Skip to content

Category: Life and culture

Who Is The True Enemy Of Our Humanity? Hmmm…?

The Apostle Paul wrote to the church at Ephesus, “Put on the whole armor of God, so that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.” So many of us are caught up in the chaos and fear that holds the world in thrall. It’s absolutely true that we live in uncertainty. We wonder where our place in society actually is. Weren’t the things that we learned as a child absolute? For those of us who grew up in the White Middle Class these fears seem especially alive. We were taught that if we just worked hard we could have anything that we desired. The world was “our oyster.” We had “the world on a string.” We could “move that rubber tree plant” if we just have “high hopes.” Now, however, we feel as if all of that has been taken away from us. What thieving, conniving, son of a bitch had the kahonas to do that? Why I oughta….! I know that we’ve all felt this. That some injustice has overtaken us. And, it was “THEM” that did it! Damn them! We then rail and rant against those other people who cause us so much anxiety and anger. In the U.S. right now those others range from illegal migrants who threaten to take our jobs. Or, it might be the Main Stream Media that are trying to teach our kids how to be some kind of ‘woke Libtard.’ Of course, the whole of Washington, D.C. is a swamp that desires to suck the life out of us. They want to take our guns and force some kind of “Homosexshul” agenda down our throats. Of course there are many who feel that conservatives are trying to drag us back into the Victorian Era. They want to control our lives by telling us what we can or can’t read or who we are able to love. We mustn’t forget the rich elites on both sides who are bankrolling the destruction of our country. For some it’s all about “God, Guns, and Country.” For others it’s about inclusivity and equality. Our anger is directed at all who seem to be stepping on our rights. OUR Rights! We turn the saying of Jesus around and say, “Anyone who is not for us is against us.” Rather than, “Whoever is not against us is for us.” We’ve divided ourselves into warring factions where there’s no room for common ground. And, it’s exhausting. There is another way. Paul alluded to it in the text from his letter to the Church at Ephesus I quoted above. Our true enemy is not that person who just cut us off on the freeway. It’s certainly not the Trans person who we saw at the grocery. In fact, no one is our true enemy. That position is reserved for what Paul described as “rulers,” Authorities,” and “Cosmic Powers.” In today’s vernacular those are referred to as Systems of Oppression. That includes Systems that instigate racism that are baked into our culture as well as our founding document. They include Systems that objectify people based on gender or gender identity. Capitalism is a System that only exists on the backs of others. And, politics is a System that guarantees that the status quo is maintained for all of the other Systems. Let me give you a real-life example. Donald Trump. For some he is the return of Christ, a savior in flawed clothing. Others see him as the incarnation of the Anti-Christ. It’s not possible for both to be true. But, it possible that neither is true. The Systems that control society and culture allow for the rise of people like Trump. But, he is as much of a victim of those Systems as any other person. Let me state it again, Donald Trump is as much of a victim of those Systems as any other person. Please, don’t throw stuff! Let me explain. If anyone thinks that a person who is down and out, say, an unhoused person is a victim, why couldn’t the person at the top of the food chain also be a victim of some other influence or power? I think that they can. Now, don’t get me wrong. I do not like Trump. Not even a little. I find him wholly out of touch with reality. His narcissism knows no bounds. He lies pathologically. He’s an abuser and a bully. There seems to be nothing in him that’s redeemable. But, redemption is not my call. That’s way above my pay grade. My task is simply to love. My brothers and sisters. My friends. My family. My…enemies? Yes, my enemies. Those who I could just as easily “Other” as they could “Other” me. When I stop to remember who my true enemies are, those powers, principalities, and systems, I find that I am able to lay aside my own presumptions and prejudices. I am free to live without the burdens of judgment and anger. More importantly, I am free to lift these others up to God and ask that God free them from the bonds that hold them as slaves to those Cosmic Forces. So, as I pray each morning I take a moment to remember folks like Donald Trump. I ask God to release him and his family from the chains that bind them. May it be so, Amen.

Leave a Comment

Our Country Tis Of Thee, Sweet Land Of People To Love

Lent is a season when folks are encouraged to look within. Introspection and reflection are as much a part of this season as candles and greenery are part of the Advent season. Many people and groups use some kind of Lenten devotional or 40 day plan to help with reflection during this time. Our church is no exception. We are using a book by Brad & Eden Jersak entitled, “Rivers from Eden: 40 Days of Intimate Conversation with God.” While it’s not strictly an Lenten book, it serves well as a source that helps with prayer and reflection.
This past week there were two days in which we were encouraged to ask God about things in our country that grieve God and bring God joy. These questions seemed appropriate considering the current divisive culture that holds the country in its grasp. Surely, God would find plenty that causes grief. And, not a lot to bring joy.
However, God is not us. Thankfully. In the book Eden Jersak wrote about her own experience of listening to the Bat Qol, the Daughter of a voice, with which God so often speaks to us. In her reflection God stated that one thing brings tears to the Divine Eyes. Selfishness. Very simple. So many people are willing to trample the rights and lives of others in order to ensure that their own rights and demands are met. I have to say that God is pretty darned observant. Eden’s reflection goes on to say that such self-centeredness is not a necessary nor inevitable action. If folks would simply take time to look outward to others. She wrote, “If this nation became less interested in what it needed and more interested in what others needed, it would become a very powerful nation indeed.” But that simple action is so very difficult for folks.
On the other side, joy comes to God as He looks at the whole of the country. Not everyone is caught up in the rip tide of selfishness. There are points of light all over. Lights of people who have turned to God and Others in order to build up and not take away. Our country is not a monolith where every single person is defined by the same buildings or people or whatever we set up in the middle as My Country. We are diverse. We are many colored and multi-vocal. These are people whose citizenship is first with the Kingdom of God. Geographic nationality does not define them.
Thomas Merton was a Cistercian Monk who lived in a monastery in Kentucky. In 1958 he was in Louisville running some errands when he had a special moment of revelation. He wrote, “In Louisville, at the corner of Fourth and Walnut, in the center of the shopping district, I was suddenly overwhelmed with the realization that I loved all these people, that they were mine and I theirs, that we could not be alien to one another even though we were total strangers. It was like waking from a dream of separateness, of spurious self-isolation in a special world. . . .

