vitalwholeness

Theologians and spiritual writers fall in and out of vogue; some become the darling of the day only to be forgotten soon after they peak while others have some kind of staying power, in season and out of season.

Paul Tillich is of the later sort, a voice that continues to speak through the years. After a recent conversation with a soul struggling through what life has given I thought of a portion of one of his chapters from The Shaking of the Foundations. As it spoke then, so it speaks now:

Do we know what it means to be struck by grace? It does not mean that we suddenly believe that God exists, or that Jesus is the Saviour, or that the Bible contains the truth. To believe that something is, is almost contrary to the meaning of grace. Furthermore, grace does not mean simply that we are making progress in our moral self-control, in our fight against special faults, and in our relationships to men and to society. Moral progress may be a fruit of grace; but it is not grace itself, and it can even prevent us from receiving grace. For there is too often a graceless acceptance of Christian doctrines and a graceless battle against the structures of evil in our personalities. Such a graceless relation to God may lead us by necessity either to arrogance or to despair. It would be better to refuse God and the Christ and the Bible than to accept them without grace. For if we accept without grace, we do so in the state of separation, and can only succeed in deepening the separation. We cannot transform our lives, unless we allow them to be transformed by that stroke of grace. It happens; or it does not happen. And certainly it does not happen if we try to force it upon ourselves, just as it shall not happen so long as we think, in our self-complacency, that we have no need of it. Grace strikes us when we are in great pain and restlessness. It strikes us when we walk through the dark valley of a meaningless and empty life. It strikes us when we feel that our separation is deeper than usual, because we have violated another life, a life which we loved, or from which we were estranged. It strikes us when our disgust for our own being, our indifference, our weakness, our hostility, and our lack of direction and composure have become intolerable to us. It strikes us when, year after year, the longed-for perfection of life does not appear, when the old compulsions reign within us as they have for decades, when despair destroys all joy and courage. Sometimes at that moment a wave of light breaks into our darkness, and it is as though a voice were saying: “You are accepted. You are accepted, accepted by that which is greater than you, and the name of which you do not know. Do not ask for the name now; perhaps you will find it later. Do not try to do anything now; perhaps later you will do much. Do not seek for anything; do not perform anything; do not intend anything. Simply accept the fact that you are accepted!” If that happens to us, we experience grace After such an experience we may not be better than before, and we may not believe more than before. But everything is transformed. In that moment, grace conquers sin, and reconciliation bridges the gulf of estrangement. And nothing is demanded of this experience, no religious or moral or intellectual presupposition, nothing but acceptance.

And so the French have decided that certain head coverings are not suitable for Muslim women. Soon enough they will be levying pricey fines for wearing something that smacks of their religious tradition. Montesquieu had lots to say about liberty, solidarity and fraternity, but it seems the French have forgotten the liberty part. They mistakenly believe that expunging religious difference is the path to true freedom, that denying religious uniqueness will transform their humanity into even greater freedom possessing creatures. But this requires, of course, denying freedoms to insure an ideal of freedom that is liberated from the chains of those silly old religious traditions. But let’s back up.

Anyone who knows a thimbleful of French history knows that the revolution included throwing off the shackles of religious influence. The liberators demonstrated this, in one way, by stacking a mountainous pile of wooden chairs in the nave of Notre Dame and setting it afire. There now. We’ve taken care of that old menace.

And clergy were prohibited from wearing symbols of their vocation – clerical garb, collars, etc – in public. Much like Muslim head coverings today.

Do I personally – philosophically speaking, theologically speaking – subscribe to this  position? Of course not. But it’s not my religious system, not my understanding. Do I think they should be enabled to figure it out for themselves, within Islam? You bet.

Now there’s libertad for you.  Wake up and smell the French Fries. Your freedom is no freedom at all. It’s an ideology, a secular religion imposed by the state.

There once was a lad from Missouri

who often  was in a big hurry

when April came by

he decided to fly

to a wedding where folks may not scurry

God – in – Everything

I have been blessed to officiate at a dear friend’s wedding this coming week. And since it is taking place in the native land of St. Francis of Assisi, I want to share one of his writings, penned over 800 years ago. It is his Canticle to the Sun.

Most High, all-powerful, all-good Lord,
all praise is Yours, all glory, all honor and all blessings.
to you alone, Most High, do they belong,
and no mortal lips are worthy to pronounce Your Name.

Praised be You my Lord with all Your creatures,
especially Sir Brother Sun,
who is the day through whom You give us light.
And he is beautiful and radiant with great splendor,
of You Most High, he bears the likeness.

Praised be You, my Lord, through Sister Moon and the stars,
in the heavens you have made them bright, precious and fair.

Praised be You, my Lord, through Brothers Wind and Air,
and fair and stormy, all weather’s moods,
by which You cherish all that You have made.

Praised be You my Lord through Sister Water,
so useful, humble, precious and pure.

Praised be You my Lord through Brother Fire,
through whom You light the night
and he is beautiful and playful and robust and strong.

