In my reflections, if a bona fide member of the academy comments that my reflection contains either an original thought or argument, I will note it in that reflection. Also, if it is brought to my attention that what I have said is also mentioned in another source, I will also note it. My intention in these reflections is to stimulate inquiry, imagination, and broadening of horizons.- JP
Note: The most recent reflection is at the top and my first is at the bottom. You can either start at the bottom of the well and swim up or start at the top and dive in, your choice. – JP
13 Hours
The Inevitable Christmas Reflection 12/22/2010
I have been asked more than once since my last reflection; What are you going to say for say Christmas? Well I actually have been composing this reflection over several weeks with one overriding issue, APPREHENSION! I have written a Christmas piece for every newsletter for the past fifteen years and, after rereading them, they seem worthy of being left on the snowbank of history. I mean, not only after fifteen years, but after two thousand, what can you say about Christmas that has not already been said? It is a task akin to kicking a football being held by Lucy. Then it hit me: there is something different about the way I see Christmas this year.
Being able to stand back and not be responsible for orchestrating the activities of Advent and Christmas allow for time to hear how others from many different perspectives experience this Season of Joy What leapt out at me after many conversations and several books, was what I see as the common factor in all the celebrations: FEAR.
Fear? That’s a real downer, you can’t really mean that. Look at all the joy in the celebrations, the happy people around the tree, the presents, the egg nog, the parties. Christmas is fun, right?
Yes it is, but what I see underlying all of it is fear of not getting what you want, not having the party work out exactly as you planned it, fear of not having your loved one love the present you gave them because they should because you love it, right? And here is the irony, we have Christmas because of the fear.
I believe God became incarnate to show us we do not have to fear. I believe God, incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth, reconciled creation and calls us all to be in balance with it and not fear anything. Now that may sound Pollyannish but ask yourself this. Why, at this time of year, do people, even non Christians and some dedicated atheists, participate in putting up a tree, buying presents, dressing up as Santa for their kids and wearing costumes to parties that were never meant to be worn in climates of less than 75ºF? We do all these things because at the heart of it all is the reason for the season.
The reason is simple. Light dispels darkness, joy replaces sadness, faith replaces fear. Consider that despite all the distasteful, i.e., crap, stuff we have to deal with, even between the trenches of WWI, the light shines. We will go to extremes to replace sadness and disappointment with joy even in the face of the fear that we may not be able to, with only the faith that we can.
I believe this happens because God showed us in human form and taught us that we are more than we give ourselves credit for. We have the ability to do things more than these and do not have to be bound by fear. We can care for the least of these, the widows, the orphans (which includes all of us whose parents have died) and those who deserve justice. The Joy of Christmas is meant for the whole year.
So cook the Christmas goose, raise a glass of wassail, and repeat after me: “God bless us everyone.”
I Would or Wood Eye 8/11/10
So for those of you who know the joke the title refers to, yes, it is most likely inappropriate if not merely in bad taste but it does get in a round about way to a reflection on a spoken phrase which drives this English Language and Literature major nuts. “I would like to …” And I am glad that you “would like to …” so are you going to?
I would like to introduce … That’s nice, are you going to? I want to have X come forward. What if X doesn’t want to come forward? “I would” or “I want” are appropriate when we are expressing a desire. They are not appropriate as requests for permission. So why does this seemingly innocuous phrase attract my ire? Everybody does it, right? I hear it all the time from local to national newscasters, so what’s the big deal? The big deal is, at least for me, that use of this phrase belies a condition which is eating away at our ability to function as a community.
I don’t like conflict any more than the next person and I enjoy it when people agree with me. I am sure I am not alone in these perspectives. However, not everyone is going to like me and conflict is always present. “I would like to …” and “I want to …” have crept into our syntax over centuries in an effort to ameliorate our confronting conflict and dislike. The problem is, they only exacerbate the situation rather than tone it down or eliminate it. So what is a person to do? How about this, “Let your yes be yes and your no be no”. When you have a desire, express it. When you need permission, ask for it. When you need to state an imperative, do it!