This sense of liberation from an illusory difference was such a relief and such a joy to me that I almost laughed out loud. . . . I have the immense joy of being man, a member of a race in which God Himself became incarnate. As if the sorrows and stupidities of the human condition could overwhelm me, now that I realize what we all are. And if only everybody could realize this! But it cannot be explained. There is no way of telling people that they are all walking around shining like the sun.

Then it was as if I suddenly saw the secret beauty of their hearts, the depths of their hearts where neither sin nor desire nor self-knowledge can reach, the core of their reality, the person that each one is in God’s eyes. If only they could all see themselves as they really are. If only we could see each other that way all the time. There would be no more war, no more hatred, no more cruelty, no more greed. . . . But this cannot be seen, only believed and ‘understood’ by a peculiar gift.”
― Thomas Merton, Conjectures of a Guilty Bystander

This is what it looks like when we see others through the eyes of the Holy Spirit. There are no longer divisions in which we define “Us” over against “Them.” It’s for this reason that I can pray for Donald Trump. Not that God would squash him. Nor that God would pour out wrathful judgment. But, that God would be present with him. That God’s Holy Spirit would touch his heart and mind and reveal Godself to him.
It’s why I can be dispassionate about the issues that tear families and friends apart. We are, all of us, in need of grace and mercy. All. Of. The. Time.
I’m writing this today primarily to the community of faith that professes Jesus as Messiah and Lord. This is our calling and vocation. We are the light of the world. The Temple of the Holy Spirit. The Body of Christ. Ours is the obligation to live and work to establish God’s Kingdom.
For those who do not profess Jesus, there is still the responsibility to treat others as we would desire them to treat us. We are a Community of Humanity. In this community we ARE our brothers’ keepers. If we can all turn our gaze outward for just a moment, perhaps we can bring joy. Not only to God, but to the World.

Leave a Comment

Holding Thoughts and Ideas Hostage: The New Politics

Shutterstock_477387868

I try to stay out of political issues as much as I can. They can be way too divisive and hostile. And, for what good purpose? So that one group can have power over others. There seems to be way more greed and power lust than any attempt to govern. It’s not really the hill that I’m willing to die on. After all, this blog has been primarily a platform to unmask the hidden dangers of certain religious traditions. Those traditions that are more concerned about greed and power lust…uh, wait a minute. That sounds familiar. “Greed and power lust.” Hmmm…Maybe I’m not too far removed from the language of modern politics.
Ok. Politics it is. At least, for today.
For the last 4 decades, or so, there has been a concerted effort on many to fan the flames of the so-called ‘Culture War.’ For those uninitiated, Culture wars are what happens when what I think is good and proper behavior is what you consider evil and decadent. It’s the old timey Blue Laws that prohibited alcohol sales on Sunday. They are the battle for the bedroom, (and, the bathroom). These culture wars are at the heart of anti-LGBTQ+ people and anti-abortion rights. They want to control everyone’s behavior based on one particular moral standard. A standard that really isn’t standard. But, these culture warriors don’t want to admit that.
In the U.S. these battles rage over a clear line of difference. That line is One Particular Interpretation of the Bible. That tosses these political issues convincingly into my wheel house. That O.P.I.O.T. B. is a staunchly conservative one. This view is commonly aligned with some flavor of flag-waving patriotism that mixes the Bible with nationalist fervor. This mixing of religion and politics, something that everyone knows should never be mixed at Thanksgiving, is like mixing gasoline with fire. Nothing good can ever come of it. This mash-up destroys both religion and politics. This grotesque hybrid is an abomination that should have been stillborn. Yet, it lives.
Now, I’m not just writing this stuff because I need to vent my spleen about the state of our union. That would be too simplistic. No, I’m concerned with one small skirmish that seems to be going mostly unnoticed by the MSM. In the midst of this lawsuit or those indictments and all of the attention turning toward an election that’s A YEAR AND A HALF AWAY, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! this little attempt to censor free thought seems relegated to a side issue.
This is the problem with banning books.
Yeah! You heard me right! Right now, in 21st century U.S.A. people are banning books. Why, you ask? Because they are afraid of the ideas that some books espouse. These, mostly conservative and reactionary people are taking a page out of an ages old play book. Censor the ideas that are different than mine. Ideas are dangerous. They allow people to think. And, of course, we don’t want anyone to do that! Keep the populace dumb and in their place in order to serve their masters, er, those better able to understand things. Little Ronnie de Santis in Florida has spearheaded this in his state. He claims that he is taking a stand against ‘wokeness,’ whatever the hell that is. I think it’s a dogwhistle to like-minded people to signify ‘anything that could possible be considered progressive.’ So, it’s a pretty broad area of discussion. Rather than having intelligent and respectful discussions about the topics that these books cover, let’s just outright ban them. Maybe, if enough people like this, we can start to burn them! Won’t that be fun! So far there have been nearly 1,000 titles banned in several states. Boards of education all over the country are being assaulted by conservatives who want thoughts and ideas controlled to their advantage.
There is a problem with this, though. Besides the obvious attack on our intellectual freedom, that is. The biggest problem is that it never works. Banning books and any other way of spreading ideas is dead on arrival. No one can contain thought. It must always find a way.
Why not just ignore the issue until people wise up and the problem goes away?
Well, it never just goes away. There is usually a steep price to pay in order to keep our thoughts free. We can go all the way back to Socrates if we want to. The powers that be didn’t like what he was saying. So, he got to enjoy a hemlock smoothie. Throughout the middle ages books and the knowledge that they contained were restricted. It seems that there are always people who think that they know best for everyone. There was that one time, however, that overshadows every other attempt to censor free thought. That began in 1933 with book burnings in Nazi Germany. We all know how that ended.
So, no, ignoring the issue won’t do. It won’t do at all. There is too much at stake to simply stand back and let nature take its course. That’s why I’m writing this. I’m really pissed off that we still have to deal with this kind of idiocy at this point of civilization. I think that I’m more afraid of what may happen to people before this current fear of thought ends. Will bookstores be targeted? Public libraries? Schools in many places are already under fire for what they offer students. Will roving bands of book vigilantes in brown shirts stop students and check their bookbags for contraband titles? Don’t laugh. People laughed before and many suffered. Do your due diligence to find out what’s happening and where. Is there a movement in your community to force school boards to limit the educational resources that your children, nieces, nephews, and grandchildren have?
Keep watch and be vigilant. Book banning have historically been only the first salvo in a much larger, bloodier culture war.

