There is a series of opinion pieces in today’s NY times asking the question if Coming Out as undocumented is a good idea?   The writers are debating the No Papers  No Fear Bus that left Phoenix, AZ on Sunday and will spend the next several weeks visiting and challenging states through out the south on SB 1070’s copy cat laws.  One of those stops will be Tuscaloosa, AL where I serve as minister. My congregation will be welcoming their presence and service to bring to light the impact of these laws on our neighbors.  (you can read more about this bus here)

The comments this article received from the LGBTQ community are fascinating.  Those writing feel the term Coming Out is somehow owned by the LGBTQ community and therefore should not be co-opted by the immigrant community.  One writer wrote:  “What LGBTA people do has never been wrong, unfair or immoral and it has never hurt others. That gay sex has been made a crime in the past was due simply to blatant discrimination.”  Oh the irony!  Tell that to Dan Cathy of Chick-Fil-A or to the Salvation Army which recently affirmed that gays deserve to be put to death. I am sure they would enjoy the chuckle.

The journey to come out as gay is a journey of re-claiming one’s dignity and integrity after years of enduring hostile environments filled with subtle  micro-aggressions and blatant violence and discrimination; not to mention laws that criminalize behavior, deny hospital visitations, survivors benefits, child rearing, etc.;  all of which demean one’s life to insignificance. There are families of gay couples who have lost their children because some judge determined that the biological and gay parent was not fit to raise their children.There are parents told that the only way they could see their children is if they hid their primary identity from view.  There are laws in states where families are separated by laws that prohibit gay parents to raise their children.  There is a move to legally declare the act of raising a child in a gay household as child abuse.

How are these painful experiences different from the experiences of undocumented people having their families split up because of laws that determine an undocumented parent cannot remain in the States but cannot take their US born children with them?   There is no difference in the experience of pain suffered.

The argument that the undocumented chose to be undocumented and gay people do not choose to be gay does not justify the pain experienced.  It is insulting and dehumanizing to make such a claim.  It is a shallow argument.

It’s shallow because it is the same argument used against the LGBTQ community.  Dan Cathy and his ilk say the same about LGBTQ’s: They say gays choose to live this life.  Gays deserve no special rights to reduce their pain because it is the consequence of their choice.

Coming out of the closet was an effective means to let the Dan Cathy’s know that we are everywhere, including in your own family. It brought the pain home to the family.  The American Family needs to know the pain that immigrants endure.  Coming out of the shadows may also be an effective means to letting the American people know the story of pain endured by our convoluted and corrupt (corrupt as in a computer file corruption) immigration system.

Many people migrate here not because they chose to but because there was no other choice available to them.   And every citizen in this country have known families that moved because they were forced to move not because they chose to move.  They moved because their place of employment was closed down by merger or went bankrupt.  They moved because their loved one needed to be closer to better medical facilities.  That is the reality of our global community. People in desperate situations are sometimes forced to move.

Why would anyone knowing the risks involved come out as undocumented?  Maybe because they like those of us who are LGBTQ want to re-claim their dignity and integrity after years of being of living in the shadows  as Americans but undocumented. But don’t take my word for it, let’s ask those who did last Tuesday in Phoenix before we start judging their decisions.  We might learn we would do the same thing if living in their shoes.

I have been on study leave this month.  It has been an interesting time for me regarding my reflection on life in the South.  Since my time here my faith has shifted yet once again and I am thinking it is in reaction to the overt religiosity that is inherent in southern culture.

I say religiosity rather than Christianity because what I see practiced here in my experience is not Christianity.  At least not the Christianity that I knew as a teenager, not the Christianity that I knew as a young adult living in Charismatic Christian Community but something that has the form of Christianity but none of the heart of Christianity. And there are reasons why I left that Christianity behind that have more to do with my understanding of Christianity than it does with the form of religiosity as I have experienced it in the South.

We have ministers here in the south who when they do not get their way ask their parishioners to pray that God will strike down with lightening those who disobey or disagree with their perspectives.   Such violent rhetoric has led people to act out this rhetoric–presuming they are god’s messengers. (Rev. Fuller regarding the Tuscaloosa Arts Council’s refusal to ban a foreign film. See his retraction here.)

We have public leaders who parade their claim of Christianity because they believe that will get them elected and these same public leaders who misquote and misuse the biblical texts to support positions that are  far away from the God revealed by Jesus. (Governor Bentley regarding biblical command to obeying the law in regards to HB 56 and HB 658. See post here. )

So this is why I say religiosity rather than Christianity because there is nothing Christian in these persons expression of faith. It has all the trappings and decorum of Christianity but none of the authentic heart that Jesus displayed in his three years of ministry.  A true religious conversion eventually leads to humility of spirit towards others–think Francis of Assisi, think Thich Nhat Hahn, think Gandhi, think Mother Teresa.   Religiosity is overt here in Alabama and my reaction to it is to retreat further away from anything resembling it.

I am more of a non-theist than when I arrived here in Alabama.  I am not an atheist who does not believe in god but I am not a theist either.  My definition of god for a long time now has been:  All that is and all that is not.  But that statement has been confused for pantheism and that is not what I am referring to either. The reason why this is not a pantheistic statement is because of the negative clause, all that is not.  Pantheism only encompasses what is;  the universe and equates the universe with god.  I look beyond that definition and include not only what is, but also what is not.  I find this definition of god includes not only the natural world but also the supernatural, the paranormal, the things that people have experienced but are not so easily defined in the natural  realm.  I find the current definitions and categorizations of these experiences insufficient and most likely superstitious explanations in an attempt to place them into some neat box to tuck away somewhere. But I cannot ignore them in my definition.

I would state there is something of the divine essence in all of creation, all that is not created, and all that is to be created.  There is not a Supreme being somewhere pulling the strings.  I am not even sure there is a universal stream of consciousness.   But there does seem to be something that places order and chaos into what we call the universe.  Is it the Higgs Boson–the God particle? My position, therefore,  is not an atheist position but rather a non-theist position.

How has this shifted my faith?  I have become more interested in how humans live together in harmony than in whether or not their souls are saved. I find the responses that Rev. Fuller and Gov. Bentley made to be fascinating from an evolutionary point of reference. Our ancestors responded in similar ways to things that were perceived as threatening.  We called upon the gods to smote the threat or we sought to bring the threat under the rule of law.  In both, these reactions revolve around being an alpha, a focal point of coercive power and control.  If a supernatural or natural event happened after the command to smote another, the person commanding would be elevated in status.  They must have a special connection.  If people began to follow the rule of law, the same elevation of power and control would be given to the person or entity enforcing the law. There is in our tribal species a need to conform to the tribe.  I want to explore what it is in our evolution as a species that holds us back from achieving our goal of living in harmony.

My focus as a person of faith has increasingly been on the here and now, in understanding how we have evolutionarily evolved and how remnants of our evolutionary past affect our present desire to be more loving, more tolerant of the other, more able to cope with the transitions of life.  And I have been recognizing how humanity loves the illusion far more than the reality of something.

I am beginning to think that there is something in our genetic evolutionary development that leads us to idolatry.  Whether that idolatry is in the classic form of idol worship or a more nuanced form such as being seen today through supremacist ideologies or blind unquestioning faith in an institution be that government, church or financial corporation. If we are ever to create that Star Trek society where poverty and inequality and all the isms have been eliminated, we need to have a better understanding of our evolutionary history.  Our faith constructs also have to evolve–not necessarily in the direction mine has–but evolve just the same.

I have been thinking about personal worldviews.  I began thinking about this at a recent conference workshop I attended where the facilitator asked as an icebreaker to mention what kind of animal we would be and why.  I commented to the person next to me that I thought this was an odd question since humans were part of the animal kingdom.  The person disagreed with me and stated something along the lines of  god creating us above the animals.

Personal worldview. At the base of my comment is my acknowledgement of life on this planet occurring through evolutionary processes.  I believe that humans, aka homo sapiens sapiens,  have evolved from other species.  And while we might not have found the link to our genetic ancestry there are very strong clues that one exists.  This worldview alters the way I interact with my environment.  How I view other animal and plant life is strongly interconnected in my worldview.

My fellow conference attendee has a different worldview.  Now while I did not confirm this with him, his comment is consistent with those who believe in creationism. A belief that is rooted in a religious worldview of how the world came to be and the role that humans have on this planet.  Now there are variations to this religious story of creation.  There are, for example,  two creation stories in the book of Genesis.  But the belief places humanity as separate and in domination over the rest of creation. It is the dominant worldview today that has shaped most, if not all, of our interactions with the earth to date and one only has to look at our coal mining and oil drilling practices to see it in action.

I recognize that there are also hybrids of these two worldviews where individuals believe in evolution but still accept the domination over the world as part of the reward, so to speak, of being on top of the evolutionary chain.  But the point I am moving towards is that it is our worldview that helps us interpret and make sense of our lives. It is our worldview that helps shape our behaviors in moving through the world.

A person who believes that they are the center of the universe acts very different from a person who believes that they are only in the universe because of gravitational pull.  How a person acts will be different because of this difference in core beliefs.

Humanity has a long history of believing that we are the center of the universe.  Remember the ancient belief that the sun, the stars, the planets, and the moon revolve around the earth? There were serious consequences for those who stated only the moon revolved around the earth.   There are people who still cling fiercely to the notion that we are the only planet in all of the galaxies in the known universe  that support life.  It is a worldview that helps them maintain their sense of the world.  Anything that might contradict that worldview is devastating and must be kept out of reach.

So what do we do when we are confronted with something that contradicts our worldview?  We might not even be aware that we have a worldview regarding some of our behaviors.  Our worldview is so ingrained in our psyches that we may be unaware of it being incomplete or inaccurate.

For example, the recent shooting in Aurora, CO confronted and in some cases may have totally contradicted our worldview.  Many have a worldview of who terrorists should be.  In this country, despite all evidence to the contrary, many people believe that all terrorists are  non-educated, Muslim people of color, and citizens of third world countries with an axe to grind against the USA.  James Holmes did not fit that description. So the press quickly put out a statement that James Holmes was not a terrorist. He did acts of profound terror but not a terrorist, why?  Because he is a white, PhD student, US citizen, and presumably Christian and therefore does not fit our worldview of what terrorists look like. He even has a warm inviting smile in the photograph of him instead of the scowl we associate with terrorists.  Some people still deny that Timothy McVeigh of the Oklahoma Bombing was a terrorist for the demographic reasons.  Terrorist acts are only committed by people who do not look like us says this worldview.  People who look like us and do acts of terror must have some sort of mental imbalance. Whether this person has a mental disability is still to be fully determined but this is where we go in order to protect our worldview of terrorists.

There were people who believed that because he used an assault weapon that he must be a veteran because the belief is only the military would know how to use such weapons.  There was, you may recall, that horrible incident in Texas by a military person.  The military in an attempt at  preempting  speculation of this sort announced within hours after the shooting, “James Holmes, is not a past or current member of any branch or component of the U.S. Armed Forces.”

Again, what do we do when our Worldview is confronted?  We attempt to place the contradiction into a category in order to make sense of it and restore our worldview.  And this is what Pastor Rick Warren attempted to do when he sent out the following tweet: “When students are taught they are no different from animals, they act like it.”  His Worldview: Creationism.  He is attempting to make sense of this tragedy based on how he thinks the world works.

We may scoff at Rick Warren’s statement just as we scoffed at previous religious leaders statements as to the cause for the 9/11 attack or Hurricane Katrina.  But we are all attempting to make sense of this horrific tragedy based on our personal worldview.

But this is not just about tragedies that do not make sense. Worldviews are also about who we are as a people.  There is a worldview that we are either male or female and  straight, that is the ordained order of things.   And then we get confronted with a person who is genetically intersex.  The person looks female but was never born with fallopian tubes but rather testes that never descended. We try to place this person into our binary worldview. It does not work.  And we have a crisis that we must sort out in order to make sense of the world.  Some of us have sorted it out, some of us have not. The reality that there are people who are neither male nor female, who are neither straight nor gay, who are instead somewhere along the spectrum is still very much a confrontation to the worldview of a good percentage of Americans.  The truth of it still threatens all of their foundational (worldview) beliefs.

There is a worldview that we as Americans are the best country in the world. It results in our being arrogant and presuming all sorts of privilege in the world that does not belong to us.  It also is being confronted and contradicted. According to one set of metrics we are only the best in incarcerations.  We are the best at food insecurity.   We are not even the best at democracy. Another set of metrics indicated we are the the best in military spending.  Our worldview of being number one does not match reality.  Something will have to give.

When our explanations and categorizations are found wanting, perhaps it is time we look at our underlying assumptions about our life, our role and our location in it and change our worldview.

 

 

 

This has been a very busy time for me, filled with lots of travel some vacation but mostly work related travel.   Two of my most recent travels included two conferences that will enrich my work with immigration, especially as it pertains to Alabama’s HB 56 and HB 658.

I was able to attend Spin Academy which teaches organizers how to shape our message and work with various forms of media.  It is important, for example, for our messaging to parallel the values of the community.  That seems like common sense but sometimes there is a misalignment there.

Not to pick on Mitt Romney’s campaign but only to use his campaign as an example of this point.  He recently spoke at the NAACP’s meeting.  His message was that he was supportive of the African American community.  His message was that he was in touch with their needs.  And then he stated he was going to repeal Obamacare and received boos from the audience.  There was a mismatch between the message  and the values he was aiming to resonate with in the African American community.

The African American community has strong child centered values.  Many children in the African American community are experiencing the benefits from this legislation.  To repeal legislation that supports their children’s well being is a brutal attack on their community. The message of being in touch with the needs  of the African American Community did not mesh with the values that repealing Obamacare expresses.   He would have done better had he simply stated that his platform is not in sync and what could he do to make his platform reflect their needs. If we are trying to win the hearts and minds of others then we have to be able tap into the values of the community with our message.

An example of this being done well is also in the conservative camp.  The emphasis on family values resonates with many Americans regardless of political allegiance.  The conservative messengers have been able to tie their message to family values.  We need to be able to be as successful in tying our message for immigration reform to the values we honor and respect in this country.

The rest of Spin Academy was focused on technical skills that would enable such messaging to occur such as how to use social media, print, radio and television venues to get our message across.  It was an excellent event.

This event was then paired with my attending the Southeast Immigrants Rights Network (SEIRN) conference in Raleigh, NC. What struck me as unique about this conference from any other conference, on any other issue, I attended before was the depth of skills being taught to a majority of grass roots organizers.  We are behind the eight ball in the immigration struggle for justice in the south east.  Many of us thought, perhaps naively, that such blatant codification of racism against any group would not happen here in the heart of the civil rights movement.

So we are on a steep learning curve.   How to develop a strong base.  How to develop strong coalitions.  How to develop campaigns that are strategic and concise in its message for repeal and for justice.  These were met head on in the SEIRN conference.  One full day of workshops and sharing stories of success by other allies in other justice fronts and then one day of deep dialog on four topics:  Strong campaigns, Power building, Integrative change models, and Alliance and Relationship building.  These were interactive dialogs integrating and processing all that we had learned the day before.

We ended the day with developing an action plan for developing a regional strategy for immigrant rights.  This was  exciting, albeit exhausting, work.  I have renewed hope that we can and will make a difference in the struggle for immigrant rights in this  country.

I am always amused when a group proclaims something does not meet community standards.  I immediately jump to ‘by whose standards’? And then begin pointing out all the places that equally do not meet those alleged standards already existing in the community that the  group has said nothing about.

Two conservative churches declared that a film, “Turn me on Dammit!” was not appropriate to be shown at the local arts film festival in Tuscaloosa, AL. In fact one pastor sent an email to the sponsoring business basically declaring an all out campaign against her business and the Tuscaloosa Arts Council if she continued sponsorship of this film.

They have not seen the movie, in fact, no one has as this was to be an advance screening of the film before it opened in Los Angeles.  If the promoters are wise they will add Banned in Alabama to their advertisement for the LA opening. It will offer yet another example of why we are the laughing stock in the union, but perhaps if enough people laugh at our narrow minded  attitudes  we Alabamians will finally get the message and grow out of our prepubescent thinking and begin reaching towards rational emotionally mature adulthood.

The director of the film, Jannicke Systad Jacobsen,  was saddened by the news that her film was banned and not even seen by those objecting, had they seen it they would have  seen “it actually has a Christian conservative message about waiting.”

So what does all of this mean?  Besides the obvious that narrow minded people are always threatened by people expressing opinions  that might be parallel to their opinions but just not expressed in the same way.

In a country that claims to have a wall of separation between church and state, such use of religious beliefs against freedom of expression is bullying. This form of religious  intimidation has become endemic in this country and is even more pronounced here in the south.

So what if the film is an honest portrayal about coming of age in the 21st century. So what if the film is honest in discussing sexuality. If these topics offend, then don’t see them.  Remain in the imaginary bubble where everyone is to remain chaste and pure until after marriage–between one man and one woman–but don’t force that bubble of naïveté on others. That is not a right given in the United States.  A right to state displeasure, sure. A right to write op-ed pieces and letters to the editor, yes.  A right to protest, yes.  But to threaten someone’s welfare for showing a film which they have not even had the critical thinking skills to see first before judging? No.  Nor is it a right to demand the mayors of Tuscaloosa and Northport to apply funding withdrawal pressures on the  Bama Theatre and Tuscaloosa Arts Council if the movie was shown.  A film series by the way that was not funded through government funds.

It is ironic that this occurred on the day that Ray Bradbury, author of Fahrenheit 451, died.  He once said, “There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them.”   The same could be said for movies.

Once to every man and nation, comes the moment to decide,
In the strife of truth with falsehood, for the good or evil side;
Some great cause, some great decision, offering each the bloom or blight,
And the choice goes by forever, ’twixt that darkness and that light.

Yesterday, the hearts of state legislator’s decided that immigrants are not human beings worthy of fulfilling their dreams in this country like others but rather a threat to America.  The legislature chose to ignore the increased pressure from religious leaders to turn away from injustice towards justice.

They passed the substitute bill of HB 658 written by Senator Beason which included what is being called a scarlet letter provision where any undocumented resident who is arrested on any charge and appears in court would have their information posted on a public online forum searchable by county and judge.

This was not in Rep. Hammon’s  proposed version of HB 658 which was passed in the house before it went to the Senate. When on the last day of the session the senate version passed and went back to the house, Rep. Hammon in telling the house the changes to the bill failed to mention this drastic addition to his colleagues.  The house did not have time read the bill  before Rep. Hammon explained the justifications for the changes in the bill.  After Rep. Hammon gave his justifications for the changes, there was a call to have the bill read again to enable the representatives to hear again how these justifications related to the bill.  This request was denied by the Speaker.  It is therefore very likely that once again the representatives did not know what they were passing.

Governor Bentley said he would not sign this bill. He has ten days to veto or sign the bill, if he does not it becomes an automatic veto. He has placed immigration back on the agenda for a special session that still needs to address such issues as redistricting and bonds.

He specifically stated he dislikes the scarlet letter provision calling it a public relations problem.    The Alabama Coalition for Immigrant Justice calls it a “public safety problem” because there can be only one purpose of such a provision: The implicit permission for vigilantes to take matters in  their own hands and cause emotional and physical harm to people living in this state.

During the day yesterday there were cries for non-compliance to this law.  Seven of my friends, part of a group I belong to called Alabama’s Conscience,  were arrested for their attempt to block legislator’s from making this vote.  They prayed and sang songs. They were charged with disorderly conduct.

When hearts have grown so very cold to see no violation of human dignity, no violation of moral ethics in breaking apart families in these laws, then the conscience must step up and intervene. It becomes our moral duty to not comply with this law in the quest to break open the hearts of others to see what this law is doing to all Alabamians in order for justice to prevail.

After the vote, our own hearts literally broke that our own leaders would seek to cause violent harm against another.  And while their actions may not be in the form of physical violence, their actions are committing emotional and spiritual violence, not only to immigrants, documented and undocumented, but also to their very souls.

We pray for the salvation of Alabama and for all of America. We are even more  resolved to continue being Alabama’s Conscience and we will continue doing all that we can  to non-violently show the pain this law is causing all of us. It means we will not comply with this law. We will not allow hatred to proliferate in our state.

 

When I heard of the news that North Carolina had voted to place its ban on same sex marriage in their state constitution, a constitution that was last revised to ban interracial marriages, my heart just broke.

Two songs came to me which seemed appropriate in my twisted mind,  especially when juxtaposed with each other .

 

Sermon given on May 6 2012 © Rev. Fred L Hammond to the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa.

It seems appropriate that we should be talking about this Doctrine of Discovery in light of this past weeks events because the two are directly related to how we, as people of the United States are conducting our policies towards immigrants here in Alabama and in the nation.

The Doctrine of Discovery also called the Doctrine of Christian Discovery is founded on a series of papal bulls or edicts written between 1452 and 1493.  The first was from Pope Nicholas V in 1452 called the Dum Diversas. It states the following:

” We grant to you (King of Portugal)  full and free power, through the Apostolic authority by this edict, to invade, conquer, fight, subjugate the Saracens (Muslims) and pagans, and other infidels and other enemies of Christ, and wherever established their Kingdoms, Duchies, Royal Palaces, Principalities and other dominions, lands, places, estates, camps and any other possessions, mobile and immobile goods found in all these places and held in whatever name, and held and possessed by the same […]and to lead their persons in perpetual servitude. [i]

This edict gave sanction for Portugal to invade Africa, take its resources, and begin what was to be called the African Slave Trade.

The second edict Romanus Pontifex  also written by Pope Nicholas V in 1455 followed up on the first papal bull confirming Portugal’s right to dominion over all lands discovered and / or conquered from the Saracens and pagans and it reaffirmed the enslavement of these people.  This edict was written to prevent other Christian nations from colonizing lands that Portugal laid claim.  The third edict Inter caetera written by Pope Alexander VI in 1493 gave the right for explorers and nations to lay claim on lands unknown to Christians. It added a clause requiring the proselytizing of the inhabitants to Christianity.   It also gave permission for Christopher Columbus  in 1493 to lay claim to the lands he set foot on for Spain.

It is this Doctrine of Christian Discovery based on these three papal bulls that became the basis for the United States claim to the Americas. The assumption here was that once the Europeans were no longer the rulers, the authority to subjugate new lands in the Americas fell on the emerging nation.

The US Supreme court in 1823, in Johnson v McIntosh used the doctrine to state that Johnson had no claim to the land he purchased directly from the native peoples because the land already belonged to the US government.  This ruling meant that the indigenous people only had the right of occupancy so long as the US government allowed it and could at anytime revoke the right of occupancy.  This was upheld in the US Supreme Court ruling of 1831; Cherokee Nation v Georgia.  Justice Marshall wrote that “the relationship of the tribes to the United States resembles that of a ‘ward to its guardian’.[ii]”  This resulted in the trail of tears when Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Muscogee-Creek, and Seminole were moved to “Indian Territory” known as present day Oklahoma.

We see this doctrine in the footprint of Manifest Destiny, the belief that the United States should expand from coast to coast.  Historian William E. Weeks suggested three themes were in the concept of Manifest Destiny:  1) The virtue of American Institutions; 2) the mission to spread these institutions thereby redeeming and remaking the world in the image of the US; and 3) The Destiny under God to do this work. [iii]

The first of these themes is today heard in the concept of American Exceptionalism, the belief that America has not only a unique role to play but a divine calling in spreading liberty and democracy in the world.  It is American Exceptionalism that feeds the erroneous belief that America is the greatest country ever, that might makes right, and that we have the right to be the police unto the nations and thereby interfere in the internal and external affairs of nations, even to intervene with force the over throw of governments we no longer approve of, regardless of whether they were democratically elected or not.  America in playing out this exceptionalism interfered with the governments in Latin and South America through out the 20^th century and with governments in the Middle East contributing to the current crisis that is ongoing.  All of these policies are grounded in the papal bulls that were written over 550 years ago by Popes of the Roman Catholic Church.

And we recently saw the Doctrine of Discovery in Candidate Newt Gingrich’s vision of a Moon colony that would then become a state of the United States. While many people scoffed at his vision, it is rooted firmly in this Doctrine of Discovery; we plant our flag, we claim it by colonization then it is rightly ours and ours alone to exploit as we choose. And if there really is a man in the moon, then he must be enslaved to the invading forces.

In a sermon recently given by Rev. Matt Alspough[iv], he states, “So we’ve based a significant part of our American political practice on the Doctrine of Discovery, that small act of political expediency enacted by the Catholic Church. We’ve seen that American acceptance of this Doctrine opened Pandora’s Box out of which poured many of our society’s ills: the slavery of Africans as economic practice, our most tragic war over that practice, and the morass of racism that continues to this day. It framed our treatment of indigenous peoples in our country, a history of forced relocation and genocide, imposing on them western religion and practices, sometimes taking their children from them. It has influenced our confusion about immigration, particularly the migration of indigenous peoples in the Americas, many of whom are on the move because United States policies in Latin America have limited economic opportunities for these people.”

This brings us right up to our present day, doesn’t it?  This is the reason why it is important to understand our history, even history that is over 500 years old still has an impact on the decisions, on the values, on the culture we express today. And the people who make these decisions in places of authority might not even have a clue as to what they are reinforcing because to them it seems so natural, so logical, so matter of fact that of course this is the way it must be. Surely the pilgrims and the puritans who came to these shores would have repudiated anything that came from Catholicism had they fully understood the source of their alleged superior dominionist attitude.  Well, perhaps not, since such an attitude benefited them in their forging their way on these shores. But the reason as to why we do something a certain way in this country may not be because we consciously chose to do it that way but rather because some racist, Christian supremacist declared it to be the will of god and it steam rolled across the ages and became part of our cultural DNA.

So here we are 560 years later, still immersed in cultural norms and mores and in laws that seek to place dominion over another people. We still have a belief in this country that we can do whatever we want with the earth, ravage its minerals, its lumber, its water to serve our purposes and to hell to everyone else.

This doctrine influences our water access in the southwest.  We know we absolutely know that the rain that falls in the Rocky Mountains and enters the Colorado River supports life through out the desert on its route to the Gulf of California.  But our laws state that if the water falls on United States then it belongs to United States and so we seek to trap it in the desert with major dams across the Colorado River. We then catch the overflow by other avenues so that we can water the non native grasses and water hungry potato farms and supply water to swimming pools in communities like Phoenix, Scottsdale, and Tucson.

We are not being sensible when it comes to water in the southwest, yet because of this ingrained doctrine of domination over the land and its native peoples we take what we want for our own greedy purposes and privilege. All of these actions are to the detriment of the indigenous peoples and species that live along the border and dependent on the spring runoffs for their survival.   The waters of the Colorado River never make it to the Delta in the Gulf of California causing extinction fears of the rare indigenous species that live in the gulf.

The people who live in Sonora were part of a nomadic tribe that traveled north into Arizona and back south again, a pattern they followed for 10,000 years.  Now the border walls prevent these people from their nomadic customs over land that has been theirs.  The chant that I heard when I was in Arizona for the day of non-compliance was “I didn’t cross the border, the border crossed me.” This is a very real statement.  Two countries, Mexico and the United States, developed borders without regard to the indigenous peoples that lived there.The Doctrine of Discovery was in operation through out the Americas.

As we come to better understand the ancient peoples of this land, we discover that the Aztec’s realm extended far into Georgia.  Many of our immigrants from Latin America today are descendants of the Aztec and Mayan people as well as other indigenous peoples.  So in some ways it could be said that immigrants from Latin America are coming home.

The state of Alabama is playing the Doctrine of Discovery by insisting that it has the right to determine who shall live within our state borders. This is currently constitutional under Johnson v McIntosh but should it be when so many of the immigrants are in fact indigenous people of these lands.  The question really becomes can we continue to tell native peoples where they can and cannot live, when it is the descendants of Europeans who are the non-natives here?

Bruce Knotts, Director of the UUA United Nations Office[v], writes: The Doctrine of Discovery violates human rights on its face.  It states that any Christian discovery of non-Christian people, gives the Christian nation the right to claim the land and enslave the people, which many European nations did all over the world.  The vestiges of these terrible crimes remain with us today.  We have imposed relatively modern borders onto ancient indigenous nations.  These newly established colonial boarders divide indigenous nations.  Families are cut off from each other.  Nowhere is this as bad as it is in our American Southwest, where some families and nations of indigenous people are on one or the other side of the American/Mexican border.  The American government makes no provision for people of one indigenous nation (which may have existed for over a thousand years as a cohesive people) are divided by a border established less than two hundred years ago.  Our immigration authorities make visits and commerce within one indigenous nation divided by the American border nearly impossible to achieve.  The Doctrine of Discovery, purports to give us the right to do what we never should have had the right to do; which is steal the land of others and to enslave the owners of the land we have stolen.  The hard work of restoring justice in this world must begin with a total and complete repudiation of the doctrine of discovery.

We have been asked by our national partners in the fight for true immigration reform to join the Roman Catholic Church in revoking this doctrine.  The Holy See in April 27 of 2010 confirms that the Papal Bull of 1493 Inter Coetera “has been revoked and considers it without any legal or doctrinal value.[vi]” Further the Episcopalians and the Quakers have also passed resolutions repudiating this doctrine.

So while we are in Phoenix for our General Assembly, the UUA has proposed a resolution for us to repudiate the Doctrine of Discovery and to urge the Federal government to fully endorse and implement without qualification the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples passed by 144 countries with four votes against. The four votes against this resolution included Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States.  These four countries have large indigenous populations within their borders.

The action of civil disobedience that I performed this past week is brought into even finer focus with the Doctrine of Discovery as the context in which HB 56 and its revision bills are placed.  Tupac Acosta from Arizona speaks frequently about the connection of SB 1070 and the Doctrine of Discovery.  He says, “the purpose of SB1070 was to consolidate the perceptions of some white Americans around the idea of an America that is white in a continent that belongs to them.[vii]”

I would suggest that this is what is happening in Alabama as well.   It is time for us to put an end to our domination culture.  It is time for us to live up to our higher ideals and values of loving our neighbors.  As I recently wrote in a blog in response to Governor Bentley’s comment about the bible stating one must always obey the law, I quoted another verse from the chapter he referred to:  Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. May we strive to always fulfill the law.

“If they read what I read in the Bible, the Bible says you always obey the law,” said Alabama Governor Bentley in response to Alabama’s Conscience act of civil disobedience against HB 56 on May 3, 2012, National Day of Prayer.

(photo by L. Robledo)

Governor Bentley is in need of some Bible lessons.  If his statement is true, then Jesus would not have stopped the stoning of the woman caught in adultery because the law must always be obeyed.  If his statement is true, then Jesus would not have healed on the Sabbath because the law must always be obeyed. If his statements are true then the Boston Tea Party in 1773 by the colonists would not have happened because the law must always be obeyed.  If his statements are true, then the Declaration of Independence would never have been written or signed because the law must always be obeyed.

If his statements are true then Alabama’s Governor George Wallace’s statement of “Segregation now, Segregation tomorrow, and Segregation forever” would still be the law of Alabama because the law must always be followed.  Thank God for people of conscience who recognize an unjust law and deliberately disobey to overturn that law.

If his statement is true then Paul, who authored the text that Governor Bentley is referring,  would never have confronted the emperor regarding Christianity because the Christian faith was considered illegal, an act of treason.   So even Paul did not believe one must always obey the law.

This statement of Bentley’s reveals that he has no understanding of his own faith tradition of Christianity.  His own faith as a Baptist came about because people of conscience disobeyed the law.  It was illegal to be of any other faith than Anglican when John Smyth declared his Baptist faith.  But if Governor Bentley is correct that the Bible says you always obey the law, then his own faith is illegal, twice over because John Smyth broke the English law decreeing the Church of England as the one faith and the Church of England broke the law when it severed ties with the Roman Catholic Church over the doctrine of divorce–another law that according to Bentley’s argument must be obeyed.  Remember that church law and civil law were one and the same in the time of the reformation.  There was no separation of church and state.

The context of Romans 13 which Bentley refers also includes Romans 13: 6 and following: “This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing.  Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor. Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law.  The commandments, ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not murder,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not covet,’ and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.”

Love does no harm to a neighbor.   No harm.  That is the criteria in which to obey the laws of government, the Bible states. Yet, HB 56 does do harm to our neighbors.  Our Immigrant neighbors are working hard, paying taxes, building up the community, creating businesses which strengthen the economy.  Immigrant neighbors with the same expressed dreams for a better life for their children.  This law seeks to rid our communities of people who are doing no harm, who are loving and caring for their community.  Governor Bentley noted this in his commemoration speech regarding the anniversary of Tornado recovery efforts in Tuscaloosa when he referred to the status of citizenship of those who were first responders.   Governor Bentley loves undocumented people when they are of usefulness to him but otherwise he has disdain for his neighbors who seek to make Tuscaloosa a better place for all to live.

This law has encouraged people to express their bigotry and prejudice against their neighbor.  Therefore any law that causes harm to their neighbor, using Bentley’s argument of always following what the Bible says, is not a law that is to be obeyed.  Such a law must be disobeyed. It must be broken time and time again because it goes against a higher law, which is the law of Love.  I choose to stand on the side of Love.

Rep. Micky Hammon stated  before voting to move the revision bill HB 658 out of committee that “Churches need something written in crayon because they exaggerate.”  Exaggerate?

It is not an exaggeration that children of documented immigrants are being bullied in school as a result of passage of HB 56. These are people whom, Rep. Hammon said would have nothing to worry about because they are legal in this country. Yet, here we are, children, legal children of parents with legal status being bullied simply because they are immigrants.  It is not an exaggeration that our neighbors who are legal residents are being harassed by strangers in public arenas for looking like an immigrant. Strangers have accosted them and screamed at them to go home to Mexico. These are people who are born in Alabama but happen to be of brown skin.  Again, people Rep. Hammon said would have nothing to worry about because they are of legal status.  It is not an exaggeration that immigrants, legal status, are followed by police after they leave a Mexican grocery store or restaurant, simply because they are brown.   It is not an exaggeration that immigrants are being called vectors of disease by a radio show host after one case of Hepatitis A was discovered at a Northport fast food restaurant.

These events of racial hatred are all a result of HB 56.  This law supports the creation of a hostile environment not only for Rep. Hammon’s targeted audience for attrition through enforcement but for every immigrant.

During the public hearing for SB 41, Senator Beasley’s bill for repeal, Senator Hank Sanders compared these very experiences to the ones he had as a child growing up before Civil Rights in Alabama.  The fear is palpable and it is real.  Immigrants, US born and documented, do have to worry in Alabama that they may be racially profiled not just by law enforcement but by the average citizens who believe they are doing their citizenship duty.

It is also not an exaggeration to state that Rep. Micky Hammon’s statement reflects a disdain for religious values that guide humane behavior.

Churches, congregations, synagogues, and other houses of religious practice are the holders of the values that a society ought to reflect.  These are values that reflect who we ought to be as a people, as a community, as a state, and as a nation.  Every religion has in their core values the premise of loving your neighbor as yourself.  Every religion has in their core values the honoring and preserving the integrity of the family unit.  Every religion has in their core values the welcoming of strangers.

These values are also not an exaggeration.  They are central to our faith traditions.  We sing about them in our services.  Our weekly readings of the Scriptures reflect these values reinforcing that which we seek to see in the world. We either live these values in our daily lives or we do not.

When these values are contrasted with the values expressed in HB 56 and its revision bill HB 658, it is clear that they conflict with the core message of our faith to welcome the stranger for we too were once strangers  in the land of Egypt.

HB 658 must not be passed into law.  It goes against every core value our religious state proclaims as worthy to be emulated.  That is not an exaggeration, Rep. Hammon, that is the holy truth of who we are called to be.

A Sense of Destiny
Rev. Fred L Hammond
2 October 2011 ©
Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

[This sermon is part one of a two part series on destiny.]

There are age old questions that humanity asks and one of them is ‘do we have a destiny to fulfill?  Is there something written in the stars that determines my fate?’  In every culture there is a methodology for telling the future.  Whether it is astrology, runes, I Ching, tea leaves, palm reading, or tarot cards; humanity in every culture attempted a variety of ways to discover its fate. And even if we do not use such external means to learn what lies ahead for us, we will do other things to help steer the course of this ship we call life.

These other things might be manipulating others, saving money for retirement, developing elaborate plans in the attempt of placing controls and securities on what our future may be. But even all of these strategies sometimes do not bring the success or the life that we desire so we are left with an even more crucial and perhaps more basic question:  ‘Does my life have a purpose that I am to fulfill?’

There is in Christian theology, a train of thought that God is outside of history and time. So all of history past, present, and future is moving towards the culmination of events as described in the Book of Revelation as the end of time where good and evil actions of souls will be judged either for heaven or hell.  So the purpose of humanity according to this theology is to move history towards judgment day.

This is the logic behind those who say we do not need to have environmental protections because to do so would thwart the culmination of God ordained events, the end of history. Or the rationale behind continued unrest in the Middle East because this is the place where the last battle will be fought before the second coming of Christ. It is certainly the logic behind the Dominionists who seek to create an American theocracy.  So one’s destiny, according to this theological discourse is to further the will of God towards the culmination of time. And when I say the will of God, I am referring to groups of people’s belief of what that will of God might be, not that anyone has the franchise on knowing such information.  Although there are many who claim to know.

Even if one does not subscribe to this particular theology, the question remains, is there a destiny, some purpose to my existence, some role that I am to play out that I am to fulfill? Is there a way for me to know what that role is?  Do I have any say at all in determining that role?  Is there a sense of Destiny that each of us have?

Rollo May, existentialist writer of the 20^th century, would say yes. But he also ties destiny with freedom and this I believe is a crucial point.  He writes, “The freedom of each of us is in proportion to the degree with which we confront and live in relation to our destiny[i]” So what is destiny?

May defines “destiny as the patterns of limits and talents that constitute the givens in life.” There are four aspects of destiny that we need to consider in these patterns. We have the cosmic level of destiny, birth and death.  These are two events that we have relatively little choice over.  We had no say in our birth and we all will die.  We might be able to have a say as to when we give birth to another or we might be able to postpone death by taking care of our health or even invite death through suicide but it is the destiny of each to die.

In this category are also the so-called acts of god; tornadoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes and the like.  We might choose to flee a hurricane or decide to take our chances in the storm but these events occur with no consideration of us. The positive side of this includes the beauty of a sunset, the rolling waves of the ocean on a silky sand beach, the breeze on a hot summer afternoon, a walk along a wooded path on a fall day.

Genetics play a role in our destiny.  We have physical characteristics that we were given in our formation in the womb even if those characteristics were falsely assigned like being born female but embodying male chromosomes.  What race we are born into, what color eyes were we given are part of this category. And May places our gifts and talents into this category as givens.

Cultural aspects play a role in determining destiny.  What family we are born into; wealthy or poverty stricken. We had no say in choosing our family or what country or in what part of the country we were born. And we did not pick the period of history in which we live.  Our lives would be vastly different if this was Alabama in the early 18^th century or mid 19^th century or even the mid-20^th century.

And the final category that May defines is circumstantial destiny. These are events that happen in the world that we cannot reverse, avoid, ignore, or even ask for a do over.  Events like 9/11, the invasion of Iraq or the collapse of financial institutions are events that have impact on our lives circumstantially and alter our world view. We may have little to no involvement in those events but they have changed the circumstances of our lives. We only have to think about airport security to see an example of how life has changed post 9/11.

May places all of these forms of destiny on a spectrum with the extreme left hand position as being those events that humanity has no control over such as fate, determinism. In the middle he places the unconscious function of the human mind; partly determined, partly influenced by human behavior.  Nearer to the right hand, he places cultural aspects because while we cannot control the culture we were born into there is freedom in how we engage that culture. And in the extreme right position he would place talents and gifts because while these are given to us, we have considerable freedom in pursuing or not pursuing the development of these talents.

This definition of destiny is very different than the theological statement that destiny is somehow an expression towards fulfilling God’s ultimate end point of a judgment day.

It is directly tied into our concept of freedom.  Stephen Hawking is a brilliant man but if all you knew about him was the books that he wrote, you would have no idea that he suffers from Lou Gehrings disease, a debilitating condition that slowly over time removes all ability for movement.  His destiny, perhaps genetic disposition, was this disease but he decided to engage the disability in a manner that enabled him to continue using his mind in extremely creative and liberating ways.  All of our lives are richer for his engaging with the limitations of his body.

May describes the freedom this way: “Freedom is honed in the struggle with destiny.  The freedom that develops in our confronting our destiny produces the richness, the endless variety, the capacity to endure, the ecstasy, the imagination, and other capacities that characterize the world and ourselves as conscious creatures, free but destined, moving in it.  In this sense destiny is personal.”

There is the story of Esther in the Hebrew Scriptures.  Born of lowly birth to a Jewish family, there was not much promise for her status in life.  She did have one thing in her favor, she was beautiful.  The King becomes enamored by her and marries her.  But there is also an advisor to the King who has a grudge against the Jews and plots with the King to have them killed.  Esther feels distressed but also helpless in this situation, since she is not the esteemed first wife of the King.  But her uncle, Mordecai says to her, “Do not think that because you are in the king’s house you alone of all the Jews will escape. For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance for the Jews will arise from another place, but you and your father’s family will perish. And who knows but that you have come to your royal position for such a time as this?[ii]”

For such a time as this.  Haunting words but words that were needed for Esther to engage her destiny and find a way to entice the king to give her an audience and perhaps save her people.

I think this question of having come to our royal position for such a time as this comes up to us in a variety of ways.  In what ways are we being called to engage our destiny, our talents, our gifts, our limitations, our pitfalls and rise up to address a pressing need at hand?  It might not be anything on a grand scale.  It might be something seemingly insignificant to us but means the world of difference to another.

There is a story [iii] that has been recycled through the internet several times, perhaps you have read it.  It goes something like this, a young man who became very successful and renowned in his chosen field returns home for his highschool reunion. There he runs into his best friend from high school.  He decides to tell his friend how grateful he was for having him as a friend all those years ago.  The friend is a bit puzzled by this overture of gratitude.  So the first one says to his friend, well do you remember the day we met. His friend laughs and says oh yes.  You were carrying all these books home and some jerks knocked them out of your arms and I helped you pick them up.  And we became instant and best friends.  Well, the first friend says, I never told you why I was carrying all those books.  You assumed I was just a study geek but you see, that day I decided to take my life.  I didn’t want my parents to have to bother with one more thing like empty out my school locker.  Your helping me that day when all was lost in my mind was the very thing that prevented me from choosing death.

The friend looks at him stunned, knowing all the great things his friend has done in his life since that moment.  His friend looked at him and says I was only doing what I would have wanted someone to have done for me if my books were knocked out of my arms. Exactly, and it saved my life, his friend says.

Who knows if you have come to where you are in life for such a time as this.

We do not always know how our lives impact another’s life.  A gentle word may give someone hope. A touch may be a moment of not being so isolated.  Many of these simple moments will be forgotten by you before the day is over but for the person receiving them, a world of difference.

Having a sense of destiny isn’t about some lofty achievement that revolutionizes the world as we know it.  Yes, lofty achievements can be a part of one’s destiny, one’s unfolding life as they grapple with the limitations that life has given them.  But a sense of destiny can be in taking the time to examine the issues of the day against the values you hold dear.  In doing so, you may be preparing yourself to be able to speak up against injustice in the world, whether that world refers to the culture as a whole or the classroom or the job site. A sense of destiny is found in discovering the freedom one has even with the limitations presented.  There are new opportunities that can be found in those limitations especially when we decide to take risks.

I know that I have shared with you some of my story regarding the founding of Interfaith AIDS Ministry but this is a story about my parting Interfaith AIDS Ministry.  I had been with the organization that I co-founded for just over twelve years. I knew it was time for new leadership.  I had taken the organization about as far as I could and I had accomplished my number one goal which was to develop an organization that when I left could continue on without having to revert back to ground zero.  I thought that I wanted to work with another agency that was slightly larger that would bring new challenges.  I began searching and no nibbles.  So I decided that I needed to reexamine what my goals truly were.

What did I want to accomplish in my life?   What sorts of things did I really enjoy?  Well I enjoy writing and I had ideas for some novels but some of these ideas needed different life experiences than I had had to that point in my life. I enjoyed doing the liturgies for the interfaith prayer services we offered at the agency.  I enjoyed the pastoral care aspects of the position.  I enjoyed the opportunities to give sermons.  So I took those aspects that I enjoyed and began pondering what I might need to do in order to find a position that would give me more of those experiences.

This was engaging my destiny.  I was in one place that had limitations for me and I wanted to be in another place that I perceived would open some new experiences for me.  I took my time to listen to the silence between the spaces.  I enjoyed this aspect of my life. Pause.  I enjoyed that aspect of my life. Pause. And in taking the time to listen not only in the midst of performing an activity that I enjoy like writing, but also listening in the midst of not writing, of not doing anything, I began to gain a sense of what I wanted in my life.  And perhaps more importantly, I began to get a sense of what my destiny might be unfolding for me and the willingness to take a risk and go to seminary in a different state far from anything I had ever known before. The classical pianist Artur Schnabel is quoted as saying, “I don’t think I handle the notes much differently from other pianists. But the pauses between the notes—ah, there is where the artistry lies!” It is in the pauses that we get a chance to find the artistry of living life.

May writes, “Pause is the prerequisite for wonder.  When we don’t pause, when we are personally hurrying from one appointment to another, from one ‘planned activity’ to another, we sacrifice the richness of wonder. And we lose communication with our destiny.”  To engage with our destiny we need to take time to pause and simply be in the stillness of that moment, to savor all the richness of that which has gone before and that which is about to be.

What is our individual sense of destiny?  And what is our collective sense of destiny?  These are very different questions and they are worth taking the time to pause, to ponder, to wonder.  Perhaps we are being prepared for just such a time as this. Blessed Be.

[i] Rollo May, Freedom and Destiny, 1981, WW Norton & Company.  All quotes by Rollo May in this sermon are from this text. Personal note:  This is my favorite book, I have read this text  many  times since it was first published in 1981.
[ii] Esther 4: 13,14
[iii] Source of this story is unknown. It is most likely a fictional story used to spread a moral message.

I recently posted about the eight stages of genocide and made comments of how I see Alabama methodically implementing these stages.  I realize making  such a statement can be seen to be outrageous but I have come to this conclusion through observing what is happening in our state.  I did not make these comments lightly.

Since writing that post The Southern Poverty Law Center has confirmed a report that a school district in Northeast Alabama called their Latino students into the cafeteria and asked them if they knew their legal status in this country.  Those that stated they were undocumented were culled out of the group and were arrested by ICE.

Here is what the law states regarding schools:

Section 28. (a)(1) Every public elementary and secondary school in this state, at the time of enrollment in kindergarten or any grade in such school, shall determine whether the student enrolling in public school was born outside the jurisdiction of the United States or is the child of an alien not lawfully present in the United States and qualifies for assignment to an English as Second Language class or other remedial program.

Here is what Genocide Watch writes to describe stage 6:

6. PREPARATION:Victims are identified and separated out because of their ethnic or religious identity. Death lists are drawn up. Members of victim groups are forced to wear identifying symbols. Their property is expropriated. They are often segregated into ghettoes, deported into concentration camps, or confined to a famine-struck region and starved. At this stage, a Genocide Emergency must be declared. If the political will of the great powers, regional alliances, or the U.N. Security Council can be mobilized, armed international intervention should be prepared, or heavy assistance provided to the victim group to prepare for its self-defense. Otherwise, at least humanitarian assistance should be organized by the U.N. and private relief groups for the inevitable tide of refugees to come.

Which of these statements does the actions of the school district in Northeast Alabama resemble most?  Now granted stage 6 has not been fully implemented in the state of Alabama but it seems to me that the actions of this school district did not follow the law as written but instead jumped to the next logical step of where this law is headed in spirit.  The school district identified and separated out the students who were undocumented and had them arrested by ICE agents.  This is indeed the spirit behind Genocide Watch’s Stage 6.

There was another event this time in Morgan County.  Committee on Church Cooperation, a non-profit organization,  whose mission is to help the poor  has decided that immigrants are not part of its mission, especially if they are undocumented.  The Decatur Daily reports this in their newspaper:

Gayle Monk, CCC executive director, said the organization has had to take extra steps to make sure undocumented immigrants do not obtain food, clothing and other assistance, much of which is donated to the agency by Morgan County churches.
“We thoroughly check everybody out,” Monk said. “We’ve even got wind that a lot of them have illegal Social Security cards. So I’ve tried to educate my staff on what to look for.”
As a condition of receiving assistance, Monk said, applicants must present government-issued photo identification showing residence in Morgan County. They also must provide a Social Security card for every member of the household, as well as documentation of income.
“The majority of the Hispanics, No. 1, can’t speak English when they come in here and, No. 2, have a Social Security card that is fake,” Monk said. …

Monk said the extra attention paid to documentation has been effective.
“It used to be about 10 percent (Hispanics) that we served,” Monk said. “Since cracking down, I haven’t seen anybody, especially in the last month. …

Monk said CCC has no connection to the controversy over undocumented immigrants because it receives no governmental funding.
“We operate strictly off of donations given to us out of the kindness of an individual’s heart,” Monk said.

In the ruling by Judge Sharon Blackburn  she stated the churches did not have a basis on which to argue that HB 56 would impinge on their freedom to practice their faith.  Yet, here is an example of an organization deciding to implement the law using the laws criteria to single out and deny services to people in need.  This organization decided to interpret their religious mission not on spiritual principles but rather on state law.  A response by CCC to criticism of their actions on facebook  states:

“Our acting Board Chairman, Mr. Greg Ethridge, states clearly “CCC’s charter is to serve those in need in Morgan County. Our policy, since 1973, has been that each client served present their proof of residency in Morgan County and thier [sic] Social Security card. This policy is regardless of race, color, creed, religion or nationality.”  

Social Security cards do not provide proof of residency within local municipalities, therefore there is no need to have them as part of this criteria of eligibility.    In this instance it can only be used to discriminate between residents who are citizens and residents who are undocumented which implies that nationality is regarded as a criteria for service by this charitable religious organization.  Comments in the story also suggests there is a bias against those who speak a different language.

Where does this story fit into the stages towards genocide?  I suggest this falls into stage 1:

1. CLASSIFICATION:All cultures have categories to distinguish people into “us and them” by ethnicity, race, religion, or nationality: German and Jew, Hutu and Tutsi. Bipolar societies that lack mixed categories, such as Rwanda and Burundi, are the most likely to have genocide. The main preventive measure at this early stage is to develop universalistic institutions that transcend ethnic or racial divisions, that actively promote tolerance and understanding, and that promote classifications that transcend the divisions. The Catholic church could have played this role in Rwanda, had it not been riven by the same ethnic cleavages as Rwandan society. Promotion of a common language in countries like Tanzania has also promoted transcendent national identity. This search for common ground is vital to early prevention of genocide.

There is the story in the Christian Scriptures where a Greek  woman is asking Jesus for a miracle for her daughter.  Jesus responds somewhat uncharacteristically that it is not right to take food from the children and cast it to the dogs.  The woman bravely responds that even the dogs get a chance to eat the crumbs that fall from the children’s table.  Jesus gives the woman her miracle.

This is not a story that we should be offering the crumbs of our abundance to those who speak a different language.  Nor is it a story that suggests  different Christian and other religious  charities should discriminate between those who are like us and those who are not in offering services.  Rather it is a story that reveals that love transcends the boundaries of race and culture and what we offer to others who are different should be of the same quality and same intention as what we offer those who are similar to us.   Where better to transcend these ethnic and racial categories and boundaries than within the services of a charitable organization whose mission is to help those in need.

There is still time to stop the progression of the effects of this law.  We all must work together to prevent the dehumanization of even one child, one family, one community.  If we do not or if we cannot, we are all dehumanized in the process.

Alabama is no longer a part of America.  Not the America I was taught to value and love.  I do not recognize the actions that are happening around me.  I did not grow up knowing the fear that I visibly see on my friends’  faces as they worry about their children being dropped off at school.  I am seriously considering carrying my US passport because I do not recognize my country. I am,  as of September 29, 2011,  living in a foreign land.

Since the law, commonly called HB 56, went into effect on September 29th municipalities have shut off water service to residents suspected of being undocumented.  This is a tactic that totalitarian countries use before they begin the final push towards genocide.  Yes, I used that word.   There are eight stages towards genocide according to Genocide Watch  and Alabama apparently is actively pursuing them.

Stage One: Classification.   We have classified Alabamans into us and them.  Citizens vs illegals.  And the “illegals” are of a specific nationality even though the law is any immigrant who is in this country without documentation.

Stage Two:  Symbolization. “names or other symbols  are given to the classifications”  Calling immigrants illegals, criminals, parasites, and rats are all signs of stage two.  This is happening in Alabama.

Stage Three: Dehumanization.  This is happening in Alabama.  We call residents who are here without papers, illegals. We are hearing people and some politicians use the terms rats or parasites or blights on society. This is for the sole purpose to dehumanize the plights of these immigrants who according to Federal law have not committed a crime.  It is harder to feel compassion towards a parasite losing its home or water but if we insist to  humanize our neighbors regardless of nationality then we have a chance for compassion and interrupting this stage.

Stage Four:  Organization.  The state has ordered that our police force which is to protect and serve to be trained outside of their authorization under federal law to arrest and detain  individuals that they determine are not here legally. In other countries where genocide is occurring these trained militias commit mass murder and that is NOT  happening here in Alabama. But it is worrisome that police are not adequately trained and therefore are racial profiling in their arrests.  The federal government is also actively engaged in this stage with its ICE raids and brandishing weapons with the sole purpose of terrorizing a community.

This past weekend a Latino minister and a minister colleague were stopped by police in Warrior, AL  in northern Jefferson County on the road en route to fix his car that had a flat tire.  He was asked for his papers to show he was here in this country legally.  He showed the police officer his passport.  The police officer “determined” the  passport was counterfeit and asked for additional identification.  He showed him a chaplaincy association card that stated he was a member of the clergy in good standing in that organization.  His colleague, who had documentation was allowed to leave.  But he was arrested on the charge of using a counterfeit passport.

When inquiries were made as to bond and charges, the charges changed to impersonating a clergyman.  What happened to the counterfeit passport?  It was a legitimate passport indicating that he had every right to be here in this country.   He was released after the jail was flooded with phone calls inquiring why they were charging someone  with  impersonation of clergy, when in fact he was and is a minister.  Impersonating clergy is a crime?   In a state where if a group of people declare that they avail a person’s skills as their minister  thereby making that person a minister; this becomes a bogus charge and reveals the racism that he has been subjected to by the police officer.

Stage Five:  Polarization.  We are seeing the beginnings of this extreme polarization.  When Farmers complained to Sen. Beason about not being able to harvest their crops, his attitude was ‘so what.’  Conservative press is becoming more extreme in their propaganda targeting immigrants. The passage of HB 56 is also an example of this polarization.

Stage Six:  Preparation.  “Victims are identified and separated out because of their ethnic or religious identity.” We are beginning to see this after the passage of this law.  Municipalities are shutting water services to those they suspect are undocumented.  Landlords are evicting families from homes.  Schools are requesting proof of citizenship of new enrollees and,  while the state school board has said this would not happen, teachers are asking previously enrolled  students if they are undocumented.  Students,  this is a question that does not need to be answered.  Respectfully decline.

Stage Seven:  Extermination of people. Not happening.

Stage Eight:  Denial of the genocide. The seeds of this are happening in the guises of  “What part of illegal, don’t you understand.” This is the following the law even if it is morally corrupt and unjust.   Martin Luther King, Jr. countered such statements with arresting Jews was the law in Germany during Nazi Germany but it does not mean it is the right and moral action to take.

Many of these stages are developing to fruition at a faster pace than others. We need to be active in dismantling these stages to prevent genocide from happening in our beloved country.

Now, I know many will read this and declare, Fred, you are exaggerating. This is not what is happening in Alabama.  This would never happen in America. My reply would be it already has happened in America several times in our history.

It happened when our founding parents  first settled this country and rounded up the native people of this land,  massacred them en masse, and forced them onto reservations.  It happened through out the deep south after the civil war through the 1970’s.  Lynchings were a common occurrence, bombings of  churches and synagogues  happened regularly because they were of a different race or different religion.  Several of these stages were implemented during World War Two when the US sent thousands of Japanese Americans to internment camps.  And it is happening again this time against another people who only seek what we have;  the dream for a better life.

We need to repeal this law. We need to expand our education for tolerance and diversity.  We need to begin living our highest values as taught by all of our faith traditions of  treating others as we would want to be treated.

The story of Jericho from the Hebrew Bible is about Joshua and the Israelites who defeated the city of Jericho by marching around the city seven times and then with a sound of a rams horn, the walls collapsed. The walls of Jericho in our analogy is HB 56 which seeks to divide our state, our communities, and our families between citizens and the undocumented. This wall of division, wall of hatred, wall of racism must come down in order for Alabama to transcend its history and become a state where all people are free to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

On October 2 I led such a walk around First Baptist Church in Tuscaloosa. This is the congregation that Governor Bentley attends. The congregation, however, offers hospitality to the immigrant community. They offer several English as a Second Language courses to the Latino and the Chinese immigrant communities here. They provide a vibrant worship community for these immigrants which empowers the ability to live here.  They are living their faith tradition which commands its followers to offer hospitality and welcome to the stranger, the foreigner, the immigrant.

So our walk had to be respectful of this ministry and yet point out the contradiction. We decided to thank First Baptist for their hospitality and point out that HB 56, where at least one of their members is a strong proponent, seeks to violate theirs and many others’ faith traditions call to be hospitable.

As we walked around the building, some of the people within looked out the windows and waved. We showed them our signs, “Thank you First Baptist: Hearts Immigrants,” “Somos Tuskaloosa,” “Repeal HB 56,” “Tuscaloosa Welcomes all people,” and “One Family Una Familia.” The on lookers gave us a thumbs up. People in cars going to the church waved. They seemed to get it.

The walls are tumbling down. We will win this. The ram horn of justice is about to blow loud and long.

Connie Goodbread, Acting District Executive for the Mid-South District of the Unitarian Universalism Association of Congregations (UUA) when speaking about faith development will often say:  “Faith Development is all we do; Unitarian Universalism is all we teach;  and the Congregation is the Curriculum.”   Recently at a Regional staff meeting we were discussing the vision of Unitarian Universalism for the Southern Region and I mentioned that when we live our faith out in the community the Culture is the Crucible.

We only truly embody our faith and values when we live those values in the culture.  It is in the culture that our faith is put to the test to strengthen our mettle.  Currently our culture is resisting attempts to be compassionate towards others.  There are loud voices that claim  the individual is above all others; disregarding the worth and dignity of others.   Moves in our government to reduce taxes on the über wealthy and corporations  to the detriment of life giving services to the poorest in our country is received with high praise by politicians and citizens alike.  The recent GOP debate had an audience member shout ‘let him die’  to the hypothetical question  of a young man who chose not to get insurance and then had an accident which left him in a coma, should he be treated?  A bad decision on the young man’s part and lack of compassion by the Ayn Rand neophytes who place individual rights and a disdain for minor impositions above collective societal rights.   It is in this world where we either live up to what we claim to profess on Sunday morning or we fail to meet the challenge.

This is the test of our values as Unitarian Universalists. How well do we represent these values in the day to day? Do we speak up when we see someone being abused for being gay or discriminated against for being an immigrant? Do we talk with our friends about the deep matters in life or do we hide away to keep the peace when a disparaging word is said about another group ?

If being Unitarian Universalist is only good one day a week then our faith is weak and ineffective.  We should not continually wonder why our congregations are not growing and or why claims of irrelevance surface. If we are not seeking to live the principles that we covenant to uphold then our voice will continue to grow weak against the din and noise of the popular cultural shift towards Ayn Rand’s extreme individualism.

As a faith, as congregations, as individuals we need to examine how we embody the values our faith teaches out in the world where we breathe, and eat, and have our being.  This is not an easy challenge. It is hard work  this path we have chosen. Dag Hammarskjold wrote these words “This is your path, And it is now, Now, that you must not fail.”

I repeat Connie Goodbread’s words with mine added at the end:

Faith development is all we do;
Unitarian Universalism is all we teach;
the congregation is the curriculum;
and the culture is the crucible.

This is our task and our path. We must not fail.

I have been pondering what our next steps should be in response to HB 56 in AL and HB 87 in GA. I confess my understanding of the HB 87 in GA is limited, so my comments here will reflect more on HB 56.

I attended the federal hearing of HB 56 in Birmingham. Judge Blackburn just wasn’t getting the religious argument and the attorney was not presenting a very strong argument to enable her to get it.  In fact, I thought she erred in her strategy altogether. The attorney went doctrinal and this law is not about doctrines but about resources that religious organizations offer in practicing their faith that enable immigrants (undocumented and documented) to remain in AL.  So there is a very good chance that the judge will rule for the state in regard to first amendment rights being violated.