Praised be You my Lord through our Sister,
Mother Earth who sustains and governs us,
producing varied fruits with colored flowers and herbs.

Praised be You my Lord through those who grant pardon
for love of You and bear sickness and trial.
Blessed are those who endure in peace,
by You Most High, they will be crowned.

So the University of Missouri basketball coach of the last five seasons, Mike Anderson, is exchanging Tigers for Razorbacks. He goes to become head basketball coach of the University of Arkansas. We can all wish him well. He did, after all, have a good run at Mizzou, a fine record of wins and losses. Missouri fans are sad and the Arkansas ones are happy.

Some have made a big deal out of the fact that just a few weeks previously Mr. Anderson talked about retiring at Mizzou, so in love was he with the people, program and place. Gee, where is his loyalty, they pined.

There is a sub text in the whole story that is, I think, the real story.

After negotiating with the University of Missouri for a seven year deal of $2 million a year, the coach just couldn’t pass up the larger offer of Arkansas of $2.2 million a year, also over seven years. That $.2 million a year adds up over seven years. It could make you love wild boars and want to be near them.

But let’s not haggle over a measly $200,000 a year difference. Rather, let’s return to the basic idea that no one is talking about. Here is a man, not unusual among his peers in salary, that is making over $2 million a year. He’s coaching a basketball team. Let’s just hold that number in our minds for a moment, let it float there as we do a little comparison.

Now we’re thinking about the average teacher’s compensation. You remember, don’t you? These are the evil teachers who wanted to have some collective bargaining when it comes to their salary and benefits. Golly, some of them might make $50,000 a year. Imagine. What excess.

But pick your profession, something that really matters. Now hold up that position and its salary and let it dangle right beside the basketball coach’s $2 million a year. Can you see them both? Do you have them sitting right next to one another? Good. Now hold them there.

If the word obscene comes to mind it may emanate from the part of the brain or psyche or heart preoccupied with values, with what things mean, how fairness and justice is regarded. It’s the same place that gets all excited when you see the vast difference between the wages of corporate CEOs and others in the corporate food chain, the ones whose benefits need to be reduced as the execs, the ones who may have directly contributed to the recent economic melt down, are rewarded with more bonuses and stock and salary. Do you feel that little area right in the center of your forehead? No, you’re not imagining it. There is a tingling sensation that won’t go away. That, friend, is the tingle of outrage in the face of conspicuous unfairness.

I wish we could just pack that up and send it to Arkansas permanently. But we can’t, because it’s mobile, portable. It is a pan-American reality that trickled down from the pros after athletes became stars and television shaped everything we know about sport. Like Albert Pujols, the St. Louis Cardinal’s golden boy. Even his well-heeled team mates and church connected friends are starting to ask questions. Why isn’t a contract for $300 million enough? Even with a nice foundation that Pujols started, something to give a moral nerve to the excess, why aren’t those numbers high enough?

The answer is simple, though we don’t want to say the words, either on the professional or collegiate level of sports. We are just as afraid to call into question the vast gap between a CEO’s salary and benefits and those of a worker.

Here are the words you are searching for: It is immoral.

But we enable it – all of us – by what we continue to support, purchase, and protect, personally and politically.

You know that little place in the center of your forehead that’s buzzing? Listen to it. There is something it wants to tell you.

I usually don’t like strained attempts to go back a millennium and capture the life of anyone, much less a 12th century Benedictine mystic, but the creators of Vision: The life of Hildegard von Bingen did her right.

For a glimpse into the monastic spirituality of the time, and a spotlight on the bright light of Hildegard’s visions, do find a way to see it.

And for those hymnology buffs among us you’ll be interested to know that in our Chalice Hymnal there are no less than three quotes from Hildegard’s writings and one hymn that weaves many strands of her writing together in one place (251, O Holy Spirit, Root of Life).

Fire of the Spirit, life of the lives of creatures,

spiral of sanctity, bond of all natures,

goal of charity, lights of clarity,

taste of sweetness to sinners, be with us and hear us.

Composer of all things, light of all the risen,

key of salvation, release from the dark prison,

hope of all unions, scope of chastities,

joy in the glory, strong honor, be with us and hear us . (CH 52)

* * *

Holy Spirit

making life alive, moving in all things, root of all created being,

cleansing the cosmos of every impurity, effacing guilt, anointing wounds.

You are lustrous and praiseworthy life,

You waken and re-awaken everything that is. (CH 235)

* * *

Creator God, draw compassion from us.

Christ, draw compassion from us.

Spirit God, draw compassion from us. (CH 541)

I confess my ignorance. I have no idea why the U.S. military is intervening in Libya’s civil war. Of course, Gadhafi is no sweet guy; he is a totalitarian dictator. In the wave of Northern Africa protest movements bad guys are falling left and right and largely non-violent protests have taken the day. But Gadhafi is not going quietly. And the rebel movement is armed and there is open warfare.