2 Comments

Equity Act: A Response to Mitt Romney

There is currently a bill in Congress, H.R. 5, that is commonly referred to as the “Equality Act.” This bill is designed to add protections for LGBTQ people to the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. It’s description is “To prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation, and for other purposes.” I’m not going to dwell on the content of the bill. Y’all can read it yourselves here.
What I am going to write about is the response that many conservative, religious folks are saying about the bill.
Well, actually, I’m not going to discuss so much THEIR responses as much as I am going to respond TO them.
In particular, I am going to single out Sen. Mitt Romney, (R-Utah), for his response.
Like so many others, Romney has seemed to be a voice of sanity among all of the craziness of conservative politics. But, under the veneer of moderation he is still far to the right of moderate.
The Equality Act was introduced into the House last week on the 18th. Later, a spokesperson for Sen. Romney released the following statement:
“Sen. Romney believes that strong religious liberty protections are essential to any legislation on this issue, and since those provisions are absent from this particular bill, he is not able to support it,” said Arielle Mueller, a Romney spokesperson, via email to the Washington Blade in response to an inquiry on the Equality Act.
For several years people have tried to cloak their personal biases and opinions under the mantle of “Sincerely held Religious beliefs.” This is pretty much what Romney said.
People who believe in various religious texts say that those texts prohibit them from agreeing to certain practices or beliefs of others. In this case, they cite a Biblical prohibition of homosexuality and “clear” statement that God created two distinct genders in all species. Ok, I’m not going to address the religious side of this. I could. And, I could present opposing views of the very same texts that they allude to. That’s the nature of Biblical interpretations. That’s what they are; Interpretations.
No, I want to go in a different direction.
I want to talk about what may be referred to as the “accidents of nature.” Or, perhaps, even as Acts of God.
I currently live in a middle-class American suburb. I have a house and a garden. I own a car and have time to write silly blog posts. I wasn’t born into a developing nation where houses are patchworks of whatever materials I can forage. Where such things as running water and sanitation services are non-existent, let alone computer or internet access.
I don’t think that anyone would argue that the above is an accurate account of an Accident of Nature. I had nothing to do with where I was born. Nor, did the individual in that other culture. We both have privileges and lacks in both. For those who like to explain things in terms of Divine Providence, I was Providentially born into the life that I now have.
Now, let me ask you.
Is the fact that some are born left-handed an Accident of Nature?
Of course they are. They had no say in the fact that they have a gift that is divergent with the majority.
How about people who may be born with a cleft palate?
Are these folks somehow responsible for this? Did they choose to be born this way?
Of course not! It’s obvious that somewhere in their development something happened that allowed them to develop this particular trait.
My wife is a nurse. She tells me stories about children who are born with any number of issues. Some have a hole in their heart that needs to be repaired surgically. Others have incomplete bowel development. All of them are what we could call Accidents of Nature.
There is another condition that doesn’t get a lot of press.
It is referred to as Intersexuality. This is a condition where a child is born with two sets of sexual organs. There may also be a difference in chromosome identity with the actual sexual organs present. A child born with female chromosomes who is born with apparent male genitalia would be an example. Some children are even born with both sets of genitalia. Many times at birth, the parents are asked to choose which gender the child should be. What if they make the wrong choice? What if their child with female chromosomes is surgically altered to give them a son?
Even in nature such things may occur.
Recently, I saw a news item about a cardinal that appeared to be half red and half white.
They reported that this was in fact a bird that was two genders!
I don’t share this because it gives credibility to Intersexuality in humans. It doesn’t.
But, it does show quite clearly that Accidents of Nature happen!
Let’s take this discussion a step further.
What if a child’s genetics are clearly male and there biological sex is also physically male. Now, let’s suggest that as this boy grows up his body produces hormones differently from other boys. This is all hypothetical, mind you. And, let’s say that these hormones, that would naturally cause this boy to find the female body attractive, are different. In his case they cause him to find pleasure in the male body. In fact, just as I am attracted to females, his attraction is to males. He desires another male in whom he can confide and grow with; another Person with whom he can bond and love.
That’s not a far-fetched idea.
In fact, for millions, it is the reality of their lives.
I share all of this to make the point that when people talk about LGBTQ issues, they are not talking about religion. There is nothing religious about an Accident of Nature. Unless, of course, you want to call it an Act of God.
No, this entire issue is about Civil Rights. It’s about the unalienable right guaranteed in our founding documents that are granted every citizen.
So, Mr. Romney, in framing the Equality Act in religious terms, you are making a horrible category error that threatens the lives and livelihoods of millions of your fellow citizens.
Many of whom are your co-religionists.
I urge you, and all other Senators to truly engage in these issues and set aside biases and bigotries that hurt rather than heal.

