A More Perfect Union?

9 02 2010

The founders of America spoke of striving to form a more perfect union. It is right to ask, from time to time, whether we have reached the peak or whether there is yet work to be done. The current state of politics in our country leads me to believe that there is a “more perfect union” on the horizon. How far out on the horizon is yet to be seen. The conclusion of Thoreau’s On the Duty of Civil Disobedience resonates with me.

The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual. Even the Chinese philosopher was wise enough to regard the individual as the basis of the empire. Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly. I please myself with imagining a State at least which can afford to be just to all men, and to treat the individual with respect as a neighbor; which even would not think it inconsistent with its own repose if a few were to live aloof from it, not meddling with it, nor embraced by it, who fulfilled all the duties of neighbors and fellow-men. A State which bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it to drop off as fast as it ripened, would prepare the way for a still more perfect and glorious State, which also I have imagined, but not yet anywhere seen.

Writing over 160 years ago, Thoreau had his hand on the pulse of the people then and, it appears, on people now. With growing discontentment in the two-party system in our country, I wonder if “we the people” could move forward in a way that values the individual, not necessarily the most powerful or the majority.





Majority Rules

7 02 2010

I am often the first one to speak up when something is being applied anachronistically. Thus, I proceed with care. Even carefully going forward, though, will not allow me to unsee what I have already seen. In reading Thoreau’s On the Duty of Civil Disobedience I came across his section on slavery that had not previously caught my attention. It stopped me dead in my tracks last night though, as I was reading through it again.

When the majority shall at length vote for the abolition of slavery, it will be because they are indifferent to slavery, or because there is but little slavery left to be abolished by their vote.

Thoreau was quite underwhelmed with allowing the masses to determine what is “right.” My experience as a student of history has caused me to come to the firm conviction that it is never right to allow a majority to determine the rights, or lack thereof, of a minority. The most obvious contemporary parallel is same-sex marriages. A few states have put this to vote (the most notable being Prop 8 in California) and allowed the majority to determine what rights a minority (homosexuals) were allowed to have. That is, the majority was allowed certain rights simply because there were more of them, but the minority were not allowed these rights due to the relative lack of them.

Try as I may, I continue to fail to be able to see how this system is “right” or “just.” The majority has almost never chosen to allow a minority to have rights equal to theirs. Think of blacks in America gaining their rights. Think of women gaining theirs. Both of these fights were long and hard and while they may have had some supporters who were part of the majority, the majority never supported their fight for equal rights.

What do you think? Should the majority be allowed to determine the rights of minorities?





This Is What You Shall Do

3 02 2010

This is what you shall do:
Love the earth and sun and the animals,
Despise riches, give alms to everyone that asks,
Stand up for the stupid and crazy,
Devote your income and labors to others,
Hate tyrants, argue not concerning God,
Have patience and indulgence toward the people,
Take off your hat to nothing known or unknown,
Or to any man or number of men,
Go freely with powerful uneducated persons,
And with the young and with the mothers of families,
Read these leaves in the open air,
Every season of every year of your life,
Reexamine all you have been told,
At school at church or in any book,
Dismiss whatever insults your own soul,
And your very flesh shall be a great poem,
And have the richest fluency not only in its words,
But in the silent lines of its lips and face,
And between the lashes of your eyes,
And in every motion and joint of your body.

- Walt Whitman





Chesterton on Bigotry

19 01 2010

G. K. Chesterton’s definition of bigotry is the best I’ve seen.

“It is not bigotry to be certain we are right; but it is bigotry to be unable to imagine how we might possibly have gone wrong.”

I believe this to be the single greatest disease in our churches today. Our inability to imagine that there is even the slightest chance that we may not be 100% right causes narrow-mindedness that results in broken relationships and countless lost opportunties to learn and grow.





A Year Ago Today

13 01 2010

Thee following is a letter that I wrote on January 15, 2009, two days after my friend and mentor, Daniel Goodman, died. Today I am remebering him, as I do regularly. I am a bit less selfish a year later, though, and realize how many people Dr. Goodman had touched. Each of you are in my thoughts and prayers today. I hope that somehow sharing my letter will somehow make this day a bit easier and meaningful for you.

—————–

Dr. Goodman,

This is not easy, you know? Going on without you. In the countless e-mail conversations between me, you and Sam you always complained about Sam and I being able to shoot back one-liners while you were writing novelettes. Today, I fear, I am the one who cannot be succinct. For, you have touched me in too many ways. It is tough, though, to remember. I think you knew that this was particularly difficult for me, but you taught me the importance of it. You taught me that memory is sacred; that remembering is a sacred act. For the past 48 hours now I have been actively engaged in remembering. Partly because I will always remember; mostly because I can never forget.