But this is indeed about first amendment rights being violated. And so I have been wondering, what are the next steps?  I have been reading about the New Sanctuary movement.  The original sanctuary movement in the 1980’s was in response to supporting refugees from El Salvador fleeing their country from the US backed civil war. These refugees were not given asylum in the US because the US maintained they were allies with these countries. But this reason hides the deeper truth that the US was providing military training and arms to the governments that were killing their people involved in liberation theology in El Salvador.  So congregations of many faith traditions became sanctuary congregations and gave hiding places to refugees and moved them from congregation to congregation to Canada which was offering asylum.

In 2007 the New Sanctuary Movement was born, “with the goal of protecting immigrant families from unjust deportation, affirming and making visible these families as children of God and awakening the moral imagination of the country through prayer and witness.”  This movement is also comprised of a broad interfaith coalition including the Unitarian Universalist Association.  (See the UUA’s involvement with the New Sanctuary Movement here. )

These congregations support a family undergoing deportation with American born children perhaps by providing meals, transportation to work, and other material and spiritual support.  Congregations may also offer their locations to alternative labor/employer match sites.  I encourage you to thoughtfully examine the New Sanctuary Movement website and pay close attention to what are the expectations and roles of participating congregations as found here.

This site also discusses briefly the federal Immigration and Nationality Act which includes section 1324 regarding harboring.  According to this site, all cases regarding prosecution of this act were aimed at individuals who secretly harbored or concealed but not those individuals who notified INS of the undocumented person’s presence but continued to shelter them.   They surmise the same would be true for congregations who alert INS of the undocumented person’s presence but continue to shelter them. But this has never been tested in court and therefore the UUA legal counsel advises that congregations contemplating this stance to consult with an immigration lawyer.

In most states sanctuary is not a criminal activity but in AL under this new law providing sanctuary or creating sanctuary for undocumented persons is a crime.  Mickey Hammon, State Representative, during the public hearing of his version of HB 56 stated, after I spoke against this bill, that if any congregation has undocumented individuals worshiping in the church that he will ensure that the clergy with the undocumented persons are arrested. He has also stated that HB 56 was to impact all aspects of the immigrant’s life.

I am quite aware that in AL, if we were to have sanctuary congregations we would be asking our congregations to be willing to face the criminal charges as defined in Alabama’s law. People harboring undocumented immigrants could be charged with a class A misdemeanor unless ten or more individuals were harbored and then the charge is a Class C Felony.  What are we willing to risk to create justice?

We begin

in water

and emerge

with a first breath.

We will depart

with a sigh.

In between

that first breath

and final sigh

is our journey

a unique

unfolding

mystery.

 

(c) Fred L Hammond

The Federal judge, Sharon Lovelace Blackburn heard the three suits against HB 56 today.  While I supported the Department of Justice’s and the Civil Rights suits, I was most interested in the Bishop’s suit that HB 56 infringed on First Amendment rights.

I wished I had been able to track down a copy of the actual complaint because if I had I would have offered an amicus brief  presenting another argument than the one offered in court today.  Judge Blackburn was adamant that the three bishop’s;  Methodist, Episcopal, and Catholic  had not made their case.

The attorney said “If the bishops encourage their clergy and congregations to serve immigrants then the bishops would have exposure to be in violation of the law.”  What?  This is not about the bishops.  This is about seeking to fulfill the tenets of faith that teach to welcome the stranger, to serve the poor, to provide resources that enable the immigrant to live here.

The Judge repeated the question, how does this statute prevent the church from practicing its faith. How does it prevent the freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion?  “Saying it does, does not make it so,” Judge Blackburn stated. As I listened to the judge read portions of the bishop’s affidavit, I would agree.

One of the bishops wrote that this law would impinge on his freedom of religion by prohibiting him from offering counsel to an immigrant pregnant woman where by not being able to receive his counsel she might then get an abortion.  I sat there in horror. This was their argument?

Judge Blackburn simply did not see the argument of infringement because the argument was based on doctrinal beliefs and not on services congregations provide based on living their faith. There is nothing in Section 13 that speaks to doctrinal beliefs and therefore does not impinge on freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of assembly the judge stated. The Bishop’s example provided was so far fetched and out of touch with what his congregations are doing that I was stunned at the weakness of this argument.

Let me back track with a story.  In Danbury, CT there developed in the 1990’s a large community of Brazilians.  The question arose as to why Danbury as a destination point?   The answer was simple.  Danbury had a well established and large Portuguese community which provided among other things  a Portuguese radio station, a Portuguese newspaper, Portuguese markets, and Portuguese worshiping communities.  Granted these were in continental dialect  Portuguese and not brazilian dialect Portuguese but the language similarities were close enough that their presence provided the resources to enable the Brazilian community to thrive and integrate easily into American society.

Congregations, regardless of faith tradition,  seeking to live out their faith teachings to welcome the stranger and to provide hospitality to the least of these  are providing the resources to enable immigrants to thrive here in Alabama.  HB 56 section 13 specifically states that harboring, transporting, and encouraging immigrants to reside in Alabama is against the law.  The free practice of our religion to provide these services as taught by our collective faiths is impinged and injured when the offering of these resources to immigrants become illegal under section 13.

What are these resources that enable and  encourage  immigrants to live here?  The provision of English as a Second language courses is a resource that will enable immigrants to live in Alabama.  The provision of meals through soup kitchens, food pantries, meals on wheels enable immigrants to live here.  The provision of church run homeless shelters, the provision of worship services in languages other than English allows/  enables/ empowers immigrants to live here. There are other resources that congregations in living out their faith provide immigrants.

Worship services do more than just feed the spirit they provide a place of community; a place where connections can be made for support.  Immigrants coming to Alabama need to find places where they can meet people who are similar enough to themselves in order to thrive.  Churches and congregations are these places because in part they are following the tenets of the faith to welcome the stranger, to feed the poor, to clothe the naked, to house the homeless.

This law on its face  states that actions that allow places of harbor, that transport immigrants to access vital resources  are actions that encourage immigrants to reside in Alabama and therefore are illegal under Section 13. The lawyer attempted to point out that section 13 does not define the terms harboring, transporting, concealing.  She further stated that Section 27 talks about entering into contracts and therefore  congregations could read this as impinging the delivery of church sacraments such as marriage.  The judge did not buy this argument because there have been no cases where a church was not allowed to perform a marriage ceremony according to its faith. The lawyer was not able to state that it was indeed the intention of the legislature to impinge faith institutions in part, I presume, because the bishops were not at the public hearings to report what was said.

When I spoke at the house public hearing, the chair of the committee sponsoring this bill stated clearly that if a congregation has undocumented immigrants worshiping in the church he would personally insure that in addition to the immigrants being arrested, the clergy would be arrested for harboring them.  The Lawyer could not state that as an answer  when the judge stated, “Everyone is exaggerating, it is not going to go that far.”  The legislator who wrote this bill intended it to go that far, I heard him after I gave my testimony against this law at the public hearing.

The best the lawyer could do was state the provision for  church exemption was removed from the senate version of this bill indicating that churches were not exempt to this law.  The judge simply did not buy this as a strong enough statement of intent.

Our hope for this law to be halted whether in whole or in part rests with the much stronger arguments presented by the U.S. Department of Justice and  the Civil Rights suits.  May it be so.

Reading:
That Which Holds All by Nancy Shaffer

Because she wanted everyone to feel included
in her prayer,
she said right at the beginning
several names for the Holy:
Spirit, she said, Holy One, Mystery, God

But then thinking these weren’t enough ways of addressing
that which cannot fully be addressed, she added
particularities, saying, Spirit of Life, Spirit of Love,
Ancient Holy One, Mystery We Will Not Ever Fully Know,
Gracious God, and also Spirit of this Earth,
God of Sarah, Gaia, Thou

And then, tongue loosened, she fell to naming
superlatives as well: Most Creative One,
Greatest Source, Closest Hope –
even though superlatives for the Sacred seemed to her
probably redundant, but then she couldn’t stop:

One who Made the Stars, she said, although she knew
technically a number of those present didn’t believe
the stars had been made by anyone or thing
but just luckily happened.

One Who Is an Entire Ocean of Compassion,
she said, and no one laughed.
That Which Has Been Present Since Before the Beginning,
she said, and the room was silent.

Then, although she hadn’t imagined it this way,
others began to offer names.

Peace, said one.
One My Mother Knew, said another.
Ancestor, said a third.
Wind.
Rain.
Breath, said one near the back.
Refuge.
That Which Holds All.
A child said, Water.
Someone
Then: Womb.
Witness.
Great Kindness.
Great Eagle.
Eternal Stillness.

And then, there wasn’t any need to say the things
she’d thought would be important to say,
and everyone sat hushed, until someone said

Amen.

“Whose Are We?” Rev. Fred L Hammond
21 August 2011 ©

Those of us who are old enough to remember the Hippie Movement, perhaps some of us even were hippies, when asking about a friend might hear, “’He’s off to find himself, man.”  It was a time of self-exploration, of dropping out of society, to wander across the country, to participate in vision quests in the hopes of finding oneself.  It was a quest that was often met with derision from the then over 30 crowd. But the quest is as universal as any other experience.  Who am I? Where do I belong?  What am I supposed to do with my life?

In some European cultures when their youth graduate high school would take a moratorium, a year or two off, to explore life a bit before going back to school for an advanced degree.  It is not a bad idea.  How many of our high school graduates know what they want to do for the rest of their life when they enter college.  How many change majors more than once as they attempt to sort things out for themselves.  The quest to find oneself, to become aware of who one is, is an important question to ask.  But if that is all we ponder then we risk falling into a sort of self-love that borders on idolatry.  We risk the fate of Narcissus, the Greek tale of a handsome young man who fell in love with a reflection of himself but found this love to be unfulfilled and subsequently died.

Rev. Colin Bossen interprets the story of Narcissus as lifting “up the importance of being connected to something other than, something greater than, ourselves. If Narcissus had been connected to something other, something greater, than himself he would not have died. The same is true for us. If we are not connected to something greater then we risk falling into a consuming self-love and spiritually wasting away.”[i]

So the quest to discover who we are, is an important one, but if it ends there it leaves us wanting. So as we ask who are we, we need to follow up the question with whose are we?  To what or whom are we responsible?  To whom are we accountable?  Who lays claim to me / us?

Last summer the Unitarian Universalist Minister’s Association began a nation wide conversation on the question whose are we?  And in the fall our various minister chapters gathered and began to ask the question of each other, whose are you?  We continued to answer the question to whose are you until we had no more responses left to give.  The response our listeners were to give to each of our answers was “God be merciful.”

The response was just as challenging as the question.  In the room were myriad concepts as to what god is or isn’t. The word merciful in this context also brought on debate, what is mercy? How can the Mystery, the Spirit of Life, the Spirit of this Earth, Gaia, One my mother knew, That which holds all, and Breath, be merciful?  And what is mercy in the context of whose am I?

In my own journey there are many who have laid claim to me in some fashion and whether they still lay claim to me today or not, these relationships have shaped my perspective on the world and shape my actions.

Whose am I?  I am my family’s.  I learned early in life that my actions and the actions of each member reflect on my family as a whole.  When I was growing up to say that one came from a good family was an important statement in society.  I experienced the emotional disappointment of others when expectations were not met by me or by any one of my family.  At some point in time we all fell short of the ideal we sometimes held high of the other. Sometimes we were able to find forgiveness for each other and sometimes forgiveness came too late.  God be merciful.

Whose am I? I am the earth’s.  My grandparents on my father side were conservationists. My grandmother would take me on walks and show me all the great variety of life that grew on their property.  She would point out the subtle differences between two varieties of Hepaticas, an early spring flower.  One variety had leaves rounded and another had leaves that came to a point but the flowers looked the same.  And she would reveal to me the diversity of life even within the same species.  A fern frond has one point and another frond on the same fern ends in two. All living things express diversity. Observe life on earth and it will reveal its secrets.

But the greatest secret of all was that all things grew out of the earth in one fashion or another and all things would return.  Whether it was the pitcher plants that would die off and sink into the bog on the edge of the old ice pond or the insects that would fall into its pooled water to feed it, all things find nourishment from the earth and all things would one day return to it, including me.  Spirit of the Earth be merciful.

Whose am I?  I am my childhood friend Glenn’s.  My relationship with Glenn was a life altering one. We were best friends in junior and senior high school, both gay, but back then both too afraid to say those words aloud.  I sought refuge in Christianity and Glenn found reconciliation and came out of the closet.  We remained friends and I would visit him every so often in our adult lives. Then in 1987, Glenn told me he was HIV positive.

I sought to find a way to support him from afar—that support led to my co-founding Interfaith AIDS Ministry, serving as board president then stepping into the Executive Director position when the fledgling agency lost its third director in about the same number of years. This agency went on to serve hundreds of people living with HIV/AIDS, preserving family integrity of families affected by this disease, and empowering youth to be prevention educators to their peers.

In the process I reconciled my own sexuality and was excommunicated from my Christian community. Glenn died before I became director, before I came out of the closet, but I was able to thank him for being in my life and opening my life to new possibilities. One who is an entire ocean of Compassion be merciful.

Whose am I?  I am god’s.  My favorite hymn from childhood was I Come to the Garden Alone.  Some of you may know it from your childhood as well. I loved the chorus especially where “He tells me I am His own.”  Believing that I belonged to god was an important part of my identity as a child and as a young adult.  As a child struggling between my sexuality and the churches teaching that my mere sexuality, prior to any behavioral expression of same, meant I was an abomination; the knowledge that I was god’s brought me comfort.

My childhood faith in a loving god and my young adult faith in a god who heals the broken was one of immense hope that belonging to god would bring me the deliverance I sought.  As I came to realize that my sexuality is fine just as it is; the deliverance I found was not from my sexuality but rather from a restrictive dogmatic belief.

I began to see the eternal as something far more fluid, far more flexible in expression than I ever realized. This realization resulted in being excommunicated from a community I called home, divorced from people that I loved dearly, shaken from a faith that no longer could answer my questions and opened the doors to a freedom I was only just beginning to experience.  Closest Hope be merciful.

Whose am I?  I am justice’s.  Two of my great grandfathers, my grandfather, granduncle and grandaunt were public servants.  One great grandfather served as Mayor and County Judge.  Another great grandfather was President of the Board of Health. My grandfather served as town supervisor.  A granduncle was a lawyer who assisted in rewriting the mental health legislation for New York State. My grandaunt, also a lawyer, was a consultant in the writing of the constitution for the country of Liberia until a military coup assassinated their president.

They served their constituents well and in the process instilled in me a sense of duty to protect the welfare of other’s rights and freedoms.  The duty of justice-making led me to support the formation of a people’s first chapter for the developmentally disabled, found an agency to advocate for medical care for people living with AIDS, coordinate the formation of Faith Leaders for Peace in San Diego, March to Washington for equality for LGBT people, and most recently organize an interfaith response in the form of yesterday’s rally; Somos Tuskaloosa: Neighbors against HB 56.  The drive for justice where oppression lives, the drive to empower voice where speech has been silenced is as deep a part of me as the blood the flows through my veins.  Yes, I am justice’s.  Refuge be merciful.

Whose am I?  I am my ancestor’s history.  I grew up on the legends of a proud family history.  Many of the legends in investigating them did not equal the reality of their lives.  Yet other stories emerged. Some painful to uncover like my 12^th great-grandmother Adrienne Cuvelier who is blamed for the first massacre of the Manhattan natives in 1634.  She is also the mother of the first white male child born on these shores.  Others emerged with joy like my 9^th great grandmother Anne Dudley, who was the author of the first published book of American poems. At my nephews wedding, a poem by Anne Dudley was quoted unbeknownst to the bridal couple that these words brought his 10^th great grandmother into the wedding ceremony.  There are grandfathers who fought in the war of 1812, the civil war, the Spanish American War, and the War to end all wars with the guns and swords from these wars echoing on our family’s walls.   There was the great-uncle who was the accountant for Thomas Edison.   And the host of ministers, too many to count who stood in pulpits and preached their truth.  There is the wonder; what of their life story still courses through my veins? Ancestor be merciful.

Whose am I?  I am the universe’s.  One who made the stars be merciful.

Whose am I? I am America’s. Great Eagle be merciful.

Whose am I?  I am my deepest desire’s.  Most Creative One be merciful.

Whose am I? I am yours.  Spirit of Love be merciful.

Whose are you? Who do you find yourself most accountable to in this life?  Who do you strive to remain in relationship with no matter what the cost?  To whom do you find yourself being shaped and guided in ways that are mysterious, ever unfolding, and perhaps enlightening?  That Which Has Been Present Since Before the Beginning be merciful.  Blessed be.

(This sermon  was delivered to the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa by past President Ana Schuber on August 14 2011 ©. It  is a reflection on the Tornado of April 27, 2011. But it is more than that, it is a powerful story of resilience over the course of a lifetime in the face of immense change. It is a story of healing and of hope.  I offer it here with permission.)

 

First let me assure those of you who are somewhat confused by the title of this talk:  I have not become a believer…still very much an atheist.  The wandering Jew I am talking about is something similar to this—a wandering Jew (lift plant into view).  Get it?

What makes me have anything in common with a wandering plant?  Well, let me say that although I try to put down roots, it appears to be the intent of the universe to keep me on the run.  (And by the way, when I finish today, someone should take this plant home with them because with my history of moving, it will probably be left here and die).

From Pillar to Post:  an Idiom which is a grammar term I love.  It means “from one place to another:  hither and thither, aimlessly from place to place, from one situation or predicament to another, pretty much the history of my life.  My family dragged me from pillar to post my entire young life.  When I was young, I was allowed one old military trunk to put my “stuff” in.  The trunk itself had had a wandering existence and I inherited it from my uncle who had used it in the Korean War long before it came to me.  Inside that trunk, I had a few toys, books, maps, pencils, artwork, etc.  Since that was the entire collection of things in my life, I was always careful to choose very tiny things to put in there.  I could have a lot if I had very tiny stuff.  To this day, I am not big on souvenirs.  I went to England several years ago…a trip of the lifetime and of all the things I could have come home with, I chose this:  Anubis, a small dog god from the British Museum.  He would have fit nicely in my old trunk.  But even my old trunk is in disarray at this moment in my life.  After listening to Deb Crocker last week talk about collections, I feel like this particular talk should be titled anti-collections, but we are not here to talk about collecting things unless events and places could be considered things.

From Pillar to Post:  Just for fun, I decided to see if I could write down all the places that I lived from the moment of birth to now deciding to only include places I lived for longer than six months:  Albuquerque-New Mexico, Brewton-Alabama, Montgomery-Alabama, Cheyenne-Wyoming, Oklahoma City, Travis Air Base-California, Yokota-Japan, Clark Air Base-Philippians, Birmingham-Alabama, Langley-Virginia, Wheeler Air Base-Hawaii, McCord-Washington State,  Birmingham-Alabama, Langley-Virginia, Teheran-Iran, Kansas City-Missouri, Warrensburg-Missouri, Fort Worth-Texas, Kansas City-Missouri, Sedalia-Missouri, Tuscaloosa-Alabama—4 different addresses.    This doesn’t include the places we lived for less than six months and then I have to add a whole ‘nother continent for that since part of it was in Germany, Greece, Wake Island and Guam just to name a few.

From Pillar to Post:  In terms of a bucket list of tragedies,  I have actually punched my card full including:  war zones in Beirut and Teheran, earthquakes in Japan & Iran, Hurricanes including  Camille, Opal, Erin, and Katrina, Asian hurricanes called Typhoons, Volcanoes—seen one not actually had to run from one, floods in Kansas City and Missouri, Fires in Oklahoma, Tsunamis in Hawaii, and while I have seen and loved (yes, I said loved) tornadoes from afar, I have finally ticked that one off my list.

I won’t say that what happened on April 27^th was the worst thing that has ever happened to me, although it did produce one of the worst nights of my life and not because I lost part of my stuff or a house…it was because I didn’t know where people I loved were and because I didn’t have control of myself. It was the first time in my life, I didn’t have a plan.  I didn’t have an idea.  I didn’t have a map.  Hell, starting over is my old friend.  I left Iran after being invited to leave by the Ayatollah Khomeini.  We left with my family and my trunk and I went to college.  I walked out of a marriage taking only my kids, the cats, an old computer and our clothes and I rebuilt a life.  I thought I liked starting over with nothing.  Empty my trunk and I can fill it again.  My story is buried deep inside and it can’t be touched by disaster and I don’t need that “stuff” to continue the story.

This time, however, I have encountered within me a different reaction to change.  I have to admit defeat somewhat in my effort to quickly overcome the moment and move on to the next without looking back.  Yesterday, I overheard a volunteer who works with one of the local area support organizations say that the recovery from the April storms is slated to take us up to three years.  Three years to recover to what?  I winced when I heard that.  I am so ready to be over the April storms.  I am tired of hearing about the tornado.  I am tired of talking about the tornado.  I am ready to be on with my life.  I am tired of the look in people’s eyes.  You know that look…it is a lost sort of look with tears around the edges.  I am tired of that feeling inside when I know that I am not going to be able to hold back the tears myself.  I am tired of driving past places I know deep down in my soul and not recognizing them.  I am tired of feeling like a grumpy toddler who just wants to go home.  Every day when I leave the parking lot on the campus, I want to turn toward the east and head home to 18 Forest Drive.  I want to pick up food at China Fun and stop at Sonic and get me a large unsweet iced tea.  I want to go home.

It is not just me.  I look around and it is all of us.  It is the older lady who sat beside me in the hospital the other day and in a very loud voice said “they need to put that McDonald’s back on 15^th street so I know where to turn. I drove past it twice.”  It is the kids that are starting back to school this week and last and they are not where they were before.  It is all of us when we drive down one of the affected roads at night and there are no lights.  It is the eerie shapes in the partial darkness around us that are the skeletons of former homes and businesses.  It is the naked and stripped trees that stand against the sky.  It is with us when we think about running to Hobby Lobby or Taco Casa or Milo’s.  It is in our language when we realize that we now have to say…”where it used to be….”  It is with me when I stand on what is now an empty lot and I can’t even remember what it looked like before the storms.

Have I been here before?  I have always been this way before.  It is just the recovery time that is longer.  Usually when I have a life changing moment, I am intact.  I may not have a lot, but whatever I have is all with me after the moment has passed.  This is different.  At this moment, I don’t know where a lot of my stuff is.  I had a call from a friend the other day and he said, “I have some of your art in my kitchen.”  I didn’t know he had anything.  Makes me wonder what else is out there.  It is like waking up as the scarecrow from the Wizard of Oz and hearing him say, after the flying monkeys have torn him up….”they threw my legs over there and they threw the rest of the me over there….”  I have talked to others who were affected by the storms and they say the same thing.

What are the lessons that we learn from this event whether we lost something or not?  There are many.

We have to cry.

There was a death here on a massive scale.  Not just the death of people although that was a horrible result of it as well.  But the death of certainty hangs heavy upon us.  Nothing seems certain any more.  We have to grieve and that means denying it, getting mad at it, stomping feet, falling to our knees and crying over stupid things like a lost quilt or a lost book or a favorite sweater or a well-loved restaurant or a gardenia bush.  The tears will be warm and they will wash away and they will comfort.

We have to ask for help.

For some of us that is difficult, not because we are so proud we can’t accept it, but because we are so independent that we almost don’t know how to ask for it, and for many of us we don’t know how we will ever pay back the favor and that weighs heavy on our hearts.  They say three years, but it could be much longer.  This is a long journey back and so there will be for some of us many opportunities before the journey ends to ask for help and really need it.

We have to show Gratitude.

The moment that it happened, there was kindness all around.  In the eyes of the young man who was dressed in National Guard Kaki, the one that told me “Ma’am, you can’t go home tonight” and then “Is there anything I can do?”  The water that was handed out, the chainsaws that just arrived, the sweet faces of friends who just appeared, the hot dogs, the people who called and texted, the ones who showed up to pack, the ones who held our hands and let us cry, the ones who gave us strength or boxes or a place to live, or handed us cash or gave us a hug.   I have written close to 60 thank-you notes trying so hard to let everyone know who has helped me, whether or not I know them personally or not how much I appreciate the help, the little bit of glue that they have offered to bind up my life and put it back together….and if I have left you out in some way, please know that it meant something, everything and I thank you.

We have to allow the change to shape us.

Whoever we are is ephemeral–always changing.  We may think we remain the same, but in fact we change and the role of crisis sometimes is to uncover the authentic self —sometimes that “self” that we hide from the rest of the world.  For me, the crusty curmudgeon, it means letting a more vulnerable self have a moment in the sunshine.  I don’t have the faith that some of you do in a god or angels, but I do have a faith and it keeps me going.  Someone right after the tornado, who knows I am an atheist came up to me and said…”after that, I bet you believe in god”.  While I believe I could have decked him with one blow, I simply said “well, I’ll tell you one thing I believe in the power of that tornado.”  My brand of faith hasn’t been shaken.  I still know that 2+2 is 4 and that when I put sugar in my coffee it is sweet and that the sun rises because the earth continues to turn and that tornadoes are random and powerful and mighty and beautiful and terrible and life-changing.  I am different, we all are.     

We have to let some of it go. 

In order to heal our hearts, we have to find our way out of the damage and let “before” go.  Who hasn’t looked back over his or her life and with nostalgia welling-up and wished for a new start? Rare, indeed, is the person who has never said, “If I had my life to live over again, I’d…”  or “I wish there was some wonderful place called the land of beginning again…”,  Every pillar or post that I have encountered has made me who I am.  Although playing the “what if” game is sometimes fun on a Saturday afternoon, it is not really what I want.  I accept the storms of April and the changes in my life.  The Etch-A-Sketch events of that terrible moment offers me and you a clean slate, a clean beach an empty lot of land to build again.                                                       

Within the darkness that we will feel for some time, we will find redemption; we will find the ability to see the faint light that can shine on the faint new path that will take us—all of us– to a new home.

I received an interesting comment  on my post A Unitarian Universalist Theology.  “…why should we concern ourselves on [relationships t]hat will pass , instead of what will endure?”

The question, even though I attempted to give an answer, remained with me.  Here is a portion of what I wrote:

What does endure? Everything that I see and experience dies in this universe including the stars above. Some ancient scriptures state that love endures. But where is love found? In relationships. I have never seen or experienced love that existed independently or was separate from a relationship between two or more entities. …  So if love endures as many various scriptures indicate, then focusing on relationships is a means to experience love and to have that love endure beyond us.

I have reflected more on love enduring beyond us and remembered several events in my life where this is true, at least in my life.  My father’s parents were conservationists, a term that today would probably be translated as environmentalists.  They co-founded the local chapter of the Audubon Society. The both loved being in nature;  exploring the various ferns and fauna that grew on their property.  I was fortunate to have them live across the road from me and so I was surrounded by their love of nature. They introduced me to raising Monarch Butterflies and other caterpillars.  They would teach me to be awed by the diversity of life even within the same species.  My grandparents have now been gone for over 40 years, yet when I stop to look at flowers or butterflies pirouetting in flight , or to listen to the warbler’s  song, it is my grandparents’ love that is being expressed here.  Their love surfaces to my memories and hold me in that grace.

I had a childhood friend who was my best friend through out middle school and high school.  He was gay. We continued our friendship into adulthood. And while I struggled with acceptance of my sexuality, he was able to be there for me. I  would argue with him about the sinfulness of it all and he would listen and still accept me for where I was.

Then Glenn in the late 1980’s was diagnosed HIV positive.  I wanted to do something that would let him know that I supported him, that I cared for him. An opportunity opened up for me to become involved with the founding of an Interfaith response to HIV in the Connecticut city where I lived.  This opportunity based in the desire to support my friend was to shift the direction of my life for ever.

I was on the founding board of this new entity.  Then I was president and then through some heavy duty risk taking, I stepped into the director position not knowing if sustainable funding would be established. That position grew into full time and then had a complement of eight staff.  Fifteen years later the ministry was providing family preservation supports to hundreds of people living with and affected by HIV.  We were educating our youth with a youth directed,  youth organized HIV/AIDS education program. We were doing outreach into the immigrant Brazilian population.  We were providing a full service food pantry with fresh meats, fresh vegetables, fresh dairy, fresh fruit and a nutritionist at 20 hours a week.  And we were the first in that community to be a tri-lingual agency with English, Spanish, and Brazilian dialect Portuguese spoken.

My relationship and my love for Glenn endured through this time even though Glenn did not live long enough to see or hear the full story of his inspiration on my life. He died just before I became director of that organization.

When I came out of the closet and subsequently excommunicated from the Charismatic Christian intentional community I lived in, it was my relationship with another friend that carried me through and lives on in me now.  Wayne’s wife was active in the AIDS ministry in those early years. When she retired our friendship thinned as friendships sometimes do. A few years had passed and she died.  I attended her memorial service and Wayne and I reconnected our friendship.  I was floundering spiritually.  Wayne invited me to attend his Unitarian Universalist congregation.   I did and while I did not join the congregation for a good length of time, I was beginning to sense that this was home for me.  Wayne was a good mentor for me.  He had a perspective on things that was delightfully refreshing.

When I began talking about entering seminary for the UU ministry, Wayne was the first to encourage me.  Wayne was a phenomenal knitter.  He was knitting me a sweater for those cold Chicago nights when the cancer thought in remission was discovered to have metastasized in the brain.  Wayne spoke with the knitting ministry of the church to finish the sweater even as he lay in the hospital bed approaching his final hours.  While I have not had much opportunity to wear the sweater here in Alabama, I treasure it as another example of love enduring.

In many ways these relationships continue on in my life in various ways.  It is their love that endures and sustains me.  They have shaped my vision of life and they have steered me into uncharted waters at the right time.  There are others whose lives have intersected with mine whose love endures and shapes mine.  I am sure that there are lives that I have intersected with and perhaps have shaped their lives, hopefully for the fuller, happier side of life.

This for me is part of what I would refer to as having a relationship with the holy.  That indescribable flow of energy between two or more that creates something new and different.  It could be something as simple as an awe and appreciation of the wonders of nature or the creation of a new entity that lets people know that they are loved and not alone with a frightening disease called AIDS.

And so I emend my answer. Love endures.  The physical may pass away, but the love shared endures and can still inform the present.  It is through relationships that love develops.  It is through relationships that love informs. It is through relationships that love shapes our lives into new creations. It is through relationships that our lives are directed on a path towards what exactly, I do not know.   Some say to the holy, some say to an afterlife of bliss, some say to come back and do it again.  And some say this is life is all we are given.  Whatever the destination, I have come to believe  having quality relationships with others is key to an abundant life.  And love endures.

One of the questions that ministers get asked is to discuss their personal theology.  Unitarian Universalists do not have a prescribed creed that we must believe in in order to be a Unitarian Universalist.  We are encouraged to ask ourselves those hard questions  and  develop a personal theology of what we believe and how this informs our daily lives.

My personal theology continues to evolve.  Today, I am much less concerned with doctrines that people hold and more concerned with the relationships that evolve around them. Therefore my theology has become more focused on the relational. What is our relationship to the holy?  What is our relationship to our past?  What is our relationship with our present?  How do the answers to these questions influence or dictate our future relational  experiences?

A person wounded by a spiritual violent religious experience who has not found some way to resolve that woundedness is going to relate to others in a much different manner than someone who has resolved that woundedness.  If they can begin to see the connection of their relationship to their past and in particular this past event to how they respond now, then perhaps they can begin to make conscious choices to act differently now.

I am less concerned with whether a person has a doctrine that states god is a father in heaven and more concerned with how this doctrine influences their relationships with each other here.  Does it enable them to be more just in their actions with others? Does it make them judgmental?  Likewise, I am less concerned with a person’s claim there is no god and more concerned with how this doctrine influences their relationships with others. Does not having a belief in god shift their relationship with one another? If so, in what direction does it shift—towards more compassion –towards more cynicism?  These questions do not have static answers.

Theology is only helpful and practical if it enables a person or a group of people to live their lives in a manner that is uplifting of universal values.   Our Unitarian Universalist faith is not concerned with whether you are a Buddhist or a Christian, a Pagan or a Muslim, an atheist or a theist. Our  faith is more concerned with how those beliefs help build sustaining relationships with each other.  If the beliefs we hold aid us in living an ever increasing compassionate and justice filled life, then those beliefs are transformative.  If these beliefs or doctrines hinder that ability, then we as individuals need to let them go. If we choose not to let them go, then the result is a breakage in the relationships.

I speak from experience in this breakage.  The Christian community I lived in during my youth could not let go of their doctrine that homosexuality was against god’s will for humanity. And therefore it resulted in a breakage in the relationship. As painful as this break was, it needed to be made in order for me to continue to grow in relationship with who I fully am, and in relationship with who I want to be—a more compassionate and justice centered person.

We live in relationship to one another and it is only in the relationships we have with one another that new desire, new opportunities, new avenues are found and developed. We heal others through our relationships with them. We do not know which experience in our life will lead to a transformation of a fuller expression of who we are at the core our being.

As I have already implied, there are theologies that would speak dogmatically another perspective than mine; however, their theology is valid based on the accumulation of their life experiences and how they have chosen to perceive those experiences. This is because I see expression of faith as an evolution and not a static entity. Where each person is in their theology is within the process of how they have made sense of their experiences to date. New experiences attract new thoughts which alter perspectives and ultimately how we perceive and relate to the world we live in. A theology that is relational reflects our Unitarian Universalist principle that each person is responsible for their own search for truth and meaning.

As a Unitarian Universalist,  it is not just other theologies that Unitarian Universalist hold but all other theologies that one must relate with in this pluralistic society. I believe the theology that I am embracing allows me to be in relationship with others who may have different theologies than mine. If we are going to strive to create a better world, then we need to find ways of being with the other that enhances the quality of our lives in community.

The Game Changes
17 July 2011 © Rev. Fred L Hammond
Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

“Once to every man and nation
comes the moment to decide
In the strife of truth and falsehood,
for the good or evil side.”

These words are from the poem entitled “The Present Crisis” by James Russell Lowell, a Unitarian from the 19^th century.  He is writing against the war with Mexico of 1846 to 1848.  President Polk invades Mexico under the pretense of coming to Texas’ aid, considered by Mexico to be a rebellious province in part because the American immigrants in Texas violated Mexico’s laws banning slavery.  At the time all of the southwest was a part of Mexico, made up mostly of indigenous tribes and some Mexican settlers. The war was justified as being part of manifest destiny, the belief God had chosen the United States to occupy all of the North American Continent and to be the primary nation of influence in the hemisphere.

The United States has long had this erroneous belief that God has chosen us to be the vanguards of the world. Therefore when American businesses in Central and South America were being restricted by democratically elected governments, the CIA would go in and topple the government and place trained dictators who would allow American corporations free reign. Hundreds of thousands of people were tortured and killed by these CIA placed dictators. 100,000 in Guatemala, 63,000 in El Salvador, thousands in Nicaragua, thousands in Chile killed by CIA trained death squads.

Many of the governments in place with American backing are still torturing their own people.  Thousands of refugees from these countries have crossed borders and deserts to find sanctuary from these conditions.  They are refused asylum status in the US because to grant asylum to them would implicate the US’ awareness and complicity in these acts of violence.  They cannot go home because the American created conditions are still too horrendous—in some cases still life threatening—and so they stay underground hoping that their children will have a better life than they did.  And this multitude of America’s sins against our neighbors to the south remains unspoken because we are the chosen ones, you see, and just as in biblical Israel, all crimes against humanity are ordained as being god’s will.   As long as we deny our complicity in this then we can continue to claim being the unwarranted victim in this current immigration situation.

The unjust invasion of Mexico in Lowell’s time was justified as manifest destiny and the war crimes of the CIA in Central and South America are manifest destiny’s offspring. The consequences we are only now beginning to see but apparently do not understand.

“Once to every man and nation
comes the moment to decide
In the strife of truth and falsehood,
for the good or evil side.”

There are many who believe that immigrants flooding the US are the cause for America’s economic woes.  Rev. Jose Ballester, Unitarian Universalist Minister in New England, asks; “Why are they coming to the United States? Could it be that the United States is responsible for destroying the economic means of the immigrants? Did diverting the waters of the Colorado River for irrigation; green lawns and providing potable water to the growing populations in the Southwest and Southern California destroy the farmland in Mexico? Did the importation of surplus US corn to be sold in Mexico ruin the agriculture economy of Mexico? Did NAFTA permit US Corporations to set-up factories in Mexico that are filled with cheap labor and do those same factories turn the surrounding areas into toxic wastes? Are there drug cartels in Mexico that threaten the government, commit unspeakable crimes and cross the USA/Mexico border to commit crimes? Who is buying the drugs that fuel these cartels?”

I can’t remember the movie, perhaps it is a combination of films.  The young child, bullied by classmates, attempts to purchase lunch and sit in the cafeteria.  The first table with a seat is denied as being saved for someone else.  Then the next table is also saving the seat for someone else.  All the students at the tables respond the same way, can’t sit here, this is saved for someone else.  For who?  Anyone else but the child bullied.  Children can be so cruel. And the behavior is simply wrong of the children to reject the child so treated.

So what is happening with our immigrant neighbors?   They are no longer able to stay in their country, perhaps for political reasons, perhaps because the land has been ravaged by American corporations’ lack of environmental concern, perhaps because the CIA placed regime is torturing the indigenous people. So they come to the states and they are told can’t stay in Arizona, can’t stay in Georgia, can’t stay in Alabama; these jobs are saved for someone else.  Has anyone else applied for these jobs… well no… but you can’t have them cause their saved.

If we were so able to see how wrong it was for the bullied child to be treated so poorly by the other children, then how is it so difficult to see how wrong it is for us to treat our immigrant neighbors in the same way?

Alabama had a year in which to examine what was happening in Arizona and to decide whether to follow suit.  We had a year to also examine and to decide what our actions would be should an Arizona type law come to Alabama.  Well that year is over.  For the most part, those who acted in opposition did not do so fervently enough. I include myself in that accusation. We failed to organize the coalitions needed to prevent the passage of this bill. We did not speak up loud enough.

HB 56 was signed into law and it is set to go into effect September 1^st.  The game has changed. We are no longer trying to prevent a law from being written; we are now forced to live with the law and its consequences until we can have it repealed. The work will be much harder than before.

I was asked by a colleague to list ten things as to why this law is immoral and should be opposed.

1. This law will deport individuals who have only known the US as home.  These individuals were brought here as infants in the care of their parents.  Many do not have family there.
2. This law will break families apart.  Forcing US born children to become wards of the state, while their parents are deported.  This is a dehumanizing act with dire consequences for the well being of the children.
3. This law denies the basic right to shelter.  It criminalizes anyone who for humanitarian reasons offers shelter.  Landlords must check citizenship status before renting.
4. This law infringes on the right to practice ones religion.  Congregations that allow undocumented immigrants to become members and attend their services would be criminalized for harboring.
5. Congregations would not be allowed to transport members (who might be undocumented)  in their vehicles because this would be considered human trafficking and would be subject to felony charges.
6. Children and parents would be required to show proof of citizenship before registering for school. All children under the age of 18 have the right to an education according to federal statute regardless of legal status.  But consider that not having documentation of citizenship might discourage families to have their children attend school and then the question of what will they be doing during school time. Not attending school might lead to criminal mischief as it did in the 1800’s when public education was not mandatory.
7. Victims of Domestic violence who are also undocumented would be subject to arrest and deportation should they seek police intervention in a domestic dispute.  This is the ‘punish the victim’ scenario.  This scenario becomes even more exaggerated if the spouse is an American citizen.
8. Domestic workers can be criminalized for harboring and transporting domestic violence victims who are undocumented.
9. All major religions have teachings and stories that command their followers to welcome the foreigner and offer hospitality.
10. This law justifies ones racism, bigotry, and hatred under the rubrics of obeying the law.

The work to repeal will be much harder than the work to prevent the law from being passed.  There will be consequences in disobeying this unjust law.  There will be consequences in offering assistance to the immigrants in our community.

At General Assembly our association re-affirmed its desire to host a Justice General Assembly in Phoenix, AZ in 2012.   This was not arrived at lightly.  We were there a year ago when the law went into effect and prevented Sheriff Arpaio from conducting his raids on that day.  80 people were arrested for civil disobedience, 24 of them Unitarian Universalists, many of those were ministers.  We went because we were invited by the people who were being impacted by this law.

We went because there are people being detained in inhumane tents where the temperature has reached 140 degrees in the hot Arizona sun.  Detained because they had a broken tail light on their vehicle and they might be undocumented. Until their legal status can be verified they are held in these inhumane settings. A broken tail light.

We went because there are families that are being torn apart. Mothers who go out to do the days shopping are arrested without being able to notify their families of their whereabouts.

We went because people in this country should not live their life in fear of being stopped for random things because they happen to be of brown skin.  These are citizens who are being stopped because they look like they might be an immigrant.

These things are already happening here in Alabama.  A young man born in California with a California drivers license seeks to transfer his license to Alabama.  This is simple transfer. It took me all of ten minutes to have it done.  This young man is told he needs to show his social security card and his passport.  Then told that the numbers on the two documents do not match and therefore he must be illegal.  The numbers, by the way, are not supposed to match; they are two very different documents through two very different federal agencies.  He goes to another department and is told that he must take the written test.

Another man from Puerto Rico is denied a driver’s license because he is told he needs to have a green card to be here.  Puerto Rico is a US territory which makes him a US citizen; he does not need a green card. This is the harassment that Latino / Hispanic people are already facing and the law has not gone into effect yet.

At Justice GA 2012 we are not anticipating any arrests.  We are planning [this is still tentative] however to be of service to the 190, 000 people who are eligible for citizenship but do not have the funds to get a lawyer to fill out paper work.  There is some talk about having some sort of immigration fair where people can come to the air conditioned convention center and receive help in filling out the paper work needed.  This might include power of attorney forms in case of deportation so their children will not be placed into state facilities but rather into trusted family or friends homes who are citizens. If our going to AZ in 2012 can help keep families safe and together, then this will be well worth the efforts.

We are planning on having workshops on how to do this work in our communities back home.  Because these laws are not just happening in a few states but are being raised in states across the country.

But it isn’t just state laws that need changing. There are federal laws as well.  The Secure Communities Act is supposed to target the undocumented violent criminal.  However, this law has instead targeted soccer moms, those who are just going about their business seeking citizenship.  26 % of those deported do not have a criminal record let alone a violent one.  “If people without criminal records are at risk for deportation, they will be less likely to call law enforcement in unsafe situations.[i]”

What is happening in Alabama?  There is an increase in the religious voice against this law. Rallies in Birmingham and in Huntsville have already taken place.  I am working with my interfaith colleagues to have one here in Tuscaloosa the end of this month.  We are still working on some of the location logistics and hopefully this will be in place soon so we can officially advertise.

Holy Spirit Catholic Church is hosting a power of attorney fair this afternoon.  I will be going there to assist as best as I can in helping folks fill out power of attorney forms to protect their children from becoming wards of the state should they be arrested for deportation.

And one of the things I am doing in my role with the Mid-South District is to help organize a coordinated interfaith response across the state.  Right now there are events that are happening but it is not coordinated state wide and if there were to be a repeal bill then we need to be in communication with other people of faith on the judicatory and diocese level so that a united voice can be made.

The game has changed. We are being asked by our faith denomination to step up to the plate because we have a role to play.  I was speaking with someone the other day and she stated she didn’t know what the will of god is for this new century.  All she knew is that she wants her actions to help create the America of this new century.  She wants it to be an America that loves its neighbors, within its borders as well as outside its borders.

I was touched by her statement.  What story of America do we want told of the early 21^st century?  What part of that story will you be telling?

I have just completed my final Sunday service at Our Home Universalist Unitarian Church in Ellisville, MS.  I was the consulting minister there for four years.  In reflecting back on my service there, I have learned a wonderful lesson about what it means to be a minister and what it means to be a Unitarian Universalist.

Four years ago, Eunice Benton, District Executive (now retired) of the Mid-South District of the Unitarian Universalist Association asked me to consider coming to Mississippi to serve two congregations at half-time each.  She asked if I had ever lived in the deep south before and the answer was no.  Eunice wisely asked me to come down and visit before making any decision.  I met with the two congregations. The first congregation asked me the typical minister search questions; what was my theology, what are my views of religious education, etc.

The interview at Our Home held over dinner was one question and one question only.  “How do you eat your grits?”  I was a bit startled by the unorthodox question but I answered, “with butter, salt and pepper.”   I was then welcomed to come to Mississippi and be their minister. The rest of the dinner conversation was filled with logistics of transition and good humored conversation.  If I had answered with sugar or maple syrup or heaven forbid, “what are grits?” I dare say I would not be here to tell the tale.

How we create and sustain loving relationships with one another is the essence of our covenantal faith. Cultural competency is one important aspect of our faith that enables us to be in relationship.  The grits question certainly addresses this point.

Theology, creeds, or doctrines we might hold, while important to have them defined for ourselves,  take a much smaller role in living the Unitarian Universalist faith.  The real question, the vital question is how do we translate our theologies, creeds, doctrines into our day to day relationships with one another.  In short, how do you eat your grits?  Are you going to be able to relate to people who come from a very different background, a different culture, a different theological perspective on what is true and still find common ground?

This is where our work is.  This is what defines our faith as different from other faiths.  16th century Unitarian minister Francis David is quoted as saying, “We do not have to think alike to love alike.”   It does, however, help if our thinking, our theologies, our doctrines, and our personally held creeds aid us in loving alike.  If they do not help us in loving our neighbor as ourselves or to do onto others as we would want others to  do onto us,  then it may be time to reconsider our theologies, our doctrines, or our personally held creeds.

Our Unitarian Universalist faith is not concerned with whether you are a Christian or a Humanist, a Buddhist or a Muslim, a Pagan or a Jew.  Our faith is more concerned with how the doctrines of those beliefs help you build sustaining loving relationships with others.

If your beliefs empower you to be more loving, more generous, more able to fulfill your highest potential, more able to be just in your relationships, then that is what is vital to this life.  If they hinder you from being inclusive of the other, cause you to shun and fear others who are different, solicit an attitude of me and mine first, then those beliefs are not serving you well. It might be best to either let them go or re-examine them to find how they can aid you in living a more generous of spirit and heart life.

Unitarian Universalists recognize that what enables one person to become more loving and more generous may not enable another to do so.  And so for one person Christianity may be the path that empowers this love, for another it may be Buddhism, and for yet another it may be one of the Earth centered faiths. This is reflected in our fourth principle: A free and responsible search for truth and meaning.

Rev. Doak Mansfield, former minister at Our Home Universalist,  once stated that Unitarian Universalism in the deep south is about grace and relationships.  We best express our faith in how we relate to one another.  It is our personal relationships that are our best calling card for our faith.   It is also in how we develop our public witness for justice.  The desire to create partnerships with those who are oppressed and to follow their lead towards freedom.  Grace and relationships.

Wherever two or more are gathered, it is in the relational aspect of the gathering that the spirit of love is either present or absent.  Unitarian Universalists strive to allow the spirit of love to be present.  That is the essence of our faith the rest, to paraphrase Hillel, is commentary.

Blessings,

” It’s not a moral issue at all- it’s an issue of legality,”  wrote a commenter on an earlier post. This person wrote further attempting to argue his point.  It is an interesting comment but one that holds very little water.  If obeying the laws of the land were the only determinant of what is moral and just, then this writer has some merit in his argument.  However, there are many laws that have been passed by the US government in its 235 year history that have been legal and immoral.

And there are many examples in other governments where what is legal has not been what is moral.  But let’s just look at American history at the legal laws have been passed that have been immoral.  The laws that were passed that removed the indigenous people from their homelands were immoral.  The laws that enslaved a people were immoral, including the laws that required slaves to show their papers, giving them the right to be away from the plantation, to any white person they met on the road. (Does this sound familiar?)  The laws that banned the vote from non-landholders, women, and blacks.  The laws that sent the CIA, our soldiers, and trained militants from the School of the Americas  (SOA) into combat to destabilize governments in Central and South America (Nicaragua, Columbia, Guatemala, Chile, and Argentina as examples). And laws that then will not grant amnesty to the refugees of these countries because we are allies with the SOA trained dictators.  Laws that banned  interracial  marriage and same gender marriage.  Laws that banned races and genders of people from access to education and employment opportunities. All very legal, but not very moral.

Morality has to do with how we are with one another.  Morality is expressed in how we treat other people.  So when actions are coercive against another, that is considered to be immoral.  The laws that demean another being; whether female, or of another race, or ethnicity, or nationality are also considered to be immoral. Jim Crow laws of the 20th century while very legal were not moral because they went against the very fabric of all of our religions’ tenets that teach us to treat others as we ourselves would like to be treated.

It is therefore deemed as immoral those actions that are done against another that are not of the person’s fault.  Therefore the laws that deport children who were brought here as young children is seen as immoral because to deport them means removing them from the only culture and, in some cases, the only language that they know. The laws targeting children by checking their citizenship status before attending school  and placing families at risk in defiance of Federal law of education regardless of status are immoral.  Deporting young people into Mexico who only speak English and know nothing of that country other than it is the country of their parents is immoral.  Actions that attack the family unit are seen as immoral.  When mothers and/or fathers are deported and children are made wards of the state, this as in immoral act against the family.

The Federal law regarding immigration is an immoral  law. One such federal law, The Secure Communities Act that instead of targeting violent criminals who are here without documentation is targeting the undocumented that if they were able to enter the country legally would make the ideal citizen. But our federal process is racist, convoluted, arduous, decades long to complete, and outrageously expensive. The process itself is immoral and unjust.

The states passing their own versions of attrition through enforcement laws are also immoral laws.   Landlords become accomplices to ICE  by having to check residency papers before being able to rent to people of their choice.  States are targeting churches and domestic violence shelters who transport people to their services, which under these laws are being charged with felonies for human trafficking and harboring undocumented.  These laws are immoral because they limit civil and religious liberties.

Employers are being mandated to use E-Verify, an employment data base that only is able to screen 46% of the workplace with any sort of accuracy. This system does nothing to intercept those engaged in identity theft. Citizens are being told they are not legal in the US to work and are losing their employment. And while a first denial has a limited time window to check for errors, employers are simply denying employment rather than do the legwork to verify the information as correct.  Employees are not being told why they are being let go.  The process is seriously flawed and creates an unjust system that harms peoples ability to support themselves.

The federal and state laws addressing immigration have to be reformed.  There needs to be a humane process for acquiring citizenship in this country.  It can be done and it can be done in a manner that is morally and ethically sound.

Yes, it may be very legal to pass such laws.  But at some point, one has to make a decision as to which law one will obey.  The laws of the land or the laws of conscience that guide our behaviors in how we treat our human family.  I will obey the laws of conscience.  My faith demands that of me.  What does your faith demand of you?

The 50th General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association is now over. It was by and large a successful event with a tad bit of anxiety towards the planning of next year’s historic Justice General Assembly in Phoenix coupled with the association’s move towards policy governance.  This anxiety was most evident and most felt in the plenary session where the assembly debated the possible ending of Actions of Immediate Witness.   According to the by-laws,  “A General Assembly Action of Immediate Witness is one concerned  with a significant action, event or development the timing or specificity of which makes it inappropriate to be addressed by a UUA Statement of Conscience pursuant to the Study/Action process.”

In order for the UUA to sponsor a Justice GA where we are not doing business as usual means limiting the number of items that we have in our plenary sessions. In what ever fashion Justice GA is to take shape, there needs to be increased time in order for our presence in Phoenix to accomplish the most good.  We cannot simply suspend by-laws but we can change our by-laws to enable and empower our association to use this meeting as an action of justice. So there were two possible proposals in which to do this.

The first proposal proposed by the board would have eliminated Actions of Immediate Witness (AIW) altogether.  There were many reasons for advocating this possible outcome.  AIWs are no longer immediate.  A statement is made, debated sometimes with intense emotions hurled at opposing views. There is the false expectation that delegates will take these AIWs home to their congregations and implement them.   The statement is passed, the assembly present cheers, and the statement is promptly forgotten in the archives of the particular general assembly.

The strongest reason for this proposal was never stated at the assembly.  A question arose as to what impact would eliminating AIWs have on staff’s actions in social witness ministries.   The response was that AIWs have to date been a means to authorize staff to act on certain actions, for example, the staff did not feel authorized to speak up on stem cell research until there was an AIW presented. If an AIW on stem cell research never surfaced that year or any year for that matter, the UUA staff would allegedly not address the issue as part of their actions in Washington. It was a weak response.

The UUA board is in the process of transitioning into a policy governance board with a series of end statements that are developed through the board’s linkages with the congregations.  It is the ends that are to  drive the actions of the staff and not the whimsical fancy of any given assembly’s AIWs, regardless of how sincere those fancies may be.

The board was correct in its recommendation to eliminate the AIWs.  The staff’s response was only correct in that this was the pre-policy governance method of actions. The staff, once policy governance is fully operational, would have greater flexibility to act on justice issues than the current AIW actions of a program based board.  The Ends are what authorizes the staff to act for justice.  Specifically it is this end:

“Congregations that move toward sustainability, wholeness and reconciliation.

1. Our congregations answer the call to ministry and justice work:
   1. Grounded in the communities in which they live
   2. Nationally and internationally
   3. With interfaith partners and alliances
2. The public engages in meaningful dialogue and takes action informed by our prophetic voice and public witness.”

The question that Peter Morales as President and CEO of the UUA and his administration need to be asking is: Does the area of  concern further or hinder these ends?  And as an accountability measure: Are there congregations already pursuing this particular area of justice?

In regards to stem cell research, the example given at the assembly, the staff felt unable to respond nationally until the  AIW was passed in 2004. However, a quick Google search reveals that congregations were engaged in this subject at least as far back as 2001.  So if the UUA was a policy governance board back in 2001, the staff pursuing the ends as stated could have been engaged in this topic at least three years earlier instead of waiting for an AIW to come along.

Why should we hold our UUA staff back from pursuing the advocacy work necessary by making them wait for the possibility, the mere random chance of an AIW?

This Assembly showed the growing pains of an organization transitioning into policy governance.  Delegates and apparently UUA staff are still not fully informed as to what policy governance means for their association. There still remains an ignorance in how policy governance can and will create a more responsive UUA. There is further need to educate that AIWs are increasingly an ineffective mode of doing justice in these current harsh and repressive legislative times.

UUA staff cannot and should not have to wait a full year before a mere possibility that someone will introduce an AIW.  And when that AIW is not introduced, the staff should not feel that they are held hostage to the General Assembly in-actions in order to live out our faith in the national and international arena.    Staff do not need an AIW to empower their justice actions on the ground, the Ends statements provide that empowerment for them.

This proposal while it received a majority vote failed to receive the necessary 2/3rds majority in order to pass this assembly.

The second proposal was a compromise proposal from the Commission on Social Witness. It eliminated AIWs for one year, 2012,  and then reinstated a maximum of three AIWs beginning in 2013.  While this proposal allows the freedom for Justice GA to be a very different kind of General Assembly, it will hinder  the UUA board in functioning fully in their role  as a policy governance board for two more years, perhaps longer.  This is because AIWs are seen by Delegates and the staff as driving their justice actions instead of the Ends Statements. This is the proposal that passed.

However, the elimination or at the very least a reconfiguration of the AIWs function needs to occur.   Change is sometimes hard to swallow but in order for our national board and UUA staff to be as responsive as possible in these times, this change of eliminating AIWs is vital to our movement.

This morning at 8:30 AM, Alabama Governor Bentley signed the controversial and harshest to date anti-immigration bill into law.  One portion of the law goes into effect immediately and that is the hiring of additional personnel to help enforce the law with Homeland Security.  The remainder of the law goes into effect September 1st.

After the Governor’s intent to sign the bill into law was announced late yesterday afternoon, I have been thinking about justice.  Where is Justice?  How does Justice come about?

It occurred to me that justice does not occur by simply speaking truth to power such as the many testimonies given at public hearings  and the letter writing campaigns. Though this could be a part of the development of justice.  Justice does not occur by marching through the streets  waving banners and yelling catchy slogans.  Though this, too, could be a part of the development of justice. And Justice does not occur by signing multiple petitions on this or that issue, though even this could be a part of the development of justice.

None of these by themselves brings about justice.  At best they are fragments of a larger whole but they themselves are not the underpinnings of justice. These were the activities that I and many others were involved in these past many months as we sought the defeat HB56 and these activities have not resulted in Justice.

The underpinnings of justice is in the relationships that are on equal footing.  Justice is ultimately reducing the suffering of others through personal, communal, institutional, and governmental relationships.

I can bring one level of justice to another person by being present in their pain, validating their injury as real. When I spent time with the immigrants in Laurel, MS after the ICE raid on Howard Industries, I listened to their stories. My presence as local clergy brought a sense of  justice to them.   I symbolized something greater than myself in my willingness to stand with them in their pain as they sought to receive their final paychecks.  This was personal.  It was a very real presence in time of help as the psalmist wrote.

When members of my congregation suffered loss in the Tornado of April 27 and then faced the degrading responses from the bureaucracy, I was able to stand with them.  Hearing their pain, hearing their frustration with a system that was meant to help, and encourage to plug away even when despair sought to engulf them whole.  Justice was in our relationship.  I sought to reduce their suffering. I listened.  Our denomination sought to reduce their suffering.  The denomination’s representatives listened to their stories and in listening, the seeds of justice were sprouting. This was justice unfolding in the personal and in the communal contexts. This was happening to our people.

I remember my home town of Danbury, CT following the tragedy of September 11, 2001.  It was the Jewish community that stood vigil and alert outside of the local mosque to ensure their neighbors safety as they worshiped. It was the Jewish community that escorted the Muslim women to the shops to ensure their safety from those whose anger might be misguided against them.  The Jews of this community knew what it was to be targeted and harassed for simply being identified as a Jew.  And they wanted to ensure that their Muslim neighbors would be safe in the land of liberty and justice for all.

From this relational action, justice was served and the larger community as the result of witnessing this act of solidarity did not respond with hatred as other communities did during the days following September 11th or even in the past recent months.  The community was reminded of its humanity in the prophetic witness of solidarity with a targeted minority.

They sought to ensure justice for people by recognizing that this Muslim community’s experience resonated with a similar experience their community experienced in another context of history.  In the process they developed new friendships and new relationships with people whose culture, whose religion,  whose history is very different from their own.  But they were saying even louder; our community reaches out to protect our people from violence.

Prior to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Martin Luther King stated,” you’ve got to change the heart and you can’t change the heart through legislation. You can’t legislate morals. The job must be done through education and religion. Well, there’s half-truth involved here. Certainly, if the problem is to be solved then in the final sense, hearts must be changed. Religion and education must play a great role in changing the heart.  (Taken from Martin Luther King, Jr.’s address at Western Michigan University, December 18, 1963,)

To change the hearts of people in power, we need to share our stories.  We need to continue to share our stories over and over again.  We need to establish relationships with our allies in the state house and senate so that these stories can be shared with ease because these are personal and intimate stories.  These are stories of great pain.  These are stories of great injustices.

But the injustice is not one-sided. There is a grave injustice that has occurred to the people who believe this law is just.  The injustice is the false belief that there is not enough to go around.  The injustice is the false belief that they must be ever vigilant in protecting what is theirs. The injustice is the false belief that if they protect the wealthiest that one day they will be welcomed to that elite club of the top 1% in the nation.

Martin Luther King, Jr. once stated, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”  This is never more true than in the injustice that has been committed against the people who believe HB56 is the right tact to take in protecting America. Because an injustice  has been committed against them that another injustice is created against the immigrants.  And they are blind to see how these injustices have hardened their hearts against one another.

The preamble of our Constitution reads as follows:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Ultimately, the laws that we pass in this country, the behaviors we bestow upon our neighbors, the morals that we use as our guides in living our lives ought to reflect back to this covenant in which we established our Constitution.   And where HB 56 is concerned; how does it establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, and promote the general Welfare within the state of Alabama?

It does not.  Legislation needs to benefit our people, all of our people who claim Alabama as home.  And I ask again, where is Justice?

 

 

Rev. Marilyn Sewell recently wrote a wonderful summary entitled the Theology of Unitarian Universalism. I would agree with most of what she wrote.  There are two areas that I think need further discussion I begin with addressing the first area.  I will write about the second area in another post.

She mentions briefly the following: “We must begin with the assertion that Unitarian Universalism has always emphasized freedom as a core value. It follows that human beings have a choice. We are not predestined by God before our births, to be saved or unsaved. We are not mired in original sin by the very fact of our birth and therefore have to go through a ceremony called baptism, even as babies, to cleanse ourselves of that sin. We do not have to have someone sacrifice himself by dying on a cross to save us from hell. Yes, human beings have a propensity to do evil, but we also have the propensity to do great good. We have a choice. Unitarian Universalists prefer to think of ourselves as being born into “original blessing,” as theologian Matthew Fox likes to put it.”