1 Comment

Friday Musing_8-14-2020

Indigenous rendering of Battle of Greasy Grass

I’ve often heard folks say, “the writing of history belongs to the victor.”
There are few people who would disagree with that. After all, how many white people in the U.S. were aware of “Juneteenth” before 2020? Does anyone know what the Lakota People call the Battle of the Little Big Horn? (ans.: Battle at the Greasy Grass. You can Google it yourself.)
The inherent danger in the victor producing the main accounts of history, is that there is only One Side accounted for.
We get to see all of the honor and courage of those on the winning side. While, at the same time, the cowardice and shame of the defeated is illuminated.
In every event, whether armed conflict, economic systems, religion, or you insert the name, those whose effectiveness in arms or wealth or prestige are the ones who tell the story.
A case in point are the recent post that I shared on the Civil War. In school we were taught that the war was fought over the issue of slavery. That’s one part of the story. That’s the part of the story that raises the honor of the White government and army so that they are considered “liberators.” The blood shed on the battlefield won a great victory for the benevolent people who had all of the power. See? We’re not all vicious slavers. Not All White People Are Like That!
Yet, while it’s absolutely true that many White Americans had purely altruistic motives, the actual Powers-That-Be were those who controlled the economy. These folks’ sole interest was in expanding their own wealth and influence. Hardly praise-worthy.
But, that’s a part of the story we don’t hear. It places the integrity of the Victors in a negative light. They all want to be known as Lovers of Liberty. Not, the lovers of money that they actually were.
So, that leads me to another saying that has been tossed around by folks.
“Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.”
First, just let me go on record of calling Bullshit on that.
What?
Well, it is!
Again, I would like to throw out the possibility that even this saying is the product of the imagination of the victors.
Of course, they desire that people remember what has gone on before! They, themselves, know all about the circumstances that led to their own acquisition of power and honor. They know all too well about how they had to fight to gain, or retain, the economic and political power they now hold. And, they don’t want their own to forget that struggle. For if they do, they realize that someone else might step into the role that they had and fight for their own power and honor. That would, somehow, diminish them.
The main reason that I call Bullshit on that saying, though, is because it simply isn’t true. History doesn’t repeat. History is literally just part of the continuum of time that has led the World to this point. It only seems repetitive because human nature is always the same. So, we continue to see the same concerns and struggles that have been part of humanity ever since our forebears climbed out of the trees of Africa and built community on the ground. It only seems to repeat because the victors are always fighting the same battles over and over again and recording their victories.
Reality, though, tells a far different story. A story that the victors don’t even realize is alive and well. It is a story that is not only ignored, but in many cases violently subdued.
It is the story that we see embroiling cultures and societies around the globe.
I call it an Affective History.
This is the long, term lived history of people.
An example:
Chattel slavery in the U.S. is a historic fact. It happened during a finite period of time from the first African slaves that were sold in Jamestown 1619 until the 13th amendment to the constitution was ratified in 1865.
What we were never taught in school, and which has only recently appeared on people’s radar, is how almost 250 years of bondage Affected the humanity of African slaves. We heard about Reconstruction, Carpet Baggers and others like them. Most of us probably heard in passing that ex-slaves were promised “40 acres and a mule” upon emancipation. What we didn’t hear was how that promise, like so many others the U.S. government made, never happened. No one ever explained how the Southern states began in 1878 to dismantle Reconstruction and resurrected their power over African Americans through Jim Crow. Yeah, we heard about those things. But, we were never privy to how this Affected those who felt the effects of racial hatred.
The Civil Rights Movement in the 50s and 60s certainly resulted in more legal rights for African Americans. White folks grudgingly gave in to many of the demands of the oppressed. That is until they could find ways to get around them. Jerry Falwell, Sr. is just one example of many who began private schools for whites only in order to exclude people of color. This lasted until 1983 when the Supreme Court upheld IRS rules that removed tax exemptions for those donating to private schools that were segregated by race.
Even that little bit of history, while it appears to put White racism in its place, doesn’t tell how this Magnanimous offering to racial minorities actually Affects those minorities.
I’m sure that if we put our heads together we could add countless examples of how events in history currently Affect people.
Women, Indigenous, African, Hispanic, Jewish, Muslims, and on and on and on.
How have people been Affected by the stories that the victors are privileged to tell?
It’s past time to hear history, and life, as told by these.

Leave a Comment

Liberty for Some?

