Sometimes I ask myself why I'm in seminary. I think it's a good question to ask, however scary. One of Emily's friends is in law school, doesn't enjoy it and is struggling. I enjoy seminary a lot and feel quite comfortable here, but the question of "why seminary?" can quickly lead to "so what are you going to do next?"
Recently, I have been leaning more towards seeking out a teaching role rather than a pastoral role. Not only does the idea of being a role model for high schoolers and teaching them how to think with more nuance excite me, but also having so much more contact time with them than the average parish ministry. I'm interested in community building and teaching people not to just deconstruct their world but also reconstruct
In the meantime, I'm in Seminary, wondering why I'm here, "searching for the living among the dead." I found this post to have a very thoughtful answer:
“I'm searching through all that has ever been hoped, in praise of what can never be known.”
In praise of always searching and never knowing,
yet ever hoping.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Savior Season
After reading David Brook's recent column, I am left to wonder... If we are really facing an historic inauguration day, vastly re-centralizing our government, throwing money left and right and are running on high anxiety, then it sounds like we're in need a of a Savior.
'Tis the season for saving, not spending.
Check out this provocative Advent video about gift ideas for this season:
'Tis the season for saving, not spending.
Check out this provocative Advent video about gift ideas for this season:
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Perishing from the Injustice We Permit
Today is the 60th Anniversary of the signing Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Amnesty International has two powerful videos, one shorter and one longer, in honor of this day and for its continued support from our leaders... and us!
"The Price of Silence"
From Jurgen Motlmann's book, The Source of Life (p. 110):
"The poor are crying out for justice first of all, not for prosperity; and we ourselves are perishing from the injustice we permit, even if we are leading comfortable lives.
The hunger for justice is a holy hunger;
the thirst for righteousness is a sacred thirst.
It is a hunger and thirst of the Holy Spirit itself.
May that Spirit fill us through and through."
"The Price of Silence"
From Jurgen Motlmann's book, The Source of Life (p. 110):
"The poor are crying out for justice first of all, not for prosperity; and we ourselves are perishing from the injustice we permit, even if we are leading comfortable lives.
The hunger for justice is a holy hunger;
the thirst for righteousness is a sacred thirst.
It is a hunger and thirst of the Holy Spirit itself.
May that Spirit fill us through and through."
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Equality in Marriage
I support equal marriage rights for two willing people, regardless of gender. I think it is a travesty that we allow some to marry and others not to. Essentially, it comes down to whether or not you believe people are created gay or choose to be gay. If you're not convinced, please befriend more gay people. We all have a lot in common; it just takes getting to know each other. We have nothing to fear but fear itself.
I've collected three videos that poignantly highlight the issue.
First, the serious (Keith Olbermann goes on what I characterize as a mercy-diatribe):
Second, the funny (Princeton students ban Freshman from walking on sidewalk - a creative way to point out the silliness of it all and what an obstruction of justice it is):
And finally, a discussion (Mike Huckabee & John Stewart talk about same-sex marriage on the Daily Show):
Jon Stewart: [Referring to Huckabee's argument that we're redefining the word "marriage" even though it used to mean slaves couldn't marry, interracial marriages were banned and polygamy is now outlawed]
"Semantics is cold comfort for humanity."
I've collected three videos that poignantly highlight the issue.
First, the serious (Keith Olbermann goes on what I characterize as a mercy-diatribe):
Second, the funny (Princeton students ban Freshman from walking on sidewalk - a creative way to point out the silliness of it all and what an obstruction of justice it is):
And finally, a discussion (Mike Huckabee & John Stewart talk about same-sex marriage on the Daily Show):
Jon Stewart: [Referring to Huckabee's argument that we're redefining the word "marriage" even though it used to mean slaves couldn't marry, interracial marriages were banned and polygamy is now outlawed]
"Semantics is cold comfort for humanity."
Monday, November 17, 2008
All It Takes is Faith
Today at lunch we discussed the theological topic of what it means to believe, and how do we come to believe in God. We're reading Jurgen Moltmann's excellent book, The Spirit of Life, and this is what spurred on the discussion.
From a Western perspective, and relying heavily on Thomas Aquinas, we must first understand before we are able to see, and once we can see we are able to love. Thus, one must first seek knowledge, even if it's "faith seeking understanding" - believing that you'll understand why it is you believe.
From an Eastern perspective, one must first love, and by loving, be able to see, and then finally understand. In a sense, it reverses or stands in contrast to the cycle set up by Aquinas.