And then in her summary of Unitarian Universalist Theology she states the following: “We believe in original goodness, with the understanding that sin is sometimes chosen, often because of pain or ignorance.”

I would argue that this is not a universal theology of Unitarian Universalists and further I would state that this belief in Original Goodness is in fact a falsehood.

Let’s look at the definitions of terms. Original Sin defined in the Catholic Encyclopedia is as follows: “Original sin may be taken to mean: (1) the sin that Adam committed; (2) a consequence of this first sin, the hereditary stain with which we are born on account of our origin or descent from Adam.” Rev. Sewell is using the term Original Sin in the second meaning. Original Sin is this stain that is passed down through the ages by virtue of our birth.

This concept of Original Sin is rejected by most Unitarian Universalists. We would concur with the New Testament writer who wrote that nothing can separate us from the love of God. There is no condition that we are born into that would separate us from Universal love from the moment of our first breath to the breathing of our last.

Original Blessing as theologian Matthew Fox uses the term means that we are born into love. He writes, “We can say blessing preceded creation, too, for blessing was its purpose. Thus there is no doubt that original blessing is the basis of all trust and of all faith. Original blessing underlies all being, all creation, all time, all space, all unfolding and evolving of what is. As Rabbi Heschel puts it, ‘Just to be is a blessing; just to live is holy.’”

He defines blessing as relational. “[O]ne does not bless without investing something of oneself into the receiver of one’s blessing. And one does not receive blessing oblivious of its gracious giver. A blessing spirituality is a relating spirituality.” This concept of Original Blessing is very different from the concept that Rev. Sewell later calls Original Goodness.

Original Goodness implies that something is good in and of itself.  This is not possible.  There is no original goodness or virtue. Theologian James Luther Adams states, “There is no such thing as goodness as such; except in a limited sense, there is no such thing as a good person as such. There is the good husband, the good wife, the good worker, the good employer, the good layperson, the good citizen. The decisive forms of goodness in society are institutional forms.”

The quality of being good does not exist in a vacuum. It does not exist without form. Goodness does not exist in and of itself. What makes a person good is the social construct that it embodies. A good birth means that there were no complications.  The good baby sleeps through the night. The good child is obedient to her parents.  The good husband or good wife helps with the household chores. These are actions that our society has determined to be good.  So to declare that there is an original goodness that humanity is born into is a falsehood. An infant is not born good or evil. An infant simply is.

Whereas, an infant can be born into original blessing because the relationship of blessing is already present in the child’s birth. The relationship of blessing, the covenant of relationship of parent to child is created at the very moment of birth resulting in blessing. But original goodness does not exist.

Rev. Sewell states that “sin is sometimes chosen, often because of pain or ignorance.” Goodness and Evil are actions that are chosen, sometimes deliberately, sometimes by default but chosen nonetheless. So if Rev. Sewell wrote that Unitarian Universalists tend to believe in Original Blessing, recognizing that sin is sometimes chosen often because of pain and ignorance, then I would agree with her statement. However, she uses the term Original Goodness which is not the same as Original Blessing, they are two very different concepts.

Blessings,

Quotations are from the following:

1) The Theology of Unitarian Universalists by Rev. Marilyn Sewell

2) Catholic Encyclopedia

3) Original Blessing by Matthew Fox

4)  Five Smooth Stones of Liberal Religion by James Luther Adams

Late last night, Alabama sent substitute bill HB56 to Governor Bentley to be signed. This morning, the following letter signed by the Alabama Ministers was sent to Governor Bentley urging him to veto this bill.

3 June 2011

State Capitol
600 Dexter Avenue
Montgomery, Alabama 36130

Dear Governor Bentley:

When the Legislature presents its substitute bill for HB56, I hope you will veto it. There are many reasons why this bill needs to be vetoed this year. But the major reason is it is simply not good for Alabama.

Governor Bentley, you recently sent back to the Legislature the proposed budget because there were bills that have not yet been passed that would place the budget out of balance and therefore make the budget unconstitutional. This bill will also make the budget unconstitutional in Alabama. Sections 22 and 23 require an increase in the state budget but because this bill falls under Amendment 621, a cost analysis is not needed to be established. But there is a cost that will be added to the state budget; and since Alabama is struggling to balance the budget in these dire economic times, this unknown cost will place the budget out of balance.

The act of criminalizing a whole group of people has costs associated to it that the state legislature has refused to seriously acknowledge. The arguments against these increased costs are based on assumed cost savings that are speculative and not based on real numbers of undocumented immigrants. We do not know how many immigrants are undocumented in the state but the Legislature is assuming that all Spanish speaking citizens are undocumented. This bill, therefore, targets anyone whose first language is Spanish and who looks like they come from south of the border.

Despite all arguments that racial profiling will not be permitted, human nature will dictate the occurrence of racial profiling. Our law enforcement personnel will not be able to be adequately trained to determine reasonable suspicion when language and ethnicity are part of the mix. But even if they were adequately trained, this bill also requires schools to determine if students were born in this country. Federal law requires that all children be given a public education regardless of national origin. This bill increases racial profiling in the schools.

This bill states the presumption that undocumented immigrants are causing economic hardship and an increase in lawlessness. There is no proof that this is the case. The legislature has come up with spurious anecdotes but nothing is found in the documentation. There is documentation that immigrants (undocumented and documented) have increased the state’s revenue in taxes and increased economic development in their respective communities. In fact, the state has had a decrease in violent crimes over the last decade even while the immigrant population has increased. This presumption is therefore a biased statement.

Governor, I urge you to veto this bill when it comes across your desk. It has components that in Arizona have cost that state millions of dollars in litigation. It has components that are blatantly prejudiced and demonize a hard-working segment of our population. This is not a job creation bill unless Alabama is seeking to increase the private for-profit prison industry in the state by criminalizing a whole population. Is this the Alabama you want to create as a legacy of your administration?

Sincerely,

Rev. Fred L Hammond, Minister, Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

Rev. Diana Allende, Minister, Auburn Unitarian Universalist Fellowship

Rev. Lone Jensen Broussard, Minister, Unitarian Universalist Church of Birmingham

Rev. Paul Britner, Minister, Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Montgomery

Rev. Alice Syltie, Minister, Unitarian Universalist Church of Huntsville

When the tornado ripped through Tuscaloosa on April 27, 2011 all sorts of communication lines became useless.  I needed to find a way in which to find out the welfare of my congregants, where they were, and what their immediate needs were.

Within minutes after the tornado ripped a one mile wide six mile long swath of destruction, I began trying to find out the status of the congregation.  What I discovered was that the congregation was terribly ill prepared for this kind of emergency.  We simply did not have the information on how to reach people to assess what was happening.

Internet was down so emailing was out. This meant that our Yahoo group or Google group that we use to send out a bulk email was not going to work.  Land lines were down so calling people’s homes was out.  Face book, Twitter were only options for folks who could access them on mobile phones but that required the ability to charge the phones. These relatively new forms of social networking became important to get information out to the community at large but only for those who had access to them. For those folks who had no available means to re-charge their phones, there was needed another way to get through. We found that only a few people in our congregation have a Twitter address. Therefore, texting became the mode of communication because it took less signal strength / less battery charge than logging on to the internet or in making mobile calls.  But even this method was not fool proof in getting vital information to and from people.  Texting was sometimes delayed by several hours.

We had families who had cell phones on different plans and this became important because some carriers were working better than others depending on what carriers cell towers were damaged or destroyed.  Who would have thought that any particular cell phone family plan offer would not be the best option in an emergency situation of this magnitude?

So I spent the first few days after the tornado literally going door to door trying to find people and assessing damage and immediate needs.  In many cases I had to park my car one to two miles away in order to walk into these neighborhoods that were obliterated. One of the homes was central in location to several of the others in our congregation and that became a place where messages could be left with people to be passed on to others.

What I learned from this experience is that our congregation needs to have a directory with all possible routes of communication available.  We need to have landline numbers, cell phone numbers of each family member; twitter, facebook, and email addresses.  We also need to have a complete listing of contact information of next of kin.

The church became the conduit for concerned family members in other parts of the country who were unable to reach their kin and vice versa. The Sunday after the tornado we had several laptops set up to access our wi-fi so that members who were unable to connect with family members could do so.  For many this was the first time they were able to post to Facebook or contact others beyond Tuscaloosa via email.

Now I know that multi-generational congregations like ours do not have all of their members on all of these social network tools.  And we have folks that for everyday non-crisis mode communications have preferences regarding how to communicate with them. Yet, when we need to connect with everyone for that emergency situation in the future; we will have to have on hand all of the possible ways to connect with folks. Even if the methods used are not the preferred methods.  When disaster strikes of such a magnitude such as it did on April 27^th any and all communication links that work need to be accessed.  Blessings,

I am not sure when we as a world community will wake up. Two devastating tornado outbreaks within a month’s time in our nation with the allegedly rare EF5 tornadoes packing winds of over 200 miles per hour seem to be as good as an alarm bell as any I have heard.

Climate change is a reality.  It is not just a made up myth to scare little children before bedtime or to make block buster movies like The Day After Tomorrow.  We are facing massive climate change.  The floods in Pakistan, Australia, and Midwest; the uncontrollable fires currently in Texas, Russia, and Africa, record breaking temperatures, record breaking snowfalls; these are all pointing to dramatic climate change.

Firemap 11 May 2011 — 20 May 2011  Source: http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/current/globalfire.htm

I know we all laughed about global warming when we had record low temperatures and snow in the Deep South this passed year.  But with an increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere comes an increase in temperatures and an increased ability for the air to hold more moisture. So it makes sense that precipitation will be more than usual.  And it makes sense that parts of the earth will be scorched of what little moisture is left preparing the land for fire which releases more CO2 into the air—a vicious cycle.

So what will it take for humanity to wake up and take steps to drastically reduce CO2 and other emission gases?

Bolivia took a bold step in that direction when it passed laws that reflected their indigenous people’s values.  This small South American country passed legislation that equated mother earth to have equal rights as humans. These rights include: “the right to life and to exist; the right to continue vital cycles and processes free from human alteration; the right to pure water and clean air; the right to balance; the right not to be polluted; and the right to not have cellular structure modified or genetically altered.”

Bolivia’s Vice-President Alvaro García Linera stated. “It establishes a new relationship between man and nature, the harmony of which must be preserved as a guarantee of its regeneration.”

We need to follow Bolivia’s lead.  Our seventh principle states, “Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.”  This principle is in harmony with the actions that Bolivia has taken.  We, as Unitarian Universalists can no longer afford to have nicely worded principles that we can simply point to. We need our actions and our behaviors to reflect these principles not only in our daily lives but also in our activism to change our society towards one that is also in harmony with Mother Earth. In short, we need to be radically progressive in embodying our principles if we want a planet that is conducive to sustaining not just life, but human life.  Blessings,

So you are heading to AL to help with the horrendous devastation that has occurred in our state in the April 27 2011 tornadoes.  I think that is wonderful that you thinking about doing this.  I think it is wonderful that you are in fact planning on doing so.  However, there are a few things you need to know before you load up your van and bring your youth group with you to descend on Alabama.

First, most municipalities and counties are requiring that you register with them before you are allowed to volunteer.  This is for your protection and to protect the victims of these tornadoes.   We need to know what skills you are bringing so we can place you where the need is greatest. And we also need to be able to tell you, thank you very much but your skills are not needed at this moment in time.  Perhaps later or perhaps you were too late in offering but we need to be able to tell you this before your arrival not after you are here.

I received a phone call from a rather frustrated minister from a progressive Christian church in the Midwest.  He wants to come down Memorial Day weekend with his teens and other able bodied folks and spend a week.  He was turned away by  Samaritan’s Purse because they required a doctrinal faith agreement statement for volunteers.  His is a liberal church and he has members who are gay who would not be allowed to volunteer with Samaritan’s Purse.  Hey, it might be ethically wrong but it is their organization and their rules.

He was turned away by the Methodists for the same reason.  And he was told by the Disciples of Christ that they won’t be organizing their efforts until later in the summer when they expect their services will be needed.  This minister did not understand how we could be so unwilling to pitch in and help immediately. He gave me quite the lecture on what I was doing wrong in my ministry by not establishing a mission center to aid in the efforts.

He wanted me to house them at our congregation.  It might have been possible for us to do that but before I would answer that request, I asked what were they going to do?   His group was going to come in with chainsaws and remove trees from houses to enable electricity to be restored and get people back into their houses.  He stated he thought his congregation could get 50 houses to be able to reconnect to electricity and water within a week.  I told him based on the information I had, the houses that were livable were reconnected to power. He did not believe me.  When I told him the people who were displaced had no homes to go back to;  he became irate with me. How could I be so cold as to refuse to help people in need?   I wasn’t  being cold hearted.  The services he was providing was no longer of service to Tuscaloosa.  Every house that was livable has power  and water restored to it.

He did not want to register with the city to volunteer.  He did not want to call the American Red Cross to find out if other communities in Alabama could still use his congregation’s specific services.   I doubted this was a huge need as the last update I heard was that all homes that were livable had power restored to it in the state but since my attention has been on Tuscaloosa I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt and have him call.

Second, we are busy trying to get the 13K displaced people in Tuscaloosa into temporary housing.  Some are currently staying in hotels, some are starting to receive FEMA trailers, and some are staying with friends and relatives, some are still in emergency shelters, and some are staying in churches.  So just where do you think you are going to be staying?

Have a plan in place before you come.  Finding a hotel available might be difficult.   And staying at a congregation that is also dealing with many of their members still reeling from the trauma of losing everything they own, might not be the best solution.  It places an additional burden on the congregation to not only care for their own members but now they have to care for you too.  Just be considerate in your ask and be willing to reduce the burden of hospitality.

Third, one of the things that I have learned in this crisis is that needs change very quickly.  What is needed today might not be needed tomorrow or even next week.

Remember, my minister friend who wanted to come down with chainsaws.  That sort of help was needed one, two, three, and four days AFTER the tornado.  Tarps were also once a big need.  But chainsaws and tarps are no longer the urgent need.   Then  suddenly the need that was on everyone’s radar was clothes, new underwear, diapers, formula, shelters for pets, those lost  and displaced and those who couldn’t stay with their owners, pet food.

Today the needs that are being posted and  I have included the links in case you are seriously interested  are the following:

Tuscaloosa City Schools needs large plastic bins, boxes, and crates with lids. Persons interested in making donations should contact the School Supply Center at 205-759-8300 or the Central Office at 205-759-3700. Monetary contributions may be made online or by calling the Central Office at 205-759-3700.

Temporary Emergency Services this morning was looking for 8-10 long-term volunteers to help us cook and distribute food to needy areas, based at our Northport location (5510 McFarland Blvd, in Northport). Do you like to cook? Do you want to help, and have some time to donate today, and over the next couple of weeks/months? Give us a call at 205 758-5535, or show up at our Northport location today. Thanks!

Temporary Emergency Services on 1705 15th Street Tuscaloosa, AL  is in desperate need of cleaning supplies.

Soma of Christ Church needs: toilet paper, paper towels, Diapers (NB, 4 6 sizes), Pull-Ups, 1st Aid Kits, new underwear, flashlights, batteries, non-electric can openers, canned meat, noodles, rice, crackers, canned corn / tomatoes / tomato sauce, oatmeal, ketchup, mustard, and mayo. 212 44th CT NE Tuscaloosa, AL 35401 Call: (205) 553-2877

Board of Education in Hackleburg: Currently they have a need for plastic totes to store things. They are assessing everything else and will let us know what needs are. So, if you want to help kids in Hackleburg…totes are needed.

These are the needs that are being posted today on the Facebook page Tuscaloosa Tornado Donations.   The two school districts had several schools that were destroyed in the tornadoes. Tomorrow this list will change and some new and urgent need will arise. Another Facebook page with community needs for Tuscaloosa is Rebuild Tuscaloosa.

We are not yet in the rebuilding mode yet. Debris from destroyed homes and businesses still need to be removed before new homes and businesses can be built.  This means that Habitat for Humanity and other home building charities are  not yet ready for volunteers to build new houses for families.  That need will come but not today and probably not next month either.  So if that is what your group wants to offer, wait.  Raise some money to cover your expenses.  Raise some money to donate to one of the many funds that have been established to help in rebuilding.

So again some simple advice before packing the van with supplies and volunteers please do the following:

1) Call the American Red Cross or United Way of Western Alabama and find out what the current needs are for volunteers in Alabama.  Perhaps what you are willing to offer is not yet needed or may never be needed.  This will help in your planning and save you the aggravation of showing up and feeling dumb for not asking first.

2) Register your volunteers in the community where you are headed.  This might be with the city or it might with a county.  We want you to be placed where the need is the greatest.  If you want to volunteer in Tuscaloosa here is an online form to register.  More information is located here.

3) Be considerate of your hosts.  If a congregation is willing to put you up in their building, don’t expect them to wait hand and foot to your needs.  They are already trying to help their members to cope in the loss and grief they are experiencing.

4) Don’t become belligerent with the people you are offering to help.  We may have lost our community but we still know our needs.  We are living with this daily.  You are the outsider looking in.  We do not need self-appointed saviors to swoop in and save us. We have capable leaders who are mapping out the steps of what needs to be done today and what can wait for tomorrow, or even next month.  Allow us to take the lead in this. This is our home.

Blessings,

The following two poems were written by me and used for a Listening Circle I facilitated tonight for members of my congregation in Tuscaloosa, AL who are putting the pieces of their lives back together again after the devastating Tornado that ripped through on April 27 2011. May there be peace in our hearts and minds as we continue our journey. Blessings, Fred L Hammond.

April 27 2011, Tuscaloosa, AL

After—the “Oh My God’s,” after—the tears,
After—the fears, unfounded and founded,
After—the adrenaline rush,
emerge the vacant eyes that stare
into the vortex of nothing
where something else once stood.
We—start the slow pace walks

through the thick black strap molasses of time.
Was it this morning—last week—yesterday?
that I—that you—that he—that she
asked, Is there life after all this?
Beneath convoluted rubble
is there hope of returning
to Eden’s garden?

The birds sing songs of life’s affirmation.
The flowers offer a rainbow’s promise.
Still some things take more than three days
to resurrect to their glory.
Tell me the songbirds’ song is true.
Tell me the flowers
are honest in their beauty.

***********

***********

Hope

I didn’t notice that
old maple tree’s buds swell.
One day it’s bare and then
the leaves are almost full.
Must it always be this
quiet explosion
that takes me by surprise?
Yet, I should’ve seen first–
yet, I could’ve witnessed
the flow of its sweetness.

Sermon offered to the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa on 8 May 2011 (c) by Rev. Fred L Hammond. One and a half weeks after the April 27th devastating tornado that rampaged through Tuscaloosa. 

“Sometimes I feel like a Motherless Child” is a spiritual written by slaves in the Deep South.  They are remembering their African homeland that they have lost.  They are remembering their mothers, their families that are far from them either back in Africa or those who have been sold to other plantation owners. It is a somber song but it also carries with it a hope.  Sometimes I feel implies that there are sometimes I don’t feel like a motherless child.  Sometimes means not always but occasionally this is true.

As I look at the devastation that has been wrought on our community and the efforts being undertaken to get through these tough times, I can say sometimes I feel like a motherless child.  I can join in and say sometimes I feel like I am almost gone.

But then I recall a few things.  I recall that when I felt that I had no friend, friends stepped forward.  People stepped forward into that role of friend, of mother, of nurturer, of protector.  All the things that we hoped would be there when the tough times come have been here in this place.

Now is the time for us to hang in together and nurture one another. To hold one another in sacred space, to hold one another in holy space where our hearts and voices are heard and validated as vital to making us whole.  This is a time of listening deeply, not debating “we should do this or that,” not seeking the fixes which are at best patch a worn piece of cloth which will rip again in the first wash cycle.  It is a time of listening.  Listening to our stories and holding them close to our hearts and validating that we have heard them. Truly heard them.

Mothers are great at fostering this in their children.  When a young child is hurt, physically or emotionally or in any other fashion for that matter, a mother will hold that child.  A mother will embrace that child, perhaps rock that child in her arms, perhaps sing to that child softly, and perhaps rub that child’s back.  These are all methods of soothing the child.  These are methods of calming the child to be in that moment and to pause in that moment.

The question of what we should or might do next will arise out of our listening to each other.  The experiences we are living through are offering us a choice as to who we will be in the future.  I know the temptation is to make a quick decision which will get the trauma behind us and as far from us as possible.  But now is not the time to make life altering decisions, now is the time to simply listen, to simply be in the moment we find ourselves in. The decisions we need to make will come when the time is ripe and their birth is ready to occur.

To be clear, I am talking about the intimate decisions of our lives, I am talking about the personal decisions here.  The more collective and larger decisions that need to be made need to be discussed. The city is already beginning to plan out what it needs to do to rebuild the city.  And it is right to do so.  These plans will take a while to develop and implement but even the city is not yet at the debating stage of these plans.  Even they are in the listening stage. They are at the information gathering stage. They have rightfully placed a moratorium on developers in the city to slow that process down so rebuilding can be planned with dignity and with integrity.  We as a congregation might have a role to play in how Tuscaloosa gives birth to the new city that will be built. But even here, we need to be nurturing, listening, and hearing the story of our collective lives being told.

When 9/11 happened, everyone in the nation was affected by the horrors of that event.  The nation was in uproar and whether you agree with what happened next or not, the nation launched an attack against Afghanistan and Iraq. We as a nation were hurting.  One person that I know responded differently.  Sarah Dan Jones, Unitarian Universalist singer/songwriter wrote a song that offered a way for us to be held, to be nurtured, to be embraced perhaps by the holy.  Perhaps if we had taken what we know from our mothers and held each other and listened with our hearts to each other then perhaps the narrative of our nation following that heart wrenching day would have been different.  The song she wrote in response was this:

“When I breathe in, I’ll breathe in peace.  When I breathe out, I’ll breathe out love.”[i]

Join me and allow the song to embrace you, to hold you close.

“When I breathe in, I’ll breathe in peace.  When I breathe out, I’ll breathe out love.”  Sing four times

We are sometimes mothers to one another. Regardless of gender, providing a mothering, nurturing experience when it is needed is something we all can offer.  The movie “The Secret Life of Bees” tells the story of young teen, Lily, who remembers very little about her mother, other than a traumatic incident during a fight between her parents. She carries this pain with her.  Her father is abusive and has told her repeatedly that her mother had left them and on the night of her death had come back only for her things.  The mother was leaving the daughter.   Lily decides to run away from home, and takes the few items of her mother’s with her, including a jar label of a black Madonna with the word honey on it.

The Black Madonna label leads Lily to a house where the honey is produced and she concocts a story that enables her to stay there. The house is owned by three African American sisters, each with their own unique gifts and strengths.  In the parlor is a sculpture of a black Madonna with a fist raised to the air.  August, the eldest sister, tells the story of this wooden sculpture.  It was found by one of her ancestors sold into slavery and once adorned the front of a sailing ship.  It is seen by the women as a symbol of their strength to weather the storms of life.  These three women and some of their friends would gather to pray around this sculpture and then as a parting ritual would place their hand on the chest of the Madonna to symbolize their drawing strength to endure. The women drew strength from each other and became mother for Lily.  In living in the mystery of life’s unfolding path, in sharing in their individual and collective struggles, they were able to offer healing to Lily. They shared a different narrative about Lily’s mother than the one she knew as a young child.

We are able to draw strength from the mothers in our lives.  We can help create a different narrative for those of us who are traumatized by the recent events.   By gathering together and drawing strength from each other we can also begin creating a different narrative for ourselves in the aftermath of this tornado.

“Gathered here in the mystery of the hour.  Gathered here in one strong body.  Gathered here in the struggle and the power.  Spirit, draw near.” [ii]

Spirit for me isn’t some other worldly entity.  I leave the mind open for the possibility of that but when I speak of spirit, it means something else.  For me, spirit is that energy that flows between two or more people.  The energy can express itself as an emotional energy but it might simply be that creative interchange of ideas that creates something new when expressed by one person and heard by another.

There is a strong connection of spirit between a parent and a young child for example.  It is a bond that transforms the other to wholeness.   Those who saw the movie, “The Secret Life of Bees” know that spirit can be a double edged sword as it was between Lily and her father.  But the spirit that I am referring to is a positive spirit, the spirit that is filled with affirmation.  The spirit I am referring to is patient and kind. This spirit does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. This spirit does not delight in harmful actions but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

Now those of you who know your Christian scriptures might have recognized that this spirit that I am referring to is love.  It is also the best expression of motherhood.  This spirit is not just reserved to mothers, anyone can exemplify these attributes.

In the wake of the storm when people are most hurting, most feeling like a motherless child, we are called to be mothering to one another.  We are called to extend that spirit of love to one another, just as the slave was able to sing, “Sometimes I feel like a motherless child” and add the conviction that this was sometimes; we too can help those who are feeling like a motherless child to reduce that experience to sometimes.

Blessed be.

“Hang on Toto, We are going to Oz!”

by Rev. Fred L Hammond

Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

1 May 2011 ©

I began Wednesday with waking up at 4:40 AM thinking that a police car was outside my apartment complex with its flashing strobe lights on. It turned out to be lightening that was happening so frequently that it produced this effect. At first I heard no thunder and then the thunder and the flashes of lightening began to fall into synch with each other. Until finally the storm was over head and the thunder was loud and booming. I never heard the tornado sirens go off as the thunder was that loud. And thus began the day that was to change the face of Tuscaloosa forever.

When I knew that we were going to be impacted by the largest tornado in recorded history, I wrote as my Face book status: “Hang on Toto, we are going to Oz!”

We know the story of the Wizard of Oz. A young teen by the name of Dorothy is feeling out of sorts and decides to run away with her faithful dog companion Toto. She runs into a shyster who takes pity on her and sees in his crystal ball Dorothy’s aunt who is very concerned for her. This revelation sends Dorothy back home but a tornado is coming and Dorothy is unable to get into a safe place so she goes to her bedroom. The tornado strikes and she is knocked unconscious. She dreams the tornado lifts the house up and lands her on top of a wicked witch in the distant and strange Land of Oz.

She longs for home in this strange place and begins her journey to the one place and the one person she has been told could possibly help her, the Wizard of Oz. Her only guide is to follow the yellow brick road. A road that she discovers has multiple paths to the Emerald City. A scarecrow tells her it really doesn’t matter which path she takes. His one desire is to have a brain that will offer him wisdom. She convinces him to join her; perhaps this wizard could give him a brain because if the wizard can get her home, then he must be some kind of wizard. They travel through some peculiar orchards and stumble upon an axe man who is made of tin but has no heart inside his hollow chest. Perhaps, just perhaps the wizard could give him a heart of compassion. Their final sojourner to join her is a lion, the king of the forest, who alas has no courage.

The four of them continue on their journey to find the Wizard of Oz in the Emerald City. A city that is green with horses of a different color; where all is peaceful, safe, and utopian-like. In some ways this is the beloved community; where justice flows down like waters and peace like an ever flowing stream.

But their journey there is not easy. It is not without conflict or unexpected detours, or pain and suffering. There are setbacks and barriers to overcome.

And by Wednesday afternoon our own journey was thrust into an unexpected detour of pain and suffering. The tornado- a mile wide slammed into Tuscaloosa and changed our lives forever. Based on the initial reports, the tornado was going to come through central Tuscaloosa and then over into Northport. And so as I saw the live weather cam and saw this monstrosity whirl its way towards us, I put on my bike helmet which I haven’t used in over 6 years, and threw the futon mattress into the center hallway of my apartment. I crawled under it and waited. After about 20 minutes I determined the storm must have passed and I walked outside into sunshine. Sunshine.

Nary a leaf was disturbed. The birds were singing their song of praise as if there was no care in the world. I had no internet, no cable and so I turned to my neighbors to hear what news they heard. I began to get a sense of the path of destruction and I became alarmed. I began calling our people who were possibly in the path of this beast. And I was getting no answer, not even cell phones were getting through.

Eunice Benton, our District Executive had called within about 30 minutes of the storm. The first inkling of destruction was beginning to hit the airwaves. Were we okay? I did not know. I was beginning the assessment of who I could get a hold of. People began to check in but those that I feared for the most there was to be no word.

I had been able to speak with Ana, she was safe but unable to get to her neighborhood to find out if her house was still there. I called Janis who live across the street, was she okay? Yes. Could she tell me if Ana’s house was safe? Yes, it looked fine from the street. When Jake, Ana’s son, who lost his trailer to the tornado, was able to walk into the neighborhood he discovered that though the front of the house looked fine the back of the house was gone. The dogs were there but traumatized.

I received a call from Rev. Jake Morrill who is a UUA Board Trustee, a minister of our sister congregation in Oakridge TN and a member of the Unitarian Universalist Trauma Ministry. These are clergy who are especially trained to help assess, plan out responses, and support clergy and congregations who have faced traumatic events. I break into tears for the hundredth time. This time because the greater world of our denomination has taken notice of our pain and the yet unrealized pain to be and wants to be with us. The message is we do not have to go this alone. Some of you may have met him when he was here Friday and Saturday to help us plan on how we can move through this event to the other side.

Thursday morning, I hear from Alice. She is with her son at Edelweiss German bakery. I meet them there. Her son shows me pictures of the community where his dad lives. It is Forest Lake. I was in Forest Lake a few months earlier for a private memorial service and marveled at its pristine appearance with perfectly landscaped yards, beautiful gardens and flowering trees filled with a variety of song birds singing their symphony. The pictures were of some other place. There were piles of giant match sticks with the lake brown with debris. Our house had landed and if this was Oz, it did not match the travel brochures.

Alice’s ex was in that rubble. One photo revealed only two things of his house still present. The stair case and a TV armoire with knick knacks undisturbed on top were all that were left. It is curious as to what remains. Students from the University of Alabama came through and found him under the narrow staircase and took him to the hospital where he was stabilized. Without their courage to go forth to help survivors, he might not have lived.

The students’ courage gave me courage for what I must do next. I still had not heard from people in the path of the tornado. I was going to walk into the neighborhood to find out, fearing the worst and hoping that they were alright at the same time is a strange tug of war of emotions. I was going to accompany Alice back to her house. We drove down one road. Blocked. We drove down another road. Blocked. We drove down yet another road and this time, Alice gets out of the car and speaks to the police officer. We are given permission to park the car to walk in. The next thing we discover the police are giving us a ride into the Kicker Road neighborhood.

There is nothing left as far as the eye can see. No trees, no houses, nothing. I have nothing comparable to compare this to. Not even the horrors of the Tsunami’s in Japan match what I am seeing. At this point Alice asks, “Where are we?” This is Kicker road, a road she has traveled on for decades. It is unrecognizable.

By this time we had received word that our people in that neighborhood at least were safe. Their houses were uninhabitable but they were safe. But what we were seeing was beyond imagining.

There was still one more couple that I had no clue about. I had lost all internet connections which meant no Facebook access. I could not even post via my cell phone. Who could have predicted five years ago that any of us would be so dependent on this new social media vehicle? I felt cut off from the world. Rob and Celeste were near the Forest Lake community, very close in fact. There was no word. I attempted a few times to get into their community and was blocked by the police. The rescue teams were still searching for possible survivors.

Some of our members were doing volunteering with other organized efforts. Ed called me and told me he was going to be walking through the Forest Lake community so I asked if he would be able to check on Rob and Celeste. He did and called to report that they were fine and house was unscathed. So this means that all of our members are safe. Some worse for the wear but safe.

It was then it hit me that we are on our journey to Oz. Many of us just want a place that we can call home. We want a place that will give us shelter. We want a place that can be our sanctuary, our refuge in times of need. We want our church to be one type of home for us and we want our living space to be another. This tornado has taken both kinds of homes in Tuscaloosa. Fortunately our church home was out of harms way but at least six of our personal homes were threatened to be unlivable.

Some of us want to make sense of all of this. I heard one of our members describing the experience of the tornado moving over head as wrestling with the almighty. This event stirs up so many old tapes in our minds. I had a fleeting thought that maybe the Baptist minister was right about god’s wrathful vengeance descending after Tuscaloosa passed the sale of alcohol on Sundays. I know that is irrational, if there is an anthropomorphic god, he or she does not cast down arbitrary vengeance. But the old tape was there. Why these people and not those people in the next house or next block? Why this tree and not the one next to it?

We are a meaning making people. It is in our evolutionary genetics. We want life to have a purpose. We want life to be filled with meaning, with destiny. These events are hard to comprehend because there is no meaning in them. So some of us want to have a brain that can comprehend, make meaning, make sense, and most importantly fill us with wisdom that will guide not just us but others around us.

I was in amazement of the number of people who were helping each other. While I was at David and Sheila’s on Thursday, viewing all the trees that had crashed on and around the house; David had stated that he needs to have some people to come and clear the driveway so that their vehicles could get out. There was a huge tree and I mean with a huge circumference that had fallen across the entrance of the drive. And I don’t think it was anymore than a few minutes and some one with a chain saw began doing just that very thing. It was if his wish was at this other person’s command. The generosity of people helping out each other was astounding.

People came by with water and sandwiches for those working. Others appeared to begin moving debris out of the yard to the edge of the road for eventual pick-up. The heart of Tuscaloosa was beating strong and it rhythmically spelled out compassion. Our own members were part of this compassion sharing. I fielded many calls from our members looking for ways to help. And the offers were as varied as there are stars in the heavens above. I know many offers were not taken up just yet, but that does not mean there won’t be future opportunities. Trust me there will be future opportunities. We were pulling together to help one another and I was amazed at how quickly that came together. And I was amazed at how much was done in the short span of time.

We are under the gun with the threat of heavy rain and so tarps had to be put up. And we responded with urgency and with largeness of heart.

And along with largeness of heart is another kind of heart, one that has courage. The word comes from the Latin cor which means heart and the old French word which refers to the inner heart, a metaphor for inner strength. Some synonyms include bravery, fortitude, endurance, mettle, spunk, spirit, tenacity. Some of us are searching for courage like the lion in the Wizard of Oz for in the days and weeks ahead it will be courage that gets us through.

It was only together that Dorothy, the scarecrow, the tin man, and the cowardly lion were able to reach their goal of defeating the wicked witch of the West and in the process developing the character that is needed to achieve their ultimate goals. Together we too can make our way towards the Emerald City.

We will need to lean on each other for heart, for courage, for wisdom and we will need to be the ones who create a sense of home once again. In the days and weeks and months ahead as we rebuild not only Tuscaloosa but the lives of those so devastatingly impacted by this tornado, we will be required to come together in new ways. We will be stretched to find new wisdom that has been there all along but never recognized. We will be called upon to love one another with compassion in ways that may seem foreign to us but if we want to rebuild, this compassion is not an option but a necessity for our spirits to be renewed. In the days ahead we will be required to act with courage, with fortitude, with tenacity because there will be days that seem that nothing is moving fast enough for us. Every disaster that has happened in this country on this magnitude or greater has been fraught with a bureaucracy that apparently has wheels stuck in molasses. And to get through this it will take courage the likes of which we may not have seen before.

But we will survive this. We will take this experience and grow from it. We will learn to love one another in visible ways that we have never imagined possible. This will happen because we have already decided to do so in the actions that we have done in these past few days.

Later today, Rev. Bret Lortie from the San Antonio Church and another member of the Unitarian Universalist Trauma Ministry will be here. He will be helping us take the next steps of healing. Mary, our board president and I will meet with him this afternoon to map out his time with us. He will be here the next few days and will leave on Wednesday. His role is to walk along side us as we begin to process all that has happened. He again represents that we are not alone in this journey. Depending on our needs there may be another minister who comes for a few days after Bret.

But understand that our yellow brick road will continue for quite some time. We need to follow it together and Bret and others will be available to us help us access the heart, the courage, and the wisdom that is already within us to lead us home to Oz. Blessed Be.

What if we got it all wrong about Christianity?  What if the crucifixion and resurrection is not the cornerstone of the Christian narrative?  What if the meaning of Jesus’ life is not the sacrificial lamb that has been slain for the redemption of the world?  What if there was a different meaning, a different purpose, a different narrative that Jesus was trying to teach humanity?  What if we have been distracted from that message by trying to find meaning in his death?

What if his torturous death on the cross was an attempt to kill an idea, akin to Gandhi’s assassination, or Martin Luther King’s?  When Michael Servetus was burned at the stake in the late 1500’s, Sebastian Castellio wrote “To kill a man is not to defend a doctrine: It is to kill a man!”  It was true with Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. their ideas were sought to be killed with their death. What if the ideas that Jesus taught were diminished in significance by glorifying his death on the cross?

The message that Jesus taught during his life was that God is love. Love one another. Be holy / be loving as your God in heaven is loving.  Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Place first the realm of heaven/ love above all else and everything shall be added unto you.  Be generous in all things; if someone asks for your coat, give them your shirt as well.  If they ask you to walk a mile, walk two. Love your enemies.

Contrast this message with God sacrificing his son to break the power of sin, the evils of the world in humanity.  God putting his beloved son in whom he is well pleased through torture, barbaric grueling torture for the salvation of humanity that is weaker, feebler, unable to measure up, unable to even come close to the love that Jesus exemplifies.

What parent would seek to punish a beloved child, perhaps a stronger, well meaning child for the wrongs committed by a younger, weaker, perhaps even physically feeble child?  What parent would then be called loving by doing such an unjust act against their children?

Rob Bell in his controversial book, Love Wins writes:  “If there was an earthly father who was like that, we would call the authorities. If there was an actual human dad who was that volatile, we would contact child protection services immediately.”  My comment on this quote was: “We [would] do the same for a father who punishes his older, stronger, more able son for the shortcomings, the wrongs committed by the younger and feebler son.  This is what God is doing when Jesus is crucified on the cross for our sins, for our wrongs committed.”

Now to be fair, the quote is taken out of context from Rob Bell’s text.  He is not talking about Jesus being punished for the sins of humanity.  He is talking about millions of people who have been taught that if someone does not accept Jesus in the ‘right’ way and they were then killed that very day, then God would have no choice but to punish them eternally with hell fire. Bell writes, “God would, in essence, become a fundamentally different being to them in that moment of death, a different being to them forever.” Such a god who portrays as being loving that would then become vindictive at the moment of death is no loving god. I agree with Rob Bell on this point.

I remember in high school, one of my classmates dying in a horrible car accident. The story went around the school that moments before his car accident he was being witnessed to about Jesus; he became angry and stormed off and consequently died.  The moral of this story was exactly what Rob Bell is saying.  My classmate because he rejected Christ was now in hell.  See what happens? God will take us out too, if we reject his son. How in heaven is this good news?

But Rob Bell’s argument in my mind is the same.  No loving parent would punish a good child, an obedient child, a child that models the best qualities of virtue for the inabilities, the inherent flaws in the child that cannot live up to those standards. No loving parent would call that love, mercy, or grace.

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16) The key is in how we define the word “gave.”  To be consistent with God being love, crucifixion on the cross does not fit the definition.  Jesus tells the parable of the vineyard that a king had leased out.  He sends a servant to collect his harvest and the servant is beaten.  The king sends another servant and he too is beaten. So the king sends his beloved son, and the workers at the vineyard conspire together and kill the son.  The king does not give the son to be killed; it is what the workers at the vineyard do. God did not give his son to be crucified; it is the action that the people chose to take. At best the crucifixion can be seen as humanities abusive tendencies with all of life’s gifts to us.

There is a flaw in the theology surrounding the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus.  Now I understand how such a flawed theology could arise.  Humans are meaning makers.  We want everything to have a meaning, a purpose.  We want our lives to be meaningful and not just the drudgery of the day to day indifference.  We have incorporated this meaning making into our clichés and platitudes.  When someone dies, we hear things like “God’s ways are mysterious” or it was “God’s will”. When we go through tough times we hear that “God is working his purpose out” or “God only allows what we can endure.”   We want our lives to have purpose, to have meaning.  So here was this man who lived and taught extraordinary truths on the nature of love.  He is betrayed, he is tortured, and he is crucified on a cross.  We want this to have meaning. We need it to be filled with profound meaning.

What possible meaning could it have?  He lived in a culture that valued the notion of substitution of wrongs through sacrifice.  This is the culture of the scapegoat.  This is the culture that had stories of child sacrifices with Abraham offering up his son to God. This is the culture that believed that blood rituals could bring atonement for sins. It makes sense that this culture would seek meaning in this manner.

But this is meaning that contradicts the very teachings of Jesus.  This is meaning that makes salvation into a three minute sinner’s prayer with no more commitment than that to achieve life eternal.  Salvation becomes marketable and easy. This life is filled with grief and sorrow but there is pie in the sky with Jesus.  All the focus is on the here after and no concern on the here and now.

Rob Bell states in his book, “Often the people most concerned about others going to hell when they die seem less concerned with the hells on earth right now, while the people most concerned with the hells on earth right now seem the least concerned about hell after death.” 

But if the meaning of Jesus’ life is not the atonement of sins to enable our safe passage into heaven, then what is his good news?  How do we make sense of his death?

Jesus saw his life to “proclaim release to the captives and the recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”  (Luke 4: 18-19) His life was to show the power of love, justice in the world.  His life was to offer a new way of being that was not caught up in greed, coercion, or power abuse; be it physical, emotional, psychological, or corporate abuse.

This is a harder message to absorb. It is not a quick fix salvation. It sometimes points the finger of justice directly at where we live and convicts us. But it does seek to embody love in a way that is liberating in the here and now. It proclaims that not even death can stop it from progressing forward. Love is more powerful than death.  Love will resurrect in the hearts and minds of those who seek after it. It proclaims that we can be a part of that message if we seek to love one another.

“Perhaps the story of the physical raising of a dead man to life is an allegory of something else like the hope and promise of resurrection in the living of our days.  In the days that followed the biblical story, there was a change in the people who had followed Jesus. We are told they were all in hiding, in fear of their lives when their teacher was killed.  Over the next few weeks, they began to come out of their own self imposed tombs to begin spreading a message they had learned from their teacher. They tapped into the message of Jesus’ ministry of love and justice for others and began to see new possibilities for their lives.  It was as if the words of this man began to live within their own hearts, and created a new perspective on how they viewed life.  The embodied resurrection was empowering them to create their lives anew with the message they had heard. “[From “The Silence of the Resurrection” © 2009 Rev. Fred L Hammond UUCTuscaloosa)

Our focus then should not be on the crucifixion of Jesus. It should not even be on the resurrection. These are just footnotes to the narrative that was Jesus’ teachings. Our focus in this narrative is on what Jesus taught.  How are we to live our day to day lives?  How do we help bring release to the captors and set the oppressed free?  How do we love one another? How do we embody the teachings of Jesus so that they too transform us and the world around us?  How do we love one another, especially the ones who have caused us pain?

These are the vital questions to be asking ourselves. These are the questions that will re-frame  and transform our lives in profound ways.    Blessings,

Harbors, Sanctuaries, and Closets

10 April 2011 © Rev. Fred L Hammond

Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

“Would you harbor me?  Would I harbor you?”  This powerful song by Sweet Honey in the Rock asks some tough questions and in further reflection asks more questions.  What does this word imply?  What are we wanting in a harbor?  What are we looking to offer as a harbor?  The word can be a noun or a verb.  As a noun, it is “a place on the coast where vessels may find shelter, esp. one protected from rough water by piers, jetties, and other artificial structures” or “a place of refuge.” As a verb, it is “Keep (a thought or feeling, typically a negative one) in one’s mind, esp. secretly” or “Give a home or shelter to” or “Shelter or hide (a criminal or wanted person)” or “Carry the germs of (a disease)”or refers to the crew of a ship that “moors in a harbor.” [i]

The harbor can be a place where sailors get some needed R and R, where boats are built or rebuilt, where ships can weather the storms.  The question becomes for what purpose do we use harbors?  Are they places where we are to remain for evermore?

The word Sanctuary also has similar connotations.  It is a place set apart, made holy for worship but it was also a place of safety, of refuge, of asylum.  In the middle ages a person could enter a sanctuary and receive immunity from being arrested or executed.

The most recent example of the word Sanctuary in this regard was in the Sanctuary Movement of the 1980’s. This was a civil initiative of some 500 congregations including Unitarian Universalist to enforce the federal law of offering asylum to refugees from war torn Central America.  The law stated that a person would be granted asylum if they could prove well founded fear of persecution in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua. The United States refused to acknowledge the proof of persecution because to do so would also mean acknowledging its role in arming the Juntas against their own people.

The goal was not to house these individuals forever in various congregations but rather to move these individuals into Canada where they could obtain political asylum and rebuild their lives until such time as they could return to their homeland or become naturalized as Canadian citizens.

The word closet means a place where to store things or hang clothes.  But in England a closet was a small room where a person could read in private and in India, a closet referred to a toilet.  The term water closet referred to a room with a flushable toilet.  The word began to take on figurative meanings as well, such as a place to hide things like family secrets. I once dated someone who described his family by saying, “Not all of the skeletons in my family’s closet are dead.”   He was born into the Mafia.  And for those who were gay being in the closet was a form of self preservation.

When I was first starting Interfaith AIDS Ministry, the office was in a converted church closet with louvered doors that I would unlock and open wide.  One of my volunteers made a sign when I was not in the office that stated “Fred has just left the closet.”  The agency spent its first five years in that closet.  Somehow this beginning all seemed very fitting.

So back to our question:  What do the words Harbors, Sanctuaries, and Closets imply for us here?  Here we are living in the Deep South where the words Christian and Baptist are conflated as one and the same.  All other denominations are suspect of heresy and are surely going to hell. And when going to hell is the starting point for every other Christian denomination, then what about the person who does not even claim the Christian nomenclature but perhaps is Jewish, or Muslim, or Unitarian Universalist, or even something all together different?

When I lived in Mississippi, I would be invited to Southern Mississippi University in Hattiesburg to speak with the social work students about Unitarian Universalists.  The professor wanted to make sure that her students knew that not everyone was a Baptist.  So I would sit on a panel with other clergy representing Roman Catholic, Muslim, Jewish, and Wiccan.  Many of the students had no idea that there were Mississippians who practiced another religion other than Baptist. I am not being ugly when I say this; they admitted never having met anyone who was not Baptist.  It was as if we had all been under lock and key, hidden away to not embarrass the company like Harry Potter at his aunt’s house.

So when we come here on Sunday, are we coming to leave our closet to be with others who are in some ways like us?  When I was in the gay closet my best moments were when I was with friends where I could simply relax and be myself.  These moments were so refreshing, so rejuvenating like removing a tight corset and being able to breathe even for a little while. And so is this place like that for you?  A place where you do not have to watch every liberal word that comes out of your mouth in conversations.  A place where Baptist platitudes will not be heard and do not need to be politely ignored or defended against?  I fully understand the attraction.

When I came out of the closet, I had a cousin claim that he did not know any gay people and so I would be the first. Well, it turns out that we have another cousin who is gay so that makes two. While I did not entirely believe my cousin that he did not know anyone who was gay, I did believe that those who were gay around him might stay in the closet because they are unsure of how he might respond. I believed that his knowing at least one openly gay person who, if I may be so bold, does not fit the gay stereotype and the negativity it generates would in time erode whatever homophobic milieu he absorbed from his environment.  In short, his knowing me and later our cousin might begin to make it safe for others around him to also come out of the closet.

I am frequently told by people in the Deep South that they either have never heard of Unitarian Universalists or of the parent faiths of Unitarians and Universalists that begat us or what they have heard is grossly misinformed. This is not the case in New England where Unitarian Universalist congregations are almost as common as Baptist congregations here.

What I also discover when talking with these individuals is that they frequently do indeed know Unitarian Universalists in their lives or Unitarians and Universalists from history but for whatever reason the living Unitarian Universalists in their lives did not feel safe to come out to them.  Much like my cousin, they claimed they did not know any Unitarian Universalists when all the time we were working side by side with them but hiding in our closet.

I wonder what would happen if we were open to listening to our colleagues at work when they begin talking about their faith to gently engage them with talking about ours.  What would happen if we came out of the Unitarian Universalist closet and people began to see that we are not the Satan worshippers or the cult they have been told.  I wonder what would happen if they began to see that what we value in our lives are similar to the values they share.  Perhaps there are differences in expression of those values but for people to recognize that others share similar values is the start towards building a better community.

There are sanctuaries where we are safe from the pressures pushing in on our lives. Sanctuaries do not need to be simply this place but could be the places where we gather.  When I was speaking in Montgomery on the recent bills presented to the house and senate, I felt sanctuary knowing that there were Unitarian Universalist clergy and others in the room urging me on.  There is a sense of safety when two or more are gathered. This too is a form of sanctuary.

Peter Mayer, Unitarian Universalists singer/song writer has a song that declares everything is holy now.  If sanctuaries are places made holy then Peter Mayer is telling us that every where is a sanctuary, everywhere and every moment has the potential to amaze us, transform us, and inform us of the holy. It is not just this place where we gather on Sunday morn but everywhere we gather.

What else happened in the sanctuaries of old?  There were prayers, rituals, and means in which to strengthen bonds to one another and to the faith such as the Eucharist also known as communion.

In a few weeks we will celebrate a communion of sorts.  We will have a flower communion where we honor the diversity of flowers of our planet as a metaphor to the diversity of our humanity.  Each one of us is beautiful; each one of us is an unfolding blossom of great potential to seed the world with love and justice. We will exchange the flowers that we bring with a flower that another has brought to remember that it is in giving and receiving that we are blessed with this love.

These rituals, both traditional and new, happened not just to soothe the heart or release the burdens that press down upon us but also to equip the faithful to go back out and engage the world.  Engage the world not just as individuals but as a community of faith.

There is something powerful when a group of people do an activity in the community.  When hundreds of Unitarian Universalists went to Phoenix, Arizona last July wearing our deep yellow “Standing on the Side of Love” shirts we were recognized as a religious movement that is making a statement on justice in this country. It was a more powerful statement than if we just showed up as individuals, albeit people of faith.

I am excited that a number of us are participating in the One Tuscaloosa project which is addressing racism in our community structures.  But at the same time, I am puzzled that we are not doing this as a group of Unitarian Universalists but rather as individuals where affiliation to our faith can remain hidden, remain closeted.

Could we be meeting here at the church as a group to discuss and reflect upon our experiences that we are having within One Tuscaloosa?  If our faith is a transformative faith it is in the sharing of our values to change the world with one another in a manner that is supportive of one another in this journey we are on.  There is no shame in someone noticing that as a group we Unitarian Universalists live by our principles and honor the integrity of those we meet.

What makes creating justice important to me as a Unitarian Universalist is not the small hard won victories but rather the reflecting on these experiences either alone or with others. Both are needed.  If we do not pause and reflect on how we are supporting our values and simply “rage, rage against the dying of the light” then we will burn out and unable to continue to love our neighbors as our selves. It is in the coming back together again in the sanctuary of our shared mutual hearts, in the sanctuary of where we are safe to cry, safe to laugh, safe to express our grief, our loss, our pain and accept the salve of love from our community that allows us to go back out and engage the world again.

Harbors.  Will you harbor me?  Will I harbor you?  I am beginning to see these words as being much larger and more powerful than before.  Harboring someone is more than just providing shelter from the storm.  It is also enabling rejuvenation to occur within the person.  After being tossed to and fro on the stormy seas of life, it might be expected that there is need to rest, to regain our strength.

Living in the Deep South, we can be bombarded with harsh dogmatic statements regarding all sorts of positions: women’s right to choose, marriage equality rights, Sharia Law, and Separation of Church and State. We can be bombarded with people concerned with our eternal wellbeing while appearing to not care very much for our physical and emotional wellbeing. These statements can wear us down after a while especially if they are colleagues or members of our family.

So coming to a Unitarian Universalist congregation can be a harbor where we will not seek to coerce another to accept any doctrine but rather give each person the breathing room to explore the doctrine and come to one’s own conclusion.

When I first began attending a Unitarian Universalist congregation, I was still reeling from a charismatic catholic prayer community that I had attended for many years.  While I learned a lot from this prayer community being exiled for my sexuality was painful.  So I warily attended the Unitarian Universalists.   I was allowed breathing room.  I could ask my questions without feeling judged or receive comments like “how could you believe that?”  And slowly I became more at ease and just like an abused animal who eventually no longer cowers in the presence of others, I began to gain the strength to call this place my harbor, my refuge; a place where I could build my ship for my spiritual journey.

A quote with multiple attributions is “A ship in a harbor is safe but that is not what ships are built for.”  It is true for our faith as well.  It is safe to be a Unitarian Universalist within this harbor, this sanctuary, and within this closet but that is not what our faith is for.  Our faith is to be engaged with the world, to be the salt that adds flavor, to be the beacon light on the hill, to help build the city of joy where all people are honored for who they are on this beautiful blue boat home.   Blessed Be.

Senate Bill 256 section two opens with this statement, “The state of Alabama finds that illegal immigration is causing economic hardship and lawlessness in this state.” I would like to know on what evidence does the state of Alabama make this assumption.

Here are the facts, The Congressional Budget Office in 2007 determined, “Over the past two decades, most efforts to estimate the fiscal impact of immigration in the United States have concluded that, in aggregate and over the long term, tax revenues of all types generated by immigrants—both legal and unauthorized—exceed the cost of the services they use.”  This does not indicate economic hardship.   The law advocacy group, Alabama Appleseed, found data that stated that immigrants in Alabama account for 4.9 Billion dollars in state revenue in 2009.  This also does not indicate economic hardship.

So what about lawlessness.  Since 1980 both violent and property crime rates have dropped nationwide according to the US Census Bureau.  But let’s look more closely at Alabama with data from the FBI. In 1980, Murder rates were at 13.2 per 100,000 and in 2009, 6.9 per 100,000.  Rape, robbery, aggravated assault remained roughly the same between 1980 and 2009.

What about the numbers of immigrants nationwide—in 1980 1-16 people was an immigrant, in 1990, 1-13 and in 2007 1-8 were immigrants. This data is from Center for Immigration Studies.   In Alabama, we know that according to the US census, the immigration population in 1990 was 1.1%.  It grew to 2% in 2000 and to 4% in 2010.  So if immigrants were indeed causing an increase in lawlessness, then their increasing numbers might be found to correlate with an increasing number of crimes but this is not the case.  What does show a possible correlation to crime rates is the increase of the poverty rate in Alabama from 14.6% in 2000 and 16.6% in 2010.

The State of Alabama has not proven its case that immigrants, documented or undocumented are causing either economic hardship or increased lawlessness.  What the state of Alabama has proved by this bill is that it is scapegoating the economic woes of Alabama on the backs of immigrants instead of addressing the real cause of its problems which is a corrupt tax code that deliberately privileges corporations and the wealthy and over burdens the working class and poor.

The result of this will be economic suicide.  Alabama may succeed to drive out our immigrant population because of the racial profiling and harassment that will ensue resulting in all of our businesses losing the 4.9 Billion dollars in revenue this group of hard working, decent people contribute annually.

You were elected to create jobs so that Alabama can thrive but this hardhearted, and dare I say, arrogant bill will instead destroy Alabama.  Do not go down this immoral and unjust path, Alabama’s people deserve better from you. You are better than this.

 

Tuesday was the day for Alabama’s Senate to hold their public hearing on their version of the Arizona style immigration bill, SB 256.  This public hearing had a different feel than the house version of this bill.  It was located in a small cramped room of standing room only.   The senators instead of just listening to comments made their own comments in response.  It was these comments that were most telling regarding the mindset behind this bill.

All of the speakers who spoke to this bill spoke in opposition. Shay Farley of Alabama Appleseed confronted the assumptions that are written directly into the bill’s language.  It was the direction I would be going in my presentation as well when my turn to speak came.   She spoke directly to the assumption that “illegal immigrants” are the cause of lawlessness and economic hardship.  The responses from Senator Scofield and another senator whose name escapes me were of the anecdotal stories of gangs, of property values decreasing because of overcrowding, the costs to schools for Spanish translators where the population is 20%  immigrants, and of hospitals not being able to recoup full costs from births of immigrants.   Anecdotal stories based on assumptions that if “illegal immigrants” were rounded up and deported then gangs would disappear, overcrowding of housing would cease, the need for Spanish translators would no longer exist, and hospitals’ maternity wards would be paid in full.  Ms. Farley countered that hospitals are mandated by federal law to provide services regardless of immigrant status. Once the child is born they are citizens thereby making hospitals eligible for full reimbursement.  The senator responded that if the immigrants simply were not here in the first place the hospital would not have to worry about full or partial reimbursement.

There is another narrative that could be applied to these anecdotal stories. That narrative is one of extreme poverty but to apply this narrative would require a different solution where tax codes are revised so that corporations and the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes in the state enabling reinvestment into communities where poverty reigns supreme.   But in this state of Alabama where white privilege is institutionalized in its constitution, it is going to take more than retelling the story of immigrants.

The assumption that if 20% of a student population speaks Spanish then that same 20% must be here illegally or born to parents who are here illegally is a false assumption.  The senator stated that if these illegal immigrants were removed then the school could hire more teachers instead of having to pay for translation services.  It is a huge assumption that 20% native Spanish speaking children in a school equals 20% undocumented children.  How would the school district or the state for that matter  accomplish the removal of these students so that there would no longer be any need for the nine translators the senator stated this school now employs?

It is quite simple of course.  Begin by stopping every driver who appears to be of foreign descent.  Now it could be for legal reasons such as driving over the speed limit or failure to use turn signals but it might also be for such minor infractions like a cracked tail light.  Create laws that require every aspect of the immigrant’s  life is spent proving their right to be here.  Every new job, every new rental, every new medical procedure, every minor infraction, every time  a ride is hitched to work, every time a church provides transportation to attend worship, every time a driver’s license is renewed, every time a marriage license or a hunting license is sought, every time children are enrolled into school or college ; the immigrant is there proving their right to exist. This proposed legislation impinges on all of these aspects of life in this state and creates felonies for all who refuse to comply to it.  This is legal harassment.

The assumption that “illegal immigrants” are receiving services that they do not deserve is strong.  And since the state cannot know who is or is not here illegally, every one who is of reasonable suspicion is stopped. It is no longer about removing undocumented people, it is about removing immigrants from the state.

A young woman spoke and stated that she is the face of immigrants in the state.  She stated that her parents became citizens through the immigration act of 1986.  The opportunities created for her family has enabled her to pursue her doctorate  but because she is Latino she will be targeted under this legislation. By her looks  alone  it will be assumed that she is undocumented.  Senator Sanford replied that all she needs to do is show her driver’s license and be on her way as if the indignity of being targeted again and again is that easily resolved.  He added that he appreciates her putting a face to immigrants in the state but hers was not the face this bill is targeting.  Senator Sanford does not get it.  His response was smug and arrogant.  His response implied that he could tell what the face of an undocumented person looks like in Alabama.   How many times will a police officer see her brown skin and then create a reason to check her out?  How many time will this happen before she decides Alabama is no longer a safe place for her because of institutionalized white supremacy and privilege?

Assumptions about the anecdotal stories is what is driving this bill.  Not facts.  Not concrete data.  But assumptions on the anecdotes.  Assumptions that are developed through the lens of a constitution that was never dismantled and discarded after the civil rights movement struck many of its provisions federally unconstitutional.  A constitution that still declares itself to be a white supremacist document and still institutionalizes white privilege through out the state.  The white senators do not get it.  They sat there and in the face of facts and in the face of evidence that proved their assumptions wrong, they smugly stated they were in the right.

I will post the text of my presentation in a separate post.

Every so often a member of my congregation or from another congregation would tell me they cannot bear to hear a certain song or a certain story or even specific words because they conjure up for them such painful memories in their past.   They have connected to these songs, stories, or specific words to those memories so tightly that their response is almost like the conditioning that Pavlov had created with connecting the sound of a bell with food. The next statement from these individuals is to please never use these songs, stories, or words again because the pain is just too unbearable.

So how do we offer healing to our congregants?  Do we do so by avoiding certain texts, certain songs, certain words or do we do so by offering these texts, songs, and words in a different context.  If we refuse to sing a song because it is painful for some of our members, then that is a pastoral issue that we need to address.  Yes, we need to understand their pain. Yes, we need to understand the source of their pain but to refuse to ever sing the song again is not healthy either; not for them and not for us.

Religious community is about transformation.  It is about healing.  It is about conversion. It is about transcendence. Why would we try to protect people from these processes? Why would we want to keep people in bondage to their wounded and traumatic past by avoiding words, songs, texts that are tangential to their experience and do not need to be paired with those experiences any longer?

We want to be sensitive.  We want to be a loving community where we respect each others dignity and worth.  We want to be a place where we do not inflict pain and hurt on each other.  So in deference to our dear companions painful experiences we choose to avoid those songs, texts, or even those words that might offend or bring to the surface their emotional pain.

But this is not how we heal.  We do not heal by avoidance.  We heal emotionally and spiritually by expanding the context of meaning.  We heal by salving the wound with love and acceptance in that new context.