Try this exercise for a week. Whether you are giving a presentation at work or praying, do not use either “I would like to” or “I want to”, e.g., “my next slide shows…”; “please direct your attention to…”; “join me in welcoming our next speaker to the podium”. I am sure you will experience at least two things.
One, people will pay attention and take notice of what you are saying because you won’t sound like everyone else. Two, you will become more certain in not only your communicating, you will also become more aware of your authentic desires and feelings.
I believe the long term effect, when more and more people take this approach, will be community in balance. Conflict will still exist, and not everyone will like you, but there will be less angst. “I’d like to get the world to sing, in perfect harmony”. It is the real thing.
Next reflection, do not use the word “just” when you pray.
Just Do It, Just Say No
(With apologies to Nancy and Nike)
I always have to ask myself why some words and phrases set me on edge, viscerally affect me, or simply make me sigh. Is it simply my seeing things differently from the speaker or is it a feeling that what I am hearing is actually affecting my being?
There could be a LONG list of phrases for this reflection, I shall, however, deal with only one word. Just.
When the Hebrews put their revelation of God into words, the one aspect they were pointed in defining was God as personal, immanent and intimate. In the King James translation, this close relationship was kept because the words “thee” and “thou” were the same as “you” and “your” are today. Through the years we have elevated thee and thou to royal status and created a gulf between us and God. AND, we have exacerbated that gulf with the use of a four letter word when we pray, JUST.
When we use “just” we reinforce our concept of a gulf between us and God despite, even for the literalists, the many times God has been quoted in scripture saying that I am with you always and will never leave your side. We then can use that gulf as an excuse or justification for why God does not answer our prayers the way we want them answered.
So what’s a person to do? Do not use the word JUST when you pray.
Think I’m way off? Try it for a week and just see how different your relationship to God becomes.
Where in the M are we? 7/25/10
I have been watching Through The Worm Hole with Morgan Freeman on The Science Channel, but this is not a critique of the series. This is a reflection on eternity and how the series has filled in some critical pieces in my personal quest to articulate how I can continue to exist after the Universe does not. But first, let me go back in my life to ground why this question is important for me.
My first recollection of any kind of spirituality was my baptism. I was four months old and I remember the white lacy whaterveritwas I wore, the green and white tile floor and the water on my head. Can’t remember any of the words, just that I had to pee after the water. Then there was the first story about Jesus when I started Sunday School at age four. Easter was a mystery until I had it all figured out by second grade. I did not know my mother’s parents even though there is a picture of her mother holding me before I was one year old. I got to know my father’s parents very well and then in the fourth grade, Grandpa died. It hit me like a ton of bricks. Jesus loves us and this isn’t supposed to happen. I was not mad at God, I just knew I did not like this dying thing. One night I woke up and yelled to my mother that I did not want to die. She told me I wouldn’t. Confusion reigns and the easiest way to deal with it is to not dwell on dying, just move on. When two friends my age died, it was, “Oh crap, pause, OK, let’s move on.”
In high school I began to engage what Easter meant to me and what happened after physical death. I was able to do this because a good friend said, “I can’t tell you for a fact what happens when we die, but I can tell you what I believe if you want to hear it.” Honesty and Mark Twain’s, Captain Stormfield’s Trip to Heaven were watershed moments in my spiritual evolution. Then in college some geek TA in an introductory astronomy class talked about entropy and the collapse of the Universe. “Wait just a freekin’ minute here, if the universe collapses, what happens to my eternal ass” (I was in college, we talked like that)? Graduation and twenty years in the Air Force flying at 600 miles an hour a hundred feet off the ground takes your mind off the question.
After the Air Force I found myself going to Seabury-Western Episcopal Seminary. I graduated and was ordained to the Priesthood in July 1994 on Bastille Day (still have not found an organist who will play the Marseillaise for the procession). Now I can not dodge the “what happens when” question. As it turns out, St. Anselm, many conversations with my classmates, teachers and colleagues and a healthy dose of process theology have been instrumental in the development of how I answer the question.