The year was 1865. The Civil War had just ended at Appomattox. Slavery was officially dead in the U.S. Finally!
Now, came the hard work of Reconstruction. The South was completely destroyed during the war. Not only was it physically bruised and burned, but all of the institutions that had grounded the entire culture had been crushed.
As I look back on that time I can’t help but wonder, how did things after the war turn out like they did? How is it that African Americans are, in so many ways, still in bondage?
The official Reconstruction period lasted a mere 12 years. During that time from 1865 to 1877 Blacks were elected to public office. Ex-slaves became bankers and lawyers and farmers. The future really was beginning to look up.
Then, form 1878 until, well, it’s not really over yet, Jim Crow was born and has lived as a shadow on the land blotting out the sunlight and bring death and hatred in its wake.
What happened that caused the nation to turn its back on those whose backs the country had been built upon?
Last week I mentioned an essay written by Matthew Karp and published in Catalyst. (Except where indicated, all quotes are from Karp’s essay.) In it he provided some insights into how the anti-slavery movement in the North became a political movement that enabled it to gain the power of State that ultimately led to the War.
In order to do that a political party was formed in the middle of the 19th century: The Republican Party. The party was formed in order to end slavery in the U.S. be wresting Washington from the rich landowners from the South. Those landed few were painted as oligarchs who wanted to expand their holdings across the country.
And, in many ways, it appears that they weren’t far from the mark. Frederick Douglass wrote in a memoir about the place where he was held in servitude. It was a large plantation in eastern Maryland. The owner, Col. Edward Lloyd, sat as the royal head of his domain. His holdings included at least 20 outlying farms with all of the necessary masters and overseers for his, according to Douglass, 1,000 slaves. By all accounts, Col. Lloyd was extremely wealthy. There was no law other than that uttered by Lloyd. He was a member of that undisputed aristocracy that ruled over what amounted to a feudal system in America.
These landed few desired nothing more than to retain all that they had and to expand it.
In the North, however, the Industrial Revolution was at full steam. Capitalists were flexing their muscles and gazing about looking for their own ways to expand. In order to do this, though, they needed labor. And, in the North, that was a substantial expense. Workers needed to paid for their efforts. While, south of the Mason-Dixon Live, labor was free.
As I wrote earlier, it seems that aside from a vocal minority, anti-slavery sentiment in the North was not wide spread. Most people simply weren’t affected by it. So, they paid little attention to what happened ‘away down South.’
The Republicans needed a way to get the majority population in the North on board a political program that could sweep away the powerful minority of the South who controlled the government. So, they developed a strategy that would pit Freedom against Slavery.
Karp wrote,

“Above all, Republicans depicted the battle against slavery as a species of class struggle — a social war not simply between slaves and masters, but between the overwhelming majority of Americans and a tiny aristocracy of slave lords who controlled the federal government.”
William Seward described the battle lines succinctly. He “lambasted slaveholders as a ‘privileged class,’ which he later refined into a ‘property class,’ akin to the patricians of Rome and the landlords of Europe.”

By framing the issue this way, the Republicans were able to turn the apathy of many in the North into a political advantage to unite Northern voters behind their party.
Seward stated that the divide was not between North and South, but

“between ‘labor states,’ subject to democratic self-government, and ‘capital states,’ where master-class barons monopolized political and economic power, quashed free speech, and organized all society around ‘the system of capital in slaves.’”

I considered all of these statements and began to see that, while there were many in the North who considered slavery a moral stain of evil on the whole country, many more were simply concerned with the economy and their own well-being. Concern for the welfare of the Black slave was secondary to the security of white labor.
Newspapers at the time captured the prevailing sentiment of many Northerners.

“Southern masters, declared a Cleveland newspaper, ‘enslave the blacks, not because they are black, but because they are laborers — and they contend that the highest civilization demands that the laboring class should be subjected and owned by the ‘higher class.’”

“The election of 1856, argued a Republican editor in Pittsburgh, was ‘not a contest of races, but a contest of institutions.’ It was a fight ‘between the Slave-holding Oligarchy, on one hand, who desire to introduce slave labor and slave institutions into Kansas, and the laboring white people of the country opposed to slavery … who wish to introduce Free Labor.’”

These are things that we were never taught in school. We were told that the North went to war to free the slaves. We heard about abolitionists who risked their lives to rescue enslaved Blacks and conduct them safely into the Promised Land where the Freedom Bell Rang.
No, not really. As with so much in our lives, it all came down to the almighty dollar.
All of this revealed to me the reasons that Reconstruction failed and Jim Crow was allowed to live and breathe in BOTH the South and the North. It explained this quote that is on the wall beneath the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. written by the Great Emancipator himself. In response to an 1862 op-ed written by Horace Greeley, Lincoln wrote,

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and it is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.”