In my younger days, I belonged to a charismatic prayer community that was known for lack of a better word its Holy Roller behavior.  Nothing would stir this up for us more than the song, “Now Let Us Sing.” We would sing it over and over again with increasing frenzy until Holy Roller behavior occurred.  The song was done in a very coercive manner.

After my being excommunicated for being gay and my early days of attending a Unitarian Universalist congregation, I would shudder whenever I heard the congregation use the word community and would practically go into a panic whenever we sang, “Now Let Us Sing.”  I spoke up about this to the congregation but instead of the congregation no longer using the word which had very manipulative connotations for me or no longer singing the song, I was invited to expand the context of meaning.  I was invited to hear the word in a new way and to sing the song in a new voice. That is healing. That is transformation.  That is transcendence. That is conversion.

I knew that I was no longer in bondage to that pain when I could use the word community and not wince at those memories.  I knew that I was no longer in bondage to that pain when I could sing, “Now Let Us Sing” and not flashback to being coercive-ly manipulated by this other group. I was finally free.

Now perhaps this example seems trivial compared to the unimaginable experiences of someone living through the Holocaust or being molested by an alleged trusted adult. But my point is either we have a religion that offers freedom and healing to its members or we do not.  If we do, and I believe we do, then we need to be willing to find creative ways to bring that healing to our members.

Isn’t that what we want our faith to offer each of us?  To find release from whatever holds us back from living our full potential?  To find a place where we can explore what that potential might in fact be?  To find a place where we can be grounded and nurtured and bloom to the fullness of our life?  Now I do not know what that looks like for each of our members. I would imagine it is wildly unique. And that is the joy of our ministry.

“‘Tis a Gift to Be Simple”
Rev. Fred L Hammond
20 March 2011 ©
Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

Back in the 1990’s as I began organizing a non-profit agency serving people with HIV/AIDS, I distinctly remember having a conversation with my staff of the time wondering how in the world we ever managed without Fax machines. Now those FAX machines used thermal paper so we had to make a photo copy of them or else the paper would brown over a short period of time making the information unreadable. This led to the question how did we ever manage without copiers. When word processing became standard, the conversation became how we ever managed without computers. Then it was cell phones, the internet, emails, text messages, facebook, twitter, all methods to assist us in communication. And now that we have Kindles and Nooks, how did we manage without having a complete library at our fingertips. All of these technologies were to make our lives easier, so we thought. And it isn’t just in communications that these advances have occurred; it is in other fields as well…

My grand uncle Luther worked the farm, where he and my grandmother were born, in the same way that my great, great, great grandfather worked it with horse drawn plows and with tools that he blacksmithed himself. There is a film in the village’s museum of my great grandmother hand churning butter, she also hand churned ice cream. The farm did not have electricity until my grandfather wired the house in 1948. And then it was only a light bulb here and there. My great grandmother’s first purchase after getting electricity was an electric butter churner. There was an outhouse placed just so over the running brook until the health department came and told them it had to be moved away from the brook. And there was a well with a hand pump that came up into the kitchen. My uncle lived this way until his death in the mid 1980’s.

How differently they lived from us today. My family is only slightly atypical to have had family members still living as if the year was 1840 instead of 1986, the year my grand uncle died.  Everyone in this room is only two or three or four generations away from having family who lived in this simpler fashion.

We hear from many sectors of society of nostalgia for simpler times. There is a desire for a time when life was not so complex, not so demanding. We expect emails to be answered immediately if not sooner. We expect our computers to be as responsive to our direction as our muscles are to our brain’s commands, anything slower than that result in frustrating expletives coming from our lips.

The push for our children is for them to have a fully developed resume of athletic, music and the arts, civic volunteerism, and academic achievements just to be considered for a college application. Their schedules are just as hectic as and even more so than their parents. The pressure to perform is fierce. We have so many demands on our time that it seems that even breathing is an intrusion. Oh for a simpler time!

So just how do we achieve a simpler time. Well clearly, it is not by reverting back to how my grand uncle Luther lived with no indoor plumbing or electricity. Some may choose that but that is not what I am suggesting.

I am suggesting however, an examination of what fills our cups? There is story about this. It goes something like this: “A philosophy professor stood before his class with some items on the table in front of him. When the class began, wordlessly he picked up a very large and empty mayonnaise jar and proceeded to fill it with rocks, about 2 inches in diameter.
“He then asked the students if the jar was full. They agreed that it was.
“So the professor then picked up a box of pebbles and poured them into the jar. He shook the jar lightly. The pebbles, of course, rolled into the open areas between the rocks.
“He then asked the students again if the jar was full. They agreed it was.
“The professor picked up a box of sand and poured it into the jar. Of course, the sand filled up everything else.
“He then asked once more if the jar was full. The students responded with a unanimous ‘Yes.’
“‘Now,’ said the professor, ‘I want you to recognize that this jar represents your life. The rocks are the important things – your family, your partner, your health, your children – things that if everything else was lost and only they remained, your life would still be full.
“The pebbles are the other things that matter – like your job, your house, your car.
“The sand is everything else. The small stuff.’
“‘If you put the sand into the jar first,’ he continued ‘there is no room for the pebbles or the rocks. The same goes for your life.
“If you spend all your time and energy on the small stuff, you will never have room for the things that are important to you. Pay attention to the things that are critical to your happiness. Play with your children. Take your partner out dancing. There will always be time to go to work, clean the house, give a dinner party and fix the disposal.
“Take care of the rocks first – the things that really matter. Set your priorities. The rest is just sand .’”
I want to suggest that the jar is still not full. There is another thing that can be placed in the jar and that is water. The water can be considered to symbolize faith and the values we hold dear in our lives. But if all we have is faith in our life then it can lead to fundamentalism, it can lead to dogmatism, it can lead to easily being swayed by the tossing waves of fanaticism. Unitarian Universalists are just as prone to this as anyone so while some might think I am only referring to fanatical groups such as the Westboro Baptists, I am not. I am also referring to us.

If faith, water, is placed in our jars first, then we place the sand in the jar, which is all that stuff, the sand will cause the faith to spill out and leave the jar. Our families, our children, our relationships will suffer horribly under all the busy-ness of our lives. Our families, our children will suffer also if our jars are filled with water first because they will threaten the faith we have and cause it to spill over.

For example, if faith is first in my jar and filled to the brim and that faith tells me that homosexuality is wrong, then when one of my rocks in my life such as a child or a sibling comes out as gay, there is no room for them in my jar without sacrificing some of my faith. And since I have placed my faith first in my jar the child or sibling is cast aside because it is more important than anything or anyone else in our life. But if I have placed my child or sibling first in my jar and then add faith, faith surrounds them in love and I find myself enriched by their presence in new and miraculous ways.

When we place our rocks in the jar first and then the pebbles and then the sand and then the water something else happens. The water is able to interact with all of these and make the jar of our life conducive to growing life. The values we treasure enable our lives to support the lush green plants of our life as well. Our lives are no longer a desert of dry rocks, pebbles, and sand instead our lives become able to sustain life. They become able to weather the storms that certainly will cross our paths and seek to blow the rocks and pebbles away.

Faith is not something that flourishes in a solitary fashion. It is something that when shared with family, friends, and those we meet can create the environment where life can be nurtured and held in love. It can be the transformative act that helps us engage our world to create a more just world.

Simplifying our lives by removing the sand so that there is room for the rocks in our lives becomes an important goal. Duane Elgin, author of Voluntary Simplicity, outlines several forms of simplicity that people across the globe are seeking.

These are:
Uncluttered Simplicity: … means taking charge of lives that are too busy, too stressed, and too fragmented.

Ecological Simplicity: … means choosing ways of living that touch the Earth more lightly and that reduce our ecological impact on the web of life. … An ecological simplicity feels a deep reverence for the community of life on Earth and accepts that the nonhuman realms of plants and animals have their dignity and rights as well.

Family Simplicity: … means placing the well-being of one’s family ahead of materialism and the acquisition of things.

Compassionate Simplicity: … means feeling such a strong sense of kinship with others that, as Gandhi said, we “choose to live simply so that others may simply live.”

Soulful Simplicity: … means approaching life as a meditation and cultivating our experience of direct connection with all that exists.

Business Simplicity: … means that a new kind of economy is growing in the world, with healthy and sustainable products and services of all kinds (home-building materials, energy systems, food production, transportation).

Civic Simplicity: … means that living more lightly and sustainably on the Earth requires changes in every area of public life—from public transportation and education to the design of our cities and workplaces.

Frugal Simplicity: … means that, by cutting back on spending that is not truly serving our lives, and by practicing skillful management of our personal finances, we can achieve greater financial independence .

There are lots of ways for us to explore living more simply and making sure that the rocks and pebbles in our lives are well grounded and supported. It does not necessarily mean that we live in poverty or that we not purchase the technological gadgets that can cause our lives to be filled primarily with sand. What it means is that we consciously and deliberately choose what we have in our lives. It means we do not fall prey to the Best Buy commercial where the gadget we bought is obsolete the minute we purchase it and therefore must spend more money to upgrade ASAP. It means that we do not spend hundreds of dollars on the special edition Nikes when the no brand shoe will suffice.

It means that we sit down as a family and have face to face conversations instead of the Sprint commercial where the mother texts the teenage daughter that grandma is moving into her bedroom. What is really disturbing about this commercial is that everyone at the dinner table is more attuned to their cell phones than they are at verbal communication. If this sounds like your household, then consider banning cell phones at the dinner table. There are some times when we do not need to be instantly accessible to the latest Facebook or tweet being posted. I realize this is the new heresy of the modern age.

The benefits of voluntary simplicity (1) to the individual are great:
• More time to spend with family, friends and community.
• Less money spent on almost everything.
• Less stress in high-paying jobs or commuting to them.
• Less worry over possessions getting stolen or damaged.
• More satisfaction in learning to do things for oneself, such as fixing and maintaining possessions, cooking, gardening and … by mending and sewing, as well as making music and fun.
• Other benefits that are corollaries of these, including more time to read, less ill health, more opportunity to exercise and do satisfying physical work, less chance of getting in an accident on the freeway, and a general reordering of values from a focus on materialism to a focus on relationships.
But the benefits when people live a voluntarily simple life go beyond the individual and the family. Benefits to society as a whole and to the Earth are significant, and include:
• Less pollution from transportation and less traffic congestion, accidents and need for new roads.
• Less environmental impact from resource extraction and manufacturing.
• Less need for new power plants and new water treatment plants as people waste less electricity and water.
• More community cohesiveness, resulting in less crime and more neighborliness, safer streets and better schools.
• More grassroots democracy as people take more interest in how their communities operate.
• More ecological restoration as people find simple pleasure in connecting with their local environment and seek to heal it.
• A flowering of local culture–music, storytelling, drama, games, poetry.
Voluntary simplicity is a means to re-prioritizing our lives so that we are able to enjoy life more with those whom we love. It enables us to be stewards of this earth by using its resources in a more responsible manner.

I will close with this thought also from Duane Elgin: “Mahatma Gandhi advocate[d] a blind denial of the material side of life. He said, ‘As long as you derive inner help and comfort from anything, you should keep it. If you were to give it up in a mood of self-sacrifice or out of a stern sense of duty, you would continue to want it back, and that unsatisfied want would make trouble for you. Only give up a thing when you want some other condition so much that the thing no longer has any attraction for you.’”

Creating a simpler life is not about giving up things because of the need to sacrifice for the sake of others but rather it is when the desired outcome has increased in value for you that giving up the sand in your life is done voluntarily and easily.

In a world that is increasingly placing demands on our time and on our resources, it becomes a life giving act to consciously place priority on what matters most in our lives. It becomes a transformative act that can model for the world another way living that is healthy for our selves and for our planet. May we all examine our lives to see if the rocks in our life are placed first in our lives. Blessed Be.

(1) http://www.greatriv.org/vs.htm

Other quotes unless noted within the text with a hyper link are from Voluntary Simplicity Secondition: Toward a Way of Life That Is Outwardly Simple, Inwardly Rich (Duane Elgin)

I had posted as my Facebook status the following: Universalism is the belief that all people, and I mean all people, are loved and received home by the creator. Therefore no matter how far we stray from our human ability to express love to our neighbors we, like the prodigal son, will be welcomed home into the arms of an all forgiving, all embracing creator. Love Wins. The choice is in whether we allow love to win now or later.

A friend then asked the obvious question, “Even Hitler?”  Yes, even Hitler. In the story of the prodigal son there were two brothers, the younger brother took his share of inheritance and wasted it all on prostitutes and drugs.  When he had become destitute he returns to his father’s home. The older brother is filled with rage that his father would throw this lavish party for his no good for nothing brother while not once had his father given him even so much as a young goat that he might celebrate with his friends.  That older brother is us.  It is easy for us who work hard to be just and loving, to do what is right to then become angry when mercy and love is offered to one who is so far from us in our actions.  It is easy to point our fingers at another and say that person is not worthy of love, look at what they have done!  “Give him the Death Penalty!”  “Crucify Him!”

They have conspired to murder, to rape, to terrorism; clearly these things are wrong and therefore worthy of death.  It is easy to justify this.  We as a society must have a standard conduct of behavior or else chaos would reign, right?  And so when a Hitler who has caused directly and indirectly so much evil and untold suffering in the world it is hard to believe that even Hitler could be embraced by Love.

I don’t remember who said it, but there is a quote out there in the universe that goes something like this, “It’s a pretty good bet that if God hates all the same people that you do, then that is not God.”  God should not be made in our image.  If God is all loving then that love extends to even those we detest with our whole being.   Hitler, in  the history of the world, might be such a candidate to be detested with our whole being.

There are some that argue, if everyone gets to heaven, then what motivation is there to do what is right/ to have a moral code of behaviors.  Love wins. If I have been so swayed by the power of love, if I have been so convinced that Love is worth my devotion with my heart and soul then I will choose to seek to do what is most loving, most honorable, most just. To embody Love becomes my motivation to change myself and to change the world towards justice.

I have just purchased the book by Rob Bell entitled Love Wins.  Today is the day it became available.  But it is not a new thought. The notion that God loves all and all will go to heaven is deeply rooted in Unitarian Universalism.  The title says it all.  Love Wins.

If there is any limitation on that love, then love does not win.  If Hitler is not included in Love winning then Love is not love.  If Love refuses a Hitler then it is not love but something else. And if Love refuses a Hitler, who else does Love refuse to embrace? Who else is Love powerless to embrace? Who else is love unable to transform and heal? And who gets to declares this powerlessness, this limitation of Love? Jesus did not.  Buddha, Mohamed, Confucius, Abraham-Hicks, Ram Dass, Thich Nhat Hahn, Dalai Lama, Marianne Williamson, all the spiritual teachers that ever walked this earth never once declared Love to have its limits of being Love.

Either Love wins or Love is not love but selective and prejudiced and biased and judgmental and unforgiving and condemning and vindictive and capricious and …

Under cold windy clouds, about 100 people from across the state gathered on the steps of the Alabama State House to protest HB 56, Alabama’s copy cat version of several Arizona’s anti-immigration bills rolled into one. I was pleased to see other Unitarian Universalist Ministers as well as some other clergy from other denominations in the crowd. There were six people scheduled to speak after welcoming remarks by Zayne Smith of Alabama Appleseed Center for Law and Justice.

Isabel Rubio, Hispanic Interest Coalition of Alabama
Jason Childs, Center for Progress in Alabama
Sam Brooke, Southern Poverty Law Center
Jared Shepherd, Alabama American Civil Liberties Union
Fred Hammond, Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa
Shay Farley, Alabama Appleseed Center for Law & Justice

After Isabel Rubio spoke, the Black Democratic Caucus surprised us by coming out to speak against the bill.  It was wonderful to have them speak eloquently about this legislation and fully understand what this bill is really about-an attack on the human rights of a specific population.  Their speaking did change the time frame for the remaining speakers, who were quickly editing down their talking points in order to abide with the permit regulations of being done by 2 PM.   Below is the full text of my speech which was translated into Spanish on the spot by one of two wonderful translators.  I have italicized the portion of my talk that I read at this event. It was well received with a spontaneous chant at the end of my talk.

My name is Fred L Hammond, I am the minister of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa.

HB 56 goes against the very foundations of our faiths which teach us to love our neighbor as our selves.  Where-ever a similar bill to HB 56 has been passed the result has been the destruction of whole neighborhoods and local economies. And while these bills in these other locations also claimed to not use racial profiling, the lives of authorized citizens were repeatedly interrupted by unwarranted stops by police based on “reasonable suspicion.” These locations became hostile environments for American citizens who also happened to have brown skin or spoke with a particular accent.  We must not allow Alabama to reverse its progress against racism; instead we must continue to create the Alabama where all people, regardless of race or creed, are free to pursue the American Dream of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

There has been no consideration of what the economic cost to the municipalities mandated to not only enforce this law but to provide the funds to do so.  Representative Hammon stated that it costs $200 million a year to educate the undocumented children in our schools. He believes the savings to the state would far outweigh the cost of implementation.  Representative Hammon, you have been given a fictitious number.  There is no data, no evidence as to how many undocumented children we have in the state of Alabama. We do not even know how many undocumented citizens live in Alabama. This bill assumes that the 4 % of our population that are immigrants are all undocumented. There is no understanding what this bill will cost nor what it might potentially save us financially.

Here is what we do know.  Alabama’s 7,000 foreign students contributed $129 million to the state economy through tuition, fees, and living expenses in 2009.  Immigrants’ purchasing power was $4.9 Billion in 2009.  This bill’s intention is to make this state hostile to immigrants through “attrition by enforcement.” This bill will open the doors to harassment of foreign students and authorized immigrants who will then leave the state and take their money with them. So Representative Hammon how much are we going to save to outweigh this kind of revenue loss to the state?  Is this bill really worth $4.9 Billion in lost revenue?

HB 56 assumes that Alabama’s economic woes are caused by a growing immigration population.  This is scapegoating our irrational fears on the backs of innocent people. Alabama’s economic woes are caused by an unfair tax structure that allows corporations to pay nothing in taxes to Alabama. If corporations paid their fair share of income taxes then our state economy would be healthier. If the cost associated with similar bills passed elsewhere is any predictor, Alabama’s economy will further collapse under the heavy financial burden foisted onto the poor and the middle class. This bill only compounds the problems of the recession and does nothing to help rebuild Alabama’s economy.   It will lead to more irrational bills, drain the economy, and redirect law enforcers and courts away from addressing the violent crimes in the state.

And finally, Representative Hammon stated if a priest is found to have an undocumented citizen in his sanctuary then the priest would be arrested under this bill. This is the kind of legislation that criminalized ministers and priests in Germany for harboring Jews. People of faith are called to love mercifully, to act with justice, and to walk humbly with our God. If this bill makes me a criminal for living my faith, then so be it.  I will stand on the side of love rather than allow neighbor to turn against neighbor under an unjust law.   Vaya con Dios.  Si, se puede.

Blessings,

Yesterday I went to the Statehouse in Montgomery to testify against HB 56, Alabama’s version of Arizona’s SB 1070.  As I listened to the testimony of those who were for this bill, I was struck by the anger they felt towards the values I hold dear.

Values like compassion for others.  Values like acceptance of diversity.  Values like equal opportunities for all.  Values like honoring the integrity and dignity of others. Values like having life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness accessible for everyone.

My faith denomination, Unitarian Universalist,  has been the sponsors of the Standing of the Side of Love Campaign.  It has been used in several ways.  It is prominent in the ongoing immigrant rights struggle in Arizona and elsewhere.  It is prominent in supporting Muslim’s right to freedom of religion in Tennessee and in New York City and other places in America.  It is prominent in the right to marriage campaign across this country.  And most recently, it has been supporting workers rights for collective bargaining in Wisconsin, Indiana, and Ohio.

One of the criticisms lobbied at Unitarian Universalists is that we are not spiritual, that we are too much of the head and not enough, if at all, of the heart.  It has been a fair criticism.  We Unitarian Universalists value reason and critical thinking skills as a way to cut through the unprovable and the improbable in order to see the core of the matter in the hopes that we can make a difference for the better of all of our lives.  Sometimes we have succeeded and sometimes it has been our thorn in our side.

The Standing on the Side of Love campaign is in its very essence a remedy to that criticism.  Many years ago now, I decided to join Rev. Mel White, founder of Soulforce, in a seventeen step journey towards preparation in confronting the homophobia and violent rhetoric within the Christian Church.  This was a series of essays and reflections which I was invited to journal about and discuss with a friend before joining Mel White in Lynchburg, VA to speak with the late Rev. Jerry Falwell about his vitriol against gays.

One of the things Mel White wrote was this:

“When we seek freedom for someone else, we find freedom for ourselves. When we finally make the decision to take a stand against oppression (or the rhetoric that leads to oppression) that stand itself leads us to spiritual renewal whether we win or we lose the battle.”

Those who begin to engage in Standing on the Side of Love have an opportunity, to not only achieve the desired goal of undoing a grave injustice but also to experience a spiritual renewal within themselves.  Okay so that sounds self-centered and not altruistic in the least.

Yet, it is only ourselves that we can change. I cannot make someone else love their neighbor as they themselves would like to be loved.  But I can do that.  I can choose to love my neighbor.  I can reflect on what that action means to me and reinforce it into my behavior.  I can join with others who also choose to love their neighbor and together we can reflect on our common experiences of doing that act and build that into our way of being together.  This is what our Unitarian Universalist congregations aim to do every Sunday.

We can role model that behavior for others to witness.  Standing on the Side of Love is spiritual work.  It is not simply wearing a yellow t-shirt or placing a heart logo on our facebook page.  It is and can be a spiritual practice that helps us be fully in touch with our humanity’s soul.

I do not know how I will be able to face the anger that I faced yesterday if I do not choose to stand on the side of love daily.  I do not know how I will address that anger and possibly soften their anger to seeing another way if I do not choose to stand on the side of love daily.

I invite you to join me to stand on the side of love as if your life and faith depends on it.  I know mine does.  Blessings.

I have just returned from my first foray into Alabama politics at the statehouse where a public hearing on HB 56, Alabama’s combined version of several  laws passed in Arizona regarding immigration.  Many of the provisions are word for word from Arizona and thus if you hated Arizona’s SB 1070, then you will hate Alabama’s.

The first Wednesday of the month is the usual day when  my Unitarian Universalist ministers from Alabama and the Florida panhandle gather in Montgomery for a collegial meeting.  My Florida colleagues were unable to come to Montgomery today, so I suggested that we meet at the statehouse and attend this public hearing.  I was going to prepare a statement and having my colleagues there was indeed a comforting presence.

I have not done a statement at a public hearing in several years, the last time being when I lived in Connecticut and so I was anticipating a similar procedure where one needs to sign up well in advance of the meeting in order to get on the speakers list.   This really was not a concern I needed to worry about.   I got there early.  So did another person who it turns out had been on several emails that I received from Unitarian Universalists in the Birmingham area.  When the doors opened for the meeting I became the first person to sign up to speak, my new acquaintance, third.

State Rep. Mickie Hammon (Yes my last name minus the d)  is the chair and chief sponsor of this bill.  He gave a few introductory remarks including that this bill is already being amended and therefore much of what we are responding to could no longer be valid.  He then called on me to speak.

Here is the text that I delivered.

My name is Fred L Hammond, I am a resident of Northport.  I am also the minister of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa.

Last night, Governor Bentley stated that your role now that the election is over is to represent all of Alabama; this bill does not represent 4% of our people in this state.  This bill causes you to not live up to the role set by our Governor.

Where-ever a similar bill to HB 56, has been passed, be it in Prince William County in Virginia or in Arizona the result has been the destruction of whole neighborhoods and local economies. And while these bills in these other locations also claimed to not use racial profiling, the lives of authorized citizens were repeatedly interrupted by unwarranted stops by police based on “reasonable suspicion.” These locations became hostile environments for American citizens who also happened to have brown skin or spoke with a particular accent.  We must not allow this to happen again in Alabama.

Nor does this bill serve the well being of our municipalities who will be mandated to enforce a law with no consideration of what the economic cost to those municipalities will be.  This body of legislators has not done its homework on what the direct and indirect cost will be to Alabama. Since the state will not be raising taxes to fund the additional work load being requested, municipalities and counties will have to raise their own taxes.  In Prince William County where this bill was first piloted in this nation, the county had to raise its taxes by 33% in order to be in compliance with the law. And that still was not enough to enable full compliance by the local police.  This will happen here in Alabama as well and will cause further collapse of this state’s economy as the poor and middle class fall under its heavy financial burden.

Another result of similar legislation elsewhere was soccer moms were going to prison while murderers and rapists remained on the street.  The courts were mandated to place a higher priority on an immigrant being found guilty of trespassing or transporting an unauthorized citizen to church while the seeking of true justice for the victims of violent crimes were placed into limbo.  This court mandate is in HB 56 as well.   There is already a two year waiting period in Montgomery courts for cases to be heard. This bill will have dire consequences and unforeseen costs to the well being of Alabama.

This bill would potentially criminalize with a felony workers for shelters who are trying to protect their clients from the domestic violence of their spouses.  If the client is an unauthorized citizen, then the worker is in violation of this bill for concealing and transporting an unauthorized citizen.  He or she could have their car impounded, charged with smuggling a human being, and charged with concealing or hiding an unauthorized citizen. The employee could be convicted with two Class C felonies simply for doing their job.

This legislation troubles me as a person of faith on many levels.  Our faith calls us to love mercifully, to act with justice, and to walk humbly with our God.  It is what Christians, Jews, Muslims and many other faith traditions are also called to do in their faith. This bill prevents what good people of faith are called to do and therefore must not be passed.  Thank you.

The next speaker was a proponent of the bill. He immediately launched into an attack wondering what planet I lived on. His body posture was angry and he shouted from the podium at the evils of illegal immigrants.

Then my new acquaintance spoke. She calmly shared some stories about her work in the Hispanic community. She pointed out the sections of the bill that would inadvertently target them. She provided some facts regarding immigrants in the state.

The next speaker was a former Minuteman from the southwest. He also yelled and screamed about his first hand knowledge of what these illegals do to Americans. I think I am beginning to see a pattern. And sure enough those who were for this bill were angry, emotional, and offered no facts to support their stance. Those who were against this bill or might have been in favor of the concept of the bill but against certain sections of the bill were calm, reasoned in their speech.

Because I had gone first, those who were vehemently for this legislation would reference my statement and attack it or would glare at me as they referenced it. Here are two examples of comments that were made. “I hope this committee is not buying these buckets of compassion.” “Yes, Christians are called to love mercifully, that is why we have missionaries to go into their countries to fix them there [italics mine] so that they do not have to come here.” During this speakers direct reference to my testimony, I caught Rep. Hammon staring at me from the chair’s bench. I do not know what was going on in his mind but he was startled when he realized I caught him.

In all there were about 10 speakers who were against this legislation and six who were for this legislation. At the end of the speakers, Rep. Hammon spoke again. He stated that it costs Alabama $200 million a year to educate unauthorized children and provide emergency medical care to unauthorized citizens in the state so while there will be municipality costs to his attrition through enforcement bill it will be outweighed by the savings. This figure is totally fictional.

First, public schools are mandated by the federal government to provide a quality education to children K-12 irrespective of citizen status. Therefore, we simply do not know how many undocumented children there are in Alabama’s schools as it is data not taken. [Watch out this will be coming.] Second, hospitals also do not know how many of their patients are undocumented and receiving treatment. [Again, watch out Alabama this too may be coming down the pike. These two unknown factors are currently before the Arizona legislation in direct opposition to federal law.] Therefore, since we do not know how many students or how many patients, there is no way to know what the cost is to educate undocumented people or medically treat undocumented people in Alabama.

But as I discovered in listening to today’s testimony bonafide facts are dismissed and raw emotional fear is valued. I have a feeling that I am going to become well acquainted with the Statehouse as this issue moves forward.

Article 23 of the Universal Human Rights Declaration adopted by the United Nations in 1948 reads:

• (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
• (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
• (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
• (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

What we are seeing in Wisconsin and in Indiana is the attempt not to balance a budget but rather the attempt of elected officials to do the bidding of the corporations to strip the fundamental right of workers to form and to join trade unions for the protection of their interests.  This is a violation of their human rights under the UN’s declaration of Human Rights.

In June of 2007, the Supreme Court of Canada  ruled:

“The right to bargain collectively with an employer enhances the human dignity, liberty and autonomy of workers by giving them the opportunity to influence the establishment of workplace rules and thereby gain some control over a major aspect of their lives, namely their work… Collective bargaining is not simply an instrument for pursuing external ends…rather [it] is intrinsically valuable as an experience in self-government… Collective bargaining permits workers to achieve a form of workplace democracy and to ensure the rule of law in the workplace. Workers gain a voice to influence the establishment of rules that control a major aspect of their lives.”

While Canada’s Supreme Court has no jurisdiction over the US, what its ruling does do is affirm  emphatically that the right to unionize and to have collective bargaining is indeed a fundamental right as declared in the UN’s Declaration of Human Rights.  It is part of what a democracy looks like for its people.

Wisconsin and Indiana are not the first states to attempt to rid collective bargaining nor would they be the first states to not have collective bargaining for their public workers, including teachers.  There are five states that explicitly make collective bargaining illegal in their state for their public sector employees.  There are additional states where restrictions apply to the bargaining process.   Many more states prohibit teachers and other public employees from striking should collective bargaining efforts fail.  Again, all of these violate the fundamental right of workers to have unions to protect their best interests.  If a union is unable to negotiate with an employer on basic work conditions or to use non-violent strategies such as a strike to bring resolution to the issues at hand, their rights are being violated.

In my state of Alabama, which does not allow public employees to have collective bargaining, David Stout the president of the Alabama Education Association which is not union, recently stated, “I don’t think people in Alabama are ready for collecting bargaining laws.”   This attitude that people need to be ready is a slap in the face of workers dignity.  Similar statements have been made before regarding groups of people needing to be ready to have the vote, needing to be ready to have democracy, needing to be ready to have equality.  The fact that it comes from the organization that is supposedly best equipped to support the interests of teachers reveals just how far the AEA is from representing their constituents.  Instead comments like these represents the state’s and corporate  interests  just like the false trade unions in corrupt corporations in Mexico.

The essential right for the workers in Indiana and in Wisconsin to be able to sit down in negotiation with their employers is about reclaiming and resurrecting our most treasured American values of democracy.  We have seen in the last 40 years such a deterioration of democracy in this nation while we pandered to the wishes of corporations as if they are people under the law with rights and privileges inherent in their being.   Our nation has stripped away through this pandering all avenues of upward mobility for the poorest of the poor in this country and for the middle class.  The divide between 90 % of the people and the top 1% has never been greater.  The average income for the bottom 90 % is $31, 244.  The average income for the top 1 % is 1, 137, 684.  The average income for the top 1/100th percent is $27, 342, 212.   Further the income of the bottom 90% has decreased significantly per year over the last decade while the top ten percent have seen astronomical gains in income.   Stripping the right to collective bargaining from employees will ensure this trend not only continues but accelerates at an alarming speed because unlike a democracy, it places an imbalance of power into the hands of the government and corporations.

The Corporations are not people.  They are only a vehicle towards sustaining our lives in what hopefully will be one with a certain level of quality of life.  If they no longer serve the people towards the advancement of a quality life for all who work for them, then corporations and governments should be held accountable for their actions against human rights.  Our elected officials must represent the people and not the corporations who line their pockets.  If they do not then they must be removed from office and replaced with elected officials that will represent the best interests of the people.

This is one of many moral issues facing our nation today.  It is essential that we stand with our workers in this fight because the survival of our democracy depends on it.

Several months ago, I responded to a relative of mine who sent me one of those viral emails about the state of affairs in America.  I had grown tired of receiving the tirade of complaints against what immigrants have done to this country, what Muslims are wanting to do to this country, and how disastrous “a foreign born Muslim” [sic] President Obama was for this country.  So I responded and stated that in this country we believe in the American Dream where everyone can grow up to become President, where everyone has the opportunity to forge their own destiny.  I further stated that since we held these ideals and values that we needed to do everything in our power to ensure that those opportunities continued to exist for everyone and if they were thwarted in anyway, we had the responsibility and the obligation to right that wrong.

The response I received was that my relative was not his brother’s keeper.  In short if he could not have it, then his brother could not either.  And the only way to keep his brother from having it was to ensure that laws were passed that were restrictive, punitive against the other from receiving what allegedly was kept from him.

The Biblical story where the brother’s keeper is mentioned is a painful story where two brothers, the sons of Adam and Eve, were at odds.  Everything that Abel did was pleasing in the eyes of God.  Everything that Cain did was displeasing and so Cain grew angry at God and angry that his brother always got what he did not get.  Cain surmised if he couldn’t get what he desired then his brother should not have it either.  And so in this story, Cain kills Abel.  When confronted by God as to where Abel was, Cain responds, “Am I my brother’s keeper?”   God exiles Cain and in order for him to  survive he will need to depend on the kindness of strangers, in short other brothers will be his keeper.  The answer to this question is yes and so are we all.

A recent article on alternet.org regarding the protests against the Wisconsin Governor’s  proposal to do away with collective bargaining of the unions, ends the article with this quote: “The Right has made great political progress getting Americans to ask the question: “How come that guy’s getting what I don’t have?” It’s the crux of the politics of grievance. Progressives need to get Americans to ask a different question: “What’s keeping me from getting what that guy has?”

It is a good question but the question does not go far enough.  It is not enough to know that white privilege is rampant in America and is used to keep others from the good life.  It is not enough to know that continued tax cuts for the top 2% income earners keeps the financial burden of government on the poor.  It is not enough to know that our corporations have moved factories and jobs to other countries where they do not have to comply to our labor laws or environmental regulations. It is not enough to know that cutting spending on health care, human services, education will keep people in poverty.  Many people know these things keep them from the same opportunities  that the other guy had to fill his coffers.

What they are not doing is demanding a government that lives up to its ideals of being of, for, and by the people.  Where the basic needs of the people are met.  They have not realized that when we seek for our brothers and sisters to thrive we are seeking for ourselves to thrive as well.  When corporations begin to take care of their employees’ basic needs such as a living wage, health care, pensions, life insurance, sufficient vacation and sick time;  the incentive for the employee to be loyal, to be productive, to be innovative increases which benefits the corporations. Ensuring the best for our brother helps ensure the best for us as well. 

It is time the people begin speaking up on what kind of government we want here in America.  Will it be one that only benefits the rich and powerful or one that fulfills our American Creed so that everyone has the opportunity of having life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?  We are not living Abraham Lincoln’s dream of being a government of, by, and for the people.  We have moved far from that dream to being a plutocracy of corporations whose only use of the people is enslavement to sell their products and to line their pockets with gold.  And if you think these words are too harsh, look at the work conditions in the countries where these corporations have set up shop to produce products.   Those conditions would be here if they could get away with it.  There are already some states that want to do away with child labor laws.

What we are seeing in Wisconsin is only the tip of the iceberg of what needs to happen across this nation. We need to send a strong message that in order for America to fulfill its creed of equality, that we need to begin by supporting the least of these in our nation; the children and the infirmed,  the workers and the laborers, the poor and the immigrant.  They are our brothers and sisters.  To paraphrase Jesus of Nazareth, what you do to the least of  my brethren, that you do also to all of us.

Acceptance v Tolerance

Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

13 February 2011 © Rev Fred L Hammond

 

There was a long pause on the phone.  Then, “What did you call me?” I was flabbergasted, I had to think; did I say something derogatory and not realize it? “I called you Sir.”   He sputtered, “No one has ever called me sir.  I am not a sir.  I am called lots of things but Sir is not one of them.”  “Well,” I replied, “I just did and therefore you must also be, a Sir.”

Keith was many things in the eyes of the world.  He was a convict, a violent criminal, an addict, a street bum, a con artist, abusive to his girlfriend, and infected with HIV/AIDS. All of these labels were met with fear by most everyone he encountered. This is the person parents warn their children about. Good people do not associate with the likes of him. He was the other to everyone he met.  At best he would be tolerated by the social service workers who would help with food stamps, clothing vouchers, rental assistance.  Rarely would he be accepted for his essential self, a fellow human trying to find his way through this maze called life.

The definition of tolerance has broadened over the centuries but its earliest meaning had to do with enduring, endurance as in something painful or abhorrent.  A newer connotation of the word is to offer a permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, culture, race; sexual orientation is different to ones own.  But the underlying denotation of enduring or forbearing something abhorrent remains.

Accept is the root word of acceptance and it has many definitions as well, including “to receive or admit formally, as to a college or club; and to regard as normal, suitable, or usual.” So the matter of acceptance means to welcome in as one of us or to consider as typically everyday normal.

The difference between tolerance and acceptance reveals a strong contrast:  endure something painful or welcome as one of us.

There is in our society lots of conversation about tolerating our diversity.  We are asked to be tolerant of gays, lesbians, and transgender folk.  We are asked to be tolerant of our religious differences.  We have heard specifically to be tolerant of Muslims in our country.  So given the definition of the word what are we really asking when we ask for tolerance of those who are different from us.  Are we asking to simply put up, endure people that we do not like, whose very presence might be painful, offensive to our set of morals or cultural mores?

It could be said that in the 20^th century Euro-Americans were tolerant of African Americans as long as African Americans remained in their scripted place of being at the back of the bus.  As long as African Americans remained in their prescribed societal role of a second class citizen, then Euro-Americans could tolerate them.  Tolerate them with total indifference. This was not acceptance of African Americans, but it was tolerance. When African Americans refused to remain at the back of the bus, tolerance of African Americans went out the window and the south went up in flames, quite literally.  African Americans wanted acceptance as equals.  They no longer would stand for the tolerance of indifference which on a good day is what they received. We all know what happened on the bad days.

Martin Buber, 20^th century philosopher, wrote a ground breaking text called I and Thou.   He describes the person who declares I as having two basic word forms, I-It and I-You or I-Thou.  We experience it. What ever that something is, it is experienced by the I.  He writes, “I perceive something.  I feel something. I imagine something. I think something. …The world as experience belongs to the basic word I-It.”

We do not experience You, instead I-You is in the realm of relationship. There are no boundaries, no borders to the I-You basic word form.  There is a border with the I-It experience.  The I-It has shape, it has definition, and it may also have a past tense.    However, the I in the I-You dyad impacts upon the You only in the present, in the here and now, likewise the You impacts on the I.  The I-You relationship must be dealt with; the relationship cannot be ignored or placed into the background like an I-It experience.

In the movie Avatar there is within the Na’vi culture this notion of seeing the other.  The Na‘vi do not experience their world in the I-It sense but rather in the I-You relationship.  They see their world in the full essence of life unfolding. Their world embodies an entity of being.  They do not experience their world they are in relationship with the world.  In the movie it is stated that the skypeople, the humans, cannot see.  When Jack Sully finally embraces the culture of the Na’vi he and his Na’vi mentor say to each other, “I see you.”  They are finally in an I-You relationship.  Buber suggests that in these moments the I-You relationship is also addressing the eternal You.  I see you.

The skypeople, the humans, are not in relation with the world Pandora.  To them the world is an It.  They experience the world.  They know what the world can offer them in resources and in potential experiences.  But the world is an It and all the beings living on the world are an It, as well.  Pandora to the skypeople is of no consequence to them. They therefore are blind and do not see Pandora.

Extrapolate this not seeing the other as a You to the United States stance and quest for oil in the Middle East or our stance on immigration and undocumented citizens.  Or our long embattled history with the indigenous people of this land. All of these are I-It experiences.  This is not simply a political analysis this is as spiritual as it gets.

 

There is a Hindi word that also expresses this I-You relationship, Namasté.  It has been translated in many ways from the simple “The god in me recognizes the god in you.” To “I honor the place in you in which the entire Universe dwells, I honor the place in you which is of Love, of Integrity, of Wisdom and of Peace. When you are in that place in you, and I am in that place in me, we are One.”  Saying Namasté, the person is acknowledging the I-You relationship.

In the last 18 days we have seen something remarkable happen in Egypt.  We saw a people rise up, realize that they are people of worth and dignity and peacefully remove a dictator who saw them only as his objects. They claimed an I-You stance in this revolution and demanded that their government see them for who they are.

In the 1950’s, when Rosa Parks sat down in the bus, when the college students sat down at the lunch counter, when Ms. Lucy walked into the University of Alabama, they were declaring an I-You stance and demanded to be seen as the same as any other person.  They were to be known as the I-You and no longer as an I-It.  There is a lot of courage and fortitude to insist to be in relationship with another who does not see you but only tolerates you as a piece of landscape in the background.  Tolerance as experienced in America is an I-It paradigm.

There is a video that has been making the rounds on Face Book. It is sponsored by a bible church in Arkansas. It opens with a young man in a hurry to work and he is complaining about every inconvenience, the kid next door on his skateboard that isn’t paying attention to cars, the traffic, the car that cuts him off, and the long lines in the coffee shop.  He is handed a pair of glasses and as he puts them on he suddenly sees the problems that is weighing down on each person. One person is fighting addictions; another just had a blow up fight with their spouse, the single mom working two jobs to make ends meet, the man who just lost his job and trying to save face with his kids.  Suddenly these people are no longer in the I-It experience.  No longer are they barriers to his getting to where ever he is rushing to but I-You individuals that if he so chooses might serve as a difference in their lives.

Does acceptance mean embracing the opposing behaviors, values, and beliefs to our own?  Contrary to popular argument, no.   I can accept the person before me as one with dignity and worth and still not like their behaviors or belief system.  Acceptance is not carte blanche.  Parents can accept their children universally but this does not automatically mean they accept their children’s behaviors that are disrespectful or harmful to themselves or others.

What it does mean is that we are seeing the whole person as a person of worth and dignity. Before us stands a person who deserves to live their life as fully and as abundantly as possible. We are in relationship with them instead of simply tolerating their presence.   This is spiritual work.  When all the forces around us insist on making others I-Its in our landscape, it takes a disciplined soul to see the other as I-You.   And when the person is oppressed by society, it takes even more fortitude to insist on being recognized as part of I-You.

Unitarian Universalist Zach Wahls, whose testimony before the Iowa state legislator on the zero impact of his parents being a lesbian couple on the development of his character was an I-You testimony.  He declared that his family is not so different from any other family in Iowa.  Their sense of worth as a family is not derived by the state declaring his parents married. “Sense of family comes from commitment to each other, it comes from the love that binds us,” Zach told the chambers.  Acceptance of his family as equal partners in contributing to the positive development of Iowan society is far different than tolerance of his family.  Zach told the council that not one person in his 19 years of life ever independently deduced that he was raised by two women instead of a heterosexual couple.  He was passionately arguing that his parents were not I-It but were worthy of being I-You because he could declare, I see you to his parents.  He was asking the council to join him in seeing, truly seeing his family as any other family in Iowa that receive the fair and equal treatment from their government.

Remember Keith, the hardened street criminal I called sir?  He died many years ago just before Thanksgiving.  At his funeral, his older brother told me that I was able to reach Keith in a way that no one in the family could.  He thanked me for seeing Keith for who he was at his core being.  He suggested that this made the difference in how Keith chose to live his final days surrounded by family, welcomed and accepted home.

Live with an attitude of acceptance, of welcoming in people where they are instead of an attitude of tolerance, of putting up and enduring the pain of life’s diversity.  By so doing you may enter into the realm of I-You and even encounter the eternal You in the process.  Namasté.

Mississippi state legislature is rushing to pass SB 2179, a copy cat law of the controversial SB 1070 that went into effect in Arizona on July 29, 2010.  Rushing to pass legislation is a huge red flag that something is amiss in this proposed law.  Good legislation does not need to be rushed through.  Good legislation can take its time to bear up under the scrutiny of debate and democratic process.

It is only bad legislation that needs to be passed quickly in order to squelch the questions that are raised regarding it.  And this bill has all the earmarks of an unjust law that will cause unnecessary  heartache and economic disaster for Mississippi.   Lt. Governor Bryant has already stated publicly that he wants to “scare Latinos out of Mississippi.”  He has not minced words on how racist his opinion is about Latinos.   This law will indeed scare Latinos.   Latinos who are here legally will be negatively impacted by this law.

And for those who argue that if a person does not break the law,  they have nothing to worry about,  is in denial of Mississippi’s own racist treatment of African Americans in years past.  Law abiding African Americans also should have had nothing to fear in the mid-20th century but they were harassed and falsely arrested and accused at every turn.   Here the proposed law states if it is “reasonably believed”  that the person may have committed an act that would cause their deportation they can be arrested without warrant.  What might constitute reasonable belief?  Speaking Spanish?  Participating in day labor because unemployment rates are high and this is the only paying gig in town?

Arizona’s economy has suffered a serious blow after its passage of SB 1070 and not because of any boycott but that estimate alone is $141 million in just four months after the law passed.  Latino’s have left that state taking with them disposable income that supported apartment complexes, restaurants, mom & pop stores, and a host of other businesses have failed since they passed their racist law.   Arizona’s Latinos purchasing power in 2009 was $30.9 billion annually.  Latino owned businesses in Arizona had sales and receipts totally $4.3 Billion.

Mississippi cannot afford to turn away businesses in the state.  They need the revenue.  They cannot afford to close down businesses that are caught hiring undocumented citizens.  Imagine the devastating economic  impact if the Howard Industries ICE raid were to happen after the passage this bill.

Immigration is a complex issue.  There needs to be rational discussion on how to address it.  To rush in and pass this bill is to repeat the shameful behavior that Mississippi participated in the past.  This bill does not serve the good people of Mississippi well.  It needs to be defeated.

A Dream Deferred

Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

16 January 2011 ©  Rev. Fred L Hammond

Langston Hughes poem was first published under the title “Harlem” in 1951.  Sixty years ago.  Oh how things have changed since then and yet, oh, how things have remained the same.   In many ways, the dreams of people in America remain deferred.

When Langston Hughes wrote this poem, Martin Luther King, Jr. was not yet a household name. Brown vs the Board of Education had not yet been ruled on by the US Supreme Court.  His dream for equality was not yet vocalized to the masses.  Voting rights were denied.  Jim Crow laws were in full force in the south and the slick-smile- to-the-face-and-quiet-stab-in–the-back racism was in the north.  Dreams were deferred and they were drying up like a raisin in the sun and they were festering like a sore and they were crusting over like a syrupy sweet and sagging like a heavy load.  They were about to explode.

Martin Luther King came on the scene and for the first time gave real hope and real promise to African Americans not only of freedom but freedom to achieve the American Dream; where their children would have opportunities of education, of employment, of a life that was unimaginable to their parents.   After years of struggle laws were passed that removed the Jim Crow laws, restored voting rights, and desegregated schools.  Affirmative Action was put into place to remove the institutional barriers to opportunities for African Americans and other minorities.

But something happened along the way.  After King’s assassination, a new despair began to seep into our country. We began to see the destruction of many of the programs that lifted us out of the depression of the 1930’s.  And the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest of us at its narrowest in 1968, the year of King’s assassination, doubled in width by 2009.[i]

Yet America’s productivity has grown during that same time period.  The gains of productivity have gone towards corporate earnings and profits instead of the employees who labored.  So who are the people who have suffered during this widening gap?  The top 20% of Americans earn 50% of the income generated in America. The fastest growing income segment are those in the top .01% of Americans with 22% of the income generated in America[ii]. The bottom 20% of Americans earn 3.4% of the income generated.   These individuals who are earning the least amount of income tend to be those without a high school diploma.  They tend to be people who live in rural areas of the country[iii].

Edward Wolff of New York University when looking at net worth of people in America discovered that 20% of Americans own about 85% of the wealth and 40% of Americans own near zero percent and in fact have a negative net wealth[iv].   I don’t know about you, but I certainly fall into that 40% category.

Martin Luther King’s dream went beyond the abolishment of racism, he saw the abolishment of poverty.  Towards the end of his life, life, poverty became an important piece of his message. He saw the programs against poverty that were in place in 1968 and their current versions 40 years later as being uncoordinated piecemeal efforts.  Housing programs, educational reform, welfare assistance all being done in piece meal fashion and all fluctuate at the whims of legislative bodies.   We saw what the well intended deregulated housing programs have wrought in 2008. It was thought that home ownership was one of the factors that would lift America out of poverty.  The largest mortgage default in American history that nearly collapsed our economy continues at record rates as we enter the New Year.

Martin Luther King stated the simplest solution to abolish poverty would be a guaranteed income.  He stated there are two groups of people in America who currently have a guaranteed income, the wealthiest with their security portfolios and the poor with their welfare assistance.

King wrote that John Kenneth Galbraith, considered one of the most influential economists of the 20^th century, estimated that $20 billion a year would effect a guaranteed income, which Galbraith describes as “not much more than we will spend the next fiscal year to rescue freedom and democracy and religious liberty as these are defined by ‘experts’ in Vietnam.”  If my calculations adjusting for inflation are correct, $125 Billion a year in 2010 dollars would effect a guaranteed income which is less than 1/3^rd what the war in Afghanistan[v] is costing Americans and 16 % of what the alleged post war costs in Iraq are slated for this budget year.

King believed that such a guaranteed income needed to be placed in the median income of Americans, to place it at the floor level would only continue the stagnation that welfare recipients currently experience.  He believed this guaranteed income needed to be dynamic and be adjusted annually with the productivity of the nation’s total income.

King wrote that a “a host of positive psychological changes inevitably will result from widespread economic security. The dignity of the individual will flourish when the decisions concerning his/her life are in his/her own hands, when [s]he has the assurance that [her]his income is stable and certain, and when [s]he knows that [s]he has the means to seek self-improvement. Personal conflicts between husband, wife and children will diminish when the unjust measurement of human worth on a scale of dollars is eliminated.[vi]”

Today we see marriage in decline in the United States as people struggle to develop economic viability.  The number of married couples dropped to a record low of 52 % in 2009 as compared to 57% in the year 2000.  And this does not include those marriages that are staying together only because they cannot afford to divorce at this time[vii]. King is suggesting that couples esteem would increase if economic woes did not define who we are as human beings.

King writes: “The contemporary tendency in our society is to base our distribution on scarcity, which has vanished, and to compress our abundance into the overfed mouths of the middle and upper classes until they gag with superfluity. If democracy is to have breadth of meaning, it is necessary to adjust this inequity. It is not only moral, but it is also intelligent. We are wasting and degrading human life by clinging to archaic thinking.

“The curse of poverty has no justification in our age. It is socially as cruel and blind as the practice of cannibalism at the dawn of civilization, when men ate each other because they had not yet learned to take food from the soil or to consume the abundant animal life around them. The time has come for us to civilize ourselves by the total, direct and immediate abolition of poverty.[viii]”

In a survey done by Michael Norton and Dan Ariely on income equity in the United States, they found “a large majority of every group … surveyed — from the poorest to the richest, from the most conservative to the most liberal — agreed that the current level of wealth inequality was too high and wanted a more equitable distribution of wealth. In fact, Americans reported wanting to live in a country that looks more like Sweden than the United States.”[ix]

The last time such huge disparity between the wealthy and the poor existed in America was during what was called the Gilded Age, the period towards the end of the 19^th century.  It was met with labor unrest and political agitation and it was toppled by the second worst depression in American history.  The current time in our society is being called the second gilded age.

American Conservative magazine suggests: “In the course of the 20th century, there were several eras of growing economic inequality. On a few occasions, they came to an end in a relatively gentle way, with democratic elections and more egalitarian legislation. More often, however, they were ended by a catastrophe, such as the Great Depression, a violent social revolution, or a world war. When the rich went out, it seems, they normally did so with a bang, and not with a whimper. The way things are now going, it is likely to be so in the future[x].”

So here we have King’s dream of a society that has not only abolished racism but also abolished poverty.  He believed it was not only doable but achievable in his lifetime.  Forty years after his death, we appear to be further away from either part of his dream from being fulfilled.  We have the gap between the wealthy and the poor growing to widths that were pre-cursers to some of the most heinous governments in our world’s history.  We have scapegoated our economic woes on the backs of immigrants and Muslims.

I spoke with [a member] on Friday.  I told her I was doing this sermon and wanted to know her thoughts about Martin Luther King.  [She] said something to me that made me stand up and take notice.  She said her mother used to ask why Martin Luther King couldn’t just write his words and not show up for these events.  Her mother was aware of the physical danger King faced every time he made a public appearance somewhere. As we now know, it was his appearance for the sanitation workers strike in Memphis that culminated in his assassination.  Why not just write and not show up.

Could King have had the same effect if he simply wrote his views and not shown up in Selma, not shown up in Birmingham, and not shown up in Montgomery?  Would his “I Have a Dream” speech be remembered if he had not shown up to deliver it at the March on Washington but merely had it published in the Atlantic Monthly?

Dreams do not come true if we choose not to show up in our pursuit of them.  If we stand back, nod our heads in agreement, but do not show up to place our words into living action, then what have we accomplished?  It is easy to do arm chair justice.  We can sign all the petitions on MoveOn.com or rant all we want about injustice on the Tuscaloosa News Forum but if we hide behind the comfort of our screen name, what have we really accomplished?  We remain unseen.  We remain voiceless.  We remain without strength to make a difference.

Now I do not know if King’s economic justice dream of guaranteed income can be easily applied given our current political tension.  There will be shouts of socialism or worse.  It could be seen as reparations for slavery even though it would benefit everyone.  But imagine knowing that regardless of the work you are doing, you would receive at least a base pay of say $40,000.   Additional salary would be based on the performance of the company producing whatever it is they produce.  For some of us that amount of salary would answer many problems.

But this sort of dream can never come true if people do not show up to advocate for it.  The majority of people in America want some form of equalization of income, so says the survey.  The survey indicates the ideal they want is Sweden.  According to the CIA Fact book, “Sweden has achieved an enviable standard of living under a mixed system of high-tech capitalism and extensive welfare benefits. It has a modern distribution system, excellent internal and external communications, and a skilled labor force.[xi]” Sweden does not have a poverty level ranking in the CIA Fact book; it is listed as not applicable.

We are called to show up in the pursuit of our dreams, in the pursuit of a just and equitable world.  Mahatma Gandhi is oft quoted as saying, “be the change you want to see in the world.”  In President Obama’s closing words at the memorial for those who were killed in Tucson last week, he said, “I want us to live up to [Christina Taylor Green’s] expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it. All of us – we should do everything we can to make sure this country lives up to our children’s expectations.[xii]” If we seek to do that we will be fulfilling Martin Luther King’s dream for all of us.  Blessed Be.

[i] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/28/income-gap-widens-census-_n_741386.html

[ii] http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/06132008/profile2.html

[iii] This information is based on this report: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec10/income_09-28.html

[iv] http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10318/1102841-109.stm

[v] based on military budget figures found at http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf

[vi] Martin Luther King  “Where do we go from here?”  as found in the text The essential writings and speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr. edited by James M. Washington.

[vii] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/21/AR2010032103139.html

[viii] Martin Luther King  “Where do we go from here?”  as found in the text The essential writings and speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr. edited by James M. Washington.

[ix] Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10318/1102841-109.stm#ixzz1B8foXmFG

[x] as found at : http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/06132008/profile2.html

[xi] https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sw.html

[xii] http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20028366-503544.html

Find the Cost of Freedom

9 January 2011 © Rev. Fred L Hammond

Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

“Find the cost of freedom, buried in the ground

Mother earth will swallow you, lay your body down.

Find the cost of freedom, buried in the ground.

Mother earth will swallow you, lay your body down.[1]”

This song welled up within me as I listened in horror at the shooting of Congresswoman Giffords and eighteen other people including the death of Federal Judge Rolls in Tucson, Arizona.

In my mind, my initial thoughts of yesterday’s event went something like this: Who is behind this attack.  Was it domestic terrorists connected to a right extremist group?  If so, will there be more attempts on others who do not share their ultra-conservative agenda?

I am ashamed to say the news that the assailant was mentally unbalanced brought me a sigh of relief and released some of those fears.  But I am equally afraid that my initial response is more typical than not.  But I am not so sure that I should surrender to framing this event solely as a very tragic but isolated one.

Dianna Butler Bass, on her blog on Beliefnet.com wrote:  “We already know what form the analysis of the assassination attempt will be.  Everyone will say what a tragedy it is.  Then commentators will take sides.  Those on the left will blame the Tea Party’s violent rhetoric and “Second Amendment solutions.”

Those on the right will blame irresponsible individuals and Socialism.  Progressives will call for more gun control; conservatives will say more people should carry guns. Everyone will have some sort of spin that benefits their party, their platform, and their policies.”[2]

And she is correct.  The opening for the left to begin their blaming came when Pima County Sheriff Dupnik in his report stated, “When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous and unfortunately, Arizona I think has become t…he capital. We have become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry.”

While I believe that Sheriff Dupnik is correct in his statement, the blame also cannot be fully framed as a result of vitriolic language.
And my framing it as a tragic but isolated event also does not serve us well by pointing the finger at destructive behaviors of mental illness as the scapegoat.

Both are a symptom of something else that is endemic to American Society.  If a caricature of Americans were to be drawn, it would depict us as an inherently violent people.  We talk peace but our actions are violent.  Our history from the earliest days of European settlements all along the eastern seaboard has been one of violence against what we call the other.  My own direct ancestors were responsible for the some of the most brutal massacres against the native people in Manhattan; many of them were given in marriage to the European settlers.  So even when we were connected by blood relations, our nation’s earliest settlers were spreading the seeds of unbridled violence into our nation’s DNA against the other.

In our 235 year history, we have had peace for only 40 of those years.  For 195 years we have been at war with someone that we did not like for some reason; usually because we wanted what they had, namely land that would become incorporated into what is called the United States or oil. We are not known for being a peaceful people.

Truth be told, we European Americans who have been the rulers of this country, do not like people who do not look like us, talk like us, or think like us.  Our history confirms this on every level.  We have consistently treated immigrants inhospitably.  We hated the Irish, the Germans, the Italians, and the Jews. Before any group could be fully integrated into our society they had to first experience, for lack of a better word, a hazing of disdain; complete with violence and oppression.  And that is for people whose skin color is pale like the English, what we did to people whose skin color was darker is beyond any sane person’s imagining.

So this heinous act yesterday is more than just a response to vitriol by radio and TV commentators or politicians; this is a symptom of the American ethos that needs radical treatment if we are to thrive as a healthy nation and fulfill our American creed.

Arun Gandhi, grandson of Mahondas Gandhi, tells a story of such a radical treatment to create a community where people respect, understand, accept and appreciate one another.  He writes, “One day Gandhi’s wife, Kasturba, was seen in the ashram kitchen cooking. This was unusual and so Gandhi stopped to inquire. “What are you cooking?” he asked.

“Ramdas,” she explained referring to their married son, “is going home to his family this afternoon and I thought I would make some sweets that his children like so much.”

“Do you make sweets for the children of all those who visit the ashram and then leave?” Gandhi asked.

Surprised and bewildered by the question Kasturba turned to face Gandhi and said: “No, of course, not.”

“Why not?” Gandhi asked. “Are they not, like Ramdas, also your children? Should we not learn to treat everyone equally?”

Kasturba thought she knew what Gandhi was leading to by creating the ashram but this was a dimension she had not considered. She quickly saw the wisdom in what he said and decided to make amends by not giving Ramdas the sweets but making more of them and distributing them to all the children in the ashram.

There must never be, Gandhi said, any double standards in our relationships and our attitude towards each other, our families and humanity in general. What applies to one, must apply to all, he said. For most people this may be totally unacceptable. Perhaps, too high a standard to attain. But Gandhi believed this was the only way to understand and respect each other.[3]”

This treating others as we would have them treat us is hard work, it seems.  It is far easier to denigrate others, to ostracize others, to refuse to understand the other’s plights.  Yet, we must begin to see that each person is part of who we are as a people.  When one person suffers in our country, we all suffer.  When an injustice is done to one person; injustice is done to all of us.

We might not see its effects immediately, we might not even feel its effects for years after the injustice occurred, yet injustice permeates through the fabric of our lives staining and weakening the very threads of our community.

Our faith calls us to examine our principles in times like these.  They are not just nice sounding words that mean very little.  If we are to claim them as our own and use them to help guide us to live life to the fullest, then we must wrestle with the meanings of these words to uncover how we measure up.  How do we understand inherent worth and dignity of every person?  How do we find justice, equity, and compassion in human relations?  How do we experience acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations?  How do we conduct a free and responsible search for truth and meaning?  These are not easy questions to answer.  Nor are they answered once and then checked off as in a list.

To live our faith is to wrestle the meaning of these principles for our own lives.  To undo the history of our nation’s propensity to violence takes each of us to transform our own hearts towards peace, towards nonviolence in all areas of our lives.  Not just in reducing physical violence against another but also seeking to reduce emotional and spiritual violence towards others.  A harsh word as we have seen can engender physical violence in another.

Events that occur in Tucson stir our hearts with grief; but it is safe to contemplate the horrors of violence in another part of the country.  What about similar events that occur right here in Tuscaloosa?  Could we make a difference in the Jared Loughners that live here in Tuscaloosa so they can chose a different path?