No matter what position you take, whether we are the products of the conscious thought of God, or that we are the result of a beautiful accident, what existed before the thought or the accident? Enter the Science Channel, Through the Worm Hole and the miracle of CGI (computer graphic images). Some of us have evolved in our spirituality where journeys in astral planes allow for a really big picture observation, e.g., Paul in the third heaven, the Buddha, and the disciple beaming from a conversation with a Nubian in Egypt to Lebanon between sentences. Most of us haven’t evolved that much however, and the graphics in Through the Worm Hole were my AHA! moment. Specifically the episode on M theory. What caught me was not the mechanics of membranes touching thereby causing many big bangs, or the possibility of this universe not being the first or last iteration of what we label as our existence. What caught me was being in the position of an observer and not ceasing to exist when the ‘branes touched. I truly felt at that moment, and do now, that we are the products of the conscious thought of a creator, inextricably a part of that creator as that creator is part of us and that the mechanics of how it all works are part of the marvelous quest of discovery in which we get to participate. I can’t tell you for a fact what happens when we die physically, but I will tell you what I believe if you want to hear it.
Mechanics Theology 7/5/10
The hardest part of this reflection was coming up with a title. This is not a reflection about people who are mechanics or a theology they might profess. It is a reflection of what people seem to be really worried about. I am sure that some of you will wonder why I came to this thought late in life when it might seem so obvious. Well, some are slower than others.
In my latest spate of reading, I was able to express that what sets people apart in their spiritual quest is not their beliefs as much as it is how their beliefs are implemented or the explanation of how those beliefs work. For this discussion, I am going to limit myself to that with which I am most familiar, Christianity.
I was engaged in a conversation with two other clergy, each from a different denomination. The specific point was Baptism and what constituted an “appropriate” and “authentic” baptism. We all agreed to the premise that the Holy Spirit is involved. We all agreed that there is a change in our spiritual approach when baptized and then the conversation proceeded to move into the “appropriate and authentic” discussion.
What I found amazing was one clergy saying to another that although he believed they were both good Christians, one was not correct. OK, I should not have been amazed, but like I said, some of us are slow to see the intellectual become tangible. It did not hit so much as a brick but like a pie thrown in slow motion. You both believe in God. You both believe in Jesus. You both believe in heaven. But you both believe the other is incorrect. You can’t have it both ways, or can you?
What my two colleagues are worried about, deep down, is not God, but how God is interpreted. Yes, my literalist friends, literalism is an interpretation. The way out, the way to have it both ways, however, comes at a price. That price is giving up your ego interpretation and living the position that I don’t agree with you, but that doesn’t mean you should change. It does mean that we need to consider how it would benefit us both to allow each other to live our belief and not force our interpretation on the other.
I worship in a way that makes sense to me and I realize it may not make sense to others, and that’s OK. I am not troubled about the mechanics of how, in fact I find the many “how” possibilities exciting. I do wonder though, if my two colleagues will still be arguing about Baptism when they both arrive in heaven.
Keynote Address to Sandpoint Memorial for Idaho Peace Officers May 14, 2010
We are gathered today to honor those who died in the line of duty and those who have died after completing their careers. In the reading of their names and remembrance of their accomplishments, we are also keenly aware of those who are serving beside us and for us.
There are no words that can remove the pain and heart felt disappointment which accompany any death. In the time of our grieving, we may hear someone tell us, it’s OK, you’ll get over it. My admonishment to you is to not “get over it”. Those we honor today are threads in the fabric of our lives. To “get over it” means we are willing to remove that thread which will diminish both the person who served and ourselves. Rather, we should always remember and be glad that thread is part of the ever increasing fabric of our lives. What makes a thread worth remembering?
I do not have a definitive answer, rather, two observations. My first observation is there is an added dimension to those who willingly serve in positions of known higher risk. We see it most clearly in law enforcement and fire protection. This is not to say that other professions do not share the same characteristics, but I have yet to have an F-16 land on the road in front of me and issue someone a ticket for speeding or a naval fire boat sail up Lincoln to put out the fireworks sparks on the roof of my house which were so graciously donated by my neighbors on the 4th. What we do see in our everyday lives are the police cruiser and the fire truck. What we also need to see are the people inside those vehicles. What are the characteristics of a person who is willing to meet a situation that can be benign or a mortal confrontation? Acknowledging those characteristics leads me to my second observation.