I have another idea to throw into the midst: trust and belief play an integral, dynamic role. They build off each other in a way that continually deepens the relationship and opens oneself up to new and further possibilities... on into the infinite.
Yet how do we enter this cycle? Where do we begin? It's a which came first problem, the chicken or the egg? How can we trust someone if we do not first believe her/him? And yet, how can we believe someone if we do not first trust her/him?
My answer is that all it takes is faith, which is a gracious gift from God (Grace Alone, Faith Alone, God Alone). Stepping out in faith gets us into the circle of trust/belief, and the deeper we go in our experience of trust and belief, the deeper our faith grows.
Thoughts? I got a bunch of blank looks from my colleagues, but I like to think that I'm on to something.
From a Western perspective, and relying heavily on Thomas Aquinas, we must first understand before we are able to see, and once we can see we are able to love. Thus, one must first seek knowledge, even if it's "faith seeking understanding" - believing that you'll understand why it is you believe.
From an Eastern perspective, one must first love, and by loving, be able to see, and then finally understand. In a sense, it reverses or stands in contrast to the cycle set up by Aquinas.
I have another idea to throw into the midst: trust and belief play an integral, dynamic role. They build off each other in a way that continually deepens the relationship and opens oneself up to new and further possibilities... on into the infinite.
Yet how do we enter this cycle? Where do we begin? It's a which came first problem, the chicken or the egg? How can we trust someone if we do not first believe her/him? And yet, how can we believe someone if we do not first trust her/him?
My answer is that all it takes is faith, which is a gracious gift from God (Grace Alone, Faith Alone, God Alone). Stepping out in faith gets us into the circle of trust/belief, and the deeper we go in our experience of trust and belief, the deeper our faith grows.
Thoughts? I got a bunch of blank looks from my colleagues, but I like to think that I'm on to something.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Obama Wins! ... Equality for All?
I can't say how joyful I am to know that Barack Hussein Obama will be our next president! WAHOO!! I thought Sen. McCain gave a gracious concession speech, and President-Elect Obama promised to work with him and listen especially to those he disagreed with. What a stark change from 8 years of boneheaded-cowboy posturing! "Unreal" America is back, and change is uh-coming.
And still, there is much work to be done, in the area of human rights, healthcare, the economy, energy, campaign finance reform... the list goes on. We have hope in what we cannot yet see, save for in our hearts. May we have the wherewithall to persevere through not just a nearly two-year long presidentinal campaign, but a four year presidency, seeking justice, loving mercy and walking humbly together for a more peaceful world.
There is also a part of me that is a little sad. The returns for California's Prop 8, which would take away the right to marry for those marrying a person of the same gender, show it passing 52-48%, or 400,000 votes difference. Other states, including Florida, Arkansas and Arizona, also passed initiatives to limit the rights of gay persons. The ban of gay marriage is even more disheartening with the news that hate crimes against gays have risen this past year by 5.5%.
Our nation was founded on the guarantee and protection of rights. We are taking a step backward by denying others rights we hetereosexuals enjoy. The state takes the rights of people away only when they do something wrong. What have our GLBT friends done wrong? Too often we act as a nation of privilege, rather than one of equality.
Hateful discrimination is unfair. It is unjust. It is wrong.
Today we mourn. Tomorrow we cry out and begin the hard work of proclaiming a peaceful message of equality for all, no matter your gender, ethnicity, age, immigration status or sexual orientation.
On this day we celebrate the unprecedented election of the first non-white, non-British, Irish or German descent leader ever elected to the U.S.'s highest office. And we also know that this is just the beginning.
And still, there is much work to be done, in the area of human rights, healthcare, the economy, energy, campaign finance reform... the list goes on. We have hope in what we cannot yet see, save for in our hearts. May we have the wherewithall to persevere through not just a nearly two-year long presidentinal campaign, but a four year presidency, seeking justice, loving mercy and walking humbly together for a more peaceful world.
There is also a part of me that is a little sad. The returns for California's Prop 8, which would take away the right to marry for those marrying a person of the same gender, show it passing 52-48%, or 400,000 votes difference. Other states, including Florida, Arkansas and Arizona, also passed initiatives to limit the rights of gay persons. The ban of gay marriage is even more disheartening with the news that hate crimes against gays have risen this past year by 5.5%.