To find the cost of freedom, we need to choose another way. Freedom is not won by violence, though that is commonly believed.  195 years of war in a country that is only 235 years young, is not a free country.  That is a country that bullies others into submission and calls standing with our foot on their neck freedom, when it is a form of our own enslavement.  We do not dare remove our foot.

Yet, if we are to be free, to be truly free, we must not only remove our foot, but help the other back up onto their feet so that they are again at an equal standing with us.  We need to begin to evolve beyond the use of violence; physical, emotional, psychological, and spiritual violence must be put behind us if we are to experience the freedom that we claim we want in this country and abroad.  It means a radical shift in how we relate to one another on every level of our relationships.

Arun Gandhi writes: “An average American family, it is said, moves 13 times during the span of a career. This means there is no time to establish roots or build relationships anywhere. We end up having a nodding acquaintance with people in the neighborhood. Individualism is our culture and this determines the breath and depth of our relationships. Individualism and community building have an inverse relationship. Only one can flourish and that too at the expense of the other.

“In the pioneering days individualism could survive because the objective was to build a homestead and acquire personal property. Now we are faced with the task of building a community and a society, which means interdependence, interconnectedness and integration. Exclusivity must give way to inclusivity if living in peace and harmony are our objectives. The choice before humanity in the next millennium, therefore, is: Learn to respect life or live to regret it.[4]”

We have been given yet another wake up call to respect all of life.  Will we push the snooze button in the hopes that another wake up call will stir us to action later?  Or will we awake suddenly and realize that we overslept and find ourselves in a situation of dire circumstances that could have been avoided.  May we awake fully and begin practicing the ways of non-violence within our families, within our relationships, and in our communities, and finally in our nation.  Blessed be.

[1] Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young

[2] Read more: http://blog.beliefnet.com/christianityfortherestofus/2011/01/congresswoman-gabrielle-giffords-speaking-for-the-soul.html#ixzz1AVWuuDgk

[3] Arun Gandhi from the Community of the Future.
[4] Arun Gandhi from the Community of the Future.

We seem to white wash our own stories-if we read the text closely, we will read that Jesus, too, was an illegal immigrant and an anchor baby.  This cartoon highlights this truth in profound ways.

We would prefer to coo and ah at the pristine baby Jesus found in Christmas pageants.  Here he is chubby with rosy cheeks.  Here he is cute with smiles and giggles.  Our manger is with fresh clean hay.  The animals are robust and clean.   Mary the new mother is pristine in blue and looks like she has just arrived from the beauty parlor and not like she has spent unknown amount of hours in labor, hair matted with sweat.  We do not witness the screams and profanity that uttered from her lips as she labored.  And Joseph, the proud father, not the humiliated man who has just watched his bride to be give birth to some other man’s child.   Yes, Mary is an unwed teenage mother, another shameful truth we dismiss all too gladly from this story.

But here are the other truths of the story that in today’s political climate we would rather not see.  Joseph and Mary are residents in a foreign land.  In order to be in compliance with a census, they must travel back to the land of their ancestors.  It is not their home land.  If it were, then the story would have told of relatives or friends that had no room for them and not the inns.  A more profound story would have been for relatives and friends to reject the coming of the Christ child.   How often is it our own families that reject who we are or who we have become?

But in order for Jesus to be the promised savior he must be born in another country to fulfill the prophecy. “But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you will come a ruler who will shepherd my people Israel.” [Matthew 2:6] Jesus is an anchor baby, born in Bethlehem in order to claim the rights and privileges of being the son of David.

Shortly after his birth, we read that King Herod orders the killing of the innocent, all children under the age of two. So Jesus and his parents become fugitives under the law and flee once again this time to Egypt. Jesus is now an illegal immigrant with a criminal record. The crime is sedition, being born a king when there was already a king in the land. The intent of overthrowing a kingdom is a felony crime.

When Herod is dead. Jesus’ parents return to their own country, not to Bethlehem where Jesus is a legal resident but to Nazareth. Where Jesus grows up as an illegal alien where he takes the job of carpenter away from other Nazarenes. Jesus does this and yet we accuse undocumented workers of doing something immoral? We admire Jesus, the carpenter, but we disdain the undocumented construction worker?

If this story were to happen in Arizona, Sheriff Arpaio would seek to arrest Joseph and Mary, throw them into Tent City, where Mary would have had her baby with little medical attention. Jesus would still be an anchor baby because the 14th amendment has not yet been repealed. Joseph and Mary would have been sent to a detainment facility to await ICE decision to deport them. Jesus as an American citizen would be sent to an orphanage. Or if the story unfolded a bit closer to the Biblical text, Joseph would have had a dream to flee back into the desert and cross back into Mexico with Mary and newborn Jesus. The trek across the Arizona desert is as treacherous and dangerous as the trek from Bethlehem to Egypt. They would have faced starvation, dehydration, and possible death only to find a wall blocking their way.

If Jesus truly brings good news to the poor, release for the prisoners, sight to the blind and to the oppressed freedom, then Jesus identifies with the struggles for justice that undocumented immigrants cry out to receive. The cry for justice began in their own country where American corporations colluded with the rich to destroy homeland economies forcing thousands upon thousands of the working poor out of jobs. It began in our own country when the School of Americas trained militias to return to their home countries of El Salvador, Guatemala, Columbia, and others to overthrow governments and set up even worse governments where citizens are killed for speaking truth to power. These injustices demand reparation by our United States Government. Ideally, we would close down the School of Americas. We would limit the influence that corporations have in other countries, and we would seek to assist the citizens to rebuild their home countries. But the least we can do is grant these refugees passage to our country and allow them to make a new way for themselves.

The least we can do is welcome them into our hearts as if they are indeed the Christ Child come to bring glad tidings and healing to the world. Blessings,

On A Midnight Clear
Homily For Christmas Eve 2010 (c)
Rev. Fred L Hammond
Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

Reading:  The missing 4^th verse from It Came Upon The Midnight Clear

O ye beneath life’s crushing load,
Whose forms are bending low,
Who toil along the climbing way
With painful steps and slow;
Look now, for glad and golden hours
Come swiftly on the wing;
Oh rest beside the weary road
And hear the angels sing.

I do not know why the fourth verse of this Unitarian hymn was removed from our hymnals when the Unitarian and Universalist congregations consolidated in 1961.  It is the only verse that is not so lofty in metaphor or universal in its wording but rather personal and intimate.

Rev. Edmund Hamilton Sears, a Unitarian Minister, wrote this song in 1849 while serving a congregation in Wayland, Massachusetts. According to the biography found at our denominations website, this song was written during a period of personal melancholy coupled with news of revolution in Europe and the United States War with Mexico still grieved the heart.  So this verse that we no longer sing is one of personal triumph rising up over despair.

In the years preceding the secession of the Confederate States, whose 150^th anniversary Alabama and other southern states are about to celebrate, the country was in looming darkness. There were heated debates in Congress regarding formation of free and slave states.  Secession and civil war was avoided during these years but the intensity of the argument made it all inevitable.

The desire for justice where all are welcomed to live free in this country faced the opposing dark clouds glooming on the horizon just like the clouds we are facing today.  The times are different, sure, and exact parallels do not exist but the desire for justice for immigrant families torn apart have similar dark clouds swirling to whisk them away.  The desire for justice for the working class faces another menacing dark cloud of corporate manipulation and greed.

It was in times like these that Edmund Sears wrote his now famous hymn asking, pleading for the world to hear the Christmas message.  The times are dark and foreboding and depending on whether one listens to MSNBC commentators or to Fox News commentators, how dark the times are vary in shade and hue.

So what is this Christmas message that gave hope to Rev. Sears?  The late Rev. A. Powell Davies writing in 1944 in what is now considered a classic Christmas sermon; “Christmas Always Begins at Midnight[1]” offers this clue:

“The hardihood of this festival, continuing, as it has, through many thousands of years, and rising, stage by stage, from primitive frenzy to pagan jubilation and finally to the symbolism of Christian observance, gives us true cause for confidence and reassurance. When it is darkest, man celebrates the light. When the earth is most desolate, he carols his joy. When the harshest and bleakest of the seasons is upon him, he can turn to gentleness, kindness and forbearance. His courage can rise superior to his circumstances.

“Perhaps this is the thought above all others that Christmas can cheer us with this year. It is the inner significance, the spiritual essence of Christmas that can mean most to us, for once. For certainly we shall not find it easy to be spontaneously happy in a world so full of miseries. Nor should we. … If we are to celebrate the ancient festival of light overcoming darkness, it must be in the full knowledge of how dense is the darkness against which the light must shine.”

In the dark times that Rev. Davies is writing, we did not yet know what the outcome of World War II would be.   Neither, do we know what the outcome of our country’s leaning to corporate plutocracy will be.  Nor do we know the influence of conservative radicalism will have on our constitution where debates of repealing the 14^th[2] and the 17^th amendments[3] are growing.  And who knows where the tenth amendment is going to end up regarding state’s rights, an issue not resolved since its passage in 1789.

We are also in dark times, just like Rev. Davies, just like Rev. Sears.  They found hope in this season.  We can too.  Listen again to how Rev. Sears found it.

Look now, for glad and golden hours
Come swiftly on the wing;
Oh rest beside the weary road
And hear the angels sing.

It is in looking for those moments of joy, those moments of victory of justice where we gain hope for the future.  And when that is not enough we pause, we rest, and we listen.  Rev. Sears says to hear the angels sing.  As far as I know, the voices of angels are inaudible these days, so this listening is a deep silent listening of the heart.

The best moment I have had to describe this is when I had a personal crisis in my life, a moment of decision of great consequence. I took the time to walk silently in the woods and came across a pair of swans swimming in a pond.  The water surface reflected like a mirror and the swans glided through that water with no disturbance or ripple.  I stood there and listened for the sound of the swans swimming. There was comfort in that moment of listening to these angels.

And while no decision was made that day, I believe that pause that I took, that resting beside the weary road to hear the angels sing, laid the foundation for me to make that decision which ultimately set me on the path towards ministry.

Again, words from Rev. Davies’ sermon: “the truth  [is] that man must find his faith, not in the daylight but in the dark. If he is ever to come to the light of morning, he must carry his own light with him through the night. Yes, and not only so, but he must make his songs in the darkness, too, and sing them first at midnight.”

This time of the year is a holy time in part because it is in darkness that new life begins; a seed sprouts in the darkness of soil, a new life begins in the darkness of the womb.  It is in darkness that we begin our journey towards the light of day. It is no small coincidence that our ancient ancestors in the northern hemisphere have chosen this time of year when darkness is at its zenith to celebrate the light and with that the hope for new life.  For people of faith that light of day is where love and justice abounds.  Blessed be.

Institutionalized Racism

by Rev. Fred L Hammond

Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

12 December 2010 ©

Reading: “In a rational, logical world,”  From the The Anniston Star Editorial Board November 5 2010

In a rational, logical world, Anniston would be able to resume paying for college scholarships for graduates of the city’s public high school.

It’s a case of local people having a say in what their city does — or should do, at least. In Tuesday’s election, Anniston residents voted overwhelmingly in favor of using city money to send eligible Anniston teens to college. The tally wasn’t close, 63.6 percent to 36.4 percent.

But this isn’t a rational, logical world.

Thanks to the state’s archaic 1901 Constitution, voters in Anniston and Calhoun County both had to approve the local amendment, even though people who don’t live in Anniston have no dog in the fight over how Anniston’s City Council writes the city’s checks.

Anniston residents passed the amendment.

Calhoun County residents didn’t.

Thus, Anniston can’t resume its worthwhile college scholarship program because state law foolishly requires that such amendments be passed both by the city and the county — even though only Anniston money would have gone to the scholarships. It’s an Anniston deal, for Anniston students, and people who don’t live in Anniston barred its rebirth.

Thanks a lot, 1901 Constitution.

Institutionalized Racism

The tale of Anniston not getting to decide what to do with Anniston money is not a unique tale in Alabama.  It isn’t just some quirky archaic law left over from a bygone era that no one pays attention to anymore like it being illegal in the State of Alabama to impersonate Clergy[1].  By the way, impersonating clergy comes with a very hefty penalty, $500 fine and/or up to one year in the county jail.  I know you all are just itching to break that law so I am keeping my eyes on you.   The law that kept Anniston, a community that demographically is about 50% black is codified in our constitution so that Calhoun County, which is 77% white can keep them in check.

No one ever states it quite like that but that is how the Alabama constitution is written and for that purpose.  In the convention hearings of 1901, there was expressed fear of “negro domination” and the response was to “establish White Supremacy in this state[2]” of Alabama.  The state legislature was to hold the power over local communities to prevent them from directing their own local destiny. This was done in two ways. The entire state had to vote on an issue occurring in a county of the state or the county had to vote on an issue occurring in one of its municipalities, even though the rest of the state or the rest of the county could care less about a new sewage treatment plant being built that would be paid for by the residents of the specific community.  The Alabama constitution is a prime example of what institutionalized racism looks like in America.

Someone could say, but Fred, all those laws in the constitution that were directed against blacks were made null and void by the federal civil rights act in 1964.  In fact, this is the rebuttal by “Citizens Against Constitutional Reform” to the “Alabama Citizens for Constitution Reform’s” claim that the 1901 Constitutional Convention “disenfranchised poor whites and Blacks in that memorable document.”   The Citizens Against Constitutional Reform state, “No one in Alabama is disenfranchised from full participation in today’s society or prosperity[3].”   Not true. In fact there is still on the books a section of the constitution that legalizes segregation of schools. While Brown v. the Board of Education made the law unconstitutional, it still remains active on the books. The offending words that are still active in the constitution are “Separate schools shall be provided for white and colored children, and no child of either race shall be permitted to attend a school of the other race.[4]”

An amendment to repeal this amendment of racial segregation failed.  “Nearly all organizations opposing the repeal of the segregation measure pointed to a provision stating that the state did not provide a right to a state financed education. Groups opposing the repeal of this amendment claimed that repeal would lead to court decisions requiring the state to raise taxes.[5]”

This defeat happened, not in 1954 when Brown v Board of Education decision was made, not in 1964 when the Civil Rights Act was passed but in 2004.  Fifty years after the ruling that unequivocally determined that separate but equal was only separate and certainly not equal. This repeal was defeated because there was a fear of taxation, not because people didn’t abhor segregation, not because they didn’t see this section of the constitution as wrong but because they feared an increase in taxation.  I’ll come back to taxation and how it plays its part in racism later.

The constitution of 1901 was written with the sole purpose of disenfranchising the Blacks. In the late 1800’s and early 1900’s there was a lot of voting fraud happening.  People would appear to have voted who didn’t show up to vote. Ballots would be stuffed. So when the vote came regarding the question to hold a constitutional convention and to the vote to ratify the new constitution, a curious thing happened according to the press.

The majority of the state of Alabama, where the majority of white voters lived, the question to ratify the constitution was defeated, 76K to 72K against.  But in the region where the majority of Black voters lived in Alabama, ironically known as the Black belt for its black top soil, Blacks apparently, or so we have been told, voted for the new constitution knowing that the outcome of this new constitution would disenfranchise them.  In Hale, Dade, and Wilcox Counties the vote was 18,000 for ratification and 500 against.  The White population in these three counties alone was only 5600 and the Black population was 12,400.  Anyone doing the math on this?  It was the vote in the Black Belt that swung the majority of votes to ratify a new constitution to create a white supremacist state.

The headlines of the day read, “Negroes not interested; in many places voted the Democratic Ticket.[6]”  With widespread stealing of the votes as the practice of the day, it is most likely that these votes were stolen.  Even in the records of the convention the stealing of votes was publicly acknowledged.  “But if we would have white supremacy, we must establish it by law–not by force or fraud. If you teach your boy that it is right to buy a vote, it is an easy step for him to learn to use money to bribe or corrupt officials or trustees of any class. If you teach your boy that it is right to steal votes, it is an easy step for him to believe that it is right to steal whatever he may need or greatly desire.[7]”

Now again, the right to vote was restored with the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  The poll tax and the literacy requirements to vote were struck from the state constitution. Therefore, the constitution is no longer a racist document, right?  Wrong.

This is the thing with institutionalization of any premise.  Once something is institutionalized it is in the fabric of how we do things to the point of not recognizing why we are doing them or who they may be affecting and hurting.  It simply is so.  For example, on a much smaller scale, when I asked my mother why she scraped the pork chops before cooking them, she replied because her mother did it.  Why did Grandma do it, because great grandma did it.  Why did Great grandma do it; because when she got the pork chops from the butcher they often had bone chips in the meat so she was scraping them out.  The behavior of scraping the pork chops was institutionalized into how my family prepared pork chops.  Now there is no harm in this small illustration of institutionalizing behavior.

But let me ask you why do we have the residents of this state vote on a matter that only pertains to one small locale?  And why is it important for that matter to become an amendment to the constitution?  The answer to both of these questions is because at one point in time, these actions maintained white supremacy rule.  To have the white majority of the state vote on whether a predominantly black community can offer educational scholarships becomes a very important question for the state seeking to maintain white supremacy.  Education presented a risk to the White majority.  And it still does today in Anniston, AL where the White Calhoun County voted no to Anniston offering scholarships to their almost 50% black, 50% white student population.   But today, we have no reason to continue this practice that was institutionalized over 100 years ago.

The definition of institutionalized racism is patterns in societal structures, such as those found within governmental institutions that result in imposing oppressive or negative conditions on identifiable groups of people on the basis of race or ethnicity[8].  So while the laws that blatantly oppress people of color in the constitution have for the most part been removed, the very structure of the constitution remains to uphold institutionalized racism.

The Anniston example given earlier is an example of this institutionalized racism.  It is the perhaps the hardest to eradicate because the patterns have become so common place, so everyday, that people do not see its impact racially.  While the vote in Calhoun County to deny Anniston the right to spend their money as they see fit might be argued as not being racist, but when looking at who is going to be disproportionately impacted by not having Anniston scholarship money available to them, it is people of color.

The process from conception to amendment to ratification vote by the people in the state can take several years because the bill can get bogged down in committee or not get passed in the house and the senate within the given session.  So even though the local government has passed this ordinance or resolution they are barred from implementing it because the state was not able to get the amendment ready for the ballot.  The wheels turn ever so slowly when seeking to control the destiny of other people deemed unable to determine their fate.

These structures were put into place to maintain white supremacy of Alabama. But it isn’t only this structure; the constitution also has set the tax codes as a means to maintain white supremacy of the wealthy.  Constitutions generally should not be setting the tax code.  Constitutions should authorize the state legislature to levy taxes but not be the holder of the tax code.  However, Alabama was reacting to re-constructionists and the carpetbagger’s who sought their fortune and built railroads and public schools through hefty property taxes. So in the constitution of 1901, income and property taxes were given set limits which resulted in sales taxes as being the only other source of revenue that could be levied with less restriction.  Alabama’s sales tax codes are the most regressive in the nation because they adversely affect the poorest of the poor while benefiting the wealthiest of citizens and special interest groups.

Alabama further altered the way property taxes are applied allowing for exemption of taxes to special interest groups who can assert that their property has an agricultural use. The loss in revenue to the state through these special interest group exemptions is estimated to be $40 million annually[9].  This is money that would have been used to fund rural public schools in the state making them among the poorest in their ability to offer a quality education.  The most affected by this institutionalized structure are the poor in the state increasing the chances for their remaining oppressed.

There are also schools in the state that use sales taxes to fund their services.  The problem is sales taxes are dependent on economy ebbs and flows more so than the other two.  When the state is in a recession, like it has been, people tend to purchase less and therefore sales tax revenue drops.

It is hard to fathom people understanding that their increased sales tax on the purchase of Doritos is going to keep little Johnnie and Mary in school.  Whereas it is easier for people to understand that their local property tax will ensure their children receiving a quality education.  But who are the people who pay the most in sales taxes?  By percentage it is people who are poor pay more of a percentage of their income on sales tax than people who are wealthy.  The wealthy tend to spend their money on services which are not taxable.

There is a need to rewrite the constitution so that 1) local governments have a greater ability to serve the needs of their community and 2) so that the tax code can be adjusted to be equitable to the abilities of its citizens.  For example tax codes that offer sizable exemptions to the paper mills vast forests from property taxes increases the burden on the rural residents of those counties to raise the needed funds to support the education of their children.

What can we do?  Our sister congregation in Birmingham has passed a resolution that will be sent to legislators in the state endorsing the idea of constitution reform.  We can write and pass a similar resolution to join with theirs.  We can write our state representatives and state senators and tell them that constitution reform is not just about home rule and taxes but also undoing the structures that maintain the institutional racism embedded in the current document. It will reduce the cost of government by having local resolutions, local ordinances, local revenues kept to the local level.  Reform will free up those resources so that our state reps can deal with state issues like job creation, transportation infrastructure, and improving our public education.

We can help create a better Alabama where all people benefit from the resources that are available and lifted up to reach their full potential as citizens.  So may it be.

Because the more opportunities we have to relate to people who see the world from a different point of view the better we are at being able to function in a multi-cultural and pluralist society.

Because science has told us that the presence of children raises the chemicals in our adult bodies that produce the desire to nurture, to have compassion, and to have empathy for the other.

Because it is important for adults to have a glimpse at the future through our children in a worship setting.

Because the expressions of joy, of sorrow, of celebration, of grief, of transcendence are different in people of different ages and to see them expressed in multiple ways is expressing the fullness of our humanity.

Because our society has fractured the family into so many divided segments that to worship multi-generationally is a counter-culture act to reclaim what is being lost.

Because children help our seniors remain connected and vital.  There is nothing like witnessing a spontaneous hug from a child with an elderly person of 90 plus years and seeing the elder’s eyes light up.

Because children benefit from getting to know other adults who are not their parents by participating in the multi-generational choir and other worship activities.

Because children learn the importance of coming together as a worship community where all are valued for who they are.

Because children learn they are not just on display when they are in the full service like they could be when they are only allowed to be in part of the service and then ceremoniously ushered out.

Alabama’s Constitution is a document that is over 100 years old. While the most blatant racist articles in this constitution have been struck down by the US Supreme Court, it is still an institutionalized white supremacist document with its fist-ed control over minority-majority counties and cities.  The attempts in the past for constitution reform have been blocked repeatedly by special interest groups and the wealthy who enjoy the power this constitution privileges them.

The Unitarian Universalist Church of Birmingham passed  a resolution on September 16, 2010 declaring that congregation’s intention to seek constitution reform.   Having this unjust document be overhauled and modernized to meet the needs of the 21st century would be continuing towards the fulfillment of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream of equality and justice for all.  I encourage other Alabama congregations, Unitarian Universalist and others,  to pass their own resolutions urging for constitution reform and then to send these resolutions to their state representatives, state senators, and to Governor Bentley.   Here is the Unitarian Universalist Church of Birmingham’s resolution on Constitution reform.

Resolution on Constitutional Reform, Endorsed by the UUCB Board

September 16, 2010

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

Whereas, as Unitarian Universalists, we envision a more caring, just, productive, and prosperous Alabama, governed under a new constitution that promotes a better life for all Alabamians, and

Whereas, the chief agenda item of the Alabama State Constitutional Convention of 1901, as articulated by John. B. Knox, in his presidential address to the convention, was, quote: “And what is it that we want to do? Why it is within the limits imposed by the Federal Constitution, to establish white supremacy in this state…But if we would have white supremacy, we must establish it by law—not by force or fraud.  These provisions are justified in law and in morals, because the negro is not discriminated against on account of his race, but on account of his intellectual and moral condition.  There is in the white man an inherited capacity for government, which is wholly wanting in the negro.” (Official Proceedings of the Constitutional Convention of the State of Alabama, May 21, 1901 to September 3, 1901, 1:538-42), and

Whereas, the 1901 constitution’s provisions to enshrine Alabama’s large rural land-owners and large sector operating in Alabama, and

Whereas, Alabama’s constitution is the oldest, longest, and most complex in the nation, with 827 amendments (compared to the national average of 116), with more amendments pending each year, as Alabama’s governance continues to become more complex, and

Whereas, Alabama’s state government is so restricted it cannot meet the needs of modern society, as shown by studies published jointly in 1999 and 2001 by Governing magazine and the Maxwell School of Syracuse University, ranking Alabama’s governmental performance last among the 50 states, and

Whereas, Alabama’s constitution demonstrates profound distrust of democracy and self-reliance, failing to enable counties to plan for their own economic development and growth, imposing severe restrictions on municipal home rule, disallowing use of the gas tax to support public transit, and causing half the legislative agenda to be focused on issues of strictly local interest, so that more than 70 percent of our constitutional amendments apply to a single city or county, and

Whereas, Alabama’s constitution enshrines an unfair and ineffective tax system, ranking it among the bottom three states in its unfairness to our poorest citizens (Governing magazine, Feb. 2003), forcing local governments and school boards to rely on fickle and regressive sales taxes because of constitutional restrictions on property and income taxes, and requiring nearly 90 percent of state funds to be earmarked for specific uses (higher than any other state), thereby destroying fiscal flexibility, and

Whereas, oligarchical control continues to prevail not only in Alabama’s government but also through its corporatist interlinkages with the business sector, resulting in a prime regional location for anti-union corporations, very poor educational resources, increasingly changing and dangerous climatic conditions, a deeply polluted environment, and large numbers of people being driven from the state in search of better economic opportunity and more friendly places, and

Whereas, a modern corporations in the position of oligarchical white supremacy over all aspects of governance are well documented by Wayne Flynt, Bailey Thomson, Harvey H. Jackson III, and in Melanie Jeffcoat’s film for the ACCR, entitled, Open Secret, which reenacts portions of the 1901 constitutional convention, and

Whereas, redrafting of the Alabama constitution must begin with frank recognition of the oligarchical and racist provisions of the 1901 document, in order to support mutual trust and the successful collaboration of all constitutional convention delegates in reformulating those provisions, and

Whereas, a reformed Constitution based on democracy is necessary for the proper discharge of governmental responsibilities, and for the assurance of broad social benefit generated by the business constitution for Alabama would, by contrast, establish broad principles for governmental operations without imposing restrictions on good lawmaking, recognize that local and metropolitan problems need to be solved at home and not in Montgomery, organize government into efficient branches, protect citizens rights, authorize appropriate types of taxation rather than imposing a state-wide tax code (extending to the level of motor vehicle assessments), encourage the people’s aspirations for democratic instead of oligarchical control of government and the business sector,  encourage people to become well-educated, collaborative, and productive citizens, and

Whereas, past attempts at constitutional reform in Alabama have been blocked by organized special interests whose unique privileges, wealth, and political power corrupt both the democratic exercise of governmental responsibilities and the conduct of business in Alabama, and

Whereas, there is an Alabama-wide grassroots movement calling for a constitutional convention of democratically elected citizen delegates from each House legislative district, as evidenced by newspaper editorials and a statewide petition drive, signed by approximately 75,000 citizens throughout the state of Alabama, calling for such a Constitutional Convention, and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Unitarian Universalist Church of Birmingham, through its ordained and lay leaders, members, and friends, will actively seek, educate, support, and advocate on behalf of a Citizen’s Constitutional Convention for the purpose of writing Alabama’s 7th Constitution, and

BE IT RESOLVED, IN ADDITION, that the Unitarian Universalist Church of Birmingham will seek to enroll the other Unitarian Universalist Churches throughout the state of Alabama in support of this resolution, or similar resolutions, according to their individual preferences, and

FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED, that the Unitarian Universalist Church of Birmingham strongly urges action by the members of the State Legislature, the Governor, and other elected officials of the State of Alabama to support and pass the enabling legislation, which will be introduced in the House and Senate in the 2011 session, that will allow the people of Alabama to vote on whether they desire a Citizen’s Constitutional Convention to be called.

A question was raised on an email list that I am on regarding why we are not having more church planters in the Unitarian Universalist ministry.    I think there are multiple factors  why we do not have more church planters. I will try to elucidate what I believe are some of those factors.

I was a co-founder of a non-profit agency.  I served on the founding board, then as president of the board, and then as executive director; did so for a total of 15 years.  The first few years of that organization took a dedication and a willingness to sacrifice personal life goals to birth that organization.  Colleague David Owen-O’Quill in a sermon he gave to Pathways Church about church planting used the metaphor of child-birth to describe the journey.  He called it a dangerous journey towards new life.  You can watch his sermon here:

Pathways Church – Sermon from 10-17-2010 – Standing For Grace

There were moments in the developing of the non-profit agency, where all seemed hopeless and lost.  We had severe money issues, I did not draw a paycheck for several months, yet in order to birth this organization we had to keep moving forward against the odds.  I as leader of this organization was committed to the mission of providing services to people living with AIDS. I was determined to find a way when there looked like no way.

There were developmental milestones we had to make that would indicate the likelihood of our thriving.  The majority of new businesses fail within the first year, and a majority of those fail within the first five years. It is the same of non-profits and for congregations. How many fellowships did Munroe Husbands plant in the fellowship movement that did not make it the first few years of their life?   The mission of getting from here, this place of where we are to over there, where people would find support, nurture, and sustenance to live with HIV/AIDS was the primary focus and everything was on the line for that to happen. I was not going to allow a simple thing like lack of money  stop me from fulfilling this mission.

Our ministers leave seminary with huge student debt, they do not have the capability to be the mid-wives of a live birth of a congregation. They are already in serious financial trouble before they even start.  They need settings where they can pay off their heavy loans–new starts do not guarantee that setting. The risk can be seen as being too great from the concept side of church planting.

They also need to be equipped with the skills including the physical, psychological, and emotional endurance to weather the birth process of a new start. They need to know the difference between when the road gets bumpy  and driving off a cliff.  There are moments in an organization’s  development when it is supposed to get bumpy right about when it does.  That is not a sign of needing to exit here but rather to fasten the seat belts, make sure the brakes are in good working order, that there is oil and gas for the engine and to continue through.

If my education at Meadville / Lombard is typical of the available seminary training then our seminary’s focus is not on organizational development skills.   They are barely teaching what is necessary administratively for seasoned congregations.  So huge student loans and weak organizational development skills are two factors that prevent newly minted ministers from seeking to be church planters.

Our Unitarian Universalist Association does not have the patience to support new starts to enable them to make it through those initial milestones of one and five years.  We gave up on Pathways Church even before our pre-designated commitment time frame was finished. [There may be very good reasons why the UUA pulled the plug of support but that is not the point I am making here.] Unlike widget production we are in the business of transforming people’s lives and growth where people are concerned does not always follow the best laid plans.  We cannot measure success where people are concerned by the same measuring tools that measures widget production.   This is part of our inherited DNA as an association, the Unitarians and the Universalists associations did not have the patience to birth new congregations–especially new congregations in uncharted waters.

It is erroneous thinking to believe that if we simply plant it, it will survive without nurturance. If we are serious about planting congregations, then we have to be serious for the long haul not just for the first year or two.  We cannot expect a congregation to thrive if we walk away too soon.  The parable of the true shepherd and the hired hand applies here. The true shepherd does not abandon the flock when the first sign of trouble (wolves) appears.

Back to David Owen-O’Quill’s sermon.  A clear and compelling mission.  Why is it important for this congregation to exist in this community?  It must be compelling. It must be full of purpose.  What does this congregation have to do, must do, to have meaning and purpose in life?  The church plant that David Owen-O’Quill has started in Chicago has as its mission to “connect the dis-connected.”  That is a powerful, transformative mission statement.  That is something that people can sink their teeth into and nosh around a bit.  Let’s face it, many of our congregation’s mission statements are simply not that substantive.  They have been wordsmithed to death and go on for paragraphs. No one can remember the mission statement off the top of their head. They are safe and as a result they are shallow. There is no risk embedded in them, no possibility of failing.  In short boring.

How can we start a new church with missions that are wilted from the get go?  Likewise ministers  need to have a compelling mission, a driving purpose that will propel them into being a church planter.  Ministers need to know who or what has their back when times get rocky.  Our evangelical friends believe that God has their back, in a faith that does not presume God as a safety net, who or what is their support system?  If we are going to take serious our faith and if we are going to be serious in having church planters, then we must remove the barriers institutionally for church planters to thrive in our religion.

To recap on why we do not have a multitude of church planters:

1. Huge student loan debt

2. little to no organizational development skill training

3. A compelling mission that is transformative from the word go.

4.  A willingness  on the part of the church planter to place one’s life on the line for that mission / purpose believed in

5. Our association does not have a history of supporting new starts beyond the initial phase.

Blessings,

Reading:  From Michael Servetus’ Christianismi Restitutio [ The Restoration of Christianity]

“Not only because such gifts, but by reason of that one alone who breathes the divine spirit into us, God is said to give us his spirit, Gen. 2 and 6. Our soul is a kind of lantern of God, Prov. 20. It is like a spark of the spirit of God, a reflection of the wisdom of God, created yet very similar to that spiritual wisdom, incorporated in it, retaining the innate light of divinity, the spark of that prime wisdom and the very spirit of divinity. God himself testifies, in chapter 6 above, that the spirit of divinity was innate in man even after Adam’s sin. The dispensation of our life is given and is sustained through grace from his breathe, as Job says, chap. 10 and 32 and following. God breathed the divine spirit into Adam’s nostrils together with a breath of air, and thence it remains, Isaiah 2 and Psa. 103. God himself maintains the breath of life for us by his spirit, giving breath to the people who are upon the earth and spirit to those treading it, so that we live, move and exist in him, Isaiah 42 and Acts 17. Wind from the four winds and breath from the four breaths gathered by God revive corpses, Ezek. 37. From a breath of air God there introduces the divine spirit into men in whom the life of inspired air was innate. Hence in Hebrew “spirit’ is represented in the same way as “breath.” From the air God introduces the divine spirit, introducing the air with the spirit itself and the spark of the very deity which fills the air.

“Michael Servetus: A Universalist Perspective” by Rev. Fred L Hammond

17 October 2010 © Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa, AL

If I were to ask who Michael Servetus was in the history of Unitarian Universalism, I would probably hear something along the following:  He was a theologian in the 16^th century who believed that the Trinity, the belief in a Triune God was not based on biblical scripture. His theology would be described as anti-trinitarian rather than Unitarian. He was burned in effigy by the Roman Catholic Church and burned at the stake with most of his writings in Geneva, Switzerland by John Calvin, another protestant theologian and founder of Calvinism. Following his execution, there was uproar over the punishment of the heretic in which Sebastien Castellion wrote, “To kill a man is not to defend a doctrine, but to kill a man.[1]”  And this answer, if given in a classroom setting would give the student a passing grade.

But there is more to Michael Servetus, also known by his Spaniard name as Miguel Serveto and by his French name, Michel de Villeneuve in homage to his hometown in Spain, than his treatises On the Errors of the Trinity and Dialogues on the Trinity. And for us as Unitarian Universalists living in the 21^st century, it is this other aspect of Servetus that I believe is more relevant to us today than his expounding on the errors of trinitarian belief.

I state this because even though half of our name is Unitarian, we are no longer a faith tradition that requires all to profess the creed in the unity of God—God is one.  Some of us may believe in the triune God, God in three persons and some of us may believe in no god.  That creed is no longer necessary for us to call ourselves Unitarian Universalists because we focus more on our character of person, for it is what we do in our actions that reveal the moral character of the person rather than on what we say with our mouth.  There is a scripture verse in the Christian texts that state that if a person confesses[2] with their mouth then they shall be saved.  Unitarians would say that words by themselves are empty and actions speak louder than words.  So the true test of our faith is found in our compassionate, loving actions; whether the inspiration of that action is based in a Unitarian God or a Triune God, or in many Gods, or in no God is immaterial to us as a whole. It is as has been stated many times in a sound bite; “deeds, not creeds.”

In order to get to the aspects of his story that I believe are relevant for us today, I need to tell something of the basic story that is emphasized by Unitarian Universalist historians. Michael Servetus was born around 1509-1511, the exact date is speculated.  What we do know is that his country of Spain had over the centuries prior to his birth become the home of Muslims, of Jews, and of Christians. The culture of the Moors, as the Muslims were known and of the Jews had greatly influenced Spain. The Catholic Church was currently the dominant religious faith.  So Spain was struggling with religious plurality.  ‘Struggling’ probably isn’t the right word, when push comes to shove; a dogmatic inquisition would occur.  Jews and Muslims were given a choice, baptism into Christianity, banishment from the country, or death.  The great inquisitions of Spain occurred before Servetus’s birth but there was this awareness during his lifetime that many had converted to Christianity in name only and not in belief, in particular to the creed of the trinity.

Servetus was a child prodigy by the time he was 13 he could read several languages including Hebrew.  Hebrew was a forbidden language because it meant that one could read the Hebrew Scriptures in the original tongue “without resorting to approved translations[3].” His learning this forbidden language meant that he was most likely   exposed to a secret culture that also existed in Spain that of the Sephardic Jews who became Christian in name only.

It was the belief in the trinity that Michael Servetus saw as the prime stumbling block for true conversions from Jew or Muslim to Christianity.  He thought if this creed, which he discovered had no scriptural basis, could be removed from Christianity then there would be no hindrance for Jew or Muslim to fully embrace Christianity.

You may have heard in the subtext a certain arrogance that pervades Michael Servetus’s personality.  This arrogance would eventually seal his doom.  Authors of Out of the Flames, Nancy and Lawrence Goldstone assert “Servetus was so smart that it never seemed to occur to him that his arguments would be more effective if he didn’t imply that anyone holding an opposing view was an idiot.” He became convinced that the creed of the trinity, codified by a vote of bishops at the Council of Nicea in the year 325 of the Common Era, was the beginning of the corruption of the Holy Church.

He began to hound the protestant reformers of the day regarding this error in theology.  He thought Erasmus would be sympathetic because he had removed the Comma Johanneum from his Latin translations of the First Epistle of John.  This was a phrase not found in the original Greek text which directly referred to the trinity.  Erasmus was not sympathetic; he was merely correcting the facts of the text.  Erasmus attitude was to uphold the church authority and any debate on the validity of the trinity would hold until Judgment Day.

Servetus lived for a time in the city of Basel, Switzerland with a protestant reformer Oecolampadius, who complained to his protestant reformers that Servetus was “of belligerent and persistent temper.[4]”  It was counseled that by any means necessary to squelch Servetus’s blasphemies less they pollute the church.

Servetus took particular haunt of John Calvin.  He sent Calvin his manuscript On the Errors of the Trinity.  They had exchanged heated letters.  This was the experience Servetus had with all of the protestant reformers, even those who were a tad sympathetic to his views, eventually publicly refuted his thesis.

Servetus thought perhaps he had not explained himself well enough. If only he could restate his thesis in another way perhaps others would see.  He then published his Dialogues on the Trinity. But they fell on deaf ears and Servetus then went into hiding in France, taking on the name Michel de Villeneuve and became a doctor of medicine.  His desire to win over John Calvin did not leave him and he would continue to write to him under his nom de plume.  His constancy in pursuing Calvin resulted in Calvin promising that if Servetus ever stepped foot in Geneva, he would not leave Geneva alive; a promise that was kept with Servetus being burned at the stake on October 27 1553.

But it is as a doctor that Servetus made a discovery that was credited to a physician 75 years after Servetus first made it.  Servetus, ever the theologian, described in concept how the circulatory system exchanged blood between the arteries and the veins. He believed correctly that blood traveled from the heart to the lungs where the breath rejuvenated the blood and then sent the blood back into the body.  However, this discovery was lost for many years because of Servetus’ controversial standing and because most of his texts were burned with him, and because he wrote from a theological perspective and not a medical one.

It is this theological perspective that I believe is relevant for us today as Unitarian Universalists living in the 21^st century.  In Servetus’s final book “Christianismi Restitutio” [The Restoration of Christianity], “God breathed the divine spirit into Adam’s nostrils together with a breath of air, and thence it remains, … God himself maintains the breath of life for us by his spirit, giving breath to the people who are upon the earth and spirit to those treading it, so that we live, move and exist in him.[5]”

This builds on what he had previously written in his Errors of the Trinity, “I say, therefore, that God himself is our spirit dwelling in us and this is the Holy Spirit within us. In this we testify that there is in our spirit a certain latent divinity and it bloweth where it listeth and I hear its voice and I know not whence it comes nor whither it goes. So is everyone that is born of the spirit of God.”

What is remarkable about this is it stands in direct opposition to Calvin’s doctrine of predestination of the elect.  Calvin argued that God from the beginning of the world humanity had two destinations, some he destined for eternal glory and others he destined for eternal damnation.  Only those who were predestined for glory would have the spirit of truth within them. Only the elect were saved.  Servetus is saying that all are among the elect, that all have the nature of the divine within them, the very breath of God itself.

Now this may seem to us as a ‘so what’ since many no longer adhere to a creed of salvation yielding to eternal life or a heaven.  That is indeed the literal reading of Servetus words and in that context perhaps not important. However, in a society where there are forces that insist on focusing on our differences to set us apart and in the extreme, dehumanizes us to the point that violence against one another or even self inflicted violence is seen as viable options, these words are very relevant.

There may not be many people today in Calvinist congregations who believe any longer in predestination, but there are plenty of people in these American states who believe to be indeed among the elect of God.  From the cultish Family on C street who indoctrinates politicians that they are elected by God and therefore can engage in all sorts of indiscretions and make heinous comments against gays and lesbians, against Muslims, and against immigrants without concern of consequence to the privileged corporate bosses at big banks and Wall Street who can break the financial laws of this country and get bailed out for destroying the economy.  This election is also seen in the very fiber of the dominant Anglo culture in this country and is the underlying argument of the Tea Party platform—America for Americans is based in this belief of the elect.

Servetus’s words come back to us and suggest that there is the potential for us to reach the heavenly realms.  In arguing against the trinity Servetus suggested “if Jesus was concluded to be less than divine, he might have been simply a man made divine through faith and acts.  And if that were true, might not that same potential be available to all [people]?[6]”

There is within all of us that latent divinity, that creative spirit, that visionary specter, that leading-edge drive to move forward towards creating a world of justice for all.  Imagine if the restrictions on our minds were released and we believed that everyone, regardless of class, education, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity/expression was truly capable of being the next Jesus, the next Sojourner Truth, the next Alice Paul, the next Gandhi, the next Dorothy Day, the next Thurgood Marshall, the next Martin Luther King, Jr., the next Cesar Chevaz, the next reformer for justice. Theologian Cornel West, speaking recently in Arizona said, “Justice is what Love looks like in public…When you love folks, you hate that they are being treated unjustly[7]“

Servetus’s words of latent divinity are a message that is timely when forces of injustice are telling us to fear the immigrant.  Timely message when these forces of injustice pair the immigrant in our neighborhoods with the drug cartels and the violent crimes south of our borders, all the while knowing this is untrue.

This is a message that is timely when forces of injustice are telling us to fear the Muslim seeking to fulfill their religious vows as a peaceful people.  Timely message when these forces of injustice pair Muslim Americans seeking the American dream with those who use their bodies as bombs to wreck havoc and chaos, while knowing this is untrue.

This is a message that is timely when forces of injustice are telling us to fear gays and lesbians who seek to live their lives as equal citizens under the law.  Timely message when these forces of injustice pair gays and lesbians with sexual predators of children, while knowing that this too is untrue.

Timely message when forces of injustice can use their guaranteed freedom of speech to spread malicious hateful lies against immigrants, against Muslims, against sexual minorities and fear no consequences while knowing that people will hear and act to embody their lies in hateful actions against immigrants, Muslims, and sexual minorities.

Who amongst us will allow the latent divinity to awaken within and be the next Harriet Tubman to serve tirelessly for freedom of those enslaved by the yokes of injustice?   Who will once again recognize that we all “retain… the innate light of divinity, the spark of that prime wisdom and the very spirit of divinity[8]” and therefore are freed to act on behalf of all to create justice once again in this land?  Or at the very least begin to fulfill the call of our Hebrew, Christian, and Islamic teachings to love our neighbors as ourselves.  May it be so.

Benediction: Do not be deceived that because there are those who are privileged in this country, that they somehow are the elect and those who are not so privileged are not among the elect. The spirit of justice, the spirit of truth oft times chooses the least of these to level the playing field, may we seek not after the privileges of the elect but rather after the spirit of justice and truth.  Go in Peace.

“Throwing the First Stone”

10 October 2010 ©  Rev. Fred L Hammond

Unitarian Universalist Congregation Tuscaloosa

There once was a young boy who dreaded going to school.  Oh he was bright enough.  And he liked the subjects well enough.  But he did not like getting on the school bus because even though there were plenty of seats, he had to fight to get one.  The bus driver would yell at him for not sitting down immediately, oblivious to the fact that the other students on the bus would refuse to let him sit.  And then when he arrived at school, he always had his books knocked out from under his arms. This was before back packs were allowed in school.  He was told he carried them like a girl.  When he tried to carry them in the more manly fashion at his hip, they would be knocked from his arms.  The books would scatter to the floor and then others would gleefully kick the books down the hall.   He would be late for class trying to retrieve them. The teachers would then send him to the principal for being late.  No amount of explaining what happened would make a difference.  It was his fault that he was late for class yet again.

Sometimes he would just be shoved in the hall way.  Once could be considered an accident, perhaps, but five or six shoves in a row by the other boys passing by was a deliberate act.  It was thought funny by the girls.   Sometimes the shoving and knocking the books to the floor were combined.  One would shove, another knock, and a few more would kick the books down the hall.

And there would be the threats of violence after school let out.  He somehow managed to slip through the crowd to avoid those encounters, even when he planned to hang out in town instead of catching the bus home.

He tried to man up.  He tried to be tough.  He tried to let the name calling and the physical affronts to his person roll off his back.  But he could not.  He knew crying would confirm in everyone’s mind that he was indeed what they called him; a faggot, a sissy, a homo, those were the names used then.  He didn’t want to live anymore, not like this.

One day after enduring what seemed like a continuous onslaught of bullying; he entered his next class and sat sideways at his desk.  He was numb.  His whole body just vibrated numbness.  His teacher asked him to turn around in his seat.  There was no response.  His teacher asked him again, and then, the tears began to fall.  The young boy just began sobbing full body sobs.

The teacher took him outside of the classroom and talked with him.  Found out what had been happening. The guidance counselor came and also listened to his story.  The guidance counselor gave a stern lecture to his classmates about their behaviors.  Told them in no uncertain terms that their treating of this young boy was wrong and they must stop this behavior or suffer the consequences of what could happen to this young boy which would be on their conscience forever.  They would be held responsible.

Life got better for this young boy after that.  Oh he still got the verbal taunts but it was nothing compared to the daily emotional and physical torment that he received that year.

The media has highlighted several suicides of young people this past month as a result of bullying.  Whether it was verbal taunts, physical assaults, or cyber-bullying, the results were the same, the ending of a young person’s life.  These young people were either gay or thought to be gay by their peers.  Their life was driven into the ground and their possibility and the hope for shining their light brightly in the world was snuffed out.

It is difficult to know how many teens commit suicide because of homophobia.  The once touted 3 in 10 deaths is now considered to be grossly overestimated and it is now thought that the deaths of sexual minorities is no greater than in any other demographic.  But this does not diminish the seriousness or the grief these families are suffering because of the loss of their children.

And the young people that we heard about in the news do not comprise every teen that committed suicide this past month or even this past week, only those we heard about.  According to a U.S. Suicide Statistics of 2001, a young adult between the ages 15-24 ends their life every 2 hours and 12 minutes.  So that means we only heard of a very few of the young people who died this past month at their own hands out of the roughly eleven young people who died every day.  The numbers add up quickly and these are only statistics on the completed suicides, not the incompleted attempts of suicide.   It is the third leading cause of death in this age group after accidents and homicides.  It is the 5^th leading cause of death in children age 5-14.
Gay, Lesbian Straight Educators Network (GLSEN) has been conducting an annual survey[1] of high school students since 1999 on bullying as it relates to sexual orientation.   Here are a few findings from 2009’s survey: 84.6% of LGBT students reported being verbally harassed, 40.1% reported being physically harassed and 18.8% reported being physically assaulted at school in the past year because of their sexual orientation.

Being out in school had positive and negative repercussions for LGBT students – outness was related to higher levels of victimization, but also higher levels of psychological well-being.

On October 1 2009, a new law went into effect in Alabama mandating all schools to have an anti-bullying policy.  It is basically a good law but there are few flaws. It is only aimed at student to student bullying and did not include harassment from authority figures such as teachers or coaches.   It defines bullying as an ongoing pattern by an individual and it requires the victim of the bullying or their parent to fill out a written form to report the bullying.  A onetime bullying event or an oral report is not sufficient to bring actions against the bully-er.  Yet, as we know in the recent suicide of Tyler Clementi, a onetime event on the internet is all it might take.   The law did not specify any specific class for protection.  Focus on the Family attempted to make the case that Alabama’s anti-bully legislation would open the door for gay activists to seek special protections.

Our school district in Tuscaloosa already had a fairly comprehensive bullying policy in place which did include sexual orientation as part of its policy.  The law now reinforces their policy.  A recent news story states that Tuscaloosa is considering broadening their policy to jurisdictions beyond school property such as “when a student interferes with another student’s educational opportunities or substantially disrupts the operations of a school or school-sponsored activity.[2]” This would include cyberbullying through an electronic device such as the internet and sexting, the sending of explicit photographs and texts through a cell phone.

Tuscaloosa would become the first school system in Alabama to have a broad jurisdiction policy on bullying.  It is certainly a step in the right direction.  GLSEN affirms this action as being a positive step.  Their report confirms that  “Students attending schools with an anti-bullying policy that included protections based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity/expression heard fewer homophobic remarks, experienced lower levels of victimization related to their sexual orientation, were more likely to report that staff intervened when hearing homophobic remarks and were more likely to report incidents of harassment and assault to school staff than students at schools with a general policy or no policy.[3]”

There are other positive actions that could be done to reduce bullying behavior as it relates to sexual orientation and gender expression.  GLSEN stated that schools with Gay-Straight alliances increased the positive experiences sexual minority students had and reduced the reports of negative experiences.  Having safe zones and supportive teachers “contributed to a range of positive indicators including fewer reports of missing school, fewer reports of feeling unsafe, greater academic achievement, higher educational aspirations and a greater sense of school belonging.[4]”

There are currently no gay straight alliances in our public high schools.  University of Alabama has two student groups, Spectrum and OUTlaw, as well as a faculty/ staff group on campus. So where are students in high school to go where they will be accepted for who they are and not fear being bullied?  –Where they will be encouraged to explore the light that is the essence of their being and nurtured to allow that light to shine bright?

I will let those questions sit for a moment.  I want to shift our attention to why this is a concern for us today. What is it about bullying, and why is bullying sexual minority youth so important for us to examine and to end it?  The reason is not just because a few individuals commit suicide, albeit a very sound reason indeed.  There is something else at work in bullying sexual minority youth and suicides are just one of the consequences of this behavior.

Iris Marion Young in her essay Five Faces of Oppression looks at oppression not in the traditional format of a few people in power oppressing the masses as in tyrannical forms of government but as a form of systems that are in place to maintain dominant culture.  She describes oppression as being structural.  There are embedded in the dominant culture “unquestioned norms, habits, and symbols, in the assumptions underlying institutional rules and the collective consequences of following those rules.[5]”

So while the intent is good to pass anti-bullying legislation or passing laws protecting rights of sexual minorities for housing, employment, etc., the assumptions of what is normal behavior remains operative in the culture.  Those who affirm the dominant culture resent what they see as the deteriorating of their traditional values and norms with the passage of such laws.

While all of the five faces of oppression, Young describes also apply to homophobia and bullying on some level, there are two that I want to highlight specifically.  She describes what she calls Cultural Imperialism which is the universalization of a dominant group’s experience and culture.  This becomes considered as the norm and therefore the norm for all of humanity. So in America, up until very recently, one did not see positive images of gays on television.  If gays were viewed on television or in the movies it was in negative, often stereotypical images.  It was the gay man dying of AIDS.  It was the flamboyant gay who everyone could laugh at. It was the manipulative and weak-spirited Mr. Smith on Lost in Space who preyed upon unsuspecting young Will Robinson and therefore had to be under constant surveillance. These images sent very strong messages of what gays deserved, of what manhood was, and the dangers to our children.  They each deserved what they got.

Young writes, “The dominant group reinforces its position by bringing the other groups under the measure of the dominant norms.[6]” These groups become reconstructed as deviant and inferior and as the other. The stereotype becomes the known example of these other groups.  Those who do not fit that stereotype are rendered invisible.  Young writes, “Just as everyone knows that the earth goes around the sun, so everyone knows that gays are promiscuous…[7]”

We see these assumptions in operation when Fred Phelps of Westboro Baptist Church declares that “God hates Fags” or when the Family Research Council declares “… that homosexuality is unhealthy, immoral and destructive to individuals, families and societies.[8]“ Those who are members of the groups targeted even if they refuse these stereotype values and desire “recognition as human, capable of activity, full of hope and possibility;[9]” they must react to the dominant culture’s perception of them as different, inferior, and immoral. The further they are from the stereotype the more invisible they become because the dominant culture only sees the stereotype and not the person before them. It is assumed that they meet the stereotype even when they do not. The dominant culture does not recognize that they have a perspective on the culture that is based on their status within the culture.  Simone Weil said, “Someone who does not see a pane of glass does not know that he does not see it. Someone who, being placed differently, does see it, does not know the other does not see it.[10]”

The dominant culture does not see the pane of glass through which their world view is shaped and altered.  It then is up to those who are placed differently and do see the pain of glass to point it out and demand that it be recognized as such—a perspective and not a universal truth.

Cultural Imperialism feeds into another face of oppression which is systemic violence.  Groups which are oppressed live with the reality that they “must fear random, unprovoked acts on their persons or property, which have no motive but to damage, humiliate, or destroy the person.[11]”

Taken on its face, no one, not even Focus on the Family, which advocated not passing the Alabama anti-bullying bill, believes bullying behavior is good.  Their stance against the law was purely on the basis that it might condone or encourage sexual minorities to come further out of the closet.  Bullying then becomes one method to send a clear message to sexual minorities that they are not to be seen as a valued contributing member of the society. Those caught in bullying might only receive light punishment and to that extent the acts are acceptable behaviors. Bullying is therefore on some level viewed as an acceptable behavior in society because it serves the function of maintaining the dominant culture’s control.

The work that must be done to bring bullying to an end is on the cultural level.  It will take diligent and persistent messaging into the main culture stream to change what is considered boys simply being boys.  This is more than passing laws and school policies against bullying. In order to change the culture, positive interactions on the relational level with the perceived other must become the norm.  Our work for justice lies in the vigilant vanguard position of overt acceptance of different perspectives, different cultural norms across all avenues of being human.  This includes sexual orientation, gender expression, racial and ethnic, and class differences—all must be in our sights for radical acceptance in order to change the cultural norm of oppression.

To bring this back to the question asked earlier.  Where are students in highschool to go where they will be nurtured and encouraged to explore the light that is the essence of their being?   Our youth group which meets every Sunday is one place where gay teens are welcomed. Because there does not exist a gay straight alliance in schools, our youth group becomes one of the places where gay, and lesbian, transgender, bi, questioning, and intersexed teens are free to gather to ask the questions they need to ask and relax in who they are.

Many of the teens who attend the youth group are not from families from this congregation.  And so this youth group becomes our congregation’s calling card into the community.  We need to do all we can to support them in their journey.  We must listen to their experiences, honor their integrity, and show unconditional love for their dignity as people here with us.

A few weeks ago, our teens offered a worship service that was poignant and moving.  They could only have done that particular service if they knew that we loved them.  We do love them.  We must continue to love them and celebrate their lives here.  We can support them by standing up to bullying that we see in our schools and elsewhere.  We might not be able to change the nation but we can and we must do all that we can to change the culture where we live.

You might have surmised the identity of the young boy at the beginning of this sermon as my personal experience of seventh grade.  You would be right. I was very close to failing that grade level until a teacher and guidance counselor intervened.  That was all it took, two people who believed in me and acted on my behalf to turn that year around.   I still struggled with my gay identity.  I still faced random acts of taunting against me but things began to change that day.  And I found other people who also accepted me and valued me as I am and life got better.  I want to make sure that every gay teen who walks through our doors knows what I have come to know.  There are people who love them, and cherish them, and life will get better.

Not everyone in the world is looking to throw the first stone. Here is a place where stones are put aside for building bridges of hope and love.  Blessed Be.

Benediction:  In the Hebrew scriptures Leviticus states “you shall the love the alien as yourself, for you were once the alien in the land of Egypt.[12]” The land of Egypt is anywhere we felt isolated and different from the dominant culture.  It is the place where we are the other, the outsider of the group, the one longing for acceptance.  We all know what that feels like; we have been there, therefore love the other as if he or she is not the other but rather us here in this setting.  Love the other as you would love yourself.  Go in peace.

This question arose for me after reading this article by Ray Suarez:  “Red, Brown, and Blue:  How our definition of whiteness has changed with each new wave of immigration.” It is well documented that as immigrants came to the United States of America, our concept of whiteness changed as these groups assimilated into the dominant Anglo culture.  The Germans were not white, Irish were not white, the Italians were not white, the Jews were not white in America until they were assimilated into the culture and assumed their place of sharing power with the anglo culture. The article states there was a great loss and sacrifice these groups had to surrender in order to be called white in America.

Hold that thought.  The definition of the word ethnicity that I am using is the following: Identity with or membership in a particular racial, national, or cultural group and observance of that group’s customs, beliefs, and language.

In recent months, there is increased rhetoric about preserving  American values, American traditions, American culture.  This rhetoric has been used in relationship to immigration, specifically undocumented immigrants from Mexico and Central America;  to Religious freedom, specifically the Islamic faith and the building of Mosques on American soil.   So the context implies that what is really being talked about is White American values, White American Traditions, White American culture.  In order to be an American, one needs to be perceived as being white, as part of the dominant Anglo culture.  This dominant Anglo culture is embedded with the notion of white supremacy and white privilege.

Back to what was lost in order to be white in America. My family has been here for close to 400 years, we are not simply Dutch or French or Irish or Welsh or German or Jewish.  My family is all of these and a few more besides.  I can no longer claim as my ethnicity any of these ethnic groups since culturally they are distinctly foreign to me, 15 + generations away from immigrant status will do that.  If I tried to reclaim all the ethnicities that make up me, I would be accused of cultural mis-appropriation. In fact, I already have been when I sought to honor my Jewish roots, albeit four generations back.

So even though my ancestral heritage includes these various groups of people, I am not a member of  these groups.  I cannot authentically claim these ethnicities as mine since I have no observance of these groups beliefs, customs, or language.  So because the dominant Anglo culture has conflated being American with whiteness–an ideology that I reject as a person who strives to undo racism in my life and in my culture–and  because my family roots have been here for 400 years and assimilated into the dominant culture a dozen plus more generations ago losing its  ethnic identity;  I become invisible because I have no ethnicity that I can authentically claim.  Except for the possibility of claiming American as my ethnicity.

But this begs the original question. Is there an American Ethnicity that is uniquely American that has not been conflated by the Anglo dominated culture? In other words what would an American ethnicity look like if “whiteness” was not part of the criteria for being an American?

I looked at the traditions and foods handed down in my family to see if there was any inkling of something that was uniquely American that could be applied to all Americans as an ethnic marker.   Something that would not presume dominance over other ethnicities that are also present in America.

There are two family recipes that I have that go back several hundred years.  One is a cookie called “Delaware Crybabies.”  This cookie is a molasses cookie/cake that dates back to the 1700’s presumably to my dutch ancestors.  The other recipe is Tomato Butter, a condiment that dates back to the early 1800’s.  So these recipes originated here in America by my ancestors, whether it was my ancestors directly that created them or a community of folks from that time period.  They are not European based so again, I cannot say they represent my ethnic heritage from Europe.  They are American based and the ingredients of these recipes are connected with the Anglo dominant culture.  Molasses, Nutmeg, and Allspice were all made available because of the Atlantic Triangle Trade where these ingredients were brought up from the Caribbean to New England in exchange for rum and other manufactured goods which was then bartered to acquire slaves in Africa.  So while these recipes have the markings of something ethnic for my family, they are tainted with the Anglo Dominance of whiteness.  The best ethnic marker I can offer them is that of being Colonial American which would then separate them out from presuming dominance over any other form of cuisine present in America.

In terms of customs that my family celebrates that might be considered American would be Thanksgiving and 4th of July.  Thanksgiving takes precedence as a holiday over any other in my family.  It is a secular family holiday which has deep roots, a time to express gratefulness of another year being together.  My family has also used this holiday to remember our loved ones who have died in thanksgiving for the gifts they bestowed us with their lives.  But the origins  of this holiday is tainted with Anglo dominance.

I remember a few years ago after the events of September 11th this ad was aired. It showed the faces of Americans.  

I don’t have any answers as to what my ethnicity is, it has been lost to the oppressive dominant culture of whiteness.  But in order for me to claim American as my ethnicity, it would mean a concerted effort to continually separate out America from the whitewash (bad pun) of white supremacy and white privilege.  The America I see does not equal white and its time that that is explicitly stated. We do not have to reinforce the history of American racism by continuing the conflation of these terms for our present or future reality. We can create a different future where America means equality for all.

