cairns

I decided to develop this further than just the comment added to the last post.  I really think our society, or at least this member of it, is ready for a new category of identity.  Here are the definitions I was recently asked to choose from for our federal government.

• Hispanic or Latino: A person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race.
• American Indian or Alaska Native: A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community attachment.
• Asian: A person having origins in any of original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian Subcontinent, including for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam.
• Black or African American: A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.
• Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander: A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands.
• White: A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.

For starters what are origins?  Does it require more than one family member?  How long in the past are they allowed to be?  And what do “maintains cultural identification,” and “community attachment” mean?  I think these definitions leave the meaning and the choice up to the person who fills out the form and give no verifiable information about our make up.

I want to propose a mindful experiment.  Let’s explore our origins.  Scientists now tell us that humans emerged from the rift valley of Africa, that could qualify us all as black.  So could the Biblical narrative which is generally understood to include Ethiopia within the boundaries of Eden.  More likely the Bible would be used by most to claim we all emerged from the Middle East.  By these definitions, that would make us all qualify as white.  But, then anthropologists tell us that the tribes of Europe and the Americas traveled from Asia, so all of us with European or Native American ancestry could identify ourselves as Asian.  And finally authors like Michener have eloquently described, and the genome project has scientifically recorded how most of us are of very mixed origins.

Which brings me to our time using myself as an example.  I know that I have Scot-Irish and German ancestors, but have no idea how many generations ago they lived or who they were.  One grandfather always claimed that we were American Indians, but nobody in the family has been able to find evidence to back up the claim.

I also know that the Native Nations had stories of emerging from the ground of this continent.  And, I know scientifically that nearly every molecule of every member of my family for generations has been composed of the soil of North America.  How many generations does that have to be true before a human can claim to be a native of this land?

(If community attachment means living on the Rez and participating in the rituals, I do not have it.  If having my heart permanently stolen by the Lakota Nation and having a deep appreciation for the respect for Earth found among many Native Nations is community attachment then I do have it.  But, I am also very sensitive to the rip off of everything but identity from the Native Nations and I make no claim to their identity.  What I am saying here is leading to a claim of belonging to a new tribe.)

I believe that I am a wonderful combination of people groups by both genetics and culture and that my material body and my worldview are profoundly from this place.  I am an American.  If the government would give me that choice for my race and ethnicity, I would mark “American.”

For some I suppose that term would imply some sort of mythical racial and historical purity with some nativist and anti-immigrant or anti-multicultural perspective.  I do not agree with their views, but I think it is clear that they strongly identify themselves as Americans.

For me it would be a term celebrating my origins in a tribe that comes from every corner of the Earth bringing language, heritage, culture, story, music, and dance combining into persons with bodies composed of the stuff of this soil to make the complexity that is an American.

I contemplated whether there should be a box that just said human or global citizen.  I might be tempted to choose such a box having developed deep affection for Haiti, Africa and China after visiting and sharing small samples of their cultures.  But, I know my worldview, culture, and ethnicity are permanently marked by growing up in and of this place.  So, I believe the term American defines people like me.

I wonder if others would prefer to identify themselves simply as American rather than the old categories we use now?  Today, I asked a member of Congress to consider exploring whether our government would support giving us the option.  Would you take it?

peace

Comments Off

I read a liberal article today focused on how conservatives name things (effective) and liberals mock (ineffective).  For good measure they included Progressives who at times can be found in either camp.

I do not believe the problem in American government is diversity of opinion.  I do not believe the problem is people who have opposite views to mine.  Our experiment with democracy has always included views and opinions that were in direct opposition to one another.  It should!  The diversity of honestly held beliefs about both aims and means helps us to avoid extremism from either side.  Getting the people’s work done only requires a few skilled persons who understand compromise as a means to achieve what is positive in both views.

But, now we have a party system where both sides seem to focus the vast majority of our elected officials time and effort on two nonproductive activities.  One is “getting yours.”  This does not have to be personal greed, but may be expressed in honest efforts to get governmental dollars spent in meaningful ways back in the home district.  This gets votes because people at home expect it as part of the job.  But, it has become the means of compromise.  Instead of working for action or inaction that is truly believed to be for the good of the country, we have a system of you vote for this and we will include these dollars for your district.  Conservatives love to point out how frivolous and wasteful too many of those projects are.  But, the truth is both sides of the aisle play the game for their voters and for their contributors.  It is wasteful beyond the dollars involved (and that is an unimaginable cost if it was the only problem!).  But, it does something worse.  It robs of us of honest debate and struggle to find real solutions to national problems.