Charles, Mark and Soong-Chan Rah, Unsettling Truths:The Ongoing, Dehumanizing Legacy of the Doctrine of Discovery, IVP, 2019, p.144

Africans stolen from their homeland and dragged across the Middle Passage where they were sold as if they were cattle or hogs; who were bred and traded as chattel; who were beaten and abused; who were broken and despised. They were eventually freed, not for the sake of their personhood nor their standing before God. But, because it appeared to be for Lincoln, a necessary concession and politically expedient.
Is it any wonder that African Americans are still treated as secondary? Greater still, is it any wonder that the African American community is, to this day, a place where hope is dimmed by the lived reality of human beings who live in fear and want? I am beginning to see why these communities erupt in violence. Places where not even their own community members are secure against the frustrations that a life of hopelessness can create. When your people have lived for over 400 years under the yokes of slavery, Jim Crow, discrimination, and derision how are you supposed to live?
Yet, these people, people who bear the Light and Likeness of God within them, continue to love God and, like Jesus before them, love those who persecute them and treat them like second class citizens.
These questions I’ve held in my heart and mind since I was young. The history that we were taught didn’t add up to the reality that I saw outside of my front door. Matthew Karp’s piece helped to illuminate the dark corners where those questions have laid all these years.
It’s not too late for the U.S. to do the right thing and finally free those who have had a white boot on their necks for far, far too long.

Leave a Comment

Musing on a Thursday Morning-Slavery Edition

William H. Seward

Since I retired from active employment a few months ago, I have found myself with more time to read, study, and think about a great many things. One topic that has truly taken up residence within a deep crevasse in my mind is Racism. White folks like me usually shy away from this. We don’t like confrontation with a violent and oppressive past that none of us ever experienced. For many of us, our forebears didn’t even emigrate to the U.S. until well after the Civil War had decided the fate of chattel slavery once and for all. How, then, can we be held accountable for any of that foul history that still rises as a stench, like the gases that seep upward from a long ignored landfill, over this land?
For those of you who know me can attest, I am not afraid to ask questions. Nor, am I afraid to confront the answers that I find.
With that in mind, I’m going to share a few thoughts. Take them for what they are, simply my musings.
Recently, there has been a lot of talk about something called systemic racism. For many of us that’s simply stating the obvious. While I don’t endorse everything that was stated in the NYT “1619 Project,” one thing stands out. The United States owes a great deal of its economic wealth and strength to the fact that it enjoyed over 200 years of free labor through the institution of African slavery. There is no doubt about that. We enjoy what we have as a direct result of the economic structures that were erected, particularly during the early 19th century, that have allowed the U.S. to become one of the two most powerful economies that the world has ever known.
So, it’s no wonder that many states in the South fought tooth and nail to preserve that institution.
However, while the institution of chattel slavery was the most publicly voiced reason for the South to challenge the U.S. government. It was not the only one.
To be clear, the South was clearly pissed off that the North was trying to tell them what to do. That’s where the claim that the war was simply about the rights of States to govern their own affairs. Yet, as I read through some of the Articles of Secession from those states, I found one common theme. That theme can best be shown by a quote from Mississippi’s Articles:

“Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery– the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.”

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_missec.asp

Please note how slaves are spoken of in this quote. They are “products” and “material interest.” Nowhere are they considered human beings who share in the inalienable rights of all people. No. They are property and objects over whom white landowners have complete control.
PLEASE NOTE THIS!
From the position of the Southern states the so called “War Between the States” was all about slavery.
That may seem obvious to most of us who took high school history. There were chapters in our books that at least mentioned that slavery was the primary issue that sparked the fire that burned half of the nation.
However, there are other concerns and forces that were in play at the time that we were not taught. These are the kinds of things that the publishers of history books conveniently tend to overlook. (Like how the Indigenous People of the continent were abused and killed and dislocated for the benefit of white expansion. But, that’s a topic for another time.)
I owe much of the insight for the next part of this post to an article written by Dr. Matthew Karp, Ph.D. in the Catalyst titled “The Mass Politics of Antislavery.” Dr. Karp is teacher at Princeton University. His area of study and expertise is the U.S. Civil War era and it’s place in the world of the Nineteenth Century.
Humans really like to simplify things. Keep It Simple Stupid is our mantra for pretty much anything and everything we think or do. Evolution may have helped us in this. I can imagine our ancient ancestors in Africa saying, “Ok. You run straight out there and grab the fruit. Then come straight back. Maybe that tiger won’t eat you.”
Simple; straightforward; easy-peasy.
As with all things, we like to think of complex issues like the Civil War in simple terms.
It was all about slavery.
Dr. Karp presents another take on things, though. A take that we may be able to relate to over 150 years later.
(Note: All quotes are from that article by Dr. Karp in the Catalyst.)
Like so many, many other things, we can be encouraged to Follow the Money.
William Seward, yes THAT Seward, was also a staunch abolitionist. But, his reasons were not all about the human cost of slavery. He seemed to be more concerned about politics and economics. In an 1850 speech he stated,

“So long as slavery shall possess the cotton-fields, the sugar-fields, and the rice-fields of the world,so long will Commerce and Capital yield it toleration and sympathy.”

Linking Northern economic concerns to slavery in the South alone would make doing away with slavery, at best, difficult. We all know how hard it is today to ask people to give up anything in order to benefit the “Other.”
Seward saw the need to build a political consensus that would necessitate the erasure of slavery. He stated how developing that consensus might look and how it could be employed in that same speech,

“Emancipation is a democratic revolution.”

Dr. Karp explained that by

“Likening the struggle against American slavery to the struggle against European aristocracy, Seward argued that any challenge to the power of the slaveholding class must come through mass democratic politics.”