At the beginning of this month, Unitarian Universalist ministers received an email from a colleague in Gainesville, FL regarding what he and other clergy in the region were going to do on September 11^th and 12^th in response to the threat of a congregation there burning the Qur’an.  They were requesting that passages from the Qur’an be read in our congregations as an act of solidarity with Muslims across the country. Given the other waves of violence and protests against Muslims,  I chose to do so.

I did not give much, if any, of an exegesis on the passages other than a brief introduction as to why I was going to read from the Qur’an.  Afterwards we took a moment of silence to remember, honor, pray for those families who lost loved ones on 9/11 and the losses committed since that date. My reading from the Qur’an these passages caused a bit of uncomfortableness in the congregation.

If I have any concern about the Unitarian Universalist faith in general, it is that we tend to be of the  LOGOS persuasion and not of MYTHOS in how we read and listen to scriptures of any ilk.  We do the very thing we accuse the Fundamentalists of doing and that is reading the words literally. Where Fundamentalists embrace the literal meanings of the words of scriptures, we reject them and do not go any further to a mythos reading.  By reading these sacred texts in a logos method, we fail to grasp the deeper meaning of the words and lose the richness that could deepen our spirituality.

Philip Pullman, author of the trilogy His Dark Materials, refers to Karen Armstrong’s description of mythos and logos reading in her book The Battle for God: Fundamentalism in Judaism, Christianity and Islam (2001).   Pullman writes: “Mythos deals with meaning, with the timeless and constant, with the intuitive, with what can only be fully expressed in art or music or ritual. Logos, by contrast, is the rational, the scientific, the practical; that which can be taken apart and put together again; that which is susceptible to logical explanation.”

Once after reading what I thought was a very moving and touching story with profound meaning, a member of the congregation came up afterwards to tell me how the story was illogical because the such and such actions should have been taken instead to fix the problem. Fixes which would have resulted in the story itself from not occurring.  The person completely missed the point of the story because he focused on the logos of the words instead of the mythos of the words. If people state that Unitarian Universalist congregations are not spiritual enough, I bet one of the things they are referring to is our inability or lack of struggle to embrace the mythos of life.

The four verses of the Qur’an I read were the following and I offer an exegesis as to how I read these texts:

1. Love of God: “Say: O People of the Scripture! Come to a common word between us and you: that we shall worship none but God, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside God. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto Him).” (Aal ‘Imran 3:64)

Another translation reads:  Say “O people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians): Come to a word that is just between us and you, that we worship none but Allah (Alone), and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allah. Then, if they turn away, say: “bear witness that we are Muslims.”

This verse to me is about honoring our highest ideals (God) and remaining true to them.  We have common ideals, common values. Let us find what these values are between us.   At the time of this writing, this was an appeal for inclusion and harmony between Jews, Christians, and Muslims.

But I want to also look at the phrase “surrendered unto Him.”  We all surrender to something that is greater than ourselves. And so I hear these words and I ask what have I surrendered to—willingly? Begrudgingly?  It might not be some lofty ideal but something rather basic like systemic oppression or my daily grind.  Does that surrender free me or enslave me?  The Muslims suggest that by surrendering to their highest ideal (god) they are freed.  That’s what they proclaim when stating, “Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto him).” It may sound paradoxical that in surrendering ones self one is freed.  By freely surrendering themselves to their highest ideal (god) they are the ones in control rather than a begrudging surrender of defeat.

I am reminded of the scene in the movie Gandhi where the Indians are trying to shut down the salt mines.  They are lined up and walk to the gate only to be struck down, brutally wounded and dragged out of the way.  This happens again and again. These brave men fighting an injustice surrendered to their fate of being struck down.  They did so willingly because the future end result would outweigh any pain and sorrow that might happen at the hands of the British. They were in control not the British.  I ask the question again, what have we surrendered to—willingly or bitterly?

2. Love of Neighbor: “It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteous is he who believeth in God and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets; and giveth wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to orphans and the needy and the wayfarer, and to those who ask, and who set slaves free.” (Al-Baqarah 2:177)

Another translation reads:  It is not Al-Birr (piety, righteousness, and every act of obedience to Allah) that you turn your faces towards the east and west (in prayers); but AL Birr is (the quality of) the one who believes in Allah, the Last Day, the Angels, the Book , the Prophets and gives his wealth, in spite of love for it, to the kinsfolk, to the orphans, and to the poor, and to the wayfarer, and to those who ask, and to set slaves free.

It is not our rituals that make us righteous or people with piety but rather what is in our hearts and the actions that issue from our hearts.  This is about creating justice, equity, and compassion (our second principle) in all human relations. This is about those highest ideals that we want to remain true to and the people who inspire us to emulate them in living in our day to day lives the charge to practice hospitality and generosity to others.

3. A Common Word: “Say: We believe in God that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the  tribes and that which Moses and Jesus received, and that which the prophets  received from their Lord. We make no distinction from any of them, and unto Him  we have surrendered.” (Al-Baqarah, 2:136-137)

Another translation reads:  Say (O Muslims), “We believe in Allah and that which has been sent down to us and that which has been ssent down to Ibrahim (Abraham), Ismail (Ishmael) Ishaq (Isaac), Ya’qub (Jacob) and to Al-Asbut (the offspring of the twelve sons of Ya’qub), and that which has been given to Musa (Moses) and Isa (Jesus), and that which has been given to the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and to Him we have submitted (in Islam).”

I read this as sharing a common history by revering the same teachers.  We have as one of our sources the “Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God’s love by loving our neighbors as ourselves.”  This verse states that Muslims also share this as one of their sources for their faith.  Even though our faiths are very different, theirs is a creedal faith and ours a covenantal faith, we have this source in common.

4. “O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a
female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other (not that you may despise each other). (Al-Hujurat 49:13)

Another translation reads: O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female; and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another.

This refers to the creation story but it is slightly different than the Genesis story.  The creation story in Islam states that the universe was created from a single entity which God split apart to create the heavens, moon and sun, and earth.  It fits the big bang theory.  While the story as in the Genesis story states the world was made in six days, the term used for days in this story appears elsewhere in the Qur’an with different meanings in terms of length. So six days in the Qur’an is best understood as six different periods of possible varying length.  The importance of this verse also being read by other faith traditions on September 11 is not the creation aspect but rather the intention that humanity was made to know one another points towards peaceful co-existence.  And since evolution teaches us that we evolved somewhere in the bowels of Africa, we are of one common ancestry.

May we learn to read with both logos and mythos skills and thereby able to see beyond the surface where our differences lie and embrace our mutual humanity.  Blessings,

Here is the story for all ages and the homily I delivered on 29 August 2010 to the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa, AL.

“Harry Potter: The Boy That Lived” A story for all ages based on the stories of Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling adapted by Rev. Fred L Hammond.  Given to the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa, AL on 29 August 2010

This is the story about Harry Potter’s early years when he was just an infant.  He was born in a time of great political distress.  The source of this distress was a powerful wizard, whose name shall not be mentioned. This wizard used his magic for harm rather than for good.  He was out to destroy all who stood in his way.

Now Harry’s parents were among those who fought against the bad things this wizard was doing. They did everything they could think of to stand up against this wizard.  The wizard had learned a very powerful spell that would kill any who stood in his way.  He killed many, many people.

But the time came when the wizard came to their house to kill Harry’s entire family.  The fierce wizard drew his wand and uttered the curse of death, and Harry’s parents were struck dead.  He did the same against Harry as well, but something happened.  Harry Potter did not die.  In fact, Harry Potter lived.

Harry Potter was taken to live with his relatives where it was thought he would be hidden away and safe from the forces of evil.   And in his absence, the story spread … Harry Potter, the boy that lived.   He unknowingly became famous because no one ever lived after being struck by the death spell. Harry Potter did all the things that young boys do; the only mark that something horrible had happened was a jagged scar on his forehead.

But why did he live?  What was the source of his protection?  No one really knew until many years later.  There is a magic that is greater than evil.  And this magic is available to everyone, even to us Muggles, who are not wise in the ways of magic. Do you know what this magic is?

This magic is said to be the source of all of creation. This magic makes the flowers bloom, the birds to sing, and rainbows to appear in the sky after a rainstorm. This magic enables people to speak up for what is fair and just.  This magic empowers people to express joy when justice is served.  What protected Harry Potter all those years ago from the evil wizard is the magic of love.  His parents loved him very much and so while pain and injustices might happen, the love his parents had for him would prevail.  Love would be the ground on which he would walk.  And that foundation is what kept Harry Potter safe and alive after the evil wizard’s spells.   May we also walk on the ground of love all of our days.

“Harry Potter, You-Know-Who, and Unitarian Universalists”  Homily delivered by Rev. Fred L Hammond 29 August 2010 (c)  Unitarian Universalist Congregation Tuscaloosa

At the end of the movie version of The Goblet of Fire, we witness Harry Potter in a battle with You-know-who, the dark lord who is so evil that to even speak his name is feared to bring harm to those present.  In the process of this battle, a classmate, Cedric is killed by You-know-who.

So when we pick up the story in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, the ministry of magic has determined that Harry Potter and the Headmaster of Hogwarts, Dumbledore is lying.  The ministry of magic has used its influence to have the newspaper of the wizards, the Daily Prophet, inflame the public by discrediting Harry Potter and Dumbledore.  The paper also is declaring that all is well and that You-know-who has not returned.  The head of the ministry has come to believe that Dumbledore is stating You-know-who is back in order to take the head magistrate’s job. But as Remus Lupin tells Harry, people become “twisted and warped by fear and that makes people do terrible things.”

Fear is rampant and the ministry of magic has determined that the common enemy is Harry Potter and Dumbledore.  In order to regain control over a presumed renegade school, the ministry of magic places as the professor of the dark arts, a Delores Umbredge.  When she is introduced at the school, she states, “Progress for the sake of progress must be discouraged, let us preserve what must be preserved, perfect what can be perfected and prune practices which ought to be prohibited.”

She then begins to systematically take over the school.  She begins by scrutinizing everyone’s move, punishing Harry Potter for speaking the truth, and announcing that anyone who questions her is therefore suspect of disloyalty. An inquisitor’s team is developed to hunt out those who are disloyal and / or plotting against the ministry of magic.  Teachers are dismissed.  The dark arts become a class on theory and not on practical defense.  She resorts to posting more and more restrictive rules on the school.  She uses fear to maintain order and resorts to torture to keep control.  And the ministry of magic focuses on security as being the number one priority for the wizard nation.

Any of this sounds vaguely familiar?  We have a lot of things being discussed around our nation.  In Arizona and across the country we have hatred and fear being spewed about immigrants.  In California, hateful lies have been spread about same sex couples causing a law for same sex marriage to be placed on hold.  In New York City, in Murfreesboro, TN and in Gainesville, FL we have angry, hateful lies being spread about American Muslims and their alleged intentions.  In Gainesville, a church plans to burn copies of the Qu’ran on September 11^th to send a message to Muslims living in America.  Yesterday, Glenn Beck and his tea party met on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial to allegedly ‘restore honor’ to the civil rights movement on the anniversary of Martin Luther King’s “I have a Dream” speech.

These are all outrageous events happening.  It makes our blood boil.  This isn’t just about the politics of the extreme right versus the politics of the left.  This is about how are we to live as a people in a nation made up of minorities.  And we are all members of a minority group.  Some are minorities by skin color, others are minorities by sexual orientation or gender identification, and others are minorities by ethnicity or by religious or political affiliation, or by class, or even by life experiences.   This nation of minorities is again debating somewhat angrily, and with violence as in Murfreesboro yesterday, who gets to join the coalition of the new majority and the benefits and privileges thereof.  Do gays?  Do immigrants from Mexico?  Do Muslim Americans?  Do African Americans?  Who else should be excluded as other?  Where is the line to be drawn that says these are the real Americans?

In 1947, the US government created a short film called “Don’t be a Sucker” that dissected how a fascist government could come to power here in America. 

The process was to divide people against the other.  Tell the nation that these individual groups are not really Americans.  These others are here to destroy the American Way of life, to take from real Americans what real Americans fought and died for.  Speak of the threat to national security these groups pose. And offer the hope of a better life to the ‘real Americans’, those who have labored long and hard for freedom by passing laws that restrict these other group’s freedom.  Oh, and one more thing, have the news agencies; print, radio, TV, and internet become part of the same conglomeration so only one side of the news could be told, the side that those in power want told.

The narrator in the film stated, “We have no ‘other’ people in America.  We are all American people.”  He instructed us to stand together, to be who we are, say what we think, and “to guard everyone’s liberty or lose our own.”  There is no we and they, there is only us.

The story line in J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is also about fear of the other. The ministry of magic thought if they could keep You-know-who to remain underground then there would be no cause for alarm.  If hatred is kept out of public sight then all must be right with the world.  But hiding hatred or using politically correct words to mitigate hatred to something sounding less threatening does not get rid of hatred; it only causes hatred to seethe underground and then it erupts violently.

I understand the outrage at demagogue Glenn Beck and Fox News who are skillfully weaving hatred across the nation against other people, against our president, against our government.   But outrage is not going to change the outcome; it will only burn undirected energy into ash.

Just as in the story where Harry Potter and Dumbledore are on the vanguard, we need to be intentional and public with our presence of acceptance of the other. There is a need to be visible in standing on the side of love with those most impacted by the hatred. There is a need to say the word that no one else wants to say, just as Harry Potter states matter of factly Lord Voldemort’s name instead of the hushed You-know-who, we need to say the word racism and bigotry because that is what is at play here.  And there should be no apology for doing so.

Harry Potter’s story also reveals some very creative ways to combat those who manipulate fear to control and intimidate others.   The responses that Harry Potter and his friends make are responses that Unitarian Universalists can also use to address the issues of our day.

The Weasely twins in the story plan a very intricate and wonderful act of civil disobedience in response to the new tyranny that Professor Umbredge has imposed on the school.  With their magic, they disrupt the school’s final examinations with fireworks and breathing dragons made of fire.  In their doing this they show the rest of the school that they are not going to be intimidated by the forces of oppression; that they will continue to live free.  The Unitarian Universalist’s ‘Standing on the Side of Love’ campaign with immigrants, with sexual minorities, and with Muslims is a visible way to show that we are not afraid of the forces of racism and bigotry.  And there are other creative ways to show that what is happening is not acceptable in a country that values liberty and justice for all.

Harry Potter and friends search out the words of prophecy because they believe that therein may indeed be information that might guide them in their actions against the dark lord.   Search out and use the prophetic words of women and men for clues on how we might respond to the concerns of our day.  Make their words known again in editorials, letters to the editors, and paid advertisements letting others know that there are higher ideals that all can be striving towards.

Yesterday friends encouraged friends on facebook to hear the words of Rev. Martin Luther King’s famous speech “I Have a Dream.” Because within these words lie a dream of hope that all people of America might one day realize the power of the American creed for themselves.  The words of this prophetic leader are just one who speaks through the ages of how to be a nation, judged not by the color of our skin but by our character as a people.

I know that I have spoken much lately about what is happening in this country from a variety of angles.  As a people of faith who historically heard the call for justice in the civil rights movement, the call is being sent out to stand on the side of love once again.  The cry for justice is not just in Arizona, or in New York City, or even in Murfreesboro, TN. Yes, their cries are being heard from afar.  But the cry for justice is coming here in Alabama as well.  Maybe not today, and maybe not tomorrow, but soon the cry for justice will be sounded here as well.   Will we be among those who respond?  Will we be prepared like Dumbledore’s Army skilled according to our unique abilities the ways for justice?

In the words of Martin Luther King, “I refuse to accept the view that [hu]mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality… I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word.” May it be so.

I have a pet peeve. As a Unitarian Universalist minister  I get annoyed when Unitarian Universalists spread false messages about our faith.  A  false message that I hear often and from seasoned Unitarian Universalists is that we can believe whatever we want.   This simply is not true.  I want to ban this false statement from our message for ever. It does not serve us well.

I understand that when we state we have a creedless faith and when we do not have a statement of belief that people must agree to in order to be Unitarian Universalists that this is a difficult concept.  But just because we do not require people to give assent to a specific doctrine or belief does not mean the inverse is true that we can believe anything we want. This is false.

We have very specific beliefs. These beliefs are as foundational to who we are as any other faith.  Our beliefs come in the form of values found in liberal religious thought.  We have as our values the five smooth stones of liberal religion that were defined for us by James Luther Adams.  These five stones have been given five names:  Possibilities, Love, Courage, Responsibility, and Joy. We are aware that new possibilities are ever before us and so we declare that revelation is open and continuous.  We value the power of love and therefore declare that relationships are to be consensual and never coerced. We value courage and recognize that it is our responsibility to build the just and loving community even in the face of dangerous events.  We value responsibility and deny the immaculate conception of virtue.   Goodness is only brought about by actions that people  create and pursue.   We value Joy because we know that resources are always available, both human and divine, to bring about the changes we seek to make.  These resources are a cause for ultimate optimism.

These values of a free religious faith cancel out some beliefs as not helpful to us as Unitarian Universalists. We would not be able to be Unitarian Universalists if we believe that the whole of revelation was found in one set of scriptures because we believe that revelation is not sealed but ongoing. Therefore we look to the wisdom of all of the world’s religions and the words and deeds of prophetic women and men to discover what revelations they may reveal.

We would not be able to be a Unitarian Universalist if we believe that all people must make a choice for Jesus as Lord and Savior or be damned for all eternity because we believe that relationships are to be consensual and not coerced.  Such a belief lends itself  to coercion.

We would not be able to be a Unitarian Universalist if we believe that the just and loving community is only in the hereafter in some form of heaven because such a belief would remove our responsibility  towards creating a just and loving community in the here and now.

We would not be able to be a Unitarian Universalist if we believe that people are born good or bad.  This removes the responsibility that people have to choose to do good things. People may come from families that have historically chosen to do good things for their community, but it does not mean that a person born to this family is automatically good.  That person born to the family that has historically done good things must take the responsibility to also choose to do good things. They cannot be declared  good simply by virtue of birth.

We would not be able to be a Unitarian Universalist if we had an attitude of despair over the state of affairs of the world.  “Ours is no caravan of despair. ” We value joy and rejoice over the resources that are available to us to create the just and loving community.  We affirm that the arc of history is bent towards justice.

Unitarian Universalists have a set of principles and living sources in which we are asked to measure our beliefs against.    We choose to covenant together to uphold these principles as currently stated as we journey through this life.

Our principles are:  The inherent worth and dignity of every person;  Justice, equity, and compassion in human relations; Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations; A free and responsible search for truth and meaning; The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;  The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all; Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

As we search to find out which beliefs we hold are true, we measure them against these principles.  We ask ourselves questions about our beliefs.  Does our belief honor the inherent worth and dignity of every person?  Does our belief foster justice, equity, and compassion in human relations?  Does our belief promote acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations?  Does our belief lend itself to a free and responsible search for truth and meaning?

These principles become a standard in which we can investigate and delve into universal truths.  And while individually we might come to believe different things, we have come to see that different beliefs might lead us towards the same destination. Therefore we do not require a test of right belief in order for a person to join the Unitarian Universalist faith. So while we may have variance in the beliefs held by Unitarian Universalists, we do not believe that all beliefs  lead us the city on the hill.

A person who believes in White Supremacy would not be able to be a Unitarian Universalist because their belief does not measure up to the principles we have covenanted to uphold.  White Supremacy does not honor the inherent worth and dignity of every person.  White Supremacy does not foster justice, equity, and compassion in human relations.  White Supremacy does not promote acceptance of  one another.

So let us put aside this myth that Unitarian Universalists can believe whatever they wish.  It simply is not true.  We have strong beliefs in values that lead us to seek to create a better world, a world filled with justice for all.

Blessings,

“But it’s a Dry Hate” presented to the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa on August 15, 2010 © Rev. Fred L Hammond

A few months ago, I am sitting in the annual business meeting of the Unitarian Universalist Minister’s Association.  On the dais were two people not to debate the question of our denomination holding General Assembly in Phoenix in 2012 but to simply state their positions, pro and con.  Rev. Susan Frederick –Gray, minister of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Phoenix gave an emotional appeal for us to not only host a Phoenix based General Assembly in 2012 but to come to Arizona on July 29^th to  prevent one more child, one more mother, one more father from being ripped away from their families.  I listened to her call and I felt my heart affirming yes, I will go to Phoenix.

The call as I heard it was not simply to protest an unjust law because the law only codified what was already happening in Maricopa County and elsewhere in Arizona.  A population of indigenous and immigrant people were being systematically targeted as no longer welcome in a region that for thousands of years was their homeland.  The call was to return to our core values of honoring the inherent worth and dignity of every person.

On the grounds of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Phoenix is a sculpture by John Henry Waddell entitled “That Which Might Have Been: Birmingham 1963.” It is a reflection on what might have been offered to society, to the world at large had four young girls not died in a racist motivated firebombing of a church in Birmingham, AL in 1963.

The gifts of these potential women are depicted in this sculpture, each facing outward to the four corners of the world.  The ‘what if’s’ surrounding these four young girls of what could have been is powerfully emoted.

Coming to Arizona from Alabama and being greeted by this image, this connection to another time and place when America was gripped in fear of a different other is a stark reminder that these two moments in our history, the civil rights movement and the immigration rights movement are linked together in profound ways.  As I pondered on this statue and its now ironic juxtaposition with the beginning of ethnic cleansing of Arizona, I wondered what the ‘what if’s’ might have been if SB 1070 and the other laws were not passed.  What would the lives of the families torn apart have been like had their mother or father not been deported? What gifts these families would have presented Arizona and the United States in the years that followed had a different scenario filled with love and welcome been played out?

What was hailed as a post-racist America when the first African American President was elected has certainly in the recent past months proved to be instead a new incarnation of racism in America.  And just as Arizonans like to exclaim to their out of state friends, “But it’s a dry heat,” this new incarnation of racism in America is a dry hate. There are no Jim Crow laws banning Latinos and Hispanics from white only drinking fountains or sitting at white only lunch counters.  There are no laws segregating schools into white and brown.  But as my friends on Facebook reminded me when I asked if there would be a marked difference between Alabama’s 104 temps with humidity vs Arizona’s 104 temps without humidity, hot is still hot.   And so it is with hate.

And while Arizona is insisting that racial profiling is not to be tolerated in the enforcement of this new law, it is evident in the actions of the Maricopa County sheriff who treats rescued abused dogs better than he treats Latinos, Hispanics, and indigenous people in his county.  It is evident in the actions of State Senator Pearce and Governor Brewer who have declared all undocumented persons from south of the border as criminals and parasites on the state.  Such dehumanizing behavior is racist and is a necessary component to begin ethnic cleansing or as Arizona prefers to call it, “enforcement through attrition.”  It is indeed a dry hate that is drying out the very heart of America as its fear spreads across the country into other states.

To begin to understand where this hatred originates, a history lesson is needed that is no longer allowed to be legally taught in Arizona because it places whites in a different social location, that of oppressor.  My colleague Rev. Jose Ballester of the Bell Street Chapel in Providence RI, informed me of this history, he writes “In a letter dated June 30, 1828 General Manuel Mier Y Teran warns Mexican president Guadalupe Victoria that the growing numbers of immigrants from the United States of America would soon disrupt the territory of Tejas (Texas), ‘It would cause you the same chagrin that it has caused me to see the opinion that is held of our nation by these foreign colonists, since, with the exception of some few who have journeyed to our capital, they know no other Mexicans than the inhabitants here. . . Thus, I tell myself that it could not be otherwise than that from such a state of affairs should arise an antagonism between the Mexicans and foreigners, which is not the least of the smoldering fires which I have discovered.  Therefore, I am warning you to take timely measures.’ Of particular concern was the immigrant’s ignoring the Mexican law prohibiting slavery.”[1] Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, parts of Nevada and Utah were ceded to the United States as a result of a war guised as defending the white American immigrants of Texas but intending to have the result of additional territory for this country.  When I was in Arizona, I saw many signs that declared, “I did not cross the border; the border crossed me.”

The United States has a long history of coercion and aggression to obtain territorial control.  When Spain ceded the Louisiana territory to France it contained the caveat that it not sell or surrender the land to the United States.  Florida became a territory after the invasion of the Spanish colony of La Florida by General Andrew Jackson.   What does this repeated action of conquest do the heart of a people?

On my first night in Arizona, the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Phoenix showed the film, 9500 Liberty documenting the effects of a similar law passed in Prince William County, VA in 2007.  Producers, Eric Byler and Anabel Park were present to comment on the film and to answer questions. The film revealed the destruction of the economic base of the county and in increase of taxes by 25% as a result of the resolution targeting Hispanic citizens. But more poignantly the film chronicled the devolution of a community’s soul from harmony and tolerance to suspicion and fear of the other.

The following day, we gathered to begin our preparations for civil disobedience and how we would support those risking arrests. At this point in time, I am sure that I will participate in the acts of civil disobedience.  We knew that we would be involved in two actions; one will be the blocking of the intersection at the Wells Fargo Building where Sheriff Joe Arpaio has his offices.

On Wednesday night, the other action is still a question mark and therefore is not being discussed except among the leaders of Puente and the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA).  Puente is the human rights organization that we, the Unitarian Universalist congregations in Phoenix and the UUA, have aligned ourselves with in this process.

On Thursday morning at 4:30 AM some Unitarian Universalists gather at the federal court to join those who have been in vigil for the past 104 days since the law passed.  This was their last vigil as many were undocumented.  Being dependent on coordinated transportation I joined the vigilers at a 6:30AM Interfaith service at the Trinity Episcopal Cathedral.  As we approach the cathedral there is an early morning rainbow against the pink sky that seems to arc from the cathedral’s steeple to the Maricopa County Jail. My companions in the car wonder if it is a sign of good omen.

It is standing room only in the sanctuary, I am aware that because I am wearing a clerical collar I am ushered to one of the few remaining seats instead of being sent to the overflow rooms.  This was indeed an interfaith service with rabbis, imams, bishops from the Roman, Anglican, and Methodist traditions, pentecostal and protestant ministers participating, and Unitarian Universalist minister, Rev. Susan Frederick-Gray offering one of the three homilies.  The vigilers are also introduced and speak.  Their stories are poignant and personal.  The energy and spirit in the room is electric.

We walk from the cathedral to the Wells Fargo building, we are singing songs.  We are a sea of “Standing on the Side of Love” yellow shirts as far as one’s eyes can fathom.  I am greeted several times by locals, Latinos and whites alike, with “Thank you for coming.”

It is time to make our final preparations for one of the two actions we agreed to be involved in that day.  We are going to block the intersection.  Our organizer is giving excellent details as to what is going to happen.  Then she announces there are people wearing florescent green hats who can connect us with lawyers if there are questions about after the arrest.   I paused.

In my work with Soulforce many years ago, I knew that this journey I was embarking on was a spiritual journey and not simply a political one.  The way of justice is always aligned with the spirit.  Where was my spirit in this work?  Was I truly prepared to what might occur at the hands of what I have come to believe to be a sadistic sheriff?

In speaking with the lawyers I was told that because I was from out of state, because I chose not to have any verifying documentation on my person that would identify me as a citizen, that I might be required to post bond in order to be released.   One of my last conversations with our board president was that my benefit compensation package did not include bond money.  I laughed then, but the question of who would post bond for me was now no laughing matter.  I knew I did not have enough money in my account for such a bond.  And I suddenly realized that I did not know if I could trust the process to move forward with civil action.  I did not know who had my back should I be arrested.  And because I could not answer this question with any full assurance, I stepped away from the civil action and assumed a supportive role.

I now know where my personal work lies in order for me to continue to stand on the side of love.  This week has been truly a gift to me if only because of this one realization.  But I ask you, where does your inner soul work lie enabling you to continue to stand on the side of love?   Because as this work continues, it will grow harder for some of us and it will demand a strong spiritual commitment to this work.

There are many stories of grace being witnessed as the protests continue.  One of my colleagues overheard an African American child ask her mother what they were doing.  Her response, “Do you remember what I told you about Dr. Martin Luther King, that is what they are doing.”[2] I see our people in yellow shirts, go up to police who are standing on the frying hot pavement and offer them water, which is gratefully received.

Mar Cardenas from First Unitarian Universalist Church in San Diego is the first to be arrested. In the county jail, Sheriff Arpaio, wants to see just who these yellow shirts are that disrupted his plans for his biggest raid to date.  She sees him and makes the sign of a heart with her hands and says, “I love you Sheriff Joe.”  He looks at her and says who me?  “Yes, you.” she replies.  He shakes his head in bafflement at her gesture. Mar Cardenas later states that she recognizes that Sheriff Joe Arpaio despite his cruel and sometimes sadistic actions against the Hispanic community, he still has dignity and worth as a human being.  It is simply a matter of reaching that core of him that still recognizes others as human.

I hear about the arrest of Unitarian Universalist Audrey Williams who is in physical pain and suffering from heat exhaustion.  She is asked by the police if she still wants to be arrested after they have escorted her out of the hot sun and into the shade. The police tell her once she is in the county jail, her experience will not be easy.  She sees the Latinos in the crowd and lifts her fist and says to the Latinos, “I love each of you.”  The police then arrest her.   Because of her medical condition she is placed into an icy cold isolation cell with no blanket and no communication with the others.

Meanwhile, our organizers discover that the Maricopa County Jail has no police officers outside the building.  So the second action is given the go ahead.  Rev. Susan Frederick-Gray and members of Puente create a barricade in front of the receiving door.  They have linked their arms inside of pvc pipes, with metal bars where jellybean clips to hold their wrists in place.  The pipes are wrapped in paper with “no 1070” and “no 287(g)” written on them. This human chain is then chained to the poles on either side of the entrance.  A banner proclaiming “Not one more” in English and in Spanish is hoisted above them.   The Maricopa County Police are taken by surprise.  They have never seen anything like this before in Phoenix.  And Sheriff Joe Arpaio calls back his police from the raids he planned to figure out how to deal with this action.  The demonstrators from the Wells Fargo intersection are held in the vans because they cannot be received at the county jail.

I am asked to go to the county jail to support this action.  I walk over with Salvador Reza and I have a moment to get to know this man who has inspired and led his people to resist the heat wave of hate that has moved across Arizona.  When I arrive there is only a handful of supporters there within the hour, our numbers grow into the hundreds.  Rev. Peter Morales, president of our association and Salvador Reza join the human chain by standing behind them.  Another group of clergy link arms in front of the chain.  We are chanting, we are singing.  And we wait for Arpaio to make his move.  At one point police officers come out in regular uniforms and assess the situation up close.  Then they go back inside.

We wait.  We know that something will happen. The doors behind the human chain open, Rev. Peter Morales and Salvador Reza are arrested first.   Then police in full riot gear and weapons come out, cut the chain links on either side and dragged the human chain inside.  The clergy who are sitting in front of them are also picked up and dragged inside.  A legal observer and a reporter are swept up in the arrests; they tried to get out of the way and had no place to go.  A barricade of officers with riot gear and clear plastic shields march out and push the crowds away from the entrance.  They stand there for what seemed like 15 minutes or so and then back up and enter the jail, closing the doors.  In total 83 people were arrested, 29 of them were Unitarian Universalists.

Later that night, I join in a vigil outside of the county jail. We are singing songs in English and in Spanish and banging drums.  We hope our friends in the jail can hear that there are people outside in support.  I later hear that some of them were able to hear us and spread the word that we were there.

The following day, after all of our people are released, we gather at Valley Unitarian Universalist Fellowship in Chandler, AZ.  We are participating in a Taize service and a ritual of gratefulness is in progress.  UUA Moderator, Gini Coulter comes up to the microphone and stands in silence.  Rev. Susan Frederick-Gray comes up and announces that Salvador Reza, the leader of the Puente organization has been arrested again for the second time.  This time falsely.  He was observing an action taking place outside of Tent City; Arpaio’s make shift jail.  We are asked to join them in vigil at Tent City until his release.

Salvador Reza was placed in a van for two hours with the outside temperatures of over 105 degrees.  The van was not running.  This amounts to torture.

We gather at Tent City to sing, to pray, to stand.  One of the songs Unitarian Universalists are singing is “Siyahamba, We are Marching.”  We are singing the English words –We are marching in the light of God–and next to me is a Latino family with a young boy.  He is looking puzzled.  We then sing the Spanish, “Caminando en la luz de Dios” and his eyes light up.  He begins singing along jumping up and down.  He continues singing after the rest of us have finished.

Some of the Puente women have brought bean burritos and carnitas sandwiches and we are all grateful for the meal.  The thankfulness that is expressed in our joining them in this struggle is huge.  There are many words thanking us for our presence.

Tupac Enrique speaks to us about Salvador’s arrest and offers a history of the oppression that has been occurring in the Southwest for centuries.  He states the borders were determined between two governments that did not consider the rights of the native nation that was there first. Because of this he declares SB 1070 an illegal law created by a government that has broken every treaty ever made with the indigenous nations.

I am reminded of the indigenous lacrosse players who were denied use of their native nation’s passports[3] to travel to England earlier this year. Lacrosse a game created by the indigenous people of this country and yet not allowed to play their game in a world competition.

Tupac offers a prayer in his people’s language.  It is a soulful emotional prayer.  I begin to understand in a deeper heartfelt manner that this struggle is not just about immigration rights but rather living and breathing the inherent worth and dignity of every people.

We receive word that Salvador has been transferred to the County Jail and we move our vigil there.  It is clear that this arrest is pure harassment and intimidation.  At the County Jail, we decide to dance in the streets to loud Mexican music to let Sheriff Arpaio know that we will not be intimidated. Even the rain that begins to fall after 1 AM does not deter us from dancing.  There is a picture of me with other Unitarian Universalists dancing a conga line. The police are watching us from the rooftops but no action is taken against us.  At his second arraignment, the judge dismisses the case because there was no probable cause for the arrest.

Prior to going to Arizona, some of my conservative friends on this issue told me that the law could only be enforced for reasonable suspicion that arose in the line of investigating another situation.  I was told that with the judge staying so many parts of the law the reason for my being in Arizona was no longer valid because everything was changed.

Talking with the people in Arizona this is not the case at all.  Employers cannot pick up day laborers along side the road. This reduces the ability for day laborers to get jobs that would enable them to have food on the table or a roof over their family’s head.   Churches could have their vans impounded and drivers arrested for human trafficking should they pick up a parishioner who is undocumented—regardless if the driver was aware of the status or not.  Police can still be sued for being perceived as not enforcing the law.  These components of the law are still in effect. The harassment of people is still occurring.

People are being stopped for minor infractions like a broken taillight and that becomes the reasonable suspicion to detain them for immigration authorities.  Even traffic court cases that were settled become the reason for detaining them.  These examples are pre-passage of SB 1070.  The harassment was going on before this law was enacted.  Once a person is handed over to immigration there is no due process.

One of the leaders of Puente was released from the jail and witnesses saw him get into a waiting van.  The police immediately surrounded the van.  The police were going to arrest him again for violating the conditions of his release because of a meter running out.   This is the sort of thing that is happening in Arizona.  And I was told by several local people that this happens daily just as this sort of thing happened in Alabama in 1963.

It is time for our nation to return to its core values of liberty, equality, and justice for all.  It is time for America to return again to being a nation worthy of its creed of all people being created equal with unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It is time for America to “return again, return again, return to the home of your soul.[4]”

---

[1] From an email written by Jose Ballester dated Saturday, August 7, 2010.  Used by permission.

[2] http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/note.php?note_id=426638593187

[3] http://www.manataka.org/page2244.html

[4] “Return Again” words and music by Shlomo Carlebach

A friend of mine asked what the fuss was all about because the judge stayed several of the controversial pieces in SB 1070 so why were people still protesting in Phoenix, AZ?  The simple answer is a partial victory is not a victory.

There were still portions of the law that placed Latinos and other Arizona citizens at risk. One aspect of the law that was upheld was the ability to charge a driver of vehicle for human trafficking and to impound the vehicle.  This would include churches that go into neighborhoods to pick people up for church activities, should any of the individuals attending church through church provided transportation be undocumented then the driver is charged with human trafficking and the church van is impounded.

In the foyer of the Maricopa Jail there was a sign that listed “No visits, No Money, Legal Visits Only” and then in pen was scrawled “No Clergy Special!” The church does not have any privilege here.  My point is that if you were thinking Sheriff Joe Arpaio would not go after the congregations transporting undocumented people  to attend church, think again.

Another aspect upheld prohibited the picking up of day laborers at day labor sites.  Thereby effectively limiting a source of possible income for unemployed people, regardless of status.  If the laborers could not get transportation to the labor sites then they cannot work.  In this economy, day labor can be the difference between having food and shelter and being homeless.

But the larger answer is that racial profiling was happening even when it wasn’t codified into the law.  I know, I know, the law specifically states racial profiling is not allowed in order to enforce this law, but the words are meaningless when contrasted with the actions performed.

I listened to the first hand stories of the people who have been harassed daily by police for the the minutest infraction, infractions that white people are rarely called into account.  A tail light was cracked. Driving 57 in a 55 mile zone.  The trailer hitch obscured a letter/ number of the car tag.  The car tag was crooked.  Being stopped once in a great while is one thing but when it becomes a daily or weekly occurrence, it is profiling.  These are the infractions that the people were concerned would become the “reasonable suspicion” for being asked to show their papers of citizenship.

We who are white would think being stopped by the police would be for something a bit more tangible, like driving 70 mph in a 55 mph zone or driving under the influence, things that posed a safety risk to self and others.   So we (whites)  have a hard time understanding differentiating between a routine stop and what Latinos are experiencing.

Our Whiteness gives us privilege for minor infractions to be ignored or if we are stopped for these minor infractions we are given a warning, sometimes written/ sometimes verbal.  These folks are not given a written warning they are arrested and the stayed portions of SB 1070 means the questions of documentation can only be asked after the person is arrested on a charge.

This division became all the more evident when I heard the stories of those arrested in the actions on July 29th.   My Anglo colleagues were not once asked their country of origin.  My Latino colleagues were. One of my colleagues refused to answer the country of origin question and was then subjected to five separate interviews with ICE agents. She simply was not white enough to assume American status.  My Anglo colleagues when given a “psyche” evaluation were handed the questionnaire with all of the no answers circled as one big circle and asked if this was correct,”if so we are done here.”  My Latino and African American colleagues were asked each question individually, one question asked was “Do you ever wake up feeling despondent or depressed?”  In Arizona where you feel your ethnic community is being targeted, what is the correct response to this question?  White privilege was in full force operation.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio made a rare visit to see those arrested on July 29th.  He looked at the clergy arrested and went up to one of my colleagues who is fair skin with light ginger hair and asked, “And why are you here?”  The implication being he did not belong with these Latinos.  The sheriff made threatening gestures towards some of the local clergy arrested letting them know they will now be watched and possibly harassed by the county police. The fuss is that this man is a racist with an agenda to purify Arizona.

One of the Puente leaders arrested was arraigned in the wee hours but held for another four to five hours after arraigned for release, came out of the jail and then he and  his party waiting for him went to their cars which happened to now be parked at an expired meter.  Upon their entering the vehicle to leave, police cars surrounded the vehicle and were going to arrest him again for violating the conditions of his release by having a car parked at an expired meter. This is the sort of harassment that happens on a daily basis.

The message is clear, the county police are going to intimidate the Latino population and hopefully make it so hostile that they will indeed through “enforcement by attrition” reduce the  Latino and Native American population in the state.  I mention Native Americans because Native Americans are Mexicans, their heritage has been native to this part of the country for thousands of years.  Many are tri-lingual, speaking their native tongue, Spanish,  and English.

The fuss is that the State Legislature and Governors office (not the citizens of Arizona) have declared that it is a criminal offense to be in this country without papers.  The truth is being in this country without documentation is a federal civil violation and not a crime. The fuss is that the 14th amendment of the US Constitution states that only the Federal government can create immigration laws.  The fuss is that the Sheriff Joe Arpaio sees immigrants as less than human and treats them less than dogs.  When Sheriff Arpaio abducted Salvador Reza for no probable cause, he was held in a van for two hours with no air conditioning.  Arizona in July is already one of the hottest places in the country, being locked in a van for two hours in that kind of heat, knowing that heat inside cars can climb very fast to a killing heat is a form of torture. Senor Reza at that moment became a political prisoner.  The fuss is that this law only codifies the racist actions that Sheriff Joe Arpaio wants to hostilely inflict on the Latino and Native American communities.  The fuss is that the State Legislature and the Governor’s office wants to redefine the American Dream/American Values as only being for white America.

This is not what America is about.  We declared that all people are created equal with unalienable rights… we declared that we are a nation with justice and liberty for all.  We declared that this was a land of opportunity for all people…

The fuss is that one of the core values of the iconic republican,  President Reagan’s farewell address is being ignored:  “I’ve spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don’t know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That’s how I saw it and see it still”

These are the American Values this country was founded on; equality for all people, justice for all people, liberty for all people.  There are no skin color tests, no brown paper bag tests that determine whether a person qualifies to live with these values.   These values are for all our people.

I join with my Colleague Rev. Susan Frederick-Gray is proclaiming “not one more person, not one more family torn apart.” Not in Arizona, Not in Mississippi, Not in Alabama.  Not in any town or state in this country where we proclaim as sacred the right to equality, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

Blessings,

“Bless the Animals” service was presented by Rev. Fred L Hammond to the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa, Alabama on 18 July 2010  ©

Chalice Lighting written by Rev. Fred L Hammond: In the beginning there was a great fire that exploded in the heavens. From this fire all the universe was born; including the sun, the moon, and the earth.  And as the fire of the earth cooled, there came forth all sorts of life:  plants, birds, fish, and all sorts of animals.  Among them were dogs, cats, horses, and even people arose from the ashes of that great heavenly fire of long ago. We light this chalice this morning in honor of that great fire which declares us all part of the one.

Opening Words Lion of Judah written by Rev. Fred L Hammond

She sits on her haunches

surveying her terrain

The phoebe to her left

The phoebe to her right

The hawk that flies above

The rabbit that crosses

unaware.

She sees all

She is aware of all

Even me on the bench

Watching her watching me

****

“Bless the Animals”

Watching the bits and pieces of news regarding the impact of the oil blowout in the gulf has made me realize how very fragile and at the same time how very resilient life is on planet Earth.  The horrifying photos of oil drenched sea turtles, pelicans, gulls, and beaches have broken the hearts of many Americans and the international community as well.

As much as our sophisticated minds would like to separate us from this fact, we are very much connected to all of life that is found on this planet we call home.  In many ways we humans are very much like the invasive species that uproots, squeezes out the native species that lived in a specific region.  We are like the kudzu that has intertwined itself around and in between the natural landscape of trees and shrubs.  We are like the rabbit in Australia, with no known natural predator, reproducing at uncontrolled rates and destroying the resources for the native species of that sub-continent.

The lesson of the sea otter and its relationship with the sea urchin and the kelp forest is a relatively new awareness for humanity. However, we have not fully integrated it or to use a word borrowed from science fiction, we have not fully grokked this lesson into our way of being.  Grok is from Robert A. Heinlein’s novel Stranger in a Strange Land and a quote from the novel defines the word:  “Grok means to understand so thoroughly that the observer becomes a part of the observed—to merge, blend, intermarry, lose identity in group experience.”

Humanity needs to grok its experience with the rest of the world’s creatures and vegetation, instead of seeing itself as separate from it.  We are not separate from nature; we are one and the same with nature. Just as birds build nests from the materials of nature, we too have built cities from the materials of nature.  The difference is that our nests impact and change forever the environment in which they are made.

The lack of awareness of the lesson of the sea otter has never been more vivid than in the Gulf of Mexico these past three months. Our disappearance as a species on this planet might not happen through a nuclear winter or through climate change, but rather through our arrogance to continue to believe that we can do whatever we want to the environment and suffer no impact from that damage.  In our arrogance we think, if it provides short term benefit then it must be good to do.  Nothing could be further from the truth as there are long term consequences that will impact the survival of humanity.

Our very being on this planet is supported by the myriad of species that live on this planet.  From the smallest microscopic virus and amoeba to the largest animal, the Blue Whale in the ocean, all creatures are linked together.  And the myriad of species of plants also supports life, not only for other plants but also for other creatures.  The Rain Forests of the Amazon have developed a complex interweaving of support for life there.  There are plants, insects, animals we have not even yet discovered because their homes are located in the high canopy of these trees.

And like the tapestry woven by the sea otter, kelp, and sea urchin, if we pull to remove one these threads, the whole of the tapestry will come undone.  And not only the tapestry but everything that uses the tapestry for its own support and survival will vanish.

This tapestry of life is interwoven into sustaining the life of this one planet.  We do not yet know fully what the long term impact of the oil blowout in the gulf will be.  We have speculations and those are not favorable.  Areas that teemed with shrimp, fish, dolphins, and whales may indeed become dead zones where nothing can live.  Will the disappearance of these areas result in the loss of the seabirds and sea turtles that rely on them for food?  Will the disappearance of sea birds result in the loss of mammals and reptiles who feed on their nesting sites?  The links in the chain may have been broken beyond repair in the gulf.  From today’s perspective we do not know what will be the full cost of life lost in the gulf.

So it becomes an important act for us to acknowledge the animals in our lives.  To honor the gifts they offer us.  From the songbirds that sing outside our windows regardless of the weather to the comfort we receive from our dogs and cats.  We are more connected to the life on this planet than we may consciously acknowledge.

The sea otters taught us that when we are in harmony with our environment, the sea of life is teeming with diversity.  Let us offer our thanks to the animals that help sustain the harmony of this planet.  Let us learn well the lessons that animals teach us, those animals we share our homes with and those who live afar.

I have spoken previously that to bless another is not simply to say a few words but rather it is an act of affirmation towards the betterment of the other. To bless another means to lift up and honor the value and worth of the other in such a way that all of our actions are towards insuring justice for the other. Therefore to bless the animals means to live life with integrity for all of our neighbors on this planet.  It means to make decisions with an awareness of how those decisions might impact the environment around us—not just in the short term during our life time but the long term. Our blessing the animals and the earth in which we all live is to make those decisions with the impact on the lives of those living seven generations from now in full awareness.

There is an old Mohawk a.k.a. Onkwehonwe legend that talks about a prophecy of the seventh generation. “According to the prophecy, after seven generations of living in close contact with the Europeans, the Onkwehonwe would see the day when the elm trees would die. The prophecy said that animals would be born strange and deformed, their limbs twisted out of shape. Huge stone monsters would tear open the face of the earth. The rivers would burn aflame. The air would burn the eyes of man. According to the prophecy of the Seventh Generation the Onkwehonwe would see the day when birds would fall from the sky, the fish would die in the water, and man would grow ashamed of the way that he had treated his mother and provider, the Earth.[1]”  The Onkwehonwe believe we are that seventh generation.  May we learn to bless the animals and the earth with our actions so seven generations from now; life on this planet will once again be whole and in harmony.  Blessed Be.

Extinguishing chalice words by Rev. Fred L Hammond: This chalice flame is extinguished but the light of love and compassion for all beings is just beginning to burn brighter within our hearts.

---

[1] As found at http://www.indianlegend.com/mohawk/mohawk_001.htm

I did not realize my blog with fewer than 50 readers a day would suddenly go viral on this story with over 3900 hits in one day–and the day is not over.  Nor did I realize that Rachel Maddow would pick up on this story.  I speculated on what possibly could have been “recurring inappropriate content”  as MPB Director Kevin Farrell wrote in an email to a listener as the explanation for dropping the popular show.  I looked at one weeks worth of programs, reviews, political commentary because if this was indeed a recurring event than it would have to be,  well–recurring.

I raised the question of positive images of gays and lesbians as the recurring theme in that weeks show as a possible suspect.  Here in the south, homosexuality is still very much an inappropriate topic.  Especially when it comes to gay rights.  I asked the question was this the recurring theme that was deemed inappropriate?

I asked this question because homophobia comes in all shapes and sizes.  Some of it can be internalized and hidden from view and therefore denied. It is insidious in our society, tucked here and there allowing institutionalized policies to rationalize homophobia  as being something else entirely.  I have never heard anything on Fresh Air that I thought as inappropriate content, let alone recurring.  But maybe because as a gay man, I long for positive gay messages on our airways that when ever I hear them, I leap for joy.

One of the comments that I received stated “It was dropped because someone called the IHL building and was placed on hold. the hold music is MPN/NPR and (they claim) Gross was talking about sex in an interview. So, someone who doesn’t even listen to NPR got it pulled off the air.” I held off on publishing this comment because I wanted to verify its information in some manner.  The verification came earlier today via email, the source was an insider at MPB.  And it was  confirmed by another edition of the Rachel Maddow Show.

But this is not a topic that Terry Gross has on a recurring basis. So that leads me to continue to wonder what else is considered “recurring inappropriate content?”

I received a comment from Unity Mississippi stating  my post has damaged both the image of Mississippi and MPB where many are allies to the cause of gay rights.

I do not regret in the least of my speaking out and raising the question.  In a state where homophobia and sex-phobia run hand in hand enabling high rates of sexual transmitted infections including HIV/AIDS, the question needed to be raised.   Homophobia is a powerful oppressor which debilitates peoples lives.  To allow one caller, obviously not comfortable with their own sexuality–straight, gay or bi– who  does not even listen to NPR is a sure indication of how much power is given to those who are fearful of the other.

Homophobia comes in all shapes and sizes and if those who claim to be allies of the GLBT community cave in to the demands  of one caller, then I suspect that internalized homophobia  or in this case sex-phobia is also at work.  I can not and will not allow my life to be shaped by homophobia in any form, from any source, from my gay friends who claim I have damaged the image of Mississippi ( by reinforcing stereotypes)  and gay friendly MPB to those who stridently and publicly work  against my procuring civil rights. Nor will I bend towards the tugs of homophobia that society has still lodged within my own heart.

My fervent hope is that after the Board at MPB meets today that they will  reconsider their positions and return to the airways of Mississippi one of the best shows on NPR, Fresh Air with Host Terry Gross.  That they will not allow themselves to be held hostage by one caller or many callers from offering the best in programming that is available.  Shows like Fresh Air offer a life line in Mississippi for so many people who want to be exposed to the vast market place of ideas.  It does so respecting the inherent worth and dignity of the person being interviewed. The program shows respect of others regardless of their life stories and that is so needed today.

Blessings,

Mississippi Public Broadcasting (MPB) dropped the very popular Fresh Air hosted by Terri Gross.  The drop came at Christmas time in 2009.  It then returned for a brief period and now is again off the MPB’s airways.   An email dated July 12 2010 from Kevin Farrell, director of MPB radio, states “MPB no longer airs this program [Fresh Air]  due to recurring inappropriate content.”

Just what was this inappropriate content?  Mr. Farrell did not elaborate.   A look at the programs that aired recently on Fresh Air  reveals these interviews:  July 13th, “A Psychiatrist’s Prescription for his Profession; ”  July 12th, “Missing ‘Priceless’ Artwork? Call Robert Wittman; ”  July 9th, “Colin Firth: A Leading Man in ‘A Single Man’; ” and July 8th, “Generating Changes In The Electrical Power Grid.”  Anything inappropriate in these stories?

Recent reviews included these: July 13th, “Robert Randolph: A Gospel Guitarist’s Secular ‘Road’;” July 12th, “A Star Named Marilyn (But Not The One You Think; ” and July 9th, “Cholodenko’s ‘Kids’ Flick: More Than Just All Right.”  Anything that stands out as recurring and inappropriate here?

Recent political topics included “CPAC, The Tea Party And The Remaking Of The Right,” “Connecting The Dots Between PhRMA And Congress,” and “‘Clinton Vs. Starr’: A ‘Definitive’ Account.” Anything inappropriate that the average American could not handle in these topics?

Now what could possibly be inappropriate about the content of these shows?  Couldn’t possibly be the interview with Colin Firth regarding his role in “A Single Man.”  He plays the part of a gay man grieving the loss of his partner.  The story line of grieving the death of a loved one is as old as the story of David and Jonathan in First Samuel of the Hebrew Scriptures.   And it certainly could not be the movie review of Cholodenko’s “The Kids Are Alright.”  That story line of parents dealing with their rebellious teens goes all the way back to Adam and Eve.  Oh wait, the parents are both lesbians.   Nah, it couldn’t be that.

Unless what is inappropriate is that these story lines reveal homosexuals as being just as affected by universal themes as everyone else. Now that we can’t have because that would mean gays, lesbians, bi’s, and transgender folks live just as mundane a life as everyone else.  It would mean that they are not the evil incarnate bent on destroying the American dream, baseball and apple pie, too. They are just trying to reach the American dream like everyone else.  Now that is inappropriate!!!

One of the beauties of public radio is that it will air shows that commercial radio is too scared to air.  It will offer a point of view that challenges us to think about life in new and unique ways.  Thinking is something that Americans seem afraid to do these days.  Based on the rise of the Tea Party with its hate and fear based jargon and the slanderous distortions coming from Fox News, people in America have forgotten how to think for themselves and seem willing to surrender their minds to the emotion of fear.

MPB seems to be following suit in reducing its programming to the amusement and entertainment shows like “Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me” and “Only a Game. ”  Not that there is anything wrong with these fine shows but public radio is meant to be something more than just idle amusement.  It is supposed to be an alternative to network radio and television not more of the same.  And in Mississippi where a girl cannot even take her girlfriend to a school prom because it might be distracting, there is a definite need for a forum where an alternative to homophobia can be heard.

No, this certainly cannot be the inappropriate content that Mr. Farrell is referring to because free speech is a constitutional right of the first amendment.  He clearly knows that to censor any programming on public radio simply because it does not match someone’s political or religious views is against the first amendment.  Right Mr. Farrell?

Blessings,

“Independence Day” was delivered on 4 July 2010 © by Rev. Fred L Hammond to the congregation of Our Home Universalist Church, Ellisville, MS

I wonder if the founding parents of our nation 234 years ago were to visit today, would they be pleased with what they have wrought into being or dismayed.   It has often been a spurious argument to attempt to state the intentions of the founders of this nation regarding this or that argument.  Yet, we try to do so regardless.

And while the temptation to speak as to the intentions of our founders is fraught with false renderings, incomplete records, and gaps in understanding, I will endeavor to attempt to sift through the chaff of time to reveal the kernels of truth that have endured as central to our democracy and American dream.

Three of our most sacred national documents reveal a mind-set of the responsibility of government that all people should enjoy.  The Declaration of Independence from Great Britain decreed, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.[1]”

The preamble to our Constitution states, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence [sic], promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.[2]”

And during the most trying of time in our union, the Gettysburg Address declares “that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.[3]”

I wonder if our forebears who wrote these words would recognize our government today as seeking to fulfill these ideals or would they weep and gnash their teeth in despair?  I fear the latter yet I am filled with hope.

These words from these sacred texts of our government have been subjected to a wide variance of interpretation.  On the extreme right we have a libertarian interpretation where the basics of our constitution would be fulfilled with the bare minimal government action.  General Welfare would only be defined as keeping our borders safe from invasion and therefore provisions for social security, Medicaid, welfare, aid in times of disaster and the controversial and still yet to be realized universal healthcare is not part of this definition. The libertarian viewpoint would be that the people out of their charitable and religious convictions would themselves provide these services either through their religious affiliation or through the founding of non-profit entities which would also be funded by people.  What wasn’t provided through these means would then be sought through private enterprise at a cost to those who could afford it.

We have examples of these already throughout our nation.  We have non-profit and for-profit hospitals and clinics.  We have public and private education from pre-school through the post-doctorate level. We have non-profit and for-profit social services for the mentally and physically challenged.

On the left extreme we have a socialist interpretation where the government is the provider of the common good.  We have examples of these as well in our nation.  We have social security and Medicare for our retired seniors.  We have railroads and interstate highways that are maintained by the government for ease in transportation. We have Welfare assistance for the disabled.  We have state police to protect and serve.  We have firefighters and public libraries. Our public education ensures a standard of education for all citizens.

There is a wide spectrum that falls in between these two poles of political thought and a few more poles from different angles criss-crossing these poles including economic overlays of how business is conducted and what roles government has in regulating business enterprises.  How does the government “promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” in regards to economic theories of capitalism and free market enterprises versus nationalized industries?   Who is included in these “blessings of liberty” when corporation business practices are involved?

When corporations are able to influence elections with unrestrained financial contributions who benefits from such a practice?  When banks are given free reign to extort funds from the average consumer, knowing that consumer does not have the ability to pay the mortgage, how does this promote the blessings of liberty?  When stock markets are given carte blanche to gamble their clients finances through hedge funds and default credit swaps and then when it all collapses to bail the markets with taxpayers funds, how is this promoting the general welfare of a nation?  Independence is a rare commodity in today’s corporate economic climate.

It is the question of how a country can fulfill the pledge of the declaration of Independence, the preamble of the constitution and a government by, of, and for the people that continue to be at the heart of the debate that is raging in our nation today.  These questions of independence were never quite answered by our founders.   It is a question that needs to be answered by every generation anew.  How to fulfill this ideal is our most pressing question for this generation.

Into this mix comes the resurgence of dogmatism, specifically religious dogmatism but there is a secular dogmatism as well that is on the rise.   In the last few years, people have been asking what role should government have in allowing people to pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

Does government have a vested interest in the definition of marriage?  This long and honored institution certainly falls into the pursuit of happiness that our founding documents state is an unalienable right granted to us not by governments but by the spirit of life itself.  This question is being debated currently in the courts in California where Prop 8 is being contested as being unconstitutional in banning same sex marriage. If the answer is yes, does government have the right to limit its definition to a particular religion’s definition placing preference above other religions’ definition of marriage, such as Unitarian Universalist’s definition of marriage?  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

I came across a response on Facebook to a stranger who took exception of a photograph of a father and son who had temporarily tattooed “No H8” on their faces.  The stranger wrote:  “How sad you have your child pose for something he has no idea what it stands for, this country is a disgrace if you think that same sex marriage is normal you need to seek the truth and the truth will set you free.”  The person in the spirit of independence answered with this response:

“First, as responsible parents, we have an obligation to guide our children down a moral path that we feel is best for them until they reach a level of maturity to choose such a path for themselves. For example, I would guess that you made your children attend church services before they truly understood what Christianity stood for, before they understood that there are hundreds of other religious beliefs to choose from or that there is a mountain of scientific evidence that stands in opposition to religious belief altogether.

“Further, wouldn’t you agree we can’t give our children complete free will to choose what they wish to do? My son doesn’t understand the importance of eating his vegetables, but I make him do it anyway.

“These arguments aside, however, the truth is that my son DOES understand what this picture stands for. Nearly all children from an incredibly early age understand the importance of fairness, that people should be treated equally. What’s unfortunate is that, for most, these intrinsic values are eventually torn away and replaced by religious indoctrination. [4]”

To raise our children in the spirit of independence is to assist them in being able to live in a world of diversity. If each person has the right to have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then it is vital that we teach our children tolerance and acceptance of differences.  It is important that they are equipped with being able to answer the question posed by our founding parents for their generation.

It is clear that our founders did not even consider the possibility of same sex marriage in the late 18^th century. But they did consider the problems of one religion having authority over another.  Further they saw the problems of government enforcing a particular religious doctrine or creed onto a populous that is diverse in religious expression.  To do so increases the possibility of oppression and restricting the ability of people to choose their own path towards life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

The states are claiming state rights in the decision of same sex marriage but this argument did not hold when interracial marriage was debated in the late 1960’s.  At some point in the not so distant future, state rights in defining marriage according to one religious doctrine, regardless if it is the majority doctrine held by people, will not hold either.

Should we allow history and science to be taught that contradicts my religious faith or political beliefs?   Remember I mentioned this polar extreme between libertarianism and socialism that our country operates in politically and religiously.  So we have the Texas state school board insisting that certain scientific facts such as evolution or certain historical debates such as separation of church and state should not be taught.  Why?  Because these topics go against their religious beliefs.

Some fundamentalist Christian groups believe that the ideal government is best achieved when Jesus returns to set up his kingdom on earth.  Religious kingdoms are not democracies but rather theocracies, benevolent ones according to these beliefs but theocracies nonetheless.  The only examples we have of modern day theocracies are oppressive regimes so it is hard to imagine that one led by a fundamentalist Jesus would be any different.  These particular fundamentalist groups want to pave the way for the second coming of their king by creating laws and scenarios that reflect their beliefs.

There is nothing in our constitution that prohibits a state to mandate what is an acceptable educational curriculum. The federal government has stated that government shall make no laws regarding the establishment of a religion or the free exercise of that religion.   And therefore this question of what can or cannot be taught in our schools is left open to interpretation.  However, consider that there is no independence of thought when a particular religion can hold sway over what is taught in a state education system.

