The Indefinite Article

Discontinuing this blog

I doubt anyone is still reading this blog, but just in case... I'm discontinuing this blog and starting a new one at:

http://www.godzonepreacher.com

In 1492...

Here's the link to my latest Patheos.com blogpost:

<a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/uucollective/2012/10/in-1492/">
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/uucollective/2012/10/in-1492/</a>

Judge not...

This is a link to my latest blog post at Patheos.com 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/uucollective/2012/09/judge-not/

Every Jot and Tittle

Heres a link to my latest blog post at Patheos.com:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/uucollective/2012/07/every-jot-and-tittle/

A Response to "Can Liberal Christianity Be Saved?"

My response to Ross Douthat's op-ed piece:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/uucollective/2012/07/a-response-to-can-liberal-christianity-be-saved/

for everything a season

I'm always a little perplexed about human-made calendars (currently the dominant Gregorian) that bring us leap years, seven day weeks, months of different lengths, etc. that don't quite match the natural cycles of our immediate cosmos. Like so many human conventions, the Gregorian calendar was an attempt by the Catholic church to control celebrations of Easter. Of course, some cultures also use other calendars based on events of great importance in their particular histories. After all, If it only took God seven days to create the universe with time for rest, then just imagine what we could do in a week's time.

All an attempt, in my humble opinion, to control the uncontrollable forces of the universe. What's wrong with the naturally occurring cosmic dance of 365-ish turns in the course of one major revolution around the sun (creating days, seasons, and years), with predictable pushes and pulls from the moon (creating daily tides and months)? It's quite elegant on its own.

And so, I quietly celebrated the new year at the moment of the turn of the seasons from autumn to winter not quite two weeks ago, when the days (in the northern hemisphere) reached their nadir and began getting longer.

As people the world over ring in the New Year during the curent turn of the earth on its lopsided axis, whether their days and nights are getting longer or shorter, Whether the tide is high or low, we would do well to think on  what we can and cannot control in our lives. Perhaps this is why we make New Year's resolutions. Transitions, natural or synthetic, are good times for transformations. We can't transform the processes of the universe no matter the mask we throw on them. We can't even change others. We can only work on ourselves. As one of my mentors says, our task is to shift from "attempting the impossible--changing others--to the merely difficult--changing myself." (Margaret Marcuson).

My next post will be about my resolutions for this year, which began about 9 revolutions ago.

Blessings,

Rev. Matt

UU Christian Fellowship Posts

I am providing posts for the UU Christian Fellowship Virtual Monastery in January. Here is a link to the first of six:

http://www.uuchristian.org/M_VirtualMonastery.html

It's not about you!

This article by my colleague, Peter Boullata says what I've been saying for years, but he says it better. We get our own needs met tenfold in service of others. If you don't believe that, you haven't served others. A must read for all Unitarian Universalists http://peterboullata.com/2011/12/29/the-liberal-church-finding-its-mission-its-not-about-you/

Occupation?

My values and my ministry are founded largely on the struggle for justice. I preach regularly as a counter-culture voice against the status quo. I have preached against corporate personhood, and have called for a radical revision of the U.S. Constitution with the goal of better protecting human rights. I am one of countless millions of victims (or is recipients a better word?) of the crumbling U.S. economy, trying with difficulty to raise a family, and wondering whether either of my two pensions will ever be sufficient to allow me to retire. And yet, I am struggling with whether I can support the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Many colleagues, parishioners, friends, and others will be angry at me for saying that I don't support mass protest of our nation's oppressive financial sector. But for now, I don't. At some level, I want to. I want to scream out, "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!" I agree that we have created an oppressive economic structure that will eventually crumble beneath its own weight, bringing all of us down with it if left unchecked. But that's also why I am struggling with taking to the streets in emotional outrage, righteous indignation, with a litany of demands, as being an effective means of countering the system.

First, we created this mess. Not you and I per se--but in the short span of 200+ years, a quarter of which I have witnessed, our not-so-distant ancestors erected an economy founded on occupation, conquest, and slave labor. We (you and I) have perpetuated it as consumers par excellence, even if only in allowing ourselves to be manipulated by it.

Ironically, every ideology that has sought either through rhetoric or action to destroy our noble democratic experiment of freedom, equality, and justice for all, has done so by attacking or predicting the demise of our economic system. The Soviets knew they would never defeat the west militarily. Their openly admitted goal was economic victory. Communist (or is it now capitalist?) China is now attempting the same without shame or secrecy. Those fringe ideologues who attacked us physically ten years ago, attacked Wall Street at least partially because of U.S. economic world domination and oppression. Are those the footsteps we want to follow in?

In the past year, as in years past, we have watched people in many nations courageously take to the streets to overthrow oppressive regimes with some measure of success. However, those regimes were not founded upon the primacy of the people. They were not representative democracies (or even republics) created with inherent checks and balances, of the people, by the people, for the people. Ours was and is. We are already in charge. To try to topple our own nation's economic infrastructure through an admittedly anarchic strategy of occupation is to commit social and cultural suicide. It is knocking down our own house of cards rather than building it stronger. If these efforts are successful, we will all suffer.