I believe there are at least six characteristics. Acceptance, compassion, forgiveness, humility, understanding and valor. Acceptance of the complete situation in which you find yourself. This does not mean agreeing with everything you see, but seeing everything which allows for the best decision. Compassion for the people you encounter. Compassion in the truest sense leads to authentic, ethical action which best serves all involved. Forgiveness does not equal doormat. Forgiveness means not attempting to control another’s destiny, but rather to be part of allowing a situation to find its conclusion. Humility means completeness. To be truly humble means you know yourself and are able to act rather than simply react. Understanding is more than knowledge. Understanding leads to integration of the characteristics I have mentioned so far and brings a person to be able to “do” valor. Valor is not a thing you can posses and it is not an act you can script. Valor can be demonstrated by an act as simple as putting on your socks when you would rather stay in bed or placing yourself in harm’s way to serve and protect.
So for those of us who serve those who serve, let us be ever mindful of the threads in our lives that have reached their length and those which continue to increase in length. Let us treat this memorial as a time of celebration of life and commitment. God bless this assembly and those we honor and may God keep us from speeding and playing with matches.
Easter (4/4/10)
The First word is the hardest
It Comes
Found on the precipice
Of an abyss that begs entrance
To trap that is freedom
– JP Carver, Seabury-Western, 1993
I waited for Easter to write my next reflection, not by design, but through divine procrastination. Come on, you know procrastination is divine, because if it wasn’t, then we would have to own the responsibility for it and who among us wants to do that? As it has worked out however, I was asked to give the Easter address, not at an Episcopal parish, but at a local, non denominational, spiritual center and my reflection is the talk I gave.
First let me say I felt honored and humbled to be asked to talk on Easter to a group which is varied in spiritual paths and holds as its guiding principle, respect for each person’s spiritual expression.
My remarks are based on The Last Week by Marcus Borg and John Crossan, Alan Jones’ February 27 reflection in Praying Day by Day from Forward Movement Publications, Sr. Joan Chittister’s 4 April 2010 interview on NPR, and Destiny of Souls by Michael Newton and my continuing encounter with the Divine.
Easter is about Resurrection and salvation. We have to ask ourselves what we mean by resurrection and salvation because, as unique individuals, none of us can see them exactly the same as another person will. In 1998 when I was traveling home to move my mother into an assisted living facility, I wore my clerics on the plane. The young man who sat next to me in the center seat (the one that we all hope will be left empty when we travel) turned to me and said,”I see you are a minister, when were you saved”? I responded, “On a Sunday morning at sunrise about two thousand years ago”. The rest of the flight was very quiet. I tell this, not to make fun of the difference in our view of salvation, but to point out the most difficult facet of any encounter with another when the discussion is about faith. The young man mentioned and I see salvation differently and the hard part is to be OK with the difference. I am sure he holds his belief as passionately as I do mine. The question is, are we willing to live with the difference and still treat each other as a child of Creation? How we approach each other on the subject of resurrection also brings to the forefront our passionate beliefs.
There is one thread about the Resurrection story which, I believe, makes it extremely difficult. The majority of people who you may ask, conflate the stories from Matthew, Mark, Luke and John into one tableau which tends to softball the message. Combine that with the non questioning approach to anything theological, and I feel you have a recipe for a large glob of pizza dough which, if you tried to spin it into a pie, would end up covering you from head to toe. In Mark, the women went to the tomb, found it empty, and ran away scarred and did not tell anyone, OOPS! Of course the question has to be asked, if they did not tell anyone, how do we know? In the other three Gospels, the story is fleshed out and we are able to engage looking for an expression of truth in the story. Joan Chittister said in her interview that doubt is the beginning of faith. I agree. I find it impossible to tell the Resurrection story and not have at least one person ask, “but what about…?”, which leads me to Alan Jones’ reflection on Orthodoxy.
To paraphrase his reflection, Orthodoxy, right thinking, is actually the approach which acknowledges the ambiguity of belief and the differences which exist because we are unique persons and that heresy is actually the position that the Divine can be defined in concrete, one for all, absolute terms which everyone can accept. Orthodoxy, according to Jones, actually allows for engagement with the complex, infinite character of the Creator. This brings me to the questions of what is resurrection and when does it occur?