Should we allow undocumented immigrants who have children born here to become citizens?   There is proposed legislation in Arizona that would prohibit children born here to undocumented immigrants from becoming citizens.  The so called anchor babies’ legislation is an attempt to prevent their parents from finding a means towards naturalization and citizenship.  This proposal which is gaining momentum not only in Arizona but in Congress violates the 14^th amendment of the constitution which states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”

Arizona is claiming that they have state rights to create laws to protect their citizens as defined in the Bill of Rights amendment 10.  State rights are an issue that was never fully answered by our founding forebears.  In fact they decidedly side stepped the question in creating the declaration of Independence and in creating the constitution.   The declaration of independence in the initial draft by Thomas Jefferson deplored the existence of slavery supported by King George III. Hypocritical perhaps since Jefferson himself had several slaves but the paragraph was removed in concession to state rights to govern as they saw fit.

State rights were used again in defining slaves owned as 3/5ths of a person in giving representation to congress.  The newly formed congress gave in to the states ability to govern as they deemed fit in order for the more populated white north to retain a majority in the federal government legislative branch.  The question of whether states had the right to oppress others when the newly formed federal government declared equality of all men was again not answered.

To define what state rights means in the bill of rights continued to be argued throughout the 1800’s.  And while some southern historians argue that the civil war was fought over state rights[5], this question was never settled.  The southern states exercised their opposition to ending slavery by seceding from the union, an ultimate test of state sovereignty but the question of state rights was not answered only the question of slavery.

The residual effects of slavery remain as a blood stain on this country 145 years after slavery ended.  Independence as declared in our country’s documents for our citizens of color still eludes them in many ways.  And the unanswered question of state rights is still part of the system that holds them down.

I do not know what the answer will be for our nation in the question of state rights to self-determine their fate.  But if we are to be true to words in our declaration of independence and our preamble to our constitution then the line must be drawn by the federal government in terms of what is permissible and what is not.  In regards to ensuring human rights, this seems to be primarily a function of the federal government when states do not abide to the spirit of our nations most sacred texts.

As Unitarian Universalists, we need to be ready to stand on the side of love in regard to these questions.  If we seek to answer these questions with what is the most loving, what is the most freedom affirming, what is the most liberating action that can be done, then we cannot veer too far off the path of what our founding parents meant when they wrote, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all [people] are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”  May we celebrate these values this Independence Day.  Blessed Be.

---

[1] As found at  http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/freedom/doi/text.html

[2] As found at http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Preamble

[3] As found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gettysburg_Address

[4] Used by permission of author As found at http://www.facebook.com/miguel.santana?v=wall&story_fbid=135201343170964#!/note.php?note_id=128947497141157&id=100000322926383

[5] I contend that the argument that the Civil War was fought over state rights is an attempt by those who wish to hide the shame of our racist past.  It seems nobler to say our ancestors fought the Civil War for the cause of state sovereignty than to admit our ancestors were racists and wanted to continue the heinous act of slavery.

A sermon delivered on 20 June 2010 © by Rev. Fred L Hammond to the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

Reading: 1 Samuel 18: 1,3-4

Now when he had finished speaking to Saul, the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul. ^{… 3} Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul. ⁴ And Jonathan took off the robe that was on him and gave it to David, with his armor, even to his sword and his bow and his belt.

“Entreat me not to leave you,
Or to turn back from following after you;
For wherever you go, I will go;
And wherever you lodge, I will lodge;
Your people shall be my people,
And your God, my God.

Where you die, I will die,
And there will I be buried.
The LORD do so to me, and more also,
If anything but death parts you and me.” (Ruth 1: 16-17)

These beautiful words from the Book of Ruth have been read at hundreds of wedding services to assist in building the covenant between a man and a woman.  But these words are not about a covenant between a man and a woman but a covenant between a woman and a woman.

The book of Ruth in the Hebrew Scriptures is about loyalty and love.  Here is the story which makes these words so powerful.

Naomi and her husband Elimelech move to the country of Moab because there was a great famine in Judah.  Elimelech dies and their two sons, Mahlon and Chileon married Moabite women, Ruth and Orpah.  After about ten years these two sons also die, leaving no children.  Naomi, now alone decides to travel back to the home of her husband’s in Bethlehem in the country of Judah because she heard that the famine was over.   So Naomi and her daughters-in law begin the trek back to Judah.

In these days, women were considered property and if Naomi had additional sons they would have been expected to take Orpah and Ruth as their wives in the hopes of giving their brothers sons.  But this is not the case and Naomi is of the age when remarriage and child bearing is not an option for her to produce sons who then could grow up and marry her daughters in law.  And if such a thing were possible would it be fair to make them wait? So for them to return to Naomi’s husband’s family meant that they would be sold into slavery when her husband’s property is sold.  And Moabites while a peaceful people were considered deceivers that lured people away to false gods.  This was not a happy prospect.

Naomi beseeches her daughters-in-law to return to their own families so that they will not be sold into slavery, into a life of unknown poverty, into a life of further degradation.  They weep at this request. Orpah decides to take Naomi’s advice and return to her people.  It is from this culture that Ruth’s words are spoken.  It is from this realization of her future prospects that she declares these words to Naomi.  “Entreat me not to leave you, Or to turn back from following after you; For wherever you go, I will go.”

Now the story has a happy ending.  Naomi and Ruth return to Bethlehem.  Naomi despairs of her bitter fate but Ruth goes and gleans the fields that belong to a man named Boaz.  It was a practice of the Jews to leave one tenth of the harvest so that the poor may glean the fields in order to have food.  Ruth did so behind the reapers and gained favor of the land owner.  Boaz, was a relative of Naomi’s husband and considered a protector of the family.  He admires the devotion that Ruth shows his kin’s widow and decides to try to make things right for them. He purchases the land that belonged to Naomi’s husband and takes the hand of Ruth in marriage. Naomi’s future is secured and Ruth becomes the great grandmother of King David.

Now, the story of Jonathan and David does not have a happy ending but it is an important story.   Our reading this morning begins after David had slew Goliath, the Philistine.  King Saul wanted to know who this warrior was and had called him to his court.  King Saul is so impressed with this young man that he invites David to live with them. During this audience with King Saul, Jonathan and David meet for the first time.  It was as the romantics might say, love at first sight.

David proved to be a great warrior and the country begin to sing his praises which made King Saul envious of David.  So envious that Saul made plans to have David killed.  But Jonathan interceded on David’s behalf on several occasions telling his father that his hatred towards David was unfounded. Jonathan renews his covenant with David and has “David swear again by his love for him; for he loved him as he loved his own life.” (1 Sam 20:17)  But Saul’s hatred against David grows and at one point rebukes Jonathan for his love, saying “Do I not know that you have chosen the son of Jesse to your own shame, and to the shame of your mother’s nakedness?” (1 Sam 20: 30)  Jonathan sends David away in order to save David’s life. “David  …prostrated himself with his face to the ground.  He bowed three times, and they kissed each other; David wept the more.” (1 Sam 20:41)  Saul and Jonathan die in battle and David laments:  “I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; greatly beloved were you to me; your love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.” (2 Sam 26)

What is important in both of these relationships is that they were mutual, each person choosing the other as equals.  Marriage as found in the Hebrew Scriptures is rarely on a mutual standing.  The marriage arrangements are coerced or arranged by a third party.  The woman is considered property of the man and therefore has no say in the relationship. If there is love it is generally love that is developed later or it is one sided.

The word love as it applies to Jonathan and David is discussed in the Mishnah, the first major written redaction of the oral traditions of the Jewish faith.  It is contrasted to the word love as it pertains to another story in David’s life, the rape of David’s daughter Tamar by her half brother Amnon.

In the story of Amnon and Tamar, it is written that Amnon loved Tamar and craftily found a way to have her come to his chambers.  He feigns illness and asks that she bake him some food. She does so and enters his chamber to feed him.  He requests that she lie with him. She resists and he rapes her.  Then what she declares an ever worse offense he rejects her, going against Jewish law that states a man who rapes a virgin must take her in marriage.  This leaves her desolate, no longer eligible for marriage.

The Mishnah states, “If love depends on some material cause and the cause goes away, the love goes away, too; but if it does not depend on a thing, it will never go away.  What love depended on something?  The love of Amnon and Tamar.  What love was not dependent on something? The love of David and Jonathan.”[1]

The Hebrew word for love in the text is Ahava.  Ahava is used some 250 times in the Hebrew Scriptures.  It is used to refer to the sexual as in the very poetic Song of Songs.  It is used to refer to the love of a husband for a wife.  It is used to refer to passion in illicit relationships.  It is used to refer to the love of Jonathan and David, and Ruth and Naomi, and it is used in the great commandment to love one’s neighbor as one self[2]. And while we translate ahava as love, it literally means “I will give.”

Rabbi Kelemen discusses love from an Orthodox Jewish perspective.  He states if you ask an Orthodox Jew if they are in love, “[they have] to stop and ask … a completely different set of questions. He has to ask himself — How much am I willing to let go of what I want for her sake? How much am I willing to sacrifice for the sake of my beloved? What am I willing to let go of for her? It’s all about “her”, “her”, “her[3]”. It’s all about the other. Ahava, I will give. If I want to know if I’m in love, if I’m in ahava from a Jewish perspective, the question is not how does he or she make me feel good or what he or she does for me but rather how much am I willing to let go for the sake of the other.

It is this kind of love that is evident in the relationships of Naomi and Ruth and Jonathan and David. Ahava. I will give.  “…wherever you go, I will go; and wherever you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God, my God.”  Ruth was giving up her culture, her home, her opportunity for safety, her gods, everything for the sake of being with Naomi.

Jonathan gave up his birthright claim to the throne. He gave up his place in commanding the armies of the kingdom.   He gave up his father’s favor for his love for David.

In terms of gay and lesbian relationships today, it is this form of love that I witness in my friends.  What have they let go of in order to be with the one they love?  A lot.

In 30 states it is still legal to fire or refuse to hire someone solely on the basis of their sexual orientation; an additional eight states still allow discrimination based on gender identity or expression[4].  In 20 states hate crime legislation either does not exist or does not include sexual orientation and gender identity or expression.  In six states there are laws prohibiting the adoption or recognizing the adoption of children by same sex couples.  Three states restrict the placing of foster children in gay households, single or coupled.  By not having their marriage relationship recognized federally, the couple is restricted from 1,138 benefits including the marital communications privilege which is the right not to testify against ones spouse. They are denied survivor benefits and spousal benefits from social security.  They are denied medical decision-making power and hospital visitation rights.

This means that to have an Ahava, I will give, love relationship with a person of the same sex or gender, the person must be willing to give up the heterosexually acceptable act of holding hands in public because if they are seen by someone they know, their job might be in jeopardy. They must be willing to risk homophobic attacks; verbal, emotional, and physical because these are not considered to be hate crimes.  They must be willing to risk losing the child they raised together if their partner dies because they were not allowed to mutually adopt the child.  The couple must be willing to endure the heartbreak of not being able to be present when the other is dying in the hospital.  He or she, after the death of their spouse, must be willing to step aside when the family swoops in and claims possession of the house and their belongings they shared.

Now there are ways to minimize these risks but they are not guarantees against these risks.  In many states blood relations trump live in relations even if there is a will designating the partner as surviving heir to the estate.  Without the legal protection of marriage, a family can make and will win legal claim as next of kin.  There are couples across the country who thought they had cobbled together the legal protections available to them under the current laws  only to find out these laws are not strong enough or sufficient enough to protect them.

Such was the case of Tim Reardon and his partner Eric in Minnesota.  Tim and Eric had filed all the papers and paid all the legal fees only to find out that they had missed one, the right for Tim or Eric to have final say over the physical remains of their loved one.  Eric died of brain cancer and Tim was not allowed to claim the body. In Minnesota the state can seize the property, the house shared by both partners, if a partner dies and there is a lien on the property[5].  Legislation, entitled The Final Wishes Act, was passed in May of this year that would have repaired this inequity of privileges that are automatic for heterosexual couples but the governor of Minnesota[6] vetoed this legislation.

In California the battle over Proposition 8 continues.  The state of California voted to overturn a court’s ruling to allow same sex marriage.  18,000 same gendered marriages were performed before the ruling was overturned by the referendum of the state’s voters.  This has now been debated in the District court for the last six months.  The judge is expected to rule in a few weeks. There is much that a same sex couple will be losing should the judge rule in favor of the referendum.  The defendants want the 18,000 same sex marriages also annulled and made illegal.  There is much that love, ahava, is willing to give in order to be a same sex couple throughout the country today.

Not all same sex relationships are able to survive in a society where the pressure against them is strong.  Sometimes what one is willing or able to give is simply not enough to sustain the relationship.  In order for any relationship to survive, to thrive in the day to day difficulties, regardless of societal acceptance or not, there is another quality that is essential.  Both Ruth and Naomi and Jonathan and David had this quality between them.

There is another Hebrew word that has been translated as love but that is not an accurate translation.  The word is Chesed.  It has been translated as Love, as loving –kindness, as faithfulness, as loyalty, as mercy, as covenantal-love, as grace, as steadfast love.  Even these words combined do not seem to capture the full essence of the word Chesed.  The words as they are used in the story of Naomi and Ruth and in the story of Jonathan and David are in connection to a covenant that binds them to a higher purpose, to God, to their higher selves.

Rabbi Keleman states that “The … Orthodox Jews, … believe that the model of a perfect spouse is God. They have this wild belief that human beings were created in the image of God, and because they were created in the image of God they have God-like potential. And therefore, at least in terms of character, they could become like God. Now if you add to this that they believe that God is pure ahava, He is pure giving.[7]”

The Covenant that God made with Abraham is one based in pure ahava, it is chesed, an undying, ever binding, unconditional,  merciful, steadfast, loyal, faithful love to Abraham and his descendants.  The marriage covenant also reflects this attitude of chesed.

Rabbi Keleman tells this story he heard about “Christopher Reeve, Superman, so he had this terrible accident and when he woke up from surgery they informed him that he was probably going to be a quadriplegic for the rest of his life. No movement from the neck down. And shortly thereafter he had a discussion with his wife. His wife visited him there in the ICU and he said to her — ‘Sweetie, you know, I understand. I don’t mind if you divorce me. It’s okay.’  She looked at him and she said — ‘What are you talking about? What do you mean if I want to divorce you? I’m not going to divorce you.’ He explained — ‘No, no. I’m a quadriplegic now, I can’t take care of myself, I can’t do anything for you. I understand if you divorce me.’ And she very beautifully responded — ‘Why would I consider divorcing you?’ Because the reason she married him was she just wanted to take care of and love him. Now he couldn’t do certain things for her, that was irrelevant. She wanted to take care of him.[8]”  This story reveals the quality of Chesed.  It is more than just what she will give, ahava, but also what she expresses loyalty to in the relationship.

It goes beyond love, beyond ahava, I will give.  It is bound in covenant even when tragedy strikes. It is bound in covenant that is renewed even as one fails to honor it.   It is bound in covenant even when employment is lost.  It is bound in covenant even when disappointments abound and dreams are lost.  It is bound in covenant even when health is failing.  It is bound in a covenanted relationship that calls for the highest purpose, the highest expression of our selves.  The Orthodox Jews might express it as reaching to become like God in character, pure in ahava.

Jonathan and David expressed this depth of love, chesed, in a covenant between each other.  The word covenant as used in the Hebrew text is the same word used to describe a marriage vow.  They remind each other of this covenant as they figure out how they were going to deal with the death threats against David made by Jonathan’s father.

Sometimes, the most loving thing to do is to let the other person leave.  Jonathan could have been selfish and insisted that David stay in the vain hope of turning Saul’s heart once again, but to do so would have meant certain death to David.   The notion of ahava, I will give, sometimes includes I will give up the relationship in order to fully love and respect your inherent worth and dignity.

With Naomi and Ruth, Boaz uses the word chesed in recognition of Ruth’s devotion to Naomi and her seeking to abide by Jewish customs.   This is a quality that is noticed and admired.  It is a profound quality that endears Ruth to Boaz to see her not as foreigner, or a servant, but as an equal in status, appropriate as a wife for him.

The Mishnah states, “If love depends on some material cause and the cause goes away, the love goes away, too; but if it does not depend on a thing, it will never go away.”  Naomi and Ruth, Jonathan and David had a love that was not dependent on some material cause, on some circumstance or event that held it in place, or on some societal more of what is acceptable or not acceptable.  Theirs was a love that was based on something elemental to the human condition that transcended material causes or circumstances.  May we all have the opportunity to experience this ahava, this chesed, this depth and breadth of love in the living of our days.    Blessed Be.

---

[1] Boswell, John;  Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe.  P 136.

[2] Ibid.

[3] http://www.warmwisdompress.com/dating/gtr/kelemen1.aspx

[4] http://www.thetaskforce.org/enda07/ENDAtoolkit_c4.pdf

[5] http://minnesotaindependent.com/24178/final-wishes-proposed-bill-aims-to-help-grieving-same-sex-couples

[6] http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2010/05/8847/

[7] http://www.warmwisdompress.com/dating/gtr/kelemen2.aspx as accessed on June 19 2010.

[8] http://www.warmwisdompress.com/dating/gtr/kelemen3.aspx

I recently posted a sermon, Immigration Reform, in which I offered a possible vision of what comprehensive immigration reform might look like.  As many may know I have been quite vocal about the racist legislation passed in Arizona; not only its  anti-immigration law  that would empower police to ask anyone they have ‘reasonable suspicion’ of being undocumented to show them their papers, but also their ban on ethnic studies,  and the firing of any teacher of English who speaks with an accent.

I said the following:

“What would a fair immigration policy look like?   John F. Kennedy in 1958 said, “Immigration policy should be generous; it should be fair; it should be flexible. With such a policy we can turn to the world, and to our own past, with clean hands and a clear conscience.”  [John F. Kennedy A Nation of Immigrants (1958)]

Well there is one more thing that an ideal immigration policy must have.   Dan Stein, Executive Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform  [FAIR] believes that it should also have clear objectives.   He states that “What the public wants is 1) a stable population size, 2) a healthy economy, and 3) a sense of national cohesion based on shared values and a common language.”[6] These three components should be the basis of a sound immigration policy.”

I then discussed this from the point of view of our Unitarian Universalist principles that encourages our divergent theological differences yet enables us to speak of our common values that bind us together.

Well, John Blevins, Prairie Star District UUA Board Trustee, linked to my posting on his site.  Then a very observant UU minister noted that John had linked to two different blogs that present FAIR in two very different lights.   He made comments about this contrast on a blog entitled “Immigration: What’s FAIR? ‘Hate Group?’ or Reliable Source?”

It turns out that the Southern Poverty Law Center has declared FAIR a Hate Group.   The article I was quoting by Dan Stein appeared at the Center for Immigration Studies, an apparent sister organization to FAIR.  It raised interesting questions for me.

I found myself in agreement with the overall objectives that Dan Stein presented in his essay.  In looking at the specifics of how Dan Stein and FAIR are seeking to implement these objectives is where I differ.  FAIR is indeed a supporter of SB 1070, the racist legislation passed in Arizona.  FAIR also is a supporter of removing citizenship from people born in this country to one or more undocumented parents; the so-called anchor babies.   So while FAIR set out a plausible vision of comprehensive immigration reform,  as they say the devil  is in the details.  In this case, it may be literally true.

I have stated this issue of immigration is a complex problem with multiple layers in it, see my post Immigration: A Complicated Onion to Peel. This latest contrast that John Blevins posted  reveals its complexity even further.

FAIR may indeed be working against everything that I believe in but they are the only group that has presented a vision of comprehensive immigration reform.  Should I discount that vision just because I disagree with their implementation of it?   Southern Poverty Law Center has not offered a vision of what they believe comprehensive immigration reform should be.  I have done the research and  I do not hear any liberal voices offering anything to this issue other than the shouting “Comprehensive Immigration Reform Now!” Nothing in as concrete and concise manner as FAIR has done.  From my perspective it remains a whirl of dust balls that has yet to settle out and reveal itself.

Shouting is not a vision statement. Protesting against what we do not want is not revealing what we do want.   Don’t misunderstand me here, I am fully behind the need to protest against racist legislation. And I am still pondering what we as Unitarian Universalists should do with our General Assembly in Phoenix, AZ in 2012.    But what does comprehensive immigration reform look like to the people most impacted by it?  I have not heard a response in the positive only in the negative.

I believe in dialog.  I firmly believe in Gandhi’s approach of finding where there is agreement to begin there and then dislodge the untruths.  It is a matter of sifting the wheat from the chaff.  Southern Poverty Law Center may declare  FAIR is a hate group and is anti-immigration, but the article I quoted is one grain of wheat.  A damn good grain at that to begin the dialog.

Blessings,

Five Smooth Stones:  An Attitude of Ultimate Optimism
Rev. Fred L Hammond
13 June 2010 ©
Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

Over the last several months we have examined Unitarian Universalist Theologian James Luther Adams Five Smooth Stones of Liberal Religion.  We looked at the first four stones; Revelation is Continuous—the idea that new understandings of the mystery of life are always unfolding; Mutual Consent –the idea that relations between people ought to be free of coercion and rest instead on the mutual, free consent of each person; A Just and Loving Community—the notion that we have a moral obligation to create a world where all people are honored and respected and No immaculate conception of virtue and the necessity of social incarnation—the idea that nothing is good in and by itself but only in its actions in relation to the other. Today we look at Adams’ final smooth stone of liberal religion, An Attitude of Ultimate Optimism.

This has been a difficult few months on the national level with what appears as legislated racism in Arizona, the protracted wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the financial collapse of our banking institutions, and the unprecedented uncontrolled oil geyser in the Gulf of Mexico.   Then on the local level we have been dealing with the tragic deaths of friends.  And we haven’t even mentioned the personal trials and tribulations that many of us are going through.  With all of these events circling around us like vultures it is difficult to see the truth in James Luther Adams proclamation that we as people of a liberal faith should resolve to have ultimate optimism.

But this is not just ultimate optimism because optimism feels better than the alternative.  No, the reason for ultimate optimism is because “the resources… [both] divine and human, are available for the achievement of meaningful change justify” this attitude.

We cannot rest on the laurels of the work that generations did before us in areas of justice, whether that justice be racial, economic, or ecological. No, James Luther Adams argues that “each generation must anew win insight into the ambiguous nature of human existence and must give new relevance to moral and spiritual values.”

And so the gains that the civil rights movement won in the mid-20^th century must be redefined and won again in the 21^st century because the arc of history is always bending towards a greater more inclusive justice.  As our eyes were opened at the injustices of segregation, our eyes need to become open to the injustices of white privilege because white privilege would seek to segregate again.  The various legislations passed in Arizona are one way white privilege is rearing its ugly head.  Whose history do we tell when we teach history in our schools[1]?  What criteria do we use to determine that a person is qualified to teach English[2]?  What shade of paint do we use to depict our children in school murals[3]?

Under the guise of immigration enforcement, white privilege is attempting to re-assert its standard for living in America.  The nation requires an immigration policy that is not solely to benefit the whims of white corporate America. Such has been our history with Mexican immigrants through out the 20^th century.  We welcomed them, documented and undocumented, when their labor kept our farms and factories producing during two world wars and deported them when those wars ended or when the economy took a downturn.  It is this issue that will define our nation again just as the civil rights movement defined our nation in the mid-20^th century.   Will we define ourselves on the side of justice?

The civil rights movement of the 1960’s was an achievement of justice for that generation but we must not assume that the achievements of that era are a fait accompli for all times.  Rev. Peter Morales, President of our denomination, wrote this week, “We are in a struggle for the future direction of American society. How we treat immigrants, especially those from Mexico and Central America, is today’s equivalent of the Civil Rights Movement. This is a struggle for America’s soul. The real issue for us is how we are going to live in an America in which Anglo-Americans (“whites” or “Americans of European descent”) are in the minority. That day will soon be with us. “White” Americans are already the minority in a number of states. The prospects frighten many people. …  The question is whether we can embrace the changes that are coming, whether we can thrive in this new America.[4]”

In terms of James Luther Adams’ fifth smooth stone, the question is ‘are we going to tap into the resources both divine and human to create an America that continues to hold its revolutionary ideal of achieving liberty and justice for all when Anglo America is no longer the majority?’ If Arizona is the canary of this new America and other states introduce replica bills against a targeted population, then the answer will sadly be no.

But the theology that our Unitarian and Universalist heritage derives from believed that history has a destination it is winging towards where justice and grace prevail.  History has a meaning that reveals something of the evolutionary direction of humanity.  For our Unitarian and Universalist ancestors it culminated in the creation of heaven on earth, a place where all people lived in harmony with the divine.  A place where there was no longer any sorrow or pain from injustice.  We sing of this place in our hymn:

“Come build a land where sisters and brothers, anointed by God may then create peace: where justice shall roll down like waters, and peace like an ever flowing stream.[5]”

But history has also revealed the darker side of humanity.  Adams states, “A realistic appraisal of our behavior, personal and institutional, and a life of continuing humility and renewal are demanded, for there are ever-present forces in us working for perversion and destruction.”   We do not have to go too far back in our history to see what perverse and destructive forces they are.

Our recent financial crisis was the result of intoxicating greed.  Without the appropriate oversights, the banks allowed their intoxicated greed to demand for more wealth at the expense of the clients who sought them for loans to live the American dream. Knowing and hedging the bet that these clients could not afford the loans they sought; the result was an economy that loomed close to the edge of world wide depression and families fortunes and homes decimated.

Yet even with this propensity to reveal the darker nature of humanity through greed and through war, our prophetic faith writes Adams, calls forth to have a ‘dynamic hope’ that “at the depths of human nature and at the boundaries of what we are, there are potential resources that can prevent a retreat to nihilism.”

The resources both divine and human are available to achieve meaningful change.  Divine here for Adams might refer to some supernatural resource but it also points to something other than supernatural but wholly inspirational.  The divine could be that new idea that breaks through the toil and struggle of rehashing the same ol’ same ol’ and beckons for a new point of view.  It could be that connecting thought that brings about a new way of being or a new way of operating.

But ultimately what choices we make will open up the resources that are available to us, both divine and human. We have a choice in the events that are occurring in the nation today.  We can say it does not impact my daily life and therefore ignore it and then wonder how it came to bite us later.

The crisis in the gulf might illustrate this better.   We live several hours away from the gulf and therefore are not facing the toxic oil fumes that are causing health problems for asthmatics and others with breathing difficulties.  We are not faced with our 134 year old family business ending because there are no oysters to harvest.

So one choice is to ignore it as Scarlet O’Hara says in Gone with the Wind, “I will think about this tomorrow… after all, tomorrow is another day.”  Ignore it and continue our mantra of ‘drill baby drill.’   Or downplay its significance as BP has done by stating that there is plenty of shrimp found elsewhere[6] or the amount of oil dumping into the gulf is minimal[7] or blocking journalists from seeing firsthand the vast wildlife succumbed to oil washing up on the beaches[8] or denying government confirmed underwater oil plumes six miles long[9].   So ignoring or denial is a choice we could make.

Or we could despair the loss of an ecosystem that impacts the world in so many multiple ways.  The prospect of dead zones in the gulf where no life can grow is certainly a despairing prospect.  A recent video found on Youtube of divers in the gulf to look at what is happening under the water noted that the water is eerily void of fish until reaching a depth of 30 feet[10].  However, this sort of despair shuts down the natural creative forces of life that is inherent in all of creation including humanity.

Or we can choose to do something about this spill.  Organize to have legislation mandate stricter regulations on off shore drilling. Organize to encourage alternate forms of clean energy such as solar and wind to become standard over fossil fuels.  Educate others of our participation in this interconnected web of life. We can begin to educate ourselves and others on how our personal consumption and craving of oil based products has contributed to this event in the gulf. The resources for making this choice are already available for us to achieve this.  All we need to do is to organize and tap into the populous will to have this achieved.

Here are three different choices all based on the same data with different conclusions made on that data.  Liberal religion invites us to not deny or despair but rather to look beyond the present to what possibilities can arise and then to act accordingly.

Howard Zinn in his essay, The Optimism of Uncertainty[11], writes about the vast surprises that have occurred through out history.  He writes, “There is a tendency to think that what we see in the present moment will continue. We forget how often we have been astonished by the sudden crumbling of institutions, by extraordinary changes in people’s thoughts, by unexpected eruptions of rebellion against tyrannies, by the quick collapse of systems of power that seemed invincible.”

Justice when it occurs may appear to have happened over night but it usually is the result of a cumulative effect of many different events over time.  A state law ending housing discrimination against gays.  An executive order granting hospital visitation rights and respecting patient care directives for same sex partners.  A law addressing bullying in schools.  The right for a lesbian mom to have custody of her children in a divorce.  Another law passed barring employment discrimination against gays and lesbians.  The ability for a transgender person to receive gender re-assignment surgery in this country.  The allowing for transgenders to state their self-identified gender on a US passport.

These on their own do not seem like huge victories.  But taken together they begin to add up to represent equal treatment under the law.  They begin to sound like justice.

Howard Zinn ended his essay with this:  “if we do act, in however small a way, we don’t have to wait for some grand utopian future. The future is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as we think human beings should live, in defiance of all that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory.[12]”

Rev. Barbara Wells ten Hove wrote, “Despite all that we do wrong, all the wrong that is done to us and the suffering we cause and endure, love is always, always there. Our job as Universalists is to preach that love wherever we go and not to scare people about the end. Just hold each other in love and work to bring more love to the world.[13]”   May it be so.

---

[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/12/arizona-ethnic-studies-la_n_572864.html

[2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/30/arizona-ethnic-studies-cl_n_558731.html

[3] http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-06-04-altered-mural-arizona-race-debate_N.htm

[4] http://www.uua.org/news/newssubmissions/166693.shtml

[5] “We’ll Build a Land” words Barbara Zanotti (Isaiah/ Amos Adapted) Music Carolyn McDade   as found in Singing the Living Tradition

[6] I heard this statement being made in response to a question about the shrimp industry in Louisiana but cannot find the source.

[7] May 14, 2010 In one of his most famous gaffes, Hayward told The Guardian “the Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume.” With thousands of gallons pumping into the ocean every day, this small ratio of oil to water is taking a large toll. May 18, 2010 “I think the environmental impact of this disaster is likely to be very, very modest,” Hayward told reporters. That same day, when asked about whether he was able to sleep at night in light of the oil spill’s disastrous effects, he replied, “Of course I can.”   As found at http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/10/news/companies/tony_hayward_quotes.fortune/index.htm

[8] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/us/10access.html

[9] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/30/underwater-oil-plumes-dis_n_595015.html

[10] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGX7krQYI_4

[11] http://www.thenation.com/article/optimism-uncertainty

[12] Ibid.

[13] From an email by Rev. Barbara Wells ten Hove, used with permission.

Immigration Reform
Rev. Fred L Hammond
6 June 2010 ©
Our Home Universalist Unitarian Church

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

These words attributed to the sonnet “The New Colossus” by Emma Lazarus are forever attached to the Statue of Liberty as the welcome to immigrants from around the world to New York Harbor.  Words that now reflect a more schizophrenic approach to immigration than a unified beckoning welcome.

Our history with immigration policies as a nation is abysmal.  We have a love/hate relation with immigrants.  We love them when their presence benefits us.  We hate them when we fear their presence will harm us.

There were essentially no restrictive immigration laws when our nation was founded.  Most of the immigrants to this nation were either of European descent who came here willingly or of African descent forced here as part of the slave trade.   Either way, we welcomed them because we needed their labor to aid in the growing of the country.  There were few laws restricting immigration with the exception of convicts in the 18^th and 19^th centuries.

The first law that seriously curtailed immigration was the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882.  This reversed the 1868 treaty with China that encouraged immigration to the US.  Immigrant Chinese were essential to the building of the railroads that connected the Pacific and Atlantic coasts.  Once this task was completed the Chinese were hired to work in the orchards of California’s growing fruit industry.

But when the Chinese exclusion act was passed, it was the Mexicans that began to be recruited to assist with the harvests in the southwest.  It was Mexican immigrants that made up to 60 % of the workforce that built the California to Mexico railway.

After the Mexican revolution in 1910 with failed results in delivering the promises of that revolution, Mexicans again began to enter the US.   We wanted them.  They helped build our economy.  When the US fought in World War One; it was the Mexicans that came to our rescue to work in our fields harvesting our crops, to work in our factories as machinists and plumbers.  We welcomed these immigrants and many came by simply crossing the border.

But there were labor disputes.  The Mexican workers were not treated fairly by their new employers and the Mexican government then intervened.  It was an early version of the Bracero program that came later.  Mexicans had to have a contract with the US ranchers for them to come into the states to work.  But with this new agreement there also came the establishment of the US Border Patrol in 1924. The free flow of immigrants from Mexico that had existed since the southwest was a part of Mexico was being challenged.

The global depression that came in the 1930’s slowed down migration from Mexico because there was no work to be had anywhere.  But with World War Two, the US once again opened its borders to Mexican workers to come and work in its factories and agricultural industries through the Bracero Program.  Mexicans were given temporary work visas to work in the US, a portion of their wages were withheld by the Mexican government to ensure that they would return to Mexico.  These were funds the participants in the Bracero Program never received and no explanation was granted.   More than 4 million Mexicans came to the US to find work and to ensure that American farms would continue to produce foods.

Unfortunately, the contracts they signed were in English with exploitive conditions.  For example, they were only allowed to return to Mexico in case of emergency and with written permission of their employer.  They were not allowed to leave the employ of one employer and work for another and with a portion of their wages withheld the benefit to the Mexican’s families never quite materialized. This program was a little better than indentured servitude.

The Bracero program continued after World War Two because the farmers were concerned of labor shortages.  The immigrant worker program could not keep up with the increased demand for farm help and farmers began recruiting undocumented workers as well.  Public opinion was turning against immigration and in 1954, President Eisenhower initiated Operation Wetback.  The derogatory term Wetback is based on one method of crossing into the US via the Rio Grande.  The intention was to round up undocumented persons and deport them back to Mexico; however, many of the deportees were re-processed as Braceros and returned to the farmers.  The practice of the round up included stopping “Mexican-looking” people and asking for their citizenship papers this angered many Mexican American citizens.  The operation was discontinued after one year because of the protests of profiling. The program deported 80,000 people and claims credit for an additional 1.2 million people who voluntarily returned to Mexico.

The Bracero program became politically unfavorable and was discontinued in 1964.  The immigration act of 1965 removed the racial quotas set in 1920.  This coincided with rapid population growth and economic decline in Mexico resulting in an increase of Mexicans crossing the border looking for work.  The passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 while giving amnesty to 2.3 million undocumented Mexicans also brought to an end the circulatory nature of immigration from Mexico.  There was an increase of militarization of the borders so many undocumented Mexicans once here decided to stay here instead of seasonally returning home.  “As Princeton sociologist Douglas Massey pointed out to the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2005: “From 1965 to 1985, 85 percent of undocumented entries from Mexico were offset by departures and the net increase in the undocumented population was small. The build-up of enforcement resources at the border has not decreased the entry of migrants so much as discouraged their return home.[1]”

In the aftermath of Katrina, Louisiana and Mississippi saw an increase in the trend of Mexican immigrants with the lure of construction jobs and an “emergency federal decree temporarily suspending immigrant-enforcement sanctions.[2]”

And there you have it, as long as we see visible benefit from the labors of undocumented workers we will suspend immigrant enforcement sanctions.  But once that visible benefit is gone or the economy goes sour, then all bets are off.  The undocumented become the scapegoat for all that is wrong in Arizona, in Kansas, in Mississippi, in America.

There continues to be a benefit for America to have undocumented workers here.  As long as that benefit remains, we will not be able to come to grips with undocumented immigration.   Consider the benefit to Adams County, Pennsylvania where its orchards produced over 330 million pounds of apples and over 18 million pounds of peaches all harvested by Mexican migrant workers.  They are paid by the bin filled, about $16 per bin. The more bins they fill in a day the more they are paid. This is hard work and therefore only the strongest and fittest survive this line of work.   The result is cheap apples and peaches.  The farmers there state that “there is absolutely no way whatsoever that they could harvest these crops without the Mexican migrant workers.[3]”  Who would harvest them?  Who would purchase apples and peaches if they suddenly cost $5-$10 a pound?

The cost of food is cheap in part because of migrant workers, many of them immigrants, many of them undocumented willing to work for low wages.  We benefit.   In 2004 a crack down in the Western part of the US on immigrants caused a shortage of workers harvesting lettuce. It was considered a less of a loss to leave the crops to rot in the fields resulting in a loss of 1 billion dollars than to hire American workers to harvest them.[4]

A 2007 White House report stated that while immigrants depress the wages of high school drop outs, immigrants actually have increased wages of native born workers by $37 Billion a year.[5] The New York Times reported that immigrants pay into social security $7 Billion a year, money that they will never see. Further, the Social Security Administration figures this amount into their yearly budget.  We benefit.

So what about immigration reform?  What would a fair immigration policy look like?   John F. Kennedy in 1958 said, “Immigration policy should be generous; it should be fair; it should be flexible. With such a policy we can turn to the world, and to our own past, with clean hands and a clear conscience.”  [John F. Kennedy A Nation of Immigrants (1958)]

Well there is one more thing that an ideal immigration policy must have.   Dan Stein, Executive Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform believes that it should also have clear objectives.   He states that “What the public wants is 1) a stable population size, 2) a healthy economy, and 3) a sense of national cohesion based on shared values and a common language.”[6] These three components should be the basis of a sound immigration policy.

It is estimated that the US could easily be at half a billion people by mid century.  We need to examine how immigration might impact that population growth.  Dan Stein suggests one possible way is limiting the immigrant’s family members that can also migrate.

The skill set the person has to contribute to a healthy economy is another avenue that should be considered.  Other countries consider what their employment needs are before granting visas to immigrants. There is flexibility there.  Consider the contributions these immigrants have given to the United States in the past decade: Steve Chen, founder of Youtube,   Jerry Yang, co-founder of Yahoo, and Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google.  The digital skills that these three alone brought to the US have created companies that are household names.  Having immigration policy that focuses on skills that promote economic health should be important.

We, as a nation, are pluralistic in nature.  We have come together under a set of principles that govern this nation. They are written into our most sacred national documents.  We need to educate these ideals to the immigrants that come allowing them in some way to assimilate into the culture.  Currently, it is reported that 75 % of immigrants learn to speak English with in ten years of their arrival.  The demand for English as a second language courses far outweigh the supply.  Yet, it is crucial that at least one common language is spoken. Yes, I know that there are academic advantages for everyone to speak two or more languages fluently.  But there must be a way for a nation to communicate to each other with ease about its ideals, its hopes, and its dreams.

This is where we come in as people of faith.  Our faith is a covenantal one where we seek to adhere to a set of principles that we believe have practical daily applications to our lives.  We are diverse in our theologies.  We believe that many paths lead to the truth.  Yet, we are able to come together because those principles, those ideals teach us to hold the other with dignity and respect.  They teach us to seek to be in right relationship with each other. They teach us about justice and fairness.  They teach us about democratic process.  They teach us about how we are all interconnected and how our actions here impact on others somewhere else.  The majority of what we teach are values that Americans accept and treasure as part and parcel of the American Dream.

Rev. Paul Langston-Daley of the Glendale Arizona church wrote about his experiences at the Rally on immigration in Phoenix on May 29^th.   He said, “In the end we arrived at that copper dome, a small group of bright yellow shirts, standing shoulder to shoulder with Catholics, labor unions, Black Baptists and most of all with families. We were tired and hot but pleased to have finished the whole distance and to see the crowd gathered, covering the statehouse lawn, spilling across the street to a small park in the sun. Our presence was felt and known there. We, Unitarian Universalists, came from as far as Boston and New York, Minneapolis and New Orleans, from all over California and from right here in Arizona. We stood together with tens of thousands to call for an end to racist legislation and to ask our federal government to create and pass comprehensive immigration reform NOW. Our blazing yellow [Standing on the Side of Love] shirts made a statement- a statement about who we are, and what is important to us as religious people. At lunch …, a colleague told us she overheard some people saying “Hey,
look over there, it’s the Love people”.

The Love People.  That sums up our calling in a nut shell.  We might not get this immigration reform exactly right.  We might find ourselves with just as many questions about immigration and about the laws passed that target groups of people as we did before.  But we can stand in love as we grapple the questions that arise from our history of ambiguous relations with the immigrant.  We can stand on the side of love because this is who we are; the Love People.  Blessed Be,

[1] http://harvardmagazine.com/2007/05/uneasy-neighbors-a-brief.html

[2]http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-01/ru-pwo011206.php

[3] http://hubpages.com/hub/Mexican-Migrant-Workers-Nuisance-or-Necessity

[4] http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/01/news/economy/immigration_economy/index.htm

[5] http://www.americanapparel.net/contact/legalizela/Legalize_LA.pdf citing http://ezraklein.typepad.com/blog/2007/11/doimmigrants-d.html

[6] http://cis.org/articles/2001/blueprints/stein.html

This image has crossed my path several times this past week.  I have seen it used by a Christian televangelist and by scientists  for different reasons.   I liked what the televangelist had to say about it.  He said something along the lines of here we are as seen 3.7 million miles away.  Earth is this small dot in this  huge vacuum of space.  Insignificant in comparison.  Yet, as far as we currently know, life has formed only here.  Insignificant in comparison to the whole of the universe as seen 3.7 million miles away, yet significant because in all of the known universe God chose to create life here.

From this vantage point all of our problems also seem small and insignificant to the greater picture of the universe.  It is not of the universe’s concern that we are entrenched in a war in Afghanistan.  Or that one oil company has destroyed life in the Gulf of Mexico.  Or that racism is alive and well in America.   From the Universe’s perspective all is well and moving around its mysterious center as it has for billions of years and presumably will for billions of years to come.

I have learned that when my problems seem huge to me, they seem insurmountable.  Problems never can be solved when I am so entangled in them that I confuse the forest for the trees.  It is only when I am able to step back away from them and gain a different perspective that I am able to tackle the problem.  It is only when I can see the problem in comparison to the larger picture of my life that I can begin to see solutions to that problem.

We are one pale blue dot in the great universe.  Whether or not life continues to thrive on this planet, we are one pale blue dot.  It is time for us to start acting like we are part of this dot and not separate from it because from the universe’s perspective we are only a tiny speck in the scheme of things.  An insignificant speck at that.  From the universes perspective all is well because the problems we face are insignificant to its function.

If we destroy each other through war, the universe will continue as it has.  If we destroy the environment through our own greed and malfeasance, this pale blue dot will continue to follow its orbit within the Milky Way.  If we allow racism to flourish, while it demeans our quality of life, the universe will not notice.  Just as we have not noticed what is happening on a planet in another galaxy.

So how shall we live on this speck of dust?  How about as one accountable to it?  Let’s find better energy resources that will not destroy life.  Let’s find ways to live together in harmony since we are so very small in the universe.  Let’s put away our racism and our acts of war because these do not serve to promote life.   While we may be a speck of dust in the Universe, we are a planet of great diversity that should be celebrated not despised, not abused, not taken for granted.

And as the televangelist said, as far as we know, the creating force of the universe  has only created life here.  Therefore as insignificant as we may be, life on this planet is unique.  We should tender that uniqueness with honor, respect, and above all with love.   Blessings,

The congregation I serve in Tuscaloosa, AL has been profoundly impacted by the loss of two people in the community.  One a beloved college professor was killed in an accident when a motorcycle driver driving excessive speeds on a winding road collided with her car.  The other was a young man,  age 39,  who died of a brain embolism.  Both individuals had connections to the congregation in multiple ways, either formally at one point or through members.

We know that death will come to all of us yet it is difficult when death arrives out of season.  How do we make peace with all the jumbled emotions that surface at times like these?

There are the platitudes that good meaning people share.   We all know them.  “God needed them.”   “You will see them again in Heaven.”  “God only gives us what we have the strength to bear.”  These words, however well intended,  are not helpful for the loved ones who survive. They raise more painful questions, “Didn’t I need them too?”  “Why did God make me so strong?” “Why would a loving God give me this to bear?”

The platitudes gloss over the depth of the emotions being felt.  Grief is an emotion that needs to be felt and experienced on its own terms and in its own way.  To deny or minimalize  grief through platitudes is in some ways to deny the love that was felt between the two people.

There is a story that I have used from Edward Searl’s In Memoriam.  The story is based from an essay by naturalist Loren Eisley.  He has taken a walk through the woods and decides to nap against a stump.  He is awoken by a cry.  A raven had captured a nestling and had it in its beak.  The parent birds were outraged and flying around the raven.   The raven unperturbed ate the nestling. Other birds joined in the protest, squawking in protest over the fate of the young bird.

Then Eisley writes, “The sighing died. It was then I saw the judgment. It was the judgment of life against death. I will never see it again so forcefully presented.  I will never hear it again in notes so tragically prolonged.  For in the midst of a protest, they forgot the violence.  There, in the clearing, the crystal note of a song sparrow lifted hesitantly in the hush, and finally, after painful fluttering, another took the song, and then another, the song passing from one bird to another, doubtfully at first, as though some evil thing were being slowly forgotten. Till suddenly they took heart and sang from many throats joyously together s birds are known to sing.  They sang because life is sweet and sunlight beautiful.  They sang under the brooding shadow of the raven.  In simple truth they had forgotten the raven, for they were singers of life, and not of death. ”

Protest, cry out against the deaths of our loved ones, and acknowledge the loss.  Acknowledge that life will not be the same.  But death is a part of life.  It is what we will all face, even our own, at some point in the future.  Therefore it is also important to acknowledge that “life is sweet and sunlight beautiful.”

Celebrate the life shared with each other. Honor those memories that have touched and shaped us by telling others these memories so that they too may be enriched if only by the telling of the  story.

To have to grieve the loss of any loved one is difficult.  When that loved one is young and full of life, it seems even harder and certainly out of season.  To share the stories of their life, the funny stories, the poignant stories, the uplifting stories of their life is vital to the grief process.  So listen with full heart to the stories being shared and avoid the temptation to respond with a platitude.  Respond with hugs, with tears, and even with silence and when the time comes respond with songs of life for we too, are singers of life, and not of death.  Blessings,

by Rev. Fred L Hammond
Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa 16 May 2010 ©

Reading from the Christian Scriptures: The Acts of the Apostles chapter 2:1-8

“When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tonguesas the Spirit enabled them.  Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. Utterly amazed, they asked: “Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language?”

Just over one hundred years ago on Azusa Street in Los Angeles, a group of men and women gathered to pray in a revival.  This was an old fashion, bible thumping, hands up in the air, glory hallelujah kind of revival.  And then something happened.  People began to speak in what sounded like strange languages. But what also was unique is that this revival in 1906 was integrated. One account reports, “African-Americans, Latinos, whites, and others prayed and sang together, creating a dimension of spiritual unity and equality, almost unprecedented for the time.[1]”

This event is heralded as the beginning of the Pentecostal movement in the Christian church.  From this beginning several Pentecostal denominations were born, such as the Assemblies of God, Church of God, and Pentecostal Holiness Church.  Pentecostalism is rivaled only by Islam as being the fastest growing faith in the world today.

Now there is one major difference between what happened on Azusa Street and what happened in the Christian text we just heard (Acts 2).  The difference is this: each one heard them speaking in his own language.    In Pentecostalism and in the Charismatic Movement that occurred in the 1960’s and 70’s, people who heard others speaking in tongues could not understand each other unless the hearers were supernaturally graced to do so.

There is only one place that I know of where people speak in other tongues and others are able to understand them.  That place, my friends, is right here in a Unitarian Universalist Congregation.   And it is a gift that we often fail to cultivate to its fullest potential.

What am I talking about?  Did I suddenly say words that seem incomprehensible?  I am going to do what many Pentecostal ministers do when preaching and refer back to the text of the day.   The text states that when all of these Jews who came from all over the known world to worship in Jerusalem heard the disciples speak, they heard them speak in their own language and were amazed.   The men and women, who had gathered still in grief over the death of their teacher, began to speak in words that others could hear and understand.

And who are we?  We are a people who gather together professing no specific creed.  Right here in this congregation we have people who profess a Christian faith, a Hindu faith, a Jewish faith, an atheist faith, a pagan faith, or possibly a New Thought faith.  We are a diverse people who speak many different tongues.  Yet here we are, covenanting together to create a community that welcomes, promotes our differences.   We have chosen to dialogue together about our various creeds so that when we meet a person who has a creed that is different than our own, we can be open and affirming with that person.  Because we have learned, some better than others, to hear those beliefs and creeds in our own language and at the same time honor the unique differences of their faith.

My spiritual journey includes the Catholic Charismatic movement.  And I remember prayer meetings where softly in one section a person would begin to sing in tongues, and then another, and another.  Suddenly the whole room would be singing, some would seem to have a melody line, and others carried the harmonies.  The voices would rise and fall easily like waves on the ocean.  And then as if conducted by an unseen maestro, the singing would stop.   It was a very beautiful experience of harmony.   But one can only have harmony if different notes are being sung.

And here we are, singing our song together, a Humanist voice joining with a Hindu voice, a Christian voice, and a Pagan voice.  And what is more, we are coming together in understanding.  We understand that each of us is needed to make the beloved community.

Several years ago when I was in San Diego, I served as coordinator for an anti-war initiative called Faith Leaders for Peace[2].  It was an initiative with 75 clergy from various faiths which sponsored events to support the end of the Iraqi and Afghani wars.  We held two interfaith services during my time there, one on the anniversary of the Iraqi war and one on Memorial Day.  The services were coordinated by Unitarian Universalists.   We know how to do interfaith services.  We know how to include voices that on the surface might seem to have disparity and find the common thread that weaves us together.  At the same time we know how to honor the differences of those threads.

A comment frequently heard from those who do not understand this aspect of our faith, is how are we held together as a community when we are diverse theologically?  Ask any weaver and you will hear that silk is spun from the most delicate of threads made by the silk worm and yet when woven together is a strong fabric.   And so too are the threads of diversity that creates our faith of Unitarian Universalism.

In honoring the diversity of beliefs within our hallowed walls we have discovered that diversity of beliefs adds to our humanity and understanding of life.  We have discovered that it is our diversity that makes us stronger spiritually and gives us increased insight into the mystery we call life.

Later this month, Buddhists will be celebrating Buddha Day. It is a day to honor the life of the Buddha. There is one story that the Buddha told that reflects this truth of diverse perspectives.

Four blind men were asked to describe an elephant.  One blind man felt the legs of the elephant and said, the elephant was like four huge trees, sturdy and strong.  A second man felt the side of the elephant and said, No that is not so, the elephant is like a huge wall, tall and wide.   A third man after feeling the trunk of the Elephant said, No you are mistaken, the elephant is like a snake, able to coil and strike.  The fourth man after feeling the tail said, you are all wrong; the elephant is like a whip.  The Buddha said that we are like the four blind men only able to see from our perspective but not able to see the whole.

Several years ago, when I asked a religious education class to draw the pictures the blind men described in order to draw an elephant, the result was a very silly looking picture.  Something was still missing of what an elephant looks like.

We have this understanding of truth that our individual perspectives are valid and yet only when we combine them can we even begin to gain a glimpse of the whole.   Yet, we also know that even combining our perspectives might still lead to a distorted and perhaps silly picture of what the elephant of truth might look like.   It is this perspective that needs to be heard in our land today because we know that in dialogue, in using all of our gifts that the hard rough boundaries of these images begin to soften and transform allowing the true essence and shape of the elephant to come into focus.

It is not only the ability to understand and bridge the diverse theology in this nation that Unitarian Universalists are capable of providing.  We have an opportunity to assist this nation in embracing the diversity of ethnicities in our land as well.  Paula Cole Jones, UUA consultant spoke at the Mid-South District Annual Assembly and offered us this statistic.  “75% of people in this country aged 70 and above identify as white, 75% of people in this country aged 10 and younger identify as people of color.” This means that in our lifetimes America will become predominantly a non-white culture for the first time in its history.

Shirley Chisholm, first African American woman elected to Congress and first African American woman to run for president, once said, “We Americans have the chance to become someday a nation in which all racial stocks and classes can exist in their own selfhoods, but meet on a basis of respect and equality and live together, socially, economically, and politically. We can become a dynamic equilibrium, a harmony of many different elements, in which the whole will be greater than all its parts and greater than any society the world has seen before. It can still happen.”

Remember what happened at the Azusa Street revivals where African Americans, Latinos, and whites came together to pray in one worship service.  It was remarked as being unprecedented for the time.  Sunday mornings at 11 AM is still considered the most segregated hour in America.  Now this integration did not last because William Seymour, the African American minister of Azusa Street, had as his mentor Charles Parham a white minister from the segregated south who thought this integration was an abomination. Parham sought to divide the congregation which he did effectively; the result was the formation of predominantly black Pentecostal and predominantly white Pentecostal denominations in the Pentecostal movement.

There was for a brief moment during that 1906 revival for whatever else it may have represented religiously, a dissolving of racial tensions.  It was an opportunity that others, specifically Parham and his ilk, could not condone nor accept.   At this point in our American history we seem to be at a similar fork in the road. One road leads to a broader appreciation of our multi-cultural diversity where ethnicities other than Anglo will be the majority by 2030 or there about.  The other road leads to increased polarization, increased racist behavior, increased attempts for white supremacy to rule.

With the passage of two laws in Arizona and a third bill working its way up the legislature, it seems that some people in this country want to travel down the road leading to increased polarization and increased racist behavior.   Other states are already looking to follow Arizona’s lead.

The Arizona governor may protest that the new immigration law does not target native and Latino descent people but that argument falls silent in light of their other new law which is a blatant attack on two cultures of our citizens.  This new law states that teaching ethnic studies are to be banned and that teachers who speak with an accent will be banned from teaching English. The reason given for banning the courses is because they “promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, promote resentment of a particular race or class of people, are designed primarily for students of a particular ethnic group or advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.”

First, this country was founded on the principle of overthrowing an oppressive government; it is written into our Declaration of Independence.  The closest we came to doing this in the United States was during the civil war.  A war that did not successfully end the racial oppression in this country yet is representative of this principle.   Since this war we generally have sought other means to over turn injustices through an election to remove the officials not representing the will of the people or Supreme Court rulings. But it is a people’s right to change the government that is oppressive to the liberties that are fundamentally endowed to us.

Second, understanding the place in history a group of people played in shaping our country is important.  Arizona, like many states in the southwest was once part of Mexico and before that belonged to the native peoples.  How Arizona came to be a United States territory was through the Mexican- American war of 1846-1848.   Texas had laid claims to the northern territories of Mexico when it declared independence from Mexico ten years earlier.  So when the US annexed Texas, we sent troops into the territories that Texas claimed, including parts of Arizona.  Mexican Americans even though technically citizens as of 1848 were not recognized as citizens for decades.  Their allegiance to the United States remained under suspicion even after statehood was conferred to Arizona in 1912.   This is the albeit brief history that Arizona no longer wants taught to its Mexican American citizens in its ethnic studies because it places Anglo America in a bad light.

Our history is our history whether we agree with what our ancestors did or not, it is still our history.  Being aware of that history and how it shapes current attitudes and policies is important to an informed electorate.

Third, ethnic solidarity over individualism is a cultural moré of many Latino cultures therefore to ban a course that might emphasize community is a direct attack on a people’s heritage. Insisting that people are individuals and not part of an ethnic identity is a tactic that repressive regimes have used to break the hold of familial influences. Individualism and ethnic solidarity need not be opposing polarities.  Individualism may be as American as apple pie but it is not better than family or ethnic loyalty. It is simply a different perspective.

Fourth, the teachers who teach English but speak with accents, presumably Spanish accents, were initially hired as part of Arizona’s bi-lingual education program which ended in 2000.  Since they could not get rid of the teachers they transferred them to teach English and now the law to ban teachers who speak with accents. Sure there is a need to ensure that English teachers have a proficiency in English grammar but there are other ways to ensure this without targeting teachers with ‘accents.’  This law is a discriminatory way to remove Latino diversity from the public schools and increase hostility towards a specific population.

The new Arizona bill, SB1097,[3] which is winding its way up the legislative process, would mandate teachers to identify and report the students in their classrooms who are from undocumented families.  The rationale given is to document the true cost of teaching undocumented families’ children. All residents of Arizona regardless of status pay for public education through various property taxes. So this bill is not about undocumented students receiving services not paid for by their families. The result of this bill would move the teachers away from their primary function and make them informants for the immigration authorities.  The possibility exists for students to be harassed for not revealing their parents’ status and if the teachers do not believe them, false reporting may result. This will encourage students to drop out of school or not enroll in school in the first place increasing the possibility of unsupervised children on the streets.  We all know that unsupervised children will inadvertently find trouble and if the children are of a specific ethnicity already being targeted, what then?

Rev. Bill Sinkford several years ago commented on what he sees in Unitarian Universalism across this country.  He comments with joy the willingness of our congregations to tackle the real day to day life challenges from our pulpits.  He is thrilled with what he describes as the resurgence of reverence, awe, and gratitude for life as being markers for us towards becoming more of who we can be.

I believe it will take more than reverence, awe, and gratitude to make us more of who we can be.  Yes, these are powerful developments for us Unitarian Universalists.  However, I see our potential as being a powerful bridge over the great chasm that has cut through this nation.   We have an ability to offer our covenantal manner of being with each other honoring our diversities.

We can do what the revivals on Azusa Street began to do but were unable to complete and that is healing the racism in our land.   The healing of racism  on Azusa Street was only the temporary feel good kind of emotionalism.   We know that to heal racism in all its forms in this country will take more than just a feel good emotion that is fleeting.

At the recent Mid-South District Assembly, I proposed a resolution which stated in part, to “Resolve to urge our member congregations to engage in a robust dialog about how both legal and illegal immigration affects their local communities and to support efforts of the United States Congress to enact legislation that addresses, in an effective and compassionate way, the entire immigration issue, and further

“Resolve to urge Unitarian Universalists from local communities to the national level to develop creative ways to bear witness to our commitment to justice, equity and compassion for all, but particularly to the poor and powerless.”

We know to do this kind of work takes the skills to listen deeply to one another, especially to the hard truths that each of us has witnessed.  We know that to do this work means we must be in relationship with the other. We know that this work is transformative work where the whole person; the intellect, the emotions, and the spirit of the person are transformed towards acceptance of humanity’s diversity.   And we know that to reinforce the transformation of the person, the institutions have to be transformed.  To only touch the emotions does not make for lasting change.

We Unitarian Universalists have at our fingertips an understanding and appreciation of the world religions.   We need to become conversant in world religions so that we can share our faith of strength in diversity with others.   We need to have a better understanding of our multi-cultural and religiously pluralistic society.  We Unitarian Universalists have covenanted in our principles to seek this understanding.   We recognize the vast wisdom of the world religions as a source of our living tradition that nurtures our faith.

But to make an impact on our society in the 21^st century, we as a people of faith must be willing to commit to a better understanding of these living traditions that feed our spirits.  We also need to commit to seek to be in relationship with those who still suffer under the racism that binds this nation in xenophobia in order to reveal that another way is possible.

We stand at the crossroads of a new day in America.  And what road we as Unitarian Universalists choose to follow will define us as a people of faith.   I believe our nation has a desire for a refreshing wind to accompany us on this road.    Unitarian Universalists have an opportunity to be a part of that refreshing wind of change that leads us to a place where we “meet on a basis of respect and equality and live together, socially, economically, and politically”.  Blessed Be.

---

[1] http://www.ag.org/enrichmentjournal/199904/026_azusa.cfm

[2] Faith Leaders for Peace was started by First Unitarian Universalist Church of San Diego and was an interfaith coalition of some 75 clergy from San Diego County.  I served as its coordinator.

[3] http://www.zimvi.com/?p=4351

Several districts across the country passed resolutions at their annual assemblies regarding the recent immigration law passed in Arizona and what Unitarian Universalists could do about it.   Mid South District held their annual assembly this past weekend in Dahlonega, GA.   The district passed a similar resolution to these other districts.  Here printed below is the resolution that passed.

Resolution of the Delegates to the 2010 Assembly of the Mid-South District

Whereas, the Governor of Arizona has signed legislation requiring state law enforcement officers to question persons about their status to legally  be in the state if there is a reasonable suspicion regarding the individual’s immigration status, and making it a misdemeanor to lack proper immigration paperwork, and,

Whereas, the Legislature of Arizona has also passed legislation awaiting the governor’s signature banning the teaching of ethnic studies in public schools because such teaching might increase ethnic solidarity over individuality in regards to immigrants and banning teachers who speak with an accent from teaching English, and

Whereas, there is a well-founded belief that persons of Hispanic origin will be turned into suspects in their own communities as a result of these laws, regardless of their legal status and,

Whereas, other states,including states within the Mid-South District, are considering similar laws which will increase hostility towards immigrants, and

Whereas, Unitarian Universalists have as their core value the inherent worth and dignity of every person which requires that we work for an ideal society, which is strengthened by and benefits from the diverse cultures within our country, and in which all persons are treated with respect and fairness, and

Whereas, as a community of faith, Unitarian Universalists are committed to stand in solidarity with all those who oppose and seek to modify unjust and harmful laws,

We hereby resolve that the Mid-South District strongly objects to the final implementation and enforcement of these laws and encourages its member congregations to support all efforts to overturn these laws at the federal level through any and all administrative, legislative and judicial means available, and further

Resolve to urge our member congregations to engage in a robust dialog about how both legal and illegal immigration affects their local communities and to support efforts of the United States Congress to enact legislation that addresses, in an effective and compassionate way, the entire immigration issue, and further

Resolve to urge Unitarian Universalists from local communities to the national level to develop creative ways to bear witness to our commitment to justice, equity and compassion for all, but particularly to the poor and powerless, and further

The Mid-South District of the UUA supports the discussion of the Unitarian Universalist Association Board of Trustees’ resolution to relocate the General Assembly of the Association out of Arizona in June 2012 and their continuing efforts to work with UU congregations and other immigration entities in Arizona to effectively address this issue of human dignity and rights.