The second method of working in government seems to be putting more emphasis on avoiding blame and manipulating situations to cast a negative light on the opposition than on identifying and solving real problems.  Politicians and campaign managers on both sides of the aisle have studied and practiced it to an art form.  They believe it works because you can win votes by placing the right spin on any incumbent’s record to cause people at home to choose change. It works because the national news media loves controversy that increases viewership and increases advertising dollars.

What it does not do is encourage working for common ground.  It does not encourage honest debate, even if heated.  It does not bring about solutions.  It does not encourage new government action where help is needed — nor does it help to reach new answers which include stopping government from doing things it should not be involved in while we all pay for it.  So it achieves no purposes of conservatives, liberals, progressives, or any other ideology.  It celebrates gridlock as long as the gridlock is blamed on somebody else.

Most dangerous of all these tactics have caused government to become more and more distant from the governed.  Conservatives may be pleased that huge new spending plans are hard to pass, but any amount spent on a huge governmental system which does not serve the people is too much.  Liberals may be pleased when they get spending on pet projects included as financial compromise, but spending this way does not accomplish their long term goals either.

What this system does is make some people quit caring at all.  Voting percentages have shown this for decades.  It is making others angrier everyday.  And the angriest, the ones already buying arms, have very radical agendas.  Our lawmakers and enforcers need to listen to what vocal people like the  Tea Party rank and file are saying while they are still using media and votes to communicate their message.  And they should listen to the underlying message, “We no longer believe ANY of you are building a better America with our tax dollars.”

As long as the response to that anger is positioning the other side to look the worst — with appeasement money for projects thrown in to buy votes and campaign dollars, our government is participating in bringing a storm I fear none of us will want to weather.

Here is to the Bayhs and Grahams of the world willing to try and bring back a government where very different views are strongly presented, both sides listened to, and meaningful compromise sought where ethically possible in order to build a stronger country.

Jesus never said the Way in life was to make sure everybody else looks worse than you.  While church and state are separated further and further each year, the vast majority of elected officials claim to be people of faith.  What would it look like if they practiced faith in action rather than party games?

peace

1 Comment »

Today a group of citizens sent notice to the occupying empire. ‘Protecting us from local tribes and foreign instigators does not give you the right to maintain a military presence among us forever.  You must leave.  We claim the rights of self-governance and sovereignty.’  And the US was born.  Am I the only one who sees some irony here?

Then they declared that we have freedom of speech.  But, I did not post this to FB in order to avoid the Southern Indiana furor which would result.  The government still will not come and arrest me for saying it.  But, we have given our freedom over to whatever version of thought is currently considered politically correct and a total lack of civility during disagreements in public discourse.  That is a painful irony!

peace

Comments Off

To be honest, in many ways I simply gave up on them.  But, most of this will be about where my hope rests.

Mathew 6:25-34 says I do not have to worry about man.  It is God who provides, and man cannot add anything by worrying about things he does not control.

Romans 8:37-39 says we are already the conquerors because nothing is capable of removing us from the love of  God.

The entire Bible confirms that God is profoundly interested in the widow, the orphan, the stranger, and the helpless — all those who know they have no other hope but God.

So, I am firmly convinced that the gifts God gives are secure; and no man, government, circumstance, or terrorist can remove them.  I am also firmly convinced that what God chooses to withhold cannot be given by man.

And yet, the Word clearly calls on us to care for the widow and orphan, to love justice, and to provide for those in need.  Because the mystery of our resurrection in Christ through baptism places us as the current body of Christ on Earth, we are called to do those things that God does.  And, this brings me up short of over concern with government on another front.

When the conservatives are in power and want government to serve the interests of war and industry, I am tempted to complain that they do not do what the Biblical texts call on governments to do.  Then, I am brought up short.  It says that I am animated by the very Spirit of God and called to do those things.  I find no mention of the government as an entity experiencing the same grace or call.