Our nation was founded on the guarantee and protection of rights. We are taking a step backward by denying others rights we hetereosexuals enjoy. The state takes the rights of people away only when they do something wrong. What have our GLBT friends done wrong? Too often we act as a nation of privilege, rather than one of equality.
Hateful discrimination is unfair. It is unjust. It is wrong.
Today we mourn. Tomorrow we cry out and begin the hard work of proclaiming a peaceful message of equality for all, no matter your gender, ethnicity, age, immigration status or sexual orientation.
On this day we celebrate the unprecedented election of the first non-white, non-British, Irish or German descent leader ever elected to the U.S.'s highest office. And we also know that this is just the beginning.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
The Impoverishment of Tragedy
A few weeks ago, I attended an Eschatology Conference where Dr. Sharon Baker of Messiah College (PA) spoke of a "Hospitable Hell." She explored the meaning of divine justice and did a thought experiment how Holy Fire might be used to purify all of us, come judgment day, so that we might all enter into the Kingdom of God. It made me think of tragedy and how we as a society and culture have lost our ability to tell a good story, be it a tragedy or comedy, because we've so much of our worldview separates "us" from "them."
Tragedy itself was perhaps most celebrated in the past and lamented in the present by Nietzsche. And I think he's onto something, when I look at our modern forms of tragedy/comedy (those eternal twins, or two sides of the same coin). Just one example, "Meet the Parents," casts a family against the groom-to-be, and we the audience laugh at Ben Stiller's misfortunes. We may identify with his situation, but we're spared the consequences, laughing at him rather than with him. We watch people suffer, in Gitmo or Abu Ghraib or Darfur, but while this knowledge is readily available, action is lacking. The distance between our heads and our hearts has never been further.
A character's "tragic flaw" is tragic precisely because the origin of his or her downfall lies within his or her self. Yet all too often we are prone to divide the issues into black/white, good/bad, righteous/evil, without recognizing that both sides are found on the spectrum of human life, and each life is a microcosm of society. Perhaps our tragic flaw is our inability to recognize that we have a tragic flaw, that as humans there are logs (let alone specks) in our eyes.
As you advocate, forgiveness (not punishment) brings about repentance. May we forgive ourselves and our own societies, repenting of the sin of allowing others to suffer or go down to hell, and not realizing that our fate is bound up in theirs. Their lives matter just as much as ours - to think less of them is to say that they don't matter as much, and therefore our actions to help them don't matter as much, and then we're all too prone to give up on the connection and let them (and thus ourselves, as we're all bound up in this together), perish.
Tragedy itself was perhaps most celebrated in the past and lamented in the present by Nietzsche. And I think he's onto something, when I look at our modern forms of tragedy/comedy (those eternal twins, or two sides of the same coin). Just one example, "Meet the Parents," casts a family against the groom-to-be, and we the audience laugh at Ben Stiller's misfortunes. We may identify with his situation, but we're spared the consequences, laughing at him rather than with him. We watch people suffer, in Gitmo or Abu Ghraib or Darfur, but while this knowledge is readily available, action is lacking. The distance between our heads and our hearts has never been further.
A character's "tragic flaw" is tragic precisely because the origin of his or her downfall lies within his or her self. Yet all too often we are prone to divide the issues into black/white, good/bad, righteous/evil, without recognizing that both sides are found on the spectrum of human life, and each life is a microcosm of society. Perhaps our tragic flaw is our inability to recognize that we have a tragic flaw, that as humans there are logs (let alone specks) in our eyes.
As you advocate, forgiveness (not punishment) brings about repentance. May we forgive ourselves and our own societies, repenting of the sin of allowing others to suffer or go down to hell, and not realizing that our fate is bound up in theirs. Their lives matter just as much as ours - to think less of them is to say that they don't matter as much, and therefore our actions to help them don't matter as much, and then we're all too prone to give up on the connection and let them (and thus ourselves, as we're all bound up in this together), perish.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
My Post-Election Hope
I wrote this as a comment on a blog for the NYTimes.com, and thought I'd share it with this audience. This election has taken over our news cycle and threatens to interfere with my studies... and so it's good every once in a while to step back and take the long view.
My hope is that after this election we can have some serious civil discourse about issues that really matter: healthcare, national security, economy, jobs, schools, etc., rather than sling mud from one side or the other. We really do all want similar ends, because we all do love America. The fact that we disagree on how to get there does not make one a patriot and the other a communist. One person does not live in "Real America," implying that the other lives in a "Fake America."