To be sure, I have memories of our time together. I have more of those than I can recall. I remember the time we spent together in October traveling from Boiling Springs to D.C. to Charleston and to Savannah, you and I trading time behind the wheel. I remember worshiping with you in the National Cathedral. I remember calling you at your home early on in our friendship about an issue that had arisen at school and how caring and supporting you were of whatever my decision would have been. I remember going to the Conor Oberst concert in Asheville, your bush league attempt to mosh with me and Sam and not getting back to Boiling Springs until 2am. The conversation we had on the way back is one I hope I never forget. I remember you telling a few of us that your middle name wasn’t really pronounced Eugene, but was actually pronounced Ew-jean.

Your readings before class were always thoughtful. One of my favorites was before a hermeneutics class one night when you quoted lyrics from The Shins:

“And if the old guard still offend,
They’ve got nothing left on which you depend.
So enlist every ounce of your bright blood, and off with their heads!
Jump from the hook! You’re not obliged to swallow anything you despise!”

Those lyrics are so you. You pushed me to think for myself more than ever.

So, to be sure, I have memories of our time together, but I also have more. I have your legacy that so many others around me recognize as well.

It is your legacy that I hope most to carry on. Your passion for Jewish-Christian dialogue was not lost on me. It has been my passion for some while now, but is even more so now. You told us one day that our theology has got to be in response to reality. Since that day I have taken my theology more seriously. I have looked, as you pushed me to, for places where God is working among groups that we typically see as “others,” such as Jews and homosexuals. Your legacy will not die with me, Dr. Goodman. I will teach and preach what you taught and preached: equality, love, healing and reconciliation. I will remember the Holocaust, especially the shoes. I will carry your banner high and I will sing Leonard Cohen, Led Zeppelin, Prince and Abba songs loud.

The heart of it really, though, Danny, is that you inspire me. I saw myself in you and I have never been as honored as when you said your saw similarities between us. It’s been a long time since I’ve had a hero, but that’s what you are. I am a better person for having known you. I am a better person because you are my friend.

Peace and Blessings,

Thomas





Superiority of Seeing

11 01 2010

Doing some light reading in Philo (Wikiedia link) for my thesis, I came across this passage:

And its name shows its power; for the nation is further called, in the language of the Hebrews, Israel, which name being interpreted means, “seeing God.” But of sight, that which is exercised by means of the eyes is the most excellent of all the outward senses, since by that alone all the most beautiful of existing things are comprehended, the sun and the moon, and the whole heaven, and the whole world; but the sight of the soul which is exercised, through the medium of its dominant part excels all the other powers of the soul, as much as the powers of the soul excel all other powers; and this is prudence, which is the sight of the mind. (De Abrahamo 56-57)

Sight is important, but is it really as superior as Philo believes? Keep in mind, he is also speaking of “seeing” in an abstract sense.





If You Can’t Say Anything Nice…

9 01 2010

Regular readers of this blog will know that I maintained a theology series for a while. You will also have noticed that the series stopped fairly abruptly with this post on 8 August. There are various reasons for stopping this series, but the main one goes back to a piece of advice that I heard often growing up:

If you can’t say anything nice, then don’t say anything at all.

I’m sure most of you are familiar with this piece of advice. Although, I heard it early and often, I am not the first to heed this advice. I have (very) strong opinions (some may say that this is an understatement) that I am rarely able to keep to myself. Thus, doing a theology series around my theology class was difficult because of the nature of the class and the vast disagreements that I have with my theology professor. After being in class, then, and trying to come to this space to write about theology, I was rarely in a good frame of mind to write objectively, so I chose to heed the old adage above. I make no promise that I will always heed the above advice (you know this to be true if you have read this space for some while), but I did think it was time to offer some “reason” as to why such a promising series (in my eyes) was discontinued.





Sin and Culture

13 11 2009

In a recent class discussion, the question came up of whether sin was culturally defined or not. I’ve created this poll to get your responses. Feel free to add your own answer in the poll and to comment on this post.

 

Is sin culturally defined?
(polls)





Sacred Memory

10 11 2009

The following are the remarks from my leadership in chapel at Gardner-Webb University on Monday, 9 November 2009. Our chapel was “Worship Through Psalms of Lament and Thanksgiving.

 

Remembering is tough for me; not remembering facts and history and theories, but remembering people and moments. Maybe I actually mean not that remembering is tough, but that memory is tough. It has been understood in my family for a long time that I don’t typically remember events and moments. I remember the stories that are told about them, but that is only because they are told often. I’m not sure why I have to be reminded of things like what Trinity and I did on our first date and it’s not just because I’m a guy. It may have something to do with memories that I’d rather not have, but can’t seem to get rid of or it may just be that I’m lazy. I’m not particularly proud of that fact that I don’t easily remember people’s names or what I got for my birthday last year, but I have been working on it because I learned one of the lessons that I think this psalm teaches.

Memory is sacred.

I learned this lesson from Dr. Goodman when studying the Holocaust.

Memory is sacred.

