

And yet, at the same time, the venue through which we can use the democratic process at our Associational level is itself only questionably democratic.  Many of our congregations have no representation at all because no one from these communities is able to attend.  And, so, our larger and more affluent congregations -- and the relatively more affluent members of these affluent congregations -- are generally the people who decide the Association's business.

But last year the General Assembly began an experiment, allowing some folks who could not physically attend the event to do so virtually.  Last year, as a couple of thousand of UUs descended on Charlotte, North Carolina, others went to their computer screens in their homes or congregations.  They watched live feeds of all of the plenary meetings; they were able to participate in discussions and debates; and they were able to vote.  Last year the experiment was aimed at shaking out the bugs -- last year's off-site delegates could vote but the votes weren't counted.  This year, though, we're doing it for real.

This year's General Assembly is June 20-24 in Phoenix, Arizona.  It is promised to be a GA like no other in our history, one in which we engage issues of social justice on the ground -- this is the land of SB1070, after all.  If you'd like to attend -- on-site or in-person -- you should probably do that soon.  (Details are at the UUA's website.) 

And if you're one of the folks from the congregation I serve -- Thomas Jefferson Memorial Church - Unitarian Universalist in Charlottesville, VA -- and are interested in being a delegate (again, on- or off-site) you can apply for delegate status by contacting the TJMC Board Executive Committee or sending a letter to the Board President  as soon as possible!

And if you're interested in learning more about being an off-site delegate, click here.  Plans are underway to have a location  at  TJMC for off-site delegates to view the proceedings, along with technical support.  Contact Bev Thierwechter  for details and BEFORE registering. Off-site delegate registration fee is $ 100; the deadline is June 8th.  If you require financial support for the off-site delegate registration fee, please contact the me.

It will be interesting to see where this experiment takes us.  What seems clear is that it will open up our process . . . and that seems to me an exciting thing.

In Gassho,

RevWik

Tuesday, May 01, 2012

Helicopter God

There is a relatively new term making the rounds in parenting circles (and discussions):  helicopter parent.  This describes a mom or dad who hovers around their child, always watching, whether needed or not, and who swoops in to rescue their child at the first sign of trouble.

While this is apparently a growing phenomena, it is also one that's being (rightly, I believe) criticized.  Firstly, if a parent hovers too closely to their child that child is constantly recieving the message that they aren't to be trusted.  This isn't the intent, of course, but it is the result.  "You need me to be watching over you," is the message that the behavior itself is sending.  "You're not safe/strong/smart/something enough to handle the world on your own."  This is not, as you can imagine, the kind of message we want to be giving our children if we want them to grow up as strong, independent adults.

The second problem with this parental approach is like unto the first -- if the parent always swoops in to save the day whenever there's the slightest problem, the child has no opportunity to learn problem solving skills for her or himself.  They'll always be looking for someone else to do things for them, waiting to be saved from every predicament.

This morning one of my children asked me to help him do something.  Actually, to be more accurate, he asked me to "help" him by doing it for him.  I told him that he could do it himself and made sure that he really did understand how.  And then I let him do it.  When he asked me why I didn't help him I told him that I had, and that now he'd not only done it but also knew he could do it himself and didn't need to wait on me to do it in the future.  This doesn't mean that I never "help" him by doing things for him; I just want to make sure that he learns how much he's capable of doing on his own.

It strikes me that a lot of so-called "religious" folks have the idea of a helicopter God.  This "God" they imagine is always hovering around, always watching, and ready to swoop in at a moment's notice.  Of course, this isn't what people actually experience most of the time, but it's what they seem to expect.  Let's unpack that last line a little bit.

When, as the saying goes, bad things happen to good people lots of folks turn their faces skyward and shout, "Why?!?!?!?"  They wonder why God isn't "answering their prayers" -- by which they mean "fixing this problem in the way I want it to be fixed."  Essentially, people are asking their "God" why God isn't helping them, by which they mean  "doing it for them." 

This is what turns a lot of people off from the very idea of "God," that their experience of living suggests that if there is such a thing as a "God" she/he/it is doing a really lousy job.  Why is there so much suffering in the world?  Why aren't my prayers being answered?

But what if God were more like a parent than we'd like to admit?  This, of course, is all metaphor and analogy because whatever God might be God isn't really like anything we can conceive of.  The inconceivable is just that -- inconceivable.  But still, throughout time and across cultures people have imagined the divine as parent . . . and what if that metaphor has some real truth to it?

Well, then, wouldn't a helicopter God be just as bad as a helicopter parent?  Wouldn't God's children be receiving the message that they aren't to be trusted?  And wouldn't they have a hard time learning how to fix their own problems and clean up their own messes? 

In the Gospel of Luke Jesus is remembered as saying, "Which of you [parents], if your child asks for a fish will give a snake instead?  Or if you're asked for an egg, would give a scorpion?  If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will God do for you?"

If God "is" a parent, then God is the greatest, most perfect parent possible.  And a helicopter parent is just not an example of perfect parenting.

In Gassho,

RevWik

Thursday, April 26, 2012

Hunger


The Vietnamese Buddhist teacher, poet, and peace activist has said that the United States is a land of "hungry ghosts." These are mythic creatures who have huge bellys and pinhole mouths; they can never satisfy their desires.  Their cravings.  Their hunger.

Today is Day 13 of my first long-term all-juice fast.  (And it's 18 days since I last had fast food, soda, processed foods, red meat, sugar, and wheat!)  I'm learning something about hunger.  About craving.