Seward, and others, would need to show that the Economy of Slavery was incompatible with, and hostile to, our American democracy.
As I reflected on this, I began to see how Seward’s attempt to spin the story about slavery was both politically expedient and wise. While slavery had been debated ever since the Continental Congress sat down to consider the future of the American colonies, it had always been pretty much a local issue. There were states, like Massachusetts, where Black folks fleeing the horrors of slavery could go without much fear of being sent back into that dark world of the lash. Other states chose to abide by the Fugitive Slave Act that required runaway slaves be returned to their “rightful owner.” There was a degree of ambivalence among much of the population of the U.S. concerning slavery.
Too many people benefited by the institution of slavery for Emancipation to be a ‘slam-dunk.’
The complexity of the issue was a threat to the very Democracy that was still trying to find its way in the world.
The questions that I have revolve around “How was this a threat?”
And, even if it was a threat, why should I think about that today?
Are there issues from this period of the 19th century that are even relevant in the 21st?
I will chase some of these questions in another post.
Stay tuned!

Leave a Comment

Love That Person? How?

The struggles that we share today are real. There truly is a virus that is turning societies around the globe upside down. Climate change is not an illusion. California is still burning. Unfortunately, so is Portland.
I think that it’s safe to say that we could all use a break from these issues. Someone please stop the news cycle for just a couple days!
Every day we see and hear people shouting at each other. Some of these people wear uniforms that designate the wearer as some authority. Police, Border Patrol, and who knows who else stand across streets with face masks and batons just waiting for someone to be foolish enough to challenge their authority. Other people, with bandannas wrapped around their faces and signs in their hands defiantly dare those authorities to bring it on.
How can we defuse this? Is it even possible to change this destructive narrative and bring about some kind of end to it, let alone reconciliation?
Maybe.
But, it will require effort.
The good news is, that effort can begin on one side of the issue. It doesn’t require everyone involved to be on board. In fact, one side may remain utterly opposed to any movement toward a peaceful settlement.
I have written the past couple days about movements and people who have been instrumental in bringing about peace and reconciliation. They did it without compromising their goals or their principles. And, they changed their world.
I wrote about the Voices of Ghandi and Dr. King. Their commitment to nonviolent resistance was unwavering as they confronted the injustices of colonialism and segregation.
I mentioned Jesus and His love for those who used Him, rejected Him, and betrayed Him. That love truly did flip the world on its ear.
All three of these people embodied a love for their enemies that I don’t see anywhere today.
Yeah, some of the families of murdered African Americans offer forgiveness to those who snatched the life from their loved ones. But, there is no one, no Voice, calling out that love can actually happen. And, that love can actually change anything.
“Really?” you may ask.
“Show me.”
On May 25, 2020 in Minneapolis, Derek Chauvin, an officer with the Minneapolis Police Dept. pressed his knee on the neck of George Floyd for 8 minutes and 46 seconds. Long enough to snuff out the life of Mr. Floyd. Chauvin has remained, as far as I know, remorseful even after being charged with murder.
Because of this heinous, willful act of violence a movement began to swell that has become a tsunami that threatens to sweep away oppressive systems that infect cultures worldwide.
What will replace those, I wonder. If of violence, racism, and other oppressive systems which form the superstructure of cultures are removed, what will culture be built upon?
These are questions for philosophers and people way smarter than I am.
One thing is necessary, though, for any rebuilding.
Love.
Ok, how can I love someone like Mr. Chauvin? He has a violent past. He has abused his authority on multiple occasions. And, he has callously taken a life that was not his to take.
God knows that’s a hard question. Maybe God can love someone like that! But, I ain’t God!
I’ve written before about how conservative Evangelicals belie their hatred and bigotry in the way they view the “Other.” The current administration in Washington has built its entire worldview on “Othering” people. Mexicans, Muslims, and citizens in cities like Portland are portrayed as “Those People.” Sadly, people who live in the suburbs of the U.S. have recently been assured that the “Others” won’t bother them.
In the pieces that I’ve shared I wrote that considering others as something ‘less than’ or something to be avoided or ignored is contrary to everything that I believe. It is also a foundational point in the one Book that so many people who claim to follow. The Bible calls out anyone who refuses to care for widows, orphans, and the foreigner living among you.
While that is all completely true, is there something there that we can learn about people like that murderer in Minneapolis? How about those damned snowflakes on the left? Those Libtards that don’t know what the world’s really like. Oh, let’s talk about those racist bastards and their Confederate battle flags! A basket full of Deplorables for sure! What can we say about the 1%? All those greedy bastards do is take, take, take.
Do you see what I did there? C’mon, look closely!
That’s right!
I never mentioned anyone’s name. I lumped them into vague categories that allows me to see them all a something less than human.
How many acts of inhumanity have there been in history? How many of those were helped along by first dehumanizing their victims?
“Those Jews are a threat to our pure, Arian race!”
“Blacks aren’t intelligent enough to vote!”
“Those Natives are a nuisance and must be erased!”
Whenever ANYONE dehumanizes another, hatred and violence are not far away.
Mr. Chauvin and people like him are the result of their culture. Just like you and me. Only, for him the influences created a person who has a skewed view of humanity. His world created him. In this way we can see him as a victim of the foul systems that pervade our world. And, because we also are victims of these same systems, albeit in differing ways, we may be able to find a degree of empathy.
Must we forgive and forget what he did?
No. We must never forget. And, forgiveness is not mine to give. He didn’t murder my loved one.
But, we must be able to Love. Not some sappy Hollywood emotional crap. That’s not love.
Love, agape, a verb is how we must move forward. There must be space given where Love can influence and, perhaps, reconciliation can happen.
That will never be possible, though, as long as people use violence and hatred against one another. That’s why we NEED a VOICE that can be heard above the shouts and flash-bangs and the tear gas. That’s why we people need to put down their own personal vendettas and embrace the common good.
I’m suggesting a position that is hard. Damned hard!
But, Love is never the easy path to take.
Just ask Ghandi, Martin, and Jesus.