Let us take advice from (gasp!) Sen. Joe Biden and (gasp!) Chris Matthews, and not question another's motive, for only God can see the human heart. Let us instead focus on OUR future hopes, desires and dreams... and search for COMMON GROUND ground to build the BRIDGE to get over the chasm of fear and arrive safely to the other side, TOGETHER.
My hope is that after this election we can have some serious civil discourse about issues that really matter: healthcare, national security, economy, jobs, schools, etc., rather than sling mud from one side or the other. We really do all want similar ends, because we all do love America. The fact that we disagree on how to get there does not make one a patriot and the other a communist. One person does not live in "Real America," implying that the other lives in a "Fake America."
Let us take advice from (gasp!) Sen. Joe Biden and (gasp!) Chris Matthews, and not question another's motive, for only God can see the human heart. Let us instead focus on OUR future hopes, desires and dreams... and search for COMMON GROUND ground to build the BRIDGE to get over the chasm of fear and arrive safely to the other side, TOGETHER.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Not Trusting "Burn After Reading"
So in the midst of studying for my Theology Exam tomorrow, I decided to write some thoughts about a sub-par movie I saw recently by the Coen brothers, Burn After Reading. The movie was somewhat funny and grotesquely (and therefore needlessly) violent - I don't necessarily recommend it. But I did want to share some thoughts about it in case you have or will see it.
I think the Coen brothers are trying to portray what happens to people when they are too focused on themselves:
- Former CIA agent Cox (Malcovich) is too focused on his book and lamenting his forced retirement;
- His wife just wants a divorce to save herself and can't see her suitor (Clooney) doesn't want her;
- Clooney's character just cares about a one-night stand and staying in shape, not caring/realizing that his actions may ruin his marriage;
- McFarland's character only wants plastic surgery, and can't see that her boss loves her.
And then they pay people to spy on each other, since no one trusts anyone else! People are pawns to be used for an end. Those people who are relatively innocent (Pitt and the boss) end up dead. it's funny and tragic all at the same time, and ultimately the viewer is repulsed by such insolent, petulant, myopic behavior.
So is this film a social commentary on our society today? The Coens seem to be saying national security agencies can't save us, especially when they're spying on people too unwilling to be in trusting relationships. Let us hope we can build better communities and treat people as an end, rather than a means, unto themselves.
I think the Coen brothers are trying to portray what happens to people when they are too focused on themselves:
- Former CIA agent Cox (Malcovich) is too focused on his book and lamenting his forced retirement;
- His wife just wants a divorce to save herself and can't see her suitor (Clooney) doesn't want her;
- Clooney's character just cares about a one-night stand and staying in shape, not caring/realizing that his actions may ruin his marriage;
- McFarland's character only wants plastic surgery, and can't see that her boss loves her.
And then they pay people to spy on each other, since no one trusts anyone else! People are pawns to be used for an end. Those people who are relatively innocent (Pitt and the boss) end up dead. it's funny and tragic all at the same time, and ultimately the viewer is repulsed by such insolent, petulant, myopic behavior.
So is this film a social commentary on our society today? The Coens seem to be saying national security agencies can't save us, especially when they're spying on people too unwilling to be in trusting relationships. Let us hope we can build better communities and treat people as an end, rather than a means, unto themselves.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Overestimating Incompetency
In Theology class today, we talked about addiction as attachment to things, ideas or habits that are less than love of God. We settle for loving finite things rather than the infinite, because to love God takes great risk and requires tremendous vulnerability that we simply won't do it.
Even as we try to fulfill our utmost desire, to love and be love, the vulnerability it requires leaves us open to pain, and to avoid hurting we protect ourselves by trusting in the little things.
I remembered this class discussion as I read this article on Salon.com that talks about overestimating our intelligence when in fact we're incompetent, and those who are competent tend to think everyone else is, too:
"People who lack the knowledge or wisdom to perform well are often unaware of this fact. That is, the same incompetence that leads them to make wrong choices also deprives them of the savvy necessary to recognize competence, be it their own or anyone else's."
Even as we try to fulfill our utmost desire, to love and be love, the vulnerability it requires leaves us open to pain, and to avoid hurting we protect ourselves by trusting in the little things.
I remembered this class discussion as I read this article on Salon.com that talks about overestimating our intelligence when in fact we're incompetent, and those who are competent tend to think everyone else is, too:
"People who lack the knowledge or wisdom to perform well are often unaware of this fact. That is, the same incompetence that leads them to make wrong choices also deprives them of the savvy necessary to recognize competence, be it their own or anyone else's."