The General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association is currently scheduled to be in Phoenix, AZ in 2012.   The question has arisen in light of the recent draconian law passed that allows police to check the immigration status of people that they have a “reasonable suspicion” as being undocumented is whether or not the General Assembly should remain scheduled in Arizona for 2012. Should the UUA boycott the state because this new law and the bill that is awaiting the governor’s signature would ban ethnic studies and teachers who teach English with accents?

Add to this mix the  possibility of Colorado and six other states passing similar laws this year.  Add to this the impact of a boycott on the people we want to support.  Add to this the impact of boycotts and sanctions America has placed on oppressive regimes like Iran and North Korea and the negative  consequences  of increasing the suffering of their citizens.  The very opposite of what we had hoped.

The idea of a boycott,  in my mind anyway, seems to be a knee jerk reaction which does nothing but make the boycotter feel and think they are doing something about an issue they disagree with.  When in fact, it does little to re-mediate the situation.

There is a very good possibility that additional states will have passed similar or even more restrictive laws this year and by 2012, we could be seeing not just one state with draconian immigration laws that racially profile a population but an entire region of states.   What if by next year, North Carolina has proposed / passed a similar law–are we going to boycott our hosting of the  General Assembly in North Carolina? Are we going to boycott them all?

This action of boycott while it may feel good in the moment–may not be the best answer to change the laws.  We need to focus our attention on Washington to pass a comprehensive immigration reform that will not only protect the citizens of our states of the issues that illegal immigration produces but also immigration reform that protects the dignity and inherent worth of the people who have come to our country looking for a better life.  The combined laws and bills passed in Arizona represent in my mind something far more sinister than deporting immigrants who are here illegally.

Perhaps what we can do as a religious denomination  that will have a greater impact is to go to Phoenix in 2012 and as a silent vigil  of protest march in the streets with our passports held high in our hands because that is where this nation is headed.  Symbolically it speaks of fascist countries where papers were required to prove ones race and religion.   We have been a country where its citizens were free to travel without restriction, without harassment anywhere within our borders.

But it cannot begin and end there.  We must write our representatives both state and federal about true immigration reform and map it out in detail what that would look like.  Not just screaming that we want reform and allow the lobbyists and corporations to then dictate what can and cannot be in the reform, but detail out what true immigration reform looks like. And then press the issue home at every turn we make.

It is a very complicated and difficult issue to ponder.  I have a greater appreciation of Bernard Loomer’ s Size of God stance when I think of this issue and what solutions might be available. It is not a simple answer like boycott AZ in 2012.  It is a more multi-layered answer than that each with their own set of negative consequences attached.  We need to weigh our actions carefully.

Immigration is a very complicated onion to peel.  There are many facets and nuances to the issue that it is easy to see how people can become conflicted and emotionally bound in the issue.  No one solution is going to be the umbrella solution that solves every problem that immigration causes us in the United States.  It may take several smaller components that when layered together will form the onion.

Arizona last month passed not one but three bills into law that reflected a dramatic shift in their approach to immigration.  We need to look at all three laws together to see the potential motivation and the impact of these laws on the citizens of Arizona and those who are living there with out documentation of legal status. Included in this mix is also the response that other states have made in reaction to these laws.  As I am writing this there are seven states that are considering similar or even more draconian laws than Arizona’s.

Arizona’s governor claims that her state is under siege by immigrants crossing the border and bringing with them a host of problems; including drug and human sex trafficking, violent crimes,  and child prostitution.  All of these are serious problems and need to be addressed with effective laws.  The question is what effective laws will address them?  Arizona’s argument is that since the Federal government has not acted and these issues appear to be growing–despite documented evidence of a marked decrease in these particular crimes since the 1990’s (http://articles.latimes.com/2010/may/03/nation/la-na-arizona-crime-20100503) — and endangering the welfare of Arizona’s citizens then they must act.

I was under the impression that police could already ask for identification papers on people they are investigating for criminal activity.  A friend of mine that works in law enforcement told  me that was not the case only INS enforcers could ask for identification papers. This law gives police the ability to ask those who are already suspected of other criminal activity their citizenship status. My friend insisted the law is intended towards people who are already under investigation of other criminal activity and not just someone walking down the street. Perhaps, but I have my doubts…

But if racism and racial profiling is not being promoted by Arizona’s laws, then what pray tell, is the purpose behind the second law that Arizona passed that same week—banning ethnic studies from public schools and banning teachers who speak with an accent from teaching English?    The reason given for banning the courses is because they “promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, promote resentment of a particular race or class of people, are designed primarily for students of a particular ethnic group or advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.”

Do they really? This country was founded on the principle of overthrowing an oppressive government; it is written into our Declaration of Independence.  We generally have done this by getting rid of oppressive laws such as the Jim Crow Laws of the south, rather than by overthrowing the entire government.   But it is a people’s right to change the government that is oppressive to the liberties that are fundamentally endowed to us.

Ethnic solidarity over individualism is a cultural moré of many Latino cultures therefore to ban a course that might emphasize community is a direct attack on a people’s heritage.  One of the stages towards genocide (according to Genocide Watch) includes discouraging any attempts of creating sympathy or simpatico with the ostracized group and to break the family and ethnic bonds that hold that group together.

The teachers who teach English but speak with accents–allegedly any accent but a Spanish accent is the target– many of them were initially hired as part of Arizona’s bi-lingual education program which ended in 2000.  Since they could not get rid of the teachers they transferred them to teach English and now the law to ban teachers who speak with accents. Sure there is a need to ensure that English teachers have a proficiency in English grammar but there are other ways to ensure this without targeting teachers with ‘accents.’  It is a discriminatory way to remove Latino diversity from the public schools and increase hostility towards a specific population.

Arizona also passed a law, which was immediately repealed, to require presidential candidates to produce a birth certificate proving birth in the United States in order to be eligible to be placed on the ballot in Arizona. In and of itself this law would be no big deal, but in the context of the birther movement that still insists that President Obama was not born in the State of Hawaii and yet does not seem to care that Arizona’s own Senator McCain who ran against Obama, was born in Panama to American parents stationed there.  If this law were in place in 2008, McCain could not run for President in his own state as an American citizen born on foreign soil. This law, albeit repealed immediately, is a racially motivated law.

These three laws combined seem to me to be a reaction to the fact that a specific population is becoming the majority and the way to stop their growing power is to profile them in negative lights through police harassment, through removal of their educational influence, and by denying the ability to honor their ethnic and cultural diversity. This is a state that is shifting ever closer to seeking extraordinary means in order to retain white supremacy / power in the state.  Arizona is not the only state that is making this shift.  There are at least seven states that are making similar overtures.

And it is this shift in attitude towards people who are different from Anglo America that is the alarm that many feel as they witness Arizona pass draconian legislation that potentially could result in racial profiling.  These three laws combined signal the potential of actions that we will regret in the not so distant future.

Immigrants are not taking jobs away from us.  This is a myth.  Immigrants generally find employment in fields that we Americans do not want such as migrant workers, or domestic help, or unskilled laborers.  We tend to look at these positions with disdain and yet they are vital to our economy.  This is work that needs to be done in order for our high standard of living to thrive but that we deemed undignified.

“So often we overlook the work and the significance of those who are not in professional jobs, of those who are not in the so-called big jobs. But … whenever you are engaged in work that serves humanity and is for the building of humanity, it has dignity and it has worth.” –Martin Luther King, Jr.   But this is work that our society has deemed unworthy and it is this work that our immigrants, those here legally and those here illegally have sought as employment.

Whatever the solution for illegal immigration, the one that needs to be found is one that will honor and respect the individuals who come here.  We can seal our borders.  We can strengthen our employment laws.  We can enhance our legal immigration system so that those who enter through legal channels are welcomed with open arms and are protected by the laws that seek to protect all of us.

The laws that Arizona passed will not do this for those who are here legally.  The laws that Arizona passed will create hardship and injustice for them.  Arizona is creating an atmosphere that will be hostile to anyone who is non-white, specifically the Hispanic, Latino, and the Native American.  This is not what we hold dear about America.  We can still fulfill our American Creed.

This onion called immigration is a multi-layered and complex issue.  It touches on issues that we do not want to admit exists and yet we must confess and deal with them.  Issues that were never so clearly revealed than in Arizona this past month.  Blessings,

CLARIFICATION: One of the three bills has been signed into law and that is the law allowing police to request citizenship status. The bill that bans ethnic studies and bans teachers who speak with an accent from teaching English is on the governor’s desk awaiting her signature or veto. The bill dubbed the “Birther Bill” that would require presidential candidates to produce their birth certificate to prove their birth in United States passed the state’s house but was not forwarded to the senate because it is believed there is not enough support for it.

A dear friend and mentor of mine, Donald Stuart Marsh, died this past month.  I have been thinking about his legacy, his impact on my life and on the life of the community he called home for forty years.  Don was the director of arts of the First Presbyterian Church in Port Jervis, NY.   A ministry he shared with his life partner, the Rev. Richard K. Avery, who served as minister of this congregation. Don had a unique gift of being able to see the gifts that a person carried within them.  He saw the spark of who they were and intuitively was able to fan that spark so that it would be a fire of vitality.

I first met Don when I was about 12 years old. My junior high experience was fairly traumatic with bullying by my class mates. So when my older sister invited me to attend an actor’s workshop of the Presby Players, I felt my life was shifting towards something remarkable.

Presby Players was the acting troupe that Don founded and directed for forty years, bringing quality theatre to a country town with discussion of contemporary issues to the fore. He is considered to be the longest running director of a church arts program of its kind in the country.  I was privileged to have been able to work behind the scenes as well as on stage in several productions.  I had parts in “The Trojan Women,” “The House of Blue Leaves,” and “The Devil’s Disciple.”

These opportunities were a life saver for me.  I also participated in the church’s choir where we sang a variety of anthems and full choral pieces with orchestration like Ralph Vaughn Williams’ Hodie. For a number of years, the church would put on a version of the passion play on Good Friday.  I enjoyed participating in all of these events as they would sustain me through my week.

But Don and Dick were music composers in their own right, collaborating on more than 150 compositions that have been enjoyed in congregations across the country as well as several being translated into several languages including Swahili.   I was often invited to participate in worship workshops where they introduced creative ways to not only perform traditional music but also their own songs.  When I turned 14, Dick and Don offered me a position to assist in their publishing house, Proclamation Productions.  All of these activities were like a safe haven for me from the day to day school life of being bullied for being gay.  He offered me and so many others like me a life line and then taught us how to offer that life line to others.

I am not the only person whose life was forever transformed and enriched by the life of Don Marsh. There are hundreds of people, not only in the city of Port Jervis, NY but across the country that were moved by the light that was Don.  The comments that are left in the online guest book are filled with similar stories.  I shall be forever grateful for his life being such an integral part of my story.

After I came out of the closet, I was fortunate to have an opportunity to tell Don how important his life intersecting mine was and how vital a role he played in my growing up. I hope that my life will be at least half as important to those around me. If there are people in your life that have intersected with your life making you the better for their presence, tell them.

To quote one of Dick and Don’s songs, “Love them now. Don’t wait till they’re gone away.  Love them now, while they’re around. Touch them, hold them, laugh and cry with them. Show them, tell them, don’t deny with them.  Honor them, give birth and die with them now.  Love them now before they’re just a guilty mem’ry.  Love them now.  Love them now.” (Love Them Now © 1970 by Richard K. Avery and Donald S. Marsh)  Blessings abound, Fred

Cottonwood thrives in the white sands of New Mexico.  It is a rather remarkable feat.  When I visited the largest white gypsum sand deposit in the world I came across these small groupings of shrubs growing in the sand dunes.

What I didn’t realize was that these were not shrubs but rather the tops of 30-50 foot high trees that were buried by the shifting dunes.  The trees strive to keep branches above the sand and as long as they are able to that the tree thrives.  At the bottom of the shifting sand dune, the cotton wood has dug it’s roots 3 feet deep to the water table.

This to me is a metaphor for faith.  The shifting sands, circumstances in our life could indeed bury us but as long as two things are operating we will thrive.  First we need to have our beings rooted firmly in what nourishes us.  So when the winds are shifting / disrupting everything we were once confident in, if we are firmly grounded in what sustains us we will be able to stand.  We might be shaken horribly by what is blown away but these things are not what sustain us.

Second we need to keep our interactions with the world, vibrant, responsive, green.  In other words offering / sharing our hope, our love, our life with others.  Remain engaged in the world.  It might at first seem sense-able to hunker down and allow the storm to bury us / entomb us until it has passed but this is not the way of faith.  Surrendering to the sand storm will mean our spiritual death.   The cottonwood by sending its green branches high above the sands offers shelter, solace, even water to the animals that calls this desolate place  home.  We are called to do the same and even more so when the sands of harsh circumstances blow across the ground of our being.

And when the sands of life have shifted again, we remain as testaments to an enduring faith offering wisdom and hope to another generation. Blessings,

Today in Alabama and in Mississippi and in several other southern states is the commemoration of the Confederate War Heroes known as Confederate Memorial Day.  This year is especially singled out as this year marks the 150th anniversary of the Civil War.   It is on this date in 1865 when General Joseph Johnston surrendered to Union General William Sherman.

As  a Yankee,  I admit I do not fully understand, when our nation has Memorial Day to honor and remember all of America’s war dead, why there is a  need to differentiate this war from the rest. The history of the origins of Memorial Day and Confederate Memorial Day may give some clues.   Memorial Day was developed to honor the war dead of both the Union and Confederate Armies.  It was first celebrated on May 30, 1868.   The south did not choose to honor their war dead on this date but instead chose another day, April 26th.  Some southern states celebrate Confederate Memorial Day on a different date. It was not until 1971  did the South recognize this holiday in May when Congress declared the last Monday in May to be a nationally recognized day of memorial to commemorate all war dead.  But there some differences in how this particular war is perceived by the losers and winners that I believe is the reason or perhaps the real motivation behind this southern holiday.

If I was to ask what this war between the states was about, those who side with the victors would say this was a war about slavery.  Those who side with the losers would state this was a war about state rights and sovereignty.  Both answers are partially correct.  As my grandmother would say “There are three sides to every story; your side, my side, and the truth.”

The issue between which has predominance, state rights or federal rights continues to be waged in the political arena.  This holiday as it is celebrated today is a grim reminder of the concern of federal sovereignty over states rights. It is the battle cry of the Tea partiers who want less federal government.  The Tea partiers do not necessarily want less government paid service–as they shout to keep hands off social security and medicare–but they want the states  and not the federal government to have more control over their social programs.   State rights have come to the fore over same-sex marriage.  And it is surely to be on the front burner after the passage of  Arizona’s new controversial immigration law.

Do states have the right to determine who they provide services to, who they marry, who can live within their boundaries?  Do states have the right to pass discriminatory laws that fly in the face of the federal constitution?  What interstate agreements  do states have in honoring other states who declare other laws to be legal for their citizens?  Confederate Memorial Day is a painful reminder of the wounds that still remain in this country from a war that tore this country in two 150 years ago.   Its wounds still fester in the racism expressed in this country under the new guise of fear against socialism, equal rights for sexual minorities,  and immigration reform.

From the chair that I sit in, Confederate Memorial Day is a longing to return to the day when states could ensure that white privilege was codified as was the case in the Alabama State Constitution last ratified in 1901 and still on the books though no longer enforceable because of  Federal law.

Mother Earth Rev. Fred L Hammond April 18 2010 © Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa

Earth.  There are very different perspectives towards this orb that is whirling through space with the Milky Way Galaxy.

Western civilization has taken a dominion perspective based on one of the two creation stories found in the Hebrew Scriptures.  “God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.’”  This is such a powerful command of domination over the earth that it is integral to the American way of life for 200 hundred plus years.

We, mostly for the pure sport of it, wiped out in a single generation the passenger pigeon. This beautiful bird had flocks in the billions that would darken the skies for days as they traveled north in their annual migration.  The last bird in the wild died at the hands of a young boy who saw the bird sitting on a fence in his yard and asked his mother for the shot gun.  But there was a time when newspaper’s boasted the number of birds killed with a single blast.   These birds were a hazard to progress.  They would land on telegraph poles and their collective weight would bring down the lines.  And so the corporations that ran the electric and telegraph lines sought out to destroy this bird once and for all. [1]

Fill the earth and subdue it.  Whether they are indeed the words of a god almighty or a words of a people who found that they are adaptable to the wiles of nature’s wrath; we have been seeking to tame the earth ever since these words were recorded.

In the last forty years there has begun a shift in our collective understanding of life on this planet earth.  This collective understanding is not new to us; humans around the world have held this understanding before.  But in the last forty years, this understanding has in western culture grown in strength.

We know this understanding as our seventh principle, “Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.”  Our western culture is ever so slowly beginning to grasp that when a species goes into extinction, the impact of that extinction ripples out across all of creation.

The passenger pigeon was not simply hunted to extinction.  This magnificent bird would not be around today even if steps were taken to protect it.  Its primary source of food was the American Chestnut and Oak.   These trees were once predominant in our forests.   The American Chestnut was prized for its lumber and was preferred for its endurance over the Oak.  However, a fungal blight was introduced through the import of an Asian Chestnut in the early 1900’s and by the 1940’s most of the American Chestnut was wiped out.   The bird would not have been able to withstand the loss of its primary food source.  But what if there was some other interconnection between this bird and the trees it used for food and nesting?   What if there was some sort of mutual benefit between the two species that when one was gone, the other subsequently suffered?

There is for instance the relationship between the sea otter, sea urchins, and kelp.   The sea otter uses the kelp forests as a hiding area from its predators.  In return for this protection, the sea otter eats sea urchins whose source of food is kelp.  Remove any one of these three and the other will suffer.  This was the case when the Southern Sea Otter was nearly hunted to extinction in the early 1900’s.  The sea urchins in turn decimated the kelp forest. [2]

Another example of interdependence between species was discovered regarding the number of coyotes and the diversity of song birds.  It was discovered that the diversity of song birds diminished when coyotes were hunted out of the canyons in southern California to make them safer for housing developments.[3] The reason for this is that coyotes acted as a control on the predators such as cats, fox, and rodents that ate the birds.

Caroline Fraser in her text, Rewilding the World: Dispatches from the Conservation Revolution writes: “Why do species matter? Why worry if some go missing? Part of the answer lies in the relationships coming to light between creatures like the canyon coyotes and the chaparral birds. After the nineteenth century’s great age of biological collecting, when collectors filled museums to bursting with stuffed birds and pinned beetles, the twentieth and twenty-first centuries have proved to be an age of connecting. Biologists have begun to understand that nature is a chain of dominoes: If you pull one piece out, the whole thing falls down. Lose the animals, lose the ecosystems. Lose the ecosystems, game over.”[4]

What is beginning to be understood is that the earth is more intertwined together than a collection of individual independent parts.  The rainforest of the Amazon is a vital key to the amount of rainfall that other areas of the globe receive. This heavily dense forest holds moisture close to the surface so that it can be released easily back into the atmosphere preventing the formation of deserts.  Not to mention the vast number of life forms that will disappear forever as the forest is replaced with agricultural crops.    Life forms that may contain secrets to our very health.

A vast number of pharmaceuticals have been derived from plants, animals, and microbes.  What most of us might consider as creatures of insignificance could be the key to cures of cancer or HIV/AIDS.  The cone snail, for example, injects a toxin into its prey numbing and paralyzing it.  This toxin is being investigated as a possible pain reduction substitute for opiates.   The Horseshoe crab has within its blood antimicrobials that destroy bacteria.  This finding could be vital in developing a new anti-bacterial medication for the now pandemic resistant strains of bacteria.

We are all connected to this planet in a myriad ways.  If we truly ponder this interconnection it could prove to be mind boggling.  Thomas Starr King, Unitarian Minister wrote to a friend Randolph Ryer about a lecture he heard Emerson give in 1849: “Emerson gave us last Monday evening the most brilliant lecture I ever listened to from any mortal. It was on the identity of the laws of the mind with the laws of nature. He proved conclusively that man is only a higher kind of corn, that he is a squirrel gone up into the first class, that he is a liberated oyster fully educated, that he is a spiritualized pumpkin, a thinking squash, a graduated sun-flower, and inspired turnip. Such imagery, such wit, such quaint things said in a tone solemn and sublime! I have the most profound respect henceforth for every melon-vine as my ancestor (melancholic thought). I look upon every turtle as of kin. Tonight he lectures again. I fear I may lose it.” **

I fear I may lose it.  The reality is we may indeed lose it all, if we humans do not begin to claim our rightful place in fellowship with our companions on this wonderful mother of us all, called Earth.

So what can we do?  We heard this morning a challenge being presented to us by our social Justice chair.  To celebrate Earth Day’s fortieth anniversary we are being asked to do forty things over forty days.  These forty things taken one day at a time can be the beginning of making a difference in our treatment of Mother Earth.

Some examples might be to fast from fast food for 40 days.  This means for the next forty days no McDonalds, no Taco Casa, No Wendy’s, No Quiznos, No Subway, No Cici’s, no KFC, no… well you get the point.  Or maybe you start a vegetable garden which you tend to for the next 40 days and beyond reaping a harvest of fresh tomatoes, squash, etc.  Or maybe you decide to shop at local farmers markets.  Purchase fair trade products where by the middle person is taken out of the equation enabling farmers to make a living.  We could even begin to sell fair trade products here to our members and friends-we already serve fair trade coffee on Sundays.  Say no to water in plastic bottles for 40 days saving our landfills from plastic that does not decompose.  Reduce packaging by purchasing your rice, grains, and cereals in bulk.  Have a book discussion on ethical eating or environmental issues.  Decide to eat lower on the food chain by eating more vegetables x number of times a week.  Eat as you always do but keep and measure the volume of packaging used and document and share your findings with the congregation and with the UUA’s blog on 40/40/40.[5] Meet with other members and friends and discuss your discoveries as you proceed in doing 40 things over the next 40 days.

These seemingly small gestures of choosing foods that are not processed beyond recognition or are packaged in biodegradable containers will ripple out to make a larger change in the environment.  We are connected in more ways than we might imagine.  We share common strands of DNA with all life on this planet.  It is not humans vs nature… We humans are a part of nature.  We are interdependent with the vast array of life on this planet.  We depend on the diversity of plants and animals to survive.  If any one species become extinct it ripples out and causes other species to become extinct.  Eventually, humanity will face the consequences of its indiscriminate treatment of the planet which gave it life.   Be good to your mother.

Blessed Be.

---

[1] Some of this information is from Clive Ponting's 'A Green History of the World', Penguin Books, 1992

[2] http://www.1hope.org/intdpndt.htm

[3] REWILDING THE WORLD: Dispatches from the Conservation Revolution by Caroline Fraser. Copyright (c) 2009 by Caroline Fraser.  Published: January 21, 2010  New York Times

[4] Adapted from the book REWILDING THE WORLD: Dispatches from the Conservation Revolution by Caroline Fraser. Copyright (c) 2009 by Caroline Fraser.  Published: January 21, 2010  New York Times

**Found the archives of the Graduate Theological Union’s library in Berkeley, CA

[5] ideas found at http://www.uua.org/socialjustice/issues/environmentaljustice/159611.shtml

Yom HaSho’ah by Rev. Fred L Hammond delivered to the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa in Alabama on 11 April 2010 (c)

Yom HaSho’ah was presented as a day of remembrance for Jews and it has been embraced by other faith traditions so that we will never forget the millions of lives nor the horrors that occurred. It is in the hope that we will learn its lessons to never allow it to happen again.   Unfortunately, this day of remembrance in recent years has also included remembrance of holocausts that have occurred since this time period.  The genocides in Cambodia, in Bosnia, in Rwanda, and in Darfur have been incorporated in honoring all the lives lost.   New countries are being added to the list of atrocities by the non-profit organization called Genocide Watch.   There are things that we can do to help prevent the conditions that allow genocide to occur.

Anne Frank, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Norbert Capek, Solomon Perel, Elie Weisel, Bruno Bettelheim, Rena and Danka Kornreich, Corrie tenBoom, Martha and Waitstill Sharp, and Oscar Schindler.  These are only a few of the names of people who died, who survived, and who helped rescue a few of the lives caught up in the web of the Holocaust in Nazi Germany.  Here are some of their stories.

Danka and Rena Kornreich were sisters and the youngest of the Kornreich family in Tylicz, Poland.  There was a small Jewish community there and the Jews and Gentiles lived in relative peace together.  There was a young gentile by the name of Andrzej Garbera who had a crush on Rena… it was a crush that was mutual albeit forbidden by Jewish custom. Theirs was a secret affair kept afar.  He wanted to marry Rena but Rena turned him down because to do so would have broken her parents’ heart.  When the Germans invaded Poland, it was Andrzej who assisted in Rena’s escape to the border into Slovakia.  He assisted many Jews to escape to the border.  One night on his return from the border there was a search by the SS with dogs. He hid in a tree for the night; nearly frozen he fell out of the tree.  The next day some of the villagers found him and brought him home but he contracted pneumonia and died a few weeks later.

Rena in an effort to protect those who gave her shelter in Slovakia decided to turn herself in and enlist for the German Work Camps.  She is taken to Auschwitz where she is tattooed with the number 1716.  The huge sign at the gates, declares “Work will make you free.”  And everyone entering Auschwitz with Rena that day believes the sign.  “‘We are young,’ we remind ourselves. ‘We will work hard and be set free. We will see what happens.’ But on the outside we are walking as if we are doomed.  It is raining, chilled like March rain. We are lost in thought but it is too cold to do much thinking.  Everywhere is gray.  My heart is turning gray. “

“There are men along the barbed-wire fences, in striped jackets, caps, and pants, watching us. Their eyes reflect nothing.  I think to myself, This must be an insane asylum, but why would they make the mentally ill work?  That’s not fair.” [1]

A few months later, she is reunited with her younger sister, Danka.  Danka is frail of health and Rena worries about her surviving the harsh conditions of the coming winter.  Rena is selected by Dr. Mengele for a “special” work detail.  Rena thinks this might be an indoor job as he has done in the past and arranges for Danka to join her.   They are sent to a room where they fed more than their daily ration of slice of bread and broth.  They think that perhaps this is a good thing for all concerned. After a few days they are told to remove their uniforms–Uniforms that once belonged to Russian prisoners of war who were shot –and to wear dresses with aprons.   Rena notices that they are not asked to place their numbers by which they are known on the outfits.  She sees one of the elites remove a young woman from the line up.  She notices the woman did this with an air of authority. And decides she and Danka must get out of this group.  With bravery, with a feeling of self-importance they return back to where their uniforms were.  The uniforms are all piled up and together, if they can get their uniforms back on they might be able to be in time for roll call.  Frantically, they find their numbers and change back into their uniforms. They run back outside where the roll call is still taking place, they are in time and they are counted.

A few days later, Rena hears that the special work detail was for sterilization and shock treatments.  All of the women either died from the shock treatments or from the infection that set in from the sterilization procedure.   Rena tells in her narrative, “There is a pressure screaming for release against my eyes, I don’t cry.  It takes time to cry and there is no time.  I fight to find a reason, but there is no reason in this place.  What did they do when they discovered there were three numbers missing in the experiment detail?  Did the woman who snuck her cousin or sister out of line just place somebody else in her place?  Why didn’t they search us out?—they had our numbers written on a list.  Why are we alive and the other girls we were selected with not?   Will there ever come a time when we can thank God for being alive today before we have to ask the same privilege tomorrow, and the next day?  Is life a privilege or a curse?”[2]

Bruno Bettelheim, a survivor of the Dachau and Buchenwald concentration camps writes in The Informed Heart: Autonomy in a Mass Age, “to have some small token experiences of being active and passive, each on one’s own, and in mind as well as body—this, much more than the utility of any one such activity, was what enabled me and others like me to survive.  By contrast, it was the senseless tasks, the lack of almost any time to oneself, the inability to plan ahead because of sudden changes in camp policies, that was so deeply destructive.  By destroying man’s ability to act on his own or to predict the outcome of his actions, they destroyed the feeling that his actions had any purpose, so many prisoners stopped acting. But when they stopped acting they soon stopped living.”  [3]

Danka and Rena Kornreich are among the survivors of the Holocaust.  Their actions enabled them to survive.  When one sister despaired of life, it was the other sister that acted on both of their behalves.  Of course not all people who took on small actions of deliberate choice in the holocaust survived to see the liberation of the camps by the allied forces.   But if Bettelheim is correct, it is these small acts, no matter how insignificant in our eyes, that enabled the survivors to retain some level of integrity.

PAUSE

Solomon Perel’s story is a remarkable and unbelievable true story of courage and wit.  The Perel family were shoemakers in Germany and were persecuted by continual vandalism.  In 1935, they relocated in Poland.  When the Germans invaded Poland, Solomon and his brother Isaak attempted to escape to Soviet-occupied Poland.  The brothers were separated and Solomon, lived in a Soviet orphanage.   When the orphanage was taken over by the Germans, because of Solomon’s perfect German, he was able to convince them that he was a German living outside of Germany.  He adopts the name of Josef Perjell. The German soldiers took him in as a German-Russian interpreter.  He played a key role in the capture of Stalin’s son, an officer in the Soviet Army.  This made him a hero in the eyes of the Germans.   However, he had to continually hide his true identity and being circumcised was made all the more difficult.

Because he was a minor, he was sent to a Hitler youth school in Germany.  He did what he had to do in order to survive. He “does confess later on that it was difficult to play the role he did where he had to pretend to be German. He writes in his autobiography, ‘I gradually suppressed my true self. Sometimes I even ‘forgot’ that I was a Jew.’”[4] Yet, he pledges that the essence of who he is would never be exterminated.   Solomon survives the war, learns of the fate of his family, learns for the first time of the horrors of the concentration camps and is reunited with his brothers David and Isaak.  Solomon moves to Israel in 1948.

It is only before a critical open-heart surgery that he decides to tell his story.  Part of his delay in telling this incredible story was because in his words, “What would those who had survived the death camps think of me?” (Perel, p. 196) “I constantly found myself comparing their bitter fate with what I had endured, and I realized how much life had spared me.” (Perel, p.200-201.)[5] While this story seems too incredible, it is estimated by researcher Bryan Riggs, that several hundred Jews masquerade as German soldiers in order to survive Nazi Germany.   Survivor guilt is strong in the people who lived to see the end of the war and the end of the holocaust.

PAUSE

“Rev. Waitstill and Martha Sharp were American Unitarians who visited Norbert Capek’s Unitarian congregation in Prague, Czechoslovakia throughout the 1920’s and 30’s.  When Czechoslovakia fell to the Nazis in 1938, the American Unitarian Association chose to send ‘commissioners’ to assess the needs of the refugees and the Prague church.  Rev. Waitstill and Martha Sharp were distraught over what was happening in Europe.  ‘These were our friends’, Waitstill would state later and something needed to be done.[6] While reluctant to leave their two young children, the Sharps arrived in Prague in 1939, the very day that the Nazis marched in.  Their work enabled many to escape to the U.S. and gave rise to the establishment of the Unitarian Service Committee, still in existence today as the Unitarian Universalist Service Committee.  The Sharp’s barely escaped arrest and detention.  They returned to Europe in 1940, where Martha Sharp arranged for 29 children and 10 adults to leave Nazi-occupied Europe.   The Sharp’s work combined with the founding of the Unitarian Service Committee ensured the rescue of 3500 families from Nazi controlled Europe.[7] The Sharp’s became known as the ‘Guardian Angels of European children.’

“Martha Sharp was said to have asked her daughter-in-law, ‘What important work are you going to do for the world?’ This is a statement of strong conviction that with our lives intricately connected to the world around us we carry a responsibility to that connection.”[8]

What important work are you going to do for the world?  It may seem impossible for us to prevent the atrocities in another country say Uganda, where legislation is proposed to eliminate the HIV/AIDS and homosexual threat by executing those who are living with this disease or who are homosexual in orientation.

Will this legislation if enacted result in Genocide?  First we need to understand the definition of Genocide.  It is important to know because many deny genocide based on a misunderstanding of what constitutes genocide.   According to international law: genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

The phrase “in whole or in part” is where many people trip up.  Genocide does not need to be the whole population; it can be a part of the population that is being harmed.  While sexual orientation or disease is not stated explicitly in the definition; the rest of the definition would classify such action as genocide.

There are distinct stages that a country progresses through en-route to committing genocide.  The first two stages are common to our human nature.  There are examples here in the United States and it does not mean that genocide will occur.  But it is clear from all the holocausts this world has experienced in the last 100 years, every single one, Armenia, Germany, Rwanda, Bosnia, Cambodia, and Darfur all began with these two stages that escalated to the third stage.

First stage:  Classification.  What divides us from them?  Is it race? Ethnicity? Religion? Nationality?  Sexual orientation?  There is a preventative in the form of education of tolerance, acceptance, and understanding.  The President of Genocide Watch, George Stanton states, “Th[e] search for common ground is vital to early prevention of genocide.”  Part of the important work that we can do for the world is to educate others about who the other is.  The other is just like us in more ways than we may even currently acknowledge. It is vital that we speak up when we hear hate speech or derogatory statements that dehumanize the other.

Stage two: Symbolization.  These are names or other symbols we give to those we classified as other.   From our own history, this would be the derogatory terms used to describe people of color or sexual minorities or political conservatives or political progressives.

These first two stages are not necessarily going to result in genocide unless they lead to the next stage; dehumanization.   Hate speech and hate symbols can increase the likelihood of advancing to the next stage.  The key is to remove the power behind the symbolization.  The act of setting up a donation table to solicit funds for organizations that support HIV/AIDS treatment or Gay civil rights where ever Fred Phelps’ church calls for the death of homosexuals is one way of removing the power his symbols might carry.

Stage 3: Dehumanization.  The humanity of the other is denied by equating them to vermin, animals, and diseases.  We have heard this dehumanization increasing in our country in the past few years.  Television talk show hosts have been accused of hate speech that dehumanizes or degrades the opposing political opinion.   Words such as “being the cancer of America” and to reload and take aim at those politicians who have supported allegedly the wrong bill have been heard.  This is dehumanization.    These are hate speeches aimed at dehumanizing the other.   Genocide Watch suggests “Local and international leaders should condemn the use of hate speech and make it culturally unacceptable. Hate radio stations should be shut down, and hate propaganda banned. Hate crimes and atrocities should be promptly punished.”

Stage four: Organization.  There is always organization behind genocide.  It is usually supported by the government where the genocide is taking place but organized through militias so the government can deny responsibility. This is the case in Darfur.

Stage five: Polarization.  Hate propaganda is broadcasted informing this is for the best interests of the country, further polarizing those who might act to stop it. Laws are passed outlawing behaviors associated with group, such as gathering for worship on Friday evenings for Sabbath.  Laws forbidding social interaction may also be passed. It became illegal in Germany to shop at a store owned by Jews.

Stage six: Preparation:  Groups are separated out from the general population.  They are forced into ghettos, concentration camps or regions with no or limited resources for survival.  Our own history revealed this being done to the Native Americans who were forced off their land and into desert regions we called reservations.  Symbols are also used to designate these people and these are forced on the people.   In Germany it was the yellow star or various colors of triangles.  In Cambodia it was a blue scarf.

Stage seven: Extermination.  Mass killings begin and this is called genocide.  Those doing the killing do not believe their targets are human.  Rapid international armed intervention must be given in order to stop the genocide.  Safe zones that are protected by international forces must be developed for refugees.  Unsafe, safe zones are worse than no safe zones because they become targets as was the case in Darfur, where the international armed forces abandoned the safe zones allowing for Janjaweed, an African Arab tribal militia, to enter and massacre the refugees.

Stage eight: Denial.  Actions are taken by the government to deny the genocide took place.  Obstructions to investigations occur.  A label of civil war may be used to cover up the genocide, such as in Darfur and Bosnia. It is important that an international council is set up to investigate and bring the proponents of genocide to justice.[9]

Survivor of the Bosnian genocide, Kemal Pervanic, stated at the first annual Holocaust Memorial Day conference in the United Kingdom: “Most Bosnians learned to regard all Serbs as murderers, killers: they believed something was wrong with them. I don’t think like that.  It’s OK to be different. We are all different, but on the other hand we are all the same, with the same rights to life, love, dignity. Lots of people aren’t prepared to share these values with others who are less fortunate than them.”[10]

Through out the eight stages of genocide there is a drive to destroy, to drive out, to reduce to sameness, to kill the human spirit that creates us as all unique.  Yet, as these few stories point out and in every story of survival of genocide I have ever heard, the human spirit has never been able to be fully crushed.  There is always some spark, some insignificant moment or choice made that restores a sense of dignity, of integrity, even if for that one brief moment that beckons the will to live another day. There is always a creative way for the human spirit to seemingly instinctively change course as Rena and Danka did with mysterious surging bravado, or to be a chameleon in the midst of enemies in order to survive like Solomon Perel did or causes Waitstill and Martha Sharp to reach out a hand to save a few from falling into harm’s way.   The human spirit cannot be fully crushed.  It can be repressed.  It can be oppressed. It can be held down and shackled.  But its spark can never be fully snuffed out. There will always be something of the human spirit that will declare its existence, its shout of I AM.

Anne Frank who lost her life in the Holocaust wrote in her diary “… in spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart. I simply can’t build up my hopes on a foundation consisting of confusion, misery, and death. I see the world gradually being turned into a wilderness, I hear the ever approaching thunder, which will destroy us too, I can feel the sufferings of millions and yet, if I look up into the heavens, I think that it will all come right, that this cruelty too will end, and that peace and tranquility will return again.” [11]

May it be so in our life times.

---

[1] Rena’s Promise by Rena Kornreich Gelissen with Heather Dune Macadam.   Page 60

[2] Ibid.

[3] Bruno Bettelheim, The Informed Heart  © The Free Press 1960  pg 148

[4] http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/classes/33d/projects/jewishlife/JewishPerelRuth.htm

[5] ibid

[6] Roots and Visions: The First 50 years of the UU Service Committee, page 15

[7] http://www.brownalumnimagazine.com/storydetail.cfm?ID=2628

[8] Originally from the sermon, “How to be A Hero” by Rev. Fred L Hammond  © February 26 2006

[9] As found at http://www.genocidewatch.org/aboutgenocide/8stagesofgenocide.html © 1998 Gregory H. Stanton. Originally presented as a briefing paper at the US State Department in 1996.   (The eight stages presented here is adapted from this work of Gregory Stanton.  The comparisons of some of the stages to the political scene,  past and present,  in the US is my commentary and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of  Genocide Watch.

[10] As found at http://www.hmd.org.uk/news/item/holocaust-memorial-day-trust-1st-annual-conference

[11] as found at http://www.buzzle.com/articles/holocaust-quotes.html

(This first appeared as the message for Our Home Universalist Unitarian Church Newsletter for April.  I thought it might be of interest.)

I have been enjoying American Idol this season.  All of the contestants are really, really good.   It has been years, O alright decades, since I had voice lessons but I am impressed with the maturity of the voices I am hearing.   Simon Cowell made a comment tonight that was really quite profound.  He told one of the contestants, one of my personal favorites, to not allow the process of the competition lead her away from who she is.  She tried something new. It was a risk.  It was a good risk.  I thought it worked for her.  But Simon’s comments were important not only for the contestants but for all of us as well.

There are a few singers who have learned early on that if they do a certain thing, the audience is going to love them for it.  It is great to know that the singers have those skills but when those skills become the standard to the performance it not only grows stale, it becomes false to who they are.

If Simon were to offer his advice as a piece of spiritual wisdom, he might have said, “Do not let the process of living lead you away from who you are.” These are important words and hard to follow because we are always in relationship with our environment.  Peer pressure is the best example I can come up with that exemplifies what I mean.  We want to be liked by others.  We want their approval.  Nothing wrong in these two desires but the way peer pressure works; we sometimes surrender who we are in order to be liked by the in-crowd or to win approval from that in-crowd.  And it is in the doing of things that we know in our heart of hearts is not true to our center that we find ourselves being led away from authenticity.

But it is not only peer pressure that is part and parcel to the process of living.  It could be disappointments that we faced.  It could be emotional woundedness that we never quite were able to resolve to satisfaction.  The process of living can result in residual habitual behaviors that tamp down the joy that life has to offer.

The first Sunday of April is Easter; a day where Christians celebrate the resurrection of Jesus. Taken just from its metaphorical meanings, it signals that even the most insurmountable defeats do not need to be so.  New life, new possibilities, new opportunities to be our authentic selves abound even in the face of insurmountable defeats.  And so it is with Simon’s advice to the young performer. To follow the leadings of the process that the institution of the performing arts demands can be a process that leads to the tomb or if kept true to her integrity can be one of exhilarating resurrection.  The process of living does not need to wear us down.  If we remain true to who we are, maintain our integrity of self, we might find our very souls being lifted up.

What do we do with Easter?

Rev. Fred L Hammond

Our Home Universalist Unitarian Church

4 April 2010 ©

Easter was always a holiday of great joy growing up.  There were dyed eggs, chocolates and gifts hidden, and new clothes. And of course there would be the wonderment of the Easter Bunny—the cousin of Santa Claus—who would scatter his candy everywhere.

In my childhood home of New York State, Easter would be the true herald of spring because it was only by Easter that the first tulips or daffodils would begin to bloom.  And maybe, if it was a particularly a warm spring, the forsythia at my home would begin to yellow.   Frost was still a possibility and there were times when a late spring snow storm would blanket the new blooms.

Easter was the few days of the year that my family would have dinner rather than supper.  Now in my family supper was served around 7 PM and dinner was served around 4:30PM.  Dinner on Easter was always fancier than supper.  We could have Mrs. Paul’s fish sticks for supper but dinner might include a roast of some sort.

The church would be filled with Easter lilies given in memory of loved ones.  These would sometimes be read aloud as part of a litany of remembrance.  I would always scan the insert to see if my grandmother’s and later my grandfather’s name would be listed.

When I was a teen, I was asked to play the part of Jesus for the Sunday School classes for a re-enactment of the last week of Jesus’ life leading up to Easter.  On Palm Sunday, we did the triumphant entry, the turning over of the money changers tables and the crucifixion.   I was laid in a tomb which was a small unused storage space under the front porch of the church.  The entrance to this area was from the first floor of the church.  There was a rock foundation and stone floor. It looked tomb like. A bench had been placed there for me to be ‘entombed.’

Now there was a Jewish couple who had been coming to the church because they enjoyed the minister’s liberal sermons.  Their daughter was about 5 years old and began attending Sunday school.  She watched attentively as I was placed in the tomb.  The following week, Easter morning, the classes gathered around the tomb only to find linen on the bench and an angel standing there saying he is not here he is risen.  The little girl turned and saw me, no longer in the role of Jesus, and exclaims, “There he is!  Jesus is alive!”

She apparently enthusiastically told her parents that Jesus was alive because that was the last time this family attended the congregation. They did not believe this part of the Christian story and did not want their child to accept something that they did not believe. I heard this child, years later was a college student studying abroad and flew back to the US aboard the ill-fated plane that crashed over Lockerbie Scotland.

When you do not believe in the resurrection, it can feel a bit awkward to celebrate Easter.   We don’t really know what to do with it.  We feel an obligation to acknowledge the day because it is part of our heritage.  But we don’t feel comfortable in proclaiming the resurrection of Jesus.  We instead would rather celebrate the metaphor of resurrection through the rebirth of spring.  The rebirth of spring has close ties with the pagan celebrations of new life and fertility that occurred around the spring equinox.   Many UU congregations across the south and southwest have conflated the Flower Communion with Easter celebration.  It is a way to nicely avoid the subject of the Christian belief of the resurrection.

Flower Communion was a ritual developed by Norbert Čapek as a ritual specifically for Unitarians.  He chose to celebrate the diversity of humanity through flowers as no two flowers are exactly alike.  The first Flower communion was held in June of 1923 in Prague just before the summer holidays. According to his wife, Maja Čapek, the ritual was to be more secular in its associations so as to be the most inclusive of all people, regardless of creed.   An important aspect that would grow over time as their neighboring country of Germany grew in power and intolerance of Jews and those of political differences grew deeper.  She stated in a letter[1] that conflating it with Easter would probably not have met Norbert’s approval and an alternative date to June could be to commemorate the last Sunday that he preached which was March 23 before being arrested and subsequently killed by the Nazis in Dachau concentration camp.  These meanings of diversity and acceptance found in the Flower Communion have nothing to do with Easter. I believe the two should be kept separate so that the fullness of each message can be contemplated.

So this leads back to what do we do with Easter?  How do we proclaim the resurrection when some of us might believe it to be an improbable event at best?

Paul of Tarsus, who spread the message of Christianity in the first  century of the Common Era, declared that if the resurrection did not happen, then all of the Christian faith is folly.  In his letter to the Corinthians he states, “If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.”  (1 Corinthians 19)  I know many Unitarian Universalists who would say this is probably the first thing Paul ever said in which they can full heartedly agree.

So if Paul is correct, then we Unitarian Universalists have no reason to celebrate Easter since our hope, our salvation is indeed based in this one glorious life.  But I do not believe Paul is correct.

I think on this point, Paul got it wrong.  Sebastian Castellio after the martyrdom of Michael Servetus by burning at the stake in 1553, stated “to kill a man is not to protect a doctrine; it is but to kill a man.”[2] The same can be said of Jesus, who many call the Christ.  And just what doctrine or doctrines were sought to be protected by his death?   The doctrine that declares justice only exists for those in power.  The doctrine that declares ‘might makes right.’   The doctrine that declares that survival is only possible by looking out for number one.  The doctrine that declares grab what you can, when you can.  The doctrine that declares trust no one.

The seditious doctrine of loving your neighbor as yourself and doing unto others as you would have them do unto you is the leavening that not only lived on after the life of Jesus but multiplied and expanded throughout western civilization.  In spite of the horrible tragedies that took place in the name of the Christian church through out its 2,000 year history, tragedies that continue to occur even to this present day, these two thoughts have revolutionized the world.

Yes there is much that the Christian church has allowed to occur in its name. Actions that were more representative of evil than of godliness have occurred in every era.  But the revolutionary idea that humanity can improve and create a more just world continues to live on two thousand years later.

We can celebrate Easter not because we believe in the resurrection of Jesus.  We can celebrate Easter because we seek to adhere to the ideals of Jesus’ message of love for the other.

I attended a Good Friday service at the University Presbyterian Church in Tuscaloosa.  One of the parts of the service that I found personally powerful was in a section entitled, Solemn Reproaches of the Cross.   This was a litany of ills or sins.  The final one was adapted from the Gospel of Matthew: “‘For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’  For this you nailed me to a cross.”

We seek to do justice in the world.  We seek to not only feed the hungry but to figure out ways to prevent hunger and famine from occurring.  We seek to not only give water to the thirsty but to also find new ways and resources for clean water to be available.  We seek to not only offer shelter to the homeless but to find ways to prevent homelessness.  We seek to find ways to reduce the racism and the oppression that results in inequity in our justice system.

Nailing to the cross is the refusal to act / to help.  It is a despair that says there is nothing we can do in this life.  It echoes one of my favorite scenes from the Color Purple where Sophie confronts Ceelie on Mister’s abuse.  Ceelie says, “This side last a lil while, heaven last always.”   Ceelie is nailing her life’s situation to the cross, it is a cross of despair, a cross of helplessness, a cross of surrender to the injustices of this world in the hope of a heaven forever.  Sophie responds with, “you betta bash mister’s head open and think bout heaven later.[3]”   While I am not condoning the action Sophie recommends, the actions that we do take to create justice are in the here and now, in this lifetime.   Waiting to go to heaven to have justice is too little, too late.

Whether or not we believe in the resurrection of Jesus, we can celebrate Easter with joy because the ideals that Jesus taught continue to live on.  They are resurrected every time we seek to liberate the poor and down trodden.  Every time we seek to create a safe environment for all of our children in schools we resurrect the ideal that all have inherent worth and dignity.  Every time we seek to find ways to provide health care to all, we resurrect the ideal that all people should be able to live as healthfully as possible. Every time we tell our elected officials that blood for oil is not how we want our country to solve its problems, we resurrect the ideal that a lasting peace is a possibility.

The Standing on the Side of Love campaign that the UUA is sponsoring is lifting up the ideal that love is stronger than greed, that love is stronger than racism, that love is stronger than any ism that is swirling around in this country today.  We resurrect that notion of freedom for all.  This for me is the meaning of Easter.

It is more meaningful than the new clothes or finding hidden eggs filled with candy and trinkets.  These are nice things and I will always remember fondly the Easters of my childhood and the joy a child experienced when she thought she spied the resurrected Jesus in her midst.

In some ways she was right.  She did see Jesus alive.  And her joy in seeing Jesus resurrected is an experience we can all experience when ever we see another person seeking to live out the message of Jesus’ life to love our neighbor as we love ourselves.  Whether it is a simple kindness like a smile and a hug or working tirelessly to right an age old injustice, there the spirit of Jesus is found.  There the Buddha is revealed.  There Gandhi-ji is honored.  There the Dali Lama is emulated. There Rosa Parks is sitting for justice again.  There Mother Theresa is loving the poor.   There the alleluias are being sung!

---

[1] Henry, Richard Norbert Fabian Čapek: A Spiritual Journey (Skinner House, 1999)

[2] as found 2 April 2010 at http://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/michaelservetus.html

[3] http://www.moviequotes.com/repository.cgi?pg=3&tt=77439

A story for all ages that I wrote to complement the sermon I gave on James Luther Adams’ fourth stone of liberal religion: no immaculate conception of virtue and the necessity of social incarnation.  It was delivered to the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa on 14 March 2010 (c).  This is based on the parable from Matthew 21: 28-32.

Once upon a time, there was a family that was known through out the town for their goodness. This family was held in high esteem by everyone. If there was ever a dispute between neighbors, this family was able to find a solution that worked for both parties. If there was ever a need in the community, this family was able to support the filling of that need. This was a good family. They believed that actions that resulted in the expansion of good were important in order to have a wonderful and loving community.

Now there were two sons in this family of roughly the same age. Wherever they went, they met people who told them what a good family they came from. Hearing these things made them feel good.

In school, the teachers would tell them, “Jason and Bryan, you come from such a good family. We know your grandfather, what a good man he is. He has been so very helpful to the community. If it weren’t for him, we wouldn’t have clean water here because he found a way to purify the wells that were contaminated.” Their grandfather was head of the city health department and made sure that the city had clean water.

The school’s foot ball coach would say, “Bryan and Jason, I know your father. He is such a good man. Why if it weren’t for him, we wouldn’t have a decent volunteer firehouse with a Hook and Ladder truck.” Their father was a volunteer firefighter and helped organize the community to raise the money for the truck to ensure they were ready in case the taller buildings had a major fire. One such fire happened and because they had a Hook and Ladder truck they were able to prevent a tall building from burning to the ground. More importantly the fire fighters were able to save a family that was trapped on the upper floors.

There was another time when a complete stranger came up to them and said, “Aren’t you Elizabeth’s sons?” They shook their heads, yes. “Well, your mom is one of the finest women in town. She helped my children have access to the town library because it wasn’t wheelchair accessible. You see, my two children were born with physical disabilities and they are unable to walk. But your mom worked with the library and the city to find the money to put in ramps to enable my children and other children like mine to use the library. I am so glad to have met you fine young men.”

Everywhere Bryan and Jason went there were accolades given to their family about all the good things their family did for others. The stories of how their family made the community better for others continued to be told. And in time Bryan and Jason came to believe that they were good simply because they came from a good family.

Then one day something happened at school. Bryan and Jason told their parents about it. There were two girls who wanted to go to the school dance as a couple and were told that they could not go; only boy/girl couples could go. Their parents asked them if it was fair that a girl couple be denied to attend the dance. After some discussion, their parents asked Jason and Bryan if they would be willing to start a petition to give to the school board requesting these girls to be allowed to go to their dance. Jason said he would not because he didn’t want to be made fun of by his football team. Bryan said he would do it. But Bryan did not start the petition. He decided he didn’t care if two girls could go to the prom or not after all it didn’t affect him any.

Jason begin to think of his grandfather’s work with getting clean water, his father’s work on having a fire truck, his mother’s work on having wheelchair ramps at the library. He remembered all these good things that his family did to help others and so he changed his mind and began the petition after all. Jason reasoned that if the school could tell two girls they couldn’t go to the school prom, what else would they do to keep people from being themselves? On Saint Patrick’s Day would they keep him from wearing the green plaid kilt his aunt bought him in Ireland to honor his Irish heritage?

So Jason circulated the petition. Teachers, students, and community members signed it. He received so many signatures that the school board decided to allow the girls to go to the dance as a couple.

Now sometimes, Bryan gets asked if Jason is his brother. When he tells them yes, he is told, “Jason is a fine young man. He stood up to fight an injustice in the school. If he hadn’t done that, then girl couples and boy couples who wanted to go to the dance would not be allowed. He is a good man just like his parents and grandparents.”

Bryan tells them that he initially wanted to help with the petition and that Jason did not. They reply, “But did you act on your good intention?” No, Bryan would shake his head. They would sigh and say, “Good intentions mean nothing; it is good actions that make a difference.”

This is a variation on the age-old question of when does life begin–at conception or at birth?  There was a recent bill passed in Utah that criminalizes  miscarriages as homicide if the woman engages in “intentional, knowing, or reckless act” that results in a miscarriage.   Potentially this means if the woman does not wear a seatbelt, or she drinks alcohol, smokes, falls down stairs, or remains in an abusive relationship and then miscarries she could be charged with homicide.   This bill had passed both houses of the state legislature and was sent to the Governor for signing.   The Governor wisely, after an uproar nationwide, sent the bill back for removal of the most offensive language, the word reckless.   It is expected that some miscarriages will still be considered homicide and carry a felony.

There is another bill , an amendment actually that will redefine for Mississippi what is the legal definition of personhood.  Personhood Mississippi is seeking to define personhood as beginning at conception.  The wording of the amendment is as follows:  Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Mississippi: SECTION 1. Article III of the constitution of the state of Mississippi is hearby amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION TO READ: Section 33. Person defined. As used in this Article III of the state constitution, “The term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.”  The organization has received wide support and exceeded the number of signatures needed to place this on the 2011 ballot.   There are similar petitions being submitted in Florida, California, Montana, and Missouri. 

Obviously if this personhood amendment were to be pass it would strike down the women’s right to control her own body should she become pregnant even if that pregnancy were to threaten her life.  If she aborts the fetus because of the risk to her health, under this redefinition she could be charged with infanticide but if the birth of the child resulted in the death of the mother, does the newborn then get charged with matricide since the fetus is a person with rights and responsibilities?  A whole other question for debate. 

These are two bills that would alter how we define personhood. These bills are based in a theological and doctrinal belief that conception is the start of personhood or the start of life.  There are doctrinal beliefs that state that birth is the beginning of the person’s life. 

Two very popular verses in the Hebrew Scriptures are quoted to support the doctrine that life begins at conception:  Jeremiah 1:5 states, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”  and Psalm 139: 13, 16 reads “For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb . . . your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.”   These verses point to more than simply when life begins but also suggests the doctrine of pre-destination. 

There are verses in the Hebrew Scriptures that support the doctrine that life begins at birth when the baby draws its first breath.  Genesis 2:7,   He “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and it was then that the man became a living being”.   Although the man was fully formed by God in all respects, he was not a living being until after taking his first breath. In Job 33:4, it states:   “The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.” Again, to quote Ezekiel 37:5;6,   “Thus says the Lord God to these bones:   Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live.   And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live;   and you shall know that I am the Lord.”  [as found at http://joeschwartz.net/life.htm] 

These two very different and opposing doctrines are based in the Bible. These are doctrines held by various denominations of the Christian and Jewish faith.  So whose doctrine is correct?  And whose doctrine should reign supreme in a democracy that claims freedom of religion? 

To add to the confusion, science has its own varied theories of when human life begins.  Does it begin at fertilization?  Does it begin at gastrulation–the point at which the embryo can no longer subdivide and create twins or triplets.  Or  is it when an EEG can be discerned?  It is a definition of death, when the brain flatlines and an EEG no longer registers.  Or is it when the fetus has potential viability, or when there is lung function somewhere between weeks 25 and 28 of gestation.   Or is it when the cord is cut and the first breath has been drawn?   Science according to which area of speciality has multiple answers to when human life begins.  As Dr. Gilbert states in his lecture given in 2007 (see link here)  there is no one coherent view and no consensus in the answer.

The answer is not one that will be found easily.  And if we are going to pass laws based on a doctrinal belief rather than based on the unfolding science then the debate becomes whose religious doctrine is supreme.  That is a road towards theocracy.  A road that this democracy needs to ensure that humanity never travels down again as it thwarts the fullness of humanity in all of its creativity and expression.    Blessings,

Comfortability is a word I coined several years ago when in a dialog about racism.  It is the skill of being able to be fully present / comfortable in an uncomfortable situation.  It is a skill that I believe we need to develop if we are to thrive in a pluralist society.

The school board in Itawamba County, Mississippi decided that a student could not attend her prom in a tuxedo and bring her girlfriend, also a student at the school, because it might be uncomfortable for the other students.  This is not the lesson that should be taught.  It teaches  that segregation and hiding our truth is acceptable behavior because integration of our differences and being honest might make someone else uncomfortable.  The lesson that needs to be taught is to embrace our differences be it racial, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation or gender expression.   We live in a pluralist society.  This is the reality of our nation.  We are going to meet someone and most likely several someones in our life time who are not just like us.  Doesn’t it make more sense to teach our children how to live in that reality rather than teaching them to be fearful of the other?  Being uncomfortable is a form of fear and it is no way to live.

There is a wonderful song in the Rodgers and Hammerstein musical South Pacific that was very controversial when the musical came out entitled, “You’ve got be carefully taught.”   The chorus is

“You’ve got to be taught to hate and fear
You’ve got to be taught from year to year
It’s got to be drummed in your dear little ear
You’ve got to be carefully taught”

And so it is taught to this very day in school districts like Itawamba County, MS and in churches like Westboro Baptist Church.  Fred Phelps’ Westboro church is an example of blatant hate teachings but the fear of the diversity of humanity is also taught subtly and quietly in other church communities, liberal and conservative alike.   There are reasons why Sunday morning is the most segregated time in the country. Not having the skill of comfortability is one of these reasons.

I hear the lack of comfortability in Unitarian Universalist congregations when I hear comments that lash out at those who believe in God or Jesus.  The people who make such comments are uncomfortable with the notion of God and Jesus as savior or even as a teacher. Being comfortable in the face of diversity is an important skill set to develop. Comfortability means to be able to be accepting of the other, honoring their inherent worth and dignity.  It does not mean subscribing to the other’s way of thinking but it does mean being able to listen or be in the presence of the other without feeling threatened, with the calm assurance of being oneself.  

Fred Phelps feels threatened by homosexuality.  Itawamba County School District feels threatened by homosexuality.  Unitarian Universalists who lash out at UU Christians, theists, and deists  feel threatened by them.  If this were not true, then their behavior would be vastly different. It might be hard to hear being compared to Fred Phelps if one’s anti-Christian comments are no where near extreme as Fred Phelps anti-gay behaviors.  However, the root cause to all three examples given is fear and being uncomfortable of the other.  We need not be this way.   

If we are going to thrive in this nation we need to begin developing this skill.  We need to begin teaching comfortability in our schools and in our congregations.  The message is ripe for the picking.  There is a lot of fear being propagated in the nation right now and it needs diffusing.   

I believe Unitarian Universalism is the faith being prepared to bring such a message today.  We are not fully skilled yet in our comfortability as seen by the example I gave above.  Yet, our covenantal faith has been priming us to being more open to theological plurality and over all we do a fairly decent job at this.  We can do better.  But our developing comfortability in theological diversity is only a step towards developing comfortability in a pluralist society filled with many ideologies,  many races, many ethnicities, and many cultures.  

Harmony only occurs when there are multiple notes being sung.  May we sing the song of comfortability and heal our nation.  Blessings,