As I cook dinner for my family I suddenly realize that whatever it is that I'm cooking -- last night it was rotissery chicken, alfredo noodles, and salad -- is my all-time favorite food in the world and that without a little taste of it I will dissolve into nothingness like the Wicked Witch when faced with water.

And when I'm getting ready to leave a nighttime meeting at church I become accutely aware of how delicious the Quarter Pound Big Bite hot dogs taste at the 7-11 I pass on the way home.  There is no finer cuisine on the planet, and my body is telling me that I desperately need something from the oversized, overprocessed meat-like food group in order to maintain optimum health.

One of the things I keep trying to teach my kids -- now 10 and 8 -- is the difference between "needs" and "wants."  "I need a new beyblade," one will say.  "No," I'll reply, "you want a new beyblade.  You need food, clothing, shelter, and love."  I think it's part of my parental duty to pass on such important information.

And yet I am discovering anew just how much I need to take my own life lessons to heart.  In this immediate instance it's food -- I need some crackers!  I need something to chew on!  But it's becoming clear to me (again) how often I make the same mistake my kids do.
  • I need more financial security.
  •  
  • I need this or that person's respect.
  •  
  • I need to attain this or that level of professional achievement.
  •  
  • I need . . .
Through the process of this juice fast I am learning to differentiate between my food needs and my food wants.  And when I'm able to do this I'm also able to see that I actually want to be healthy more than I want the taste of a Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese.  Needs must be attended to; wants can be weighted against other wants and decisions can be made.  We have at least some measure of control over our wants.

This is one of the great gifts of fasting -- whether it be a food fast, a media fast, a fast from negative-thoughts.  It can help us remember the difference between wants and needs, and help us (re)gain control of our living.

In Gassho,

RevWik

Sunday, April 22, 2012

More Lessons

 

I haven't yet watched this film myself, but it's definitely going on my list. Should it be on yours?

In Gassho,

RevWik

PS -- two nights ago I finally watched Supersize Me.  If you've ever eaten at McD's . . . a lot . . . you should watch it too.

Seemingly As If . . .

Here's another reflection prompted by my Lenten reading:

Folks on the so-called Religious Right claim that the United States was founded by Christians on Christian principles. They say that it was in intent -- and is now in it's history -- a "Christian Nation." They say that our country should be governed with Biblical values.

The wonderful Steven Colbert named the conundrum quite clearly a while back:
 “If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn't help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don't want to do it.” 
 That seems pretty straightforward to me.  And seems to pretty much sum up the options.  Yet in case a modern comedian isn't convincing enough, how about the words of God (as declared by the prophet Isaiah)?
1 “Shout it aloud, do not hold back.
   Raise your voice like a trumpet.
Declare to my people their rebellion
   and to the descendants of Jacob their sins.
2 For day after day they seek me out;
   they seem eager to know my ways,
as if they were a nation that does what is right
   and has not forsaken the commands of its God.
They ask me for just decisions
   and seem eager for God to come near them.
3 ‘Why have we fasted,’ they say,
   ‘and you have not seen it?
Why have we humbled ourselves,
   and you have not noticed?’
   “Yet on the day of your fasting, you do as you please
   and exploit all your workers.
4 Your fasting ends in quarreling and strife,
   and in striking each other with wicked fists.
You cannot fast as you do today
   and expect your voice to be heard on high.
5 Is this the kind of fast I have chosen,
   only a day for people to humble themselves?
Is it only for bowing one’s head like a reed
   and for lying in sackcloth and ashes?
Is that what you call a fast,
   a day acceptable to the LORD?
 6 “Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen:
to loose the chains of injustice
   and untie the cords of the yoke,
to set the oppressed free
   and break every yoke?
7 Is it not to share your food with the hungry
   and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter—
when you see the naked, to clothe them,
   and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?
8 Then your light will break forth like the dawn,
   and your healing will quickly appear;
then your righteousness[a] will go before you,
   and the glory of the LORD will be your rear guard.
9 Then you will call, and the LORD will answer;
   you will cry for help, and he will say: Here am I.
   “If you do away with the yoke of oppression,
   with the pointing finger and malicious talk,
10 and if you spend yourselves in behalf of the hungry
   and satisfy the needs of the oppressed,
then your light will rise in the darkness,
   and your night will become like the noonday.
11 The LORD will guide you always;
   he will satisfy your needs in a sun-scorched land
   and will strengthen your frame.
You will be like a well-watered garden,
   like a spring whose waters never fail.
12 Your people will rebuild the ancient ruins
   and will raise up the age-old foundations;
you will be called Repairer of Broken Walls,
   Restorer of Streets with Dwellings.
 13 “If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath
   and from doing as you please on my holy day,
if you call the Sabbath a delight
   and the LORD’s holy day honorable,
and if you honor it by not going your own way
   and not doing as you please or speaking idle words,
14 then you will find your joy in the LORD,
   and I will cause you to ride in triumph on the heights of the land
   and to feast on the inheritance of your father Jacob.”
            For the mouth of the LORD has spoken.
Seems pretty straightforward too.  (That's Isaiah 58, by the way.)
Day after day they seek me out; they seem eager to know my ways, as if they were a nation that does what is right and has not forsaken the commands of its God.  They . . . seem eager for God to come near them.  [Yet] is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen: to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free and break every yoke?  Is it not to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter—when you see the naked, to clothe them, and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?

If you do away with the yoke of oppression, with the pointing finger and malicious talk, and if you spend yourselves in behalf of the hungry and satisfy the needs of the oppressed, then your light will rise in the darkness, and your night will become like the noonday. 

Is anybody on the Religious Right reading this stuff?

In Gassho,

RevWik