There are those who believe that our life, even though it be eternal from birth, is a one time physical shot and that after death we are with God forever, as spirit and that resurrection occurs for all at that moment of transition. There are those who believe that we are eternal and incarnate multiple times into physical bodies on this earth to learn lessons which bring us closer to the nature God intends for us. Personally, I don’t believe in re-incarnation, because that means I will have to live life again in the same body. If I do incarnate again, I don’t mind being bald, but I’m going to be in a skinny body with a high metabolism. That being said, resurrection for me is not about time, but is that moment when, no matter what our path, we move into that “new creation” which was made possible through God’s incarnating as Jesus of Nazareth and effecting our reconciliation.
Barb and I heard a plea on TV last week from an organization which was sponsoring an Easter egg hunt. They did not have enough Easter baskets which they wanted filled with chocolate bunnies and chocolate eggs. My acculturated reaction was, “Tough, Easter is not about chocolate!”, but wait, if that is a person’s path for entry into the dialogue about what Easter is, I should sponsor a basket. As good as dark chocolate is for you (OK that’s why I’m healthy but not skinny), it only provides a small part of what I really need at Easter, a HUG! Hugging a bunny, my dog or my cat is great, but the hug of a loved one, a friend, or even a person you are meeting for the first time, is hugging God. Resurrection is the hug God gives us. Resurrection brings us into the balance God intends for Creation. That balance which allows us to move through time, dimensions, into locked rooms and eat with friends; to be one with Unconditional Love (which by the way is also embodied in a bunny, my dog and my cat).
I end this reflection with the position I hold for all I have said. I believe it to be true, I do not intend or have to prove it to be true, because, I can’t prove it, I can only believe it. And I do not ask any one else to prove what they believe to be true, I only ask them to tell me what they believe.
May this Easter be the continuation of your eternal dialogue and a hug with God.
Deflecting Attack (2/27/2010)
I have been reading a lot since the last reflection (check the latest entries to the Readings). The amount of material and the concepts I am engaging for the first time seem overwhelming. As I stepped back and looked for a theme which might pervade all that I was reading, two concepts settled out, balance and deflecting attack.
The visual I got for deflecting attack came from The Karate Kid. Alan Rickman even used it as the Metatron in the movie Dogma. Wax on, wax off. If you have not seen either of these movies, please do. Wax on; move your left hand in a counter clockwise motion as you apply wax to your car. Wax off; move your right hand in a clockwise motion as you remove the wax. Use both motions to polish the car. Why is this important? One of the first principals in martial arts is to deflect a blow rather than meet it head on with equal force. Visualize a hand coming directly towards you. Move either your left or right hand in the appropriate motion and deflect the blow away from you. When done correctly, the attack won’t hit you and you will even use the force of the attacker to move them farther away from you. This works best when you are balanced in your movement, which gets me to the second theme that is consistent in everything I have been reading.
I believe there is an ultimate goal, an ultimate truth of creation. For me, that ultimate is balance. When all is in balance, any force will be used to create rather than remove. One of my seminary professors said it best, “My up can not result in any body else’s down”. Every action has a consequence. A balanced action results in a balanced consequence.
I had a driver cut me off at the gas station yesterday. Rather than waiting for 30 more seconds for me to move through the pumps after the person in front of me left, this person pulled around to the pump in front at an angle that kept me from moving forward. The look they gave me was also one of anger. My first reaction was consideration of displaying an undiplomatic gesture, rolling down the window and telling them that although I knew they were trying their best, their best sucked. A milii second later, I realized that to regain balance, the best I could do was to back out of my spot and exit the station through an open isle. Wax on, wax off.
This incident is obviously not the most serious in degree compared to the many others that come into our lives, but they can all be approached in like manner. Jesus’ second commandment is so simply stated we can easily miss its complexity, dismiss it as a cliché or justify it can’t be real because nothing so profound can be said in seven words. However, when I learn to love my self and show that same love to my neighbors, I will be balanced and not have to use more force than necessary to deflect an attack of any size.