I am not saying that peaceful protest and even well-placed civil disobedience are not useful tactics. They are often incredibly important elements of a larger strategy. I simply think better strategies and tactics could be employed to fix a broken economic system that is the pulse of our capitalist (or is it socialist?) nation, for better or worse.

Perhaps we should just stop using the system for our own gain and comfort with such wild abandon. This isn't so hard to do if those of us with something to sacrifice would be willing to do so. I am changing my bank accounts from the well-known giant I use for convenience to my member-owned bank. I plan to start using cash almost exclusively for daily tranasctions. I have closed some credit accounts than I no longer need. I am again looking more closely at how my 401K retirement account is invested. There are many other steps that we can take as consumers to quickly get the attention of a failing economy. We own it, we feed it, we drive it. It is of the people, by the people, for the people. They (Wall Street) use OUR money, which WE choose how to spend. Wall Street couldn't care less if every citizen of the world takes to the streets, as long as we keep lining their corporate pockets. Changing our spending habits will, however, get their attention quickly.

Again, I know that this will be an unpopular position among my usual associates. I know that there are many more complexities to this critical issue. I agree that we have slowly created a system of economic apartheid under the guise of the American dream. I know that many with extreme wealth exploit the system and everyone in it. I know that many living in poverty don't have the leverage that I have. I know that the rapidly growing poverty gap must be fixed soon before this house of cards comes tumbling down on all of us. But again, this is exactly the point. Those of us with some leverage CAN make a rapid difference by rapidly changing our spending and voting habits with which we feed the system.

My bias is that I have most often effected change and countered the status quo from within the systems I have been a part of, not by tearing them down from the outside. Some will simply call me a hack, a company man, a stooge. But isn't changing a system from within the truest manifestation of revolution? Didn't Jesus ride through the gates of Jerusalem knowing full well what he was doing?

One final point. Occupation? Isn't occupation and oppression what we are trying to overcome? Aren't the people occupying Wall Street and main streets all over the nation and world the same people who oppose military and ideological occupations? How can we occupy what is already ours? We can take it back, but we can't "occupy" it like an army.

If we are truly a nation of the people, by the people, for the people. If we are truly a nation founded by people of faith who espoused the virtues of neighborly love and care, then let us move beyond the language and symbolic practice of the violence and oppression that we oppose and go deeper. Let us create a beloved community without tearing down the entire forest, without throwing out the baby with the bathwater, without the militaristic language and practice of occupation.

With all that said, I want to be proven wrong. I want the "occupiers" to be successful in tearing down oppression. I just want them to be smart, careful, clever, and creatively subversive. Much like Jesus was. Jesus turned over the money changers' tables too. But that was a small part of his revolution. His was a revolution of the mind, body, and spirit. I see people taking to the streets. I want to see people occupying hearts and minds with justice, equity, and compassion.

Maybe I'm just getting old and mellow. Maybe I am too much a part of the system to any longer change it. But maybe not. Maybe changing the world one heart, or one dollar, at a time is still the best way.

Blessings,

Rev. Matt

Why?

"Why?"

It was many years ago now, but I can still remember the first time my eldest son asked that question. He was three years old. I was telling him to do something (I don't remember what). Instead of responding with the worn-out and parent-torturing two-year-old anthem, "No!" he invoked the three-year-old, even more disturbing and existential, "Why?!"

Oh no. Now I had to answer him, reason with him, and know things. Of course, I was well-prepared with my best parental response, "Because I said so!" This, of course, didn't work. It just perpetuated a string of "Whys?"

Three year olds are not the only ones who repeatedly ask why. Therapists do it too. They call in inference-chaining. The idea is to repeatedly ask the client "Why?" to each subsequent answer about their presenting problem or feelings. This moves them closer and closer to their deeper issues.

I think this is also the reason young children ask, "Why?" "Because" isn't the answer they want. They want to go deeper, to learn something they don't know, to explore life's core.

"Why?" is a very human question. Beyond being a learning tool and a means to deeper understanding of ourselves, it can also be an existential call for help.

"Why me?" "Why them?" "Why not?" "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Very simply, to ask why is to be aware of our desire not just for learning, but for difference or change, to ask for help, to be aware of both opportunity and tragedy. It is to be aware of the divine. In our ability to ask "Why?" we are the universe becoming aware of itself.

Sometimes, the answer to "Why?" is neither "Because" nor some deeper insight. Sometimes, the answer is simply, "I don't know," or as Jesus was know for doing, asking a question in return instead of providing an answer.

"Why" lives In the realm of uncertainty and discernment. To provide an answer too quickly (despite the child's natural inclination for concreteness) risks disturbing the creative process. Unquestioned answers are far more dangerous than unanswered questions. Investigation, discernment, and creativity take time.

Perhaps the best response to the "Whys?" that come our way is, "Why, indeed?"