When the liberals are in power and want government to step up and do the work of caring for those in need, I am tempted as much as my most conservative friends to grouse about everything the government does costing me more money while providing little to those who work for a living like my family.  Then, I am brought up short.  If I, if the Christian community — (Both Jews and Muslims also claim to believe in the same Old Testament God who compels justice for the powerless.  Native American practiced it most of the original cultures of this continent with no claim to the Gospel mandate. The list goes on.  But, my faith and hope are within the context of Christianity.) — again, if we who claim to know, love, and serve the God of mercy had taken care of the infirm and the destitute [to the measure of their need rather than the salving of our consciences] there would be no issue for the government to try to solve.  I have worked with families in these situations for most of my career, and I know they are real.  I have tried to give their children hope through education and exposure to Truth.  But, I know the issue is real.  I know my God calls us to minister to the need.  So, when my government tries its feeble best to do human engineered solutions the limit to my anger is conviction.  We were supposed to care for our neighbors and enemies as children of the same God.

I am a political cynic.  Whatever the government does will most likely cost me money and solve very few problems.  But, I am an optimist in faith that life does not come from governments.  It is by the ongoing gifts of God that we have our being, our meaning, our sustenance, and our hope.

The king is dead, long live the King.

peace

Comments Off

I am sure there are good honestly motivated Republican folks who sincerely disagree with President Obama — just like there are Democrats who honestly disagree with policies of Republican administrations.

But the degree of venom in what I have been listening to lately causes me a darker (I almost edited this adjective out, but it speaks to how language of color still remains a very common part of our vocabulary for the negative) suspicion. I wonder if I am the only person who thinks some of the people screaming Radical, Socialist, Dangerous, un-American, etc. in tones and volume bordering on actual violence actually mean but will not say N****R.

Maybe its just me. Maybe our partisanship has truly become this deep and this angry.  Maybe the American public is now this easily manipulated to real fear and anger by the string pullers who manipulate the internet and media. Any one of those would be sad and a warning of dangerous possible futures in its own right. But, I think I smell hatred of another color.

If you think I am crazy,I am open to reasonable other explanations.  I would be happy to hear some in fact.  Any responses resorting to only (or too much) name calling, obscenity, or venom, will simply be deleted.

peace

1 Comment »

you already know, to those who don’t my words will not suffice.

But, I have waited for this day my entire life,

Since I saw JFK dare to call us to greatness and then die,

Since I saw MLK dare to call us to our true selves and then die,

So many miles marched,

So many nameless dead,

So many promises waiting to be fulfilled,

Thousands of years of European power and power in the hands of Euro descendants,

So much accomplished and so much damage done through hubris,

So many mistakes and lasting mistrust,

So hard for others to believe it is possible for all to matter,

Finally a son of another continent,

European descent as well its true,

But, a son of hope and promise,

An identification point for the disenfranchised around the world,

A day of vindication,

A day of prayers answered,

A day of possible new beginnings and ending excuses,

A day to dream again of what we can be and do,

If we care about greatness,

It we care about righteousness,

If we care about living out the Gospel,

If we care about our global family and our immediate neighbors,

I have lived and worked among those outside of power most of my life,

Today, we are looking up not down,

Today, a man of intelligence, literacy, and faith is a hero,

Today, I love my country.

[I do not care if you agree with his politics or mine, or secretly resent his color or background, or trust his words to be true.  Our actual way forward will be worked out in compromise within a system of government like no one else on earth has known, resilient and sometimes cumbersome, but carefully designed to allay your fears.  If you think today is a dark day, my words will seem like raving to you (but examine the content of the very phrase.)  Today is about something so much bigger, an affirmation of all people, a celebration of nonviolent transfer of power, of hope in the face of crisis, of celebrating the victory of both ourselves and the other!]

Today, I am weeping, laughing, singing, dancing, praying, praising, hoping, and loving.

I have waited long for this day.

Thank you, Jesus!

peace

2 Comments »

Just watched a supposedly “non-partisan” video on my church’s web page about voting the issues tomorrow. OK, that was a dumb move to start with because I knew what it would be and knew I would be offended.  I did write a note about it directly to the church leadership before doing this rant which will be read by folks who have no control, or will never even darken the door of the place.

It implied that the the rights of the unborn and the definition of marriage for us and our children hinges on Christians choosing the right person tomorrow.  It was pure Republican in every way but having an RNC endorsement attached.