Now memory is not just comprised of the good events that one wants to remember, but of the bad as well. If the Psalmist chose only to remember the good, then it would mean nothing to remember the deeds of the Lord. Remembering God’s deliverance isn’t very meaningful if you don’t remember from what you were delivered.

I’ve worked hard to remember better since Dr. Goodman taught me this lesson and even harder since his death. For, it was not only meaningful to Dr. Goodman when I remembered that he thought that R.E.M. was the greatest rock band of all times, but it continues to be meaningful for me. Whenever I listen to an R.E.M. song now I think of Dr. Goodman and think of how God used him in my life and in the lives of so many others.

But does it really fall into the category of “sacred memory” to remember some one’s favorite rock band, you may ask. I think it certainly does, but it doesn’t stop there. Sacred memory is individual and it is corporate. We not only remember things about ourselves and other individuals that we know, but we remember things about our community, both our physical community and our spiritual community. We remember the fear that Mary are Martha had when they discovered an empty tomb and we remember the trail that Martin Luther blazed for us, but we also remember the horror of the Crusades and the inaction of Christians during the Holocaust. We all know the adage that “history repeats itself,” but that doesn’t have to be so. When we are actively engaged in remembering we, as individuals and as a community, can make sure that the good remains and we can work to keep the bad at bay. As soon as we forget the freedom of religion that others so vigorously fought for us to have, we will become complacent about others’ freedom of religion and will begin to think that they ought not be able to practice their religion or lack of religion. If we forget that true faith is helping orphans and widows, then we will become arrogant about our faith and think that it was somehow meant to benefit us.

You see, memory is a funny thing because it is only one side of a coin. The other side of the coin is hope.

Because we remember, we can hope.

Because the Psalmist remembered the deeds of the Lord, the Psalmist hoped for a better future. Hope has long been meaningful for me, but never as meaningful as it was when I realized its relationship with memory. Because I remember the good works of God, I hope that God will continue those good works in the future. Because I remember war, I hope along with Micah for lasting peace.

Let it not be said of us as it has been said of others:

There is no memory of those who have gone before, moreover, there will not be any memory of those who come after by those that come after them (Eccl. 1:11)

Let us remember those who have gone before and let us live our lives in such a way that those who come after remember us.

This day let us affirm that like the psalmist, we remember. Let us realize that memory is sacred; my memory, your memory, our memory.

The psalms that we read responsively express lament and thanksgiving, two ubiquitous aspects of life. In a well-known passage, the author of Ecclesiastes says:

For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven: a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted; a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; a time to seek, and a time to lose; a time to keep; and a time to cast away; a time to tear, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; a time to love, and a time to hate; a time for war, and a time for peace.

There is one couplet that may have been nice to see included: “there is a time to remember, and a time to forget.” But that wouldn’t actually be accurate, because all time is the time to remember. Every matter under heaven is to be remembered. How else do we know to trust God but that we remember when others have trusted God? Why do we cry out to God in times of trouble, except we remember the works of God?

Our darkest nights, we remember. Our brightest mornings, we remember.

It is true that some memories we cannot forget, but today we also choose to remember.

To remember is a sacred and holy act. This we must never forget.

When we remember, it means that we remember the past, the good and the bad, but above all, when we remember, it means that we hope.

We hope for the future.

We hope for a future that is better than our past and better than our present and we work intentionally to bring that future about.





A Battle You Can Win

14 10 2009


Boys Boxing

Photo by George Eastman House

The GRE is at the heart of the preparation process for most who wish to do graduate study. For those of you who don’t know, I typically describe the GRE as the SAT for graduate schools. It’s a test that supposedly measures one’s ability to perform at the graduate level. All I can tell that it actually does is measure one’s facility with 7th – 9th grade mathematics and 2nd, 3rd, or 4th level definitions of many obscure and/or arcane words. Tomorrow at half past noon, this test and I will battle.

I have taken the GRE before and faired well, but since I am currently applying to PhD programs to hopefully start in the fall of 2010, I am retaking it to attempt to inch my score up, because, hey, every little bit counts, right? I have been preparing for this test for a while now, using flashcards, reading GRE books, blog posts and taking practice tests.

Alas, the day is finally upon me and I have, I think, a much better disposition toward the test than I have at other times during this process. I have been bitter because of how poor of a measurement of my ability to perform in a PhD program I think the GRE is. At other times, I have been quite downtrodden, feeling that I am going to be wasting my time and money, namely after a few of my practice tests.

For the past few days, however, I have had a different perspective. Ken Brown posted about his GRE Preparation and Approach a few days ago and he ended his post with the line:

it’s a battle you can win.

Hence, the title of my post. So, that’s my attitude toward the GRE now. I’m going to battle tomorrow and I fully believe it’s a battle I can win. The GRE is not the war (the whole application process is the war), it is merely one battle along the way; a battle that I intend to win.