So, do we normally intervene – other than in peace-making diplomacy – in every armed civil war taking place in other countries around the globe? We never thought of that kind of response in Egypt, even if it got nasty. Why snuggle up to the rebels in Libya? Is it our dear love of democracy? Neutralizing some terrorist network?

How jaded I’ve become. It actually occurred to me that all this just might have to do with the gigantic oil fields under that Libyan sand. And we might just be betting on the horse we believe win this struggle for power, the one left standing at the end of the day, our good friend flying his flag right over the oil fields.

Why else intervene? Can you think of one viable reason? Before you play the freedom card and say we’re just helping to liberate those poor Libyan people from the shackles of tyranny, you have to first scan the long list of all the other countries submerged in civil war where we did not intervene, every country that didn’t have one drop of oil to its name.

But, of course, I could be very, very wrong.

Why are we lobbing our cruise missiles their direction?

Strange + Strange often = True

As I read the most recent issue of Sojourners (April 2011) I ran across a brief report from Ray McGovern relating to the now famous (or infamous) WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange.  The combination of unusual author and atypical assumptions lent a “luster of midday to objects below.”

First strange bit: Author Ray McGovern was a career CIA guy, an analyst for 27 years. He lived and slept intelligence and saw it all from the inside. That leads to strange number two.

Second strange bit: Now speaking for the church, from the inside of a religious point of view, McGovern defends the whole WikiLeaks enterprise. In fact, he paints Assange not as an enemy of the state, but rather as an enemy of the state of denial.

Sidetrack: At the unavoidable risk of dating myself, I’ll share that while I was in college the then controversial Daniel Ellsberg came to my campus and spoke. We were packed like sardines in a large conference hall. And I remember his arrival, his words and the impact of them. Ellsberg was the WikiLeaks of his time, sans the electronic means to broadcast it by web, blog, text, or tweet. He just wrote about it and talked to groups about it. The Pentagon Papers simply revealed the unimaginable extent and scope of US incursions in the world. And Ellsberg was painted with the same “unpatriotic” brush as Assange is today. They tried to assassinate his character, make him into a criminal, define him as enemy of the state. But I digress.

Back to our former CIA agent become church activist. McGovern simply knows, from experience, how assassinations are ordered, secret covert missions conducted, and disappeared persons detained and tortured. So when WikiLeaks “outs” this, makes impossible our denial that such things are taking place on our tax dime and on our behalf, he simply nods. He knows it’s true. And the docs and video footage leaked by WikiLeaks verify it.

What McGovern also knows is that every attempt is made to “kill the messenger” when the messenger carries information that uncovers the truth. If we can make him appear shady, criminal, and an enemy of the state, he can be delegitimated, the ultimate goal. If not physically assassinated, his reputation can be. Then he can be dismissed with the wave of a hand.

I am fairly suspicious of claims made by anyone in the political realm. People just twist things to conform to their already existing point of view. But sometimes Strange + Strange = True. I think this is one of those cases. And unless the truth becomes known, and citizens insist that this is not the way we want to behave on the world stage, then we will continue in a state of denial. And not even WikiLeaks will be able to help us.

I just viewed that remarkable BBC drama based on actual events inside one of the Nazi death camps during World War II, God on Trial. As a way to make sense of the unthinkable, Jews convene a court, bringing forth any and all evidence that might either vindicate or find God guilty. But guilty of what? Murder? But is there some other reason for God’s absence, for allowing this to happen? Hasn’t God broken covenant? Is this punishment? Purification? Of not of individuals, then of the whole? Or is this simply the consequence of extending human beings freedom, even freedom to do evil? In the end, say some, Hitler will be dead, the war over, but Torah will live on. But at what cost?

God is found guilty. But then they worship God on the way to the gas chambers, the ovens.

In the midst of Holocaust, or any genocide, or mass suffering by natural or human cause, it would be easy to dismiss God, the idea of God, as irrelevant. I can see that happening. It is harder to hold on to belief while not knowing why things are the way they are. But what seems harder still, to me, is to still hold on to faith while allowing the suffering to revise one’s sense of how God might be present in the world. Maybe it is, but not as we imagined it to be. With that we may not need to find God guilty because that isn’t how God acts in the world, anyway. We would find God neither guilty or innocent, but rather present or not.

In the same way we might no longer hold God responsible for what happened to Jesus, some bloody transaction to soothe some unresolved justice.  But we do see God present in the suffering of Jesus; wherever there is suffering, there is God.

Revelation:

St. Pats is no big deal in Ireland. On this day, says my Irish friends, we might go to mass and then next door to the pub. But that’s normal. Then home like always. None of this green stuff and cultural parties.

What’s with those Americans, anyway? They are trying to be more Irish than the Irish.

But when we’re far from home, from origins, then the celebration that didn’t used to matter that much comes to matter a great deal.

What you don’t have, you want. What you do have, you take for granted. What’s far you want to bring near. And what’s near you chose to ignore.

Well, dang. Just pinch me.