And yet the President of the United States decides neither of these.  After decades of pro-life and pro-family Bushes and a Reagan, we still have abortion rights and my daughter lost all government assistance for either her or her daughter the second she got married.  Supposedly, I can control the court to do the “right” thing by always voting for Republicans for President.  So, I looked up the Supreme Court record.

Reagan and the two Bushes have successfully placed eight justices on the Supreme Court and the situation remains unchanged.

How long can this party keep claiming people’s votes on this single issue when they have not and cannot change it when they are in power?

As long as we let them would be my answer to my own question.

As for me, don’t tell me you are pro-family and remove all government help the second a single mother chooses to marry the baby’s father.  Do not tell me you are pro-life when you are also pro-war, anti health care for the poor, anti-education which would help to prevent unwanted pregnancies, indifferent to the plight of all people and life that is not “us,” and anti-policies that would provide a living wage to workers. Don’t even imply that there is a holy choice when the nominee of the party which claims to support your issues is a man who first cheated on and then divorced his wife after she was injured and had become less attractive to him.  Please don’t tell me Jesus wants me to vote for the party that openly states their preference for improving the future by favoring the rich.  I do not believe He ever said anything of the sort.

I do not believe that the Democrats have any magic answers either.  I do not begrudge you your preference if you vote Republican.  I just wish church people would quit using the Bible to beat up anyone who disagrees with their choice!

Jesus did not tell his followers to form or support political parties, in fact he rejected all offers to make his mission a political one in any traditional sense.  He told us to love God and our neighbor as our self.  He told us to forgive as He forgives, and to love as He loves.  He told us to carry the message of His saving work to all people.  Those are what the church is supposed to be about.  Meanwhile the western church spends its resources on itself and brags if we send more than 5% of our money to the 90% of the world which is unchurched.  We have too much wrong inside our own house to be throwing stones at anybody.

OK, I feel a little better now.

peace

Comments Off

Still thinking about all these issues of leadership, another thought from the Old Testament narrative strikes me.  Very rarely did the people hear the words of God from the king in the palace.  Far more often the voice of God came from those strange prophetic voices arriving from the wilderness.  Maybe God does more direct talking to people from the fringe than from power no matter who wins?

By the time of the New Testament, Jesus seems to have little interest in the political leaders of the day.  Preceded by the last of the wilderness wild-men prophets, He calls us directly to the Kingdom of God rather than men.  Looks to me like he is far more interested in the fishermen, mothers, lepers, widows, possessed, adulterers, and children than any of those who sat in positions of power.  Theirs is the Kingdom.  Our task  is to reach upward to God and outward to His people.  Perhaps that is how we render unto God what is God’s while we do our duty and vote as best we can, then pray for whoever wins in order to render unto Caesar?

peace

Comments Off

“until he acknowledged that the Most High God is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and sets over them anyone he wishes.”

I am still in the process of escaping my supposed literalist (literalistic on anything that favored us and damned others) past.  So, my musings on today’s brief political statement also set me to wondering about the nature of our treasured system of democracy in the light of passages like this one that say the establishment of rulers is God’s business.

Does our cherished democracy set up a false belief that we humans decide who will be in power?

Is our supposedly empowering democracy a more recent version of the casting of lots to see who has already been chosen?

Or most heretical of all, does our democracy give God a less bloody method for conducting His business?

peace

1 Comment »

Donkey or Elephant?

The neighbors probably think we have lost our minds or are in some family feud over politics!  The truth is we will vote for the Republican Governor, Mitch Daniels with the same respect we will vote for Obama.  I do not agree with many of Mitch’s conservative actions.  But, I respect him for saying what he is going to do and then doing his best to do just what he says.  I respect him for running a campaign that proclaims his record and his plan for the future, not character assassination of the other candidate.

So the signs in the yard are us, voting for national change and a conservative governor doing a good job of running a conservative state.  I wish the national parties would notice that more and more of us out here will NOT vote based on who can out-slime the other candidate.

Let me back up and say that another way.  I believe in decency.  I am a pacifist.  I believe in grace lived out man to man, not just counted on from God to man.  For me it has reached a level where I will vote for those who hold out a vision of decency and hope in public life — even when I disagree on specific political issues.

peace

Comments Off