Leave a Comment

Love My Enemy? Well Then, Who IS My Enemy?

While wondering about the lack of a Voice in today’s chaotic culture. A Voice that would lift up the call for Freedom; for Equality; for Life and that could help to unite and inspire people to reach for the Heavens of Hope.
I am straining my ears, attentive to the slightest vibrations of air that just might signal someone stepping into the role of Messenger of Hope. I try to position myself on the highest hill where the clear, cool air may reverberate across the landscape that a Voice has finally sounded that call to take up the arms of Love and Peace that we so desperately need to hear.
Then, I wonder…
What would that message actually be?
Would it be some of the “‘same ol’ same ol’” that promises changes to policies that discriminate against certain segments of our population? Can we truly hope that political change alone will cast the demons of Racism, Classism, or Gender out like a priest who sprinkles holy water out of an airplane? Are not the issues facing us today more daunting than implying that simple bandaid solutions wrought by well-meaning and benevolent people continue to offer?
As I study and meditate on people who actually did create a persona that inspired millions to respond positively to the glaring injustices of their time, I began to see something that I alluded to yesterday that powered the engines of change of which they stood at the helm.
Both Martin Luther King, Jr. and Mahatma Ghandi before him spoke of the need to follow the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.
“Love your enemies and bless those that persecute you.”
How revolutionary those words were when they were first spoken!
First century Palestine was in the iron grip of Rome. Caesar and his armies imposed something called the “Pax Romana,” or the “Roman Peace. Caesar Augustus established himself as the Emperor in Rome after a bloody civil war with Marc Antony and his Egyptian ally, Cleopatra. The ensuing peace became the symbol of Roman strength and established her military as the primary tool for enforcing that peace. So, Jesus was well aware of who those following him considered the “Enemy”. It was Rome. When Jesus uttered those words in what we now call his “Sermon on the Mount” he touched a nerve within everyone who heard him. In fact, just before Jesus mentioned this about enemies, he told the people that if “anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.” Every person who heard that would know that the ‘anyone’ that Jesus mentioned referred to Roman soldiers. An edict was on the books that stated any Roman soldier could require any other person to carry his pack for him up to one mile. Jesus pretty much told those listening that not only should they bear the burden of their sworn enemy the required distance, but they should shoulder it for double the distance! Holy crap! What in the world was Jesus trying to do?
The short answer was that Jesus desired that they, in fact, Love their Enemy.
Ok, ok…it was easy for Jesus to say this. But, did he actually ever do it himself?
Well, besides allowing his enemies to crucify him, yes, he did.
I mean, crucifixion was an extreme to be sure. And, Jesus did tell those who followed him that they would need to “take up their cross and follow Him.”
Plus, after Jesus’ arrest, everyone knew that crucifixion was coming. He had no choice in that matter. One could make the argument that Love wasn’t really a factor. Rome did to him whatever they wanted. Love or not.
But, did he practice what he preached while his life was still in his own hands?
I think so.
I was meditating on the passage of the Gospel according to John that recounts Jesus’ actions at what’s called “The Last Supper.” Countless writers and poets and artists have attempted to convey what Jesus did that night. The part of this story that I considered was the scene during the meal when Jesus got up, girded up his tunic, tied a towel around his waist and washed his disciples’ feet. This passage has been used ever since it was written as an illustration of Jesus’ humility. He even told them, “You call me ‘Teacher and Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am. Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet.”
I thought long about this scene.
Who was there?
What were they all talking about around the table?
What were their thoughts?
Was this simply a ‘teachable moment’ for Jesus?
Or, was He making a statement about life itself?
I can’t speak to the last four of these questions with any certainty. No one can.
But, the first one is rather obvious.
The Twelve whom he had called to follow from day one.
So, let me set the stage for you.
Jesus washed the feet of:
1) Peter—who would in just a very few hours deny that he even knew Jesus.
2) Thomas—would not believe the testimony of the others that Jesus had been raised from the dead. He would forever be known as “Doubting Thomas.”
3) James and John—These two brothers tried to conspire with Jesus in order to have the places of honor in Jesus’ kingdom. They tried to use Jesus for their own gain.
4) Judas Iscariot—the text tells us that before Jesus began to wash his feet that “the devil had already prompted [him] to betray Jesus.
5) ALL of the disciples deserted Jesus when the Temple guards, led by Judas, appeared in the Garden of Gethsemane to arrest Jesus.
Are all of these men Jesus’ enemies?
No, hardly.
But, they are good examples of the kinds of people that we will encounter in our daily comings and goings. They are the kind of people who will assert their rights over everyone else’s. They won’t wear masks. They will aim their AR-15 at you for saying that Black Lives Matter. They will be the ones who like to say, “It’s the economy, stupid.” These are our neighbors who don military gear and pin a badge on their chest just before they use a baton on the ribs of a person who is exercising their right to assemble and protest.
And, they are the oligarchs who comprise that “One Percent” who seem to own the rest of us.
Jesus said, “Love these. Yes, they hurt people and despitefully use them. Yes, they are selfish and unloving. They are also afraid. They are also your neighbor. Oh, and never forget…God Loves Them, too.”
God Loves Them, too.
How easy it is to forget those few words.
That’s the “Why” we should consider loving our enemies.
Perhaps, tomorrow we can discuss the “How.”

Leave a Comment