The converse also bears repeating.... In short, smart people tend to believe that everyone else "gets it." Incompetent people display both an increasing tendency to overestimate their cognitive abilities and a belief that they are smarter than the majority of those demonstrably sharper.
Let us pray for humility, the beginning of all wisdom... and competency.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Meaning of the Gospel
Today in my New Testament: Paul class, we discussed what is meant by the various references to "gospel" in the NT. Gospel, in greek, is "euhangellion," which is generally translated as "tidings of joy." But to know exactly what joy we're speaking of, we add "Gospel of" ... Jesus Christ, God, etc., or "Gospel according to" ... Matthew, Mark, Luke and George. (Of course it's John, but if four accounts, then why not more? less?)
As many a professor and pastor have professed to me, and I concur, it is a good thing we have four accounts or vantage points. (I'd still like to see that movie, Vantage Point, despite the reviews.) This leaves us room for interpretation, treating the text more as literary rather than as literal. In this way, we are not disrespecting the bible but, in fact, are taking it most seriously - in all its multiple meanings and application. For a text to be great, it needs to make allusions and references that have many meanings, and point to a truth beyond itself (see Shakespeare, Greek Tragedy, etc.). The same goes with the Bible.
So what is "gospel"? Or what do we mean by "gospel"? Is it entirely focused on the life & resurrection of Jesus Christ? Would the gospel be true without the resurrection? (for Paul, probably no; he emphasizes death and resurrection heavily, especially in Galations) Is it only a matter of opinion, to a varying degree?
I think it’s more than that – perhaps we need to deconstruct what we mean in order to reconstruct another’s meaning… we assume too much that what we’re talking about or what we mean mean is what the other person is talking about… or means.
As my former roommate put it quite humorously, "I said what I meant. In fact, I meant what I said." If only we knew what he meant... or said.
As many a professor and pastor have professed to me, and I concur, it is a good thing we have four accounts or vantage points. (I'd still like to see that movie, Vantage Point, despite the reviews.) This leaves us room for interpretation, treating the text more as literary rather than as literal. In this way, we are not disrespecting the bible but, in fact, are taking it most seriously - in all its multiple meanings and application. For a text to be great, it needs to make allusions and references that have many meanings, and point to a truth beyond itself (see Shakespeare, Greek Tragedy, etc.). The same goes with the Bible.
So what is "gospel"? Or what do we mean by "gospel"? Is it entirely focused on the life & resurrection of Jesus Christ? Would the gospel be true without the resurrection? (for Paul, probably no; he emphasizes death and resurrection heavily, especially in Galations) Is it only a matter of opinion, to a varying degree?
I think it’s more than that – perhaps we need to deconstruct what we mean in order to reconstruct another’s meaning… we assume too much that what we’re talking about or what we mean mean is what the other person is talking about… or means.
As my former roommate put it quite humorously, "I said what I meant. In fact, I meant what I said." If only we knew what he meant... or said.
What does the Gospel mean to you?
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Security Crisis & the Reign of God
Amidst these past few years of national security crises, and this past week of financial upheaval and insecurity, I can't help but think:
With love comes trust, and when we begin to trust again - ourselves, our neighbors, even eventually our enemies or those we disagree with - we will no longer need to find security in our wealth, our nation, our ill-conceived wars or military might. We will find security and solace in the One who first loved us, and continues to love us, and will never stop loving us.
As many a theologian rightly asserts, God's economy is not based on scarcity, but on abundance. In a world of abundance, we will not simply live sustainably, but in perfect harmony. Others call it the Reign of God.
All we need is a little more love in this world.
With love comes trust, and when we begin to trust again - ourselves, our neighbors, even eventually our enemies or those we disagree with - we will no longer need to find security in our wealth, our nation, our ill-conceived wars or military might. We will find security and solace in the One who first loved us, and continues to love us, and will never stop loving us.
As many a theologian rightly asserts, God's economy is not based on scarcity, but on abundance. In a world of abundance, we will not simply live sustainably, but in perfect harmony. Others call it the Reign of God.
How are you bringing about the Reign of God today?
Rephrased:
How have you loved or trusted someone today?
Rephrased:
How have you loved or trusted someone today?
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Obama on Foreign Policy Issues
I felt compelled to write this for some relatives of mine, outlining my beliefs with regards to Obama and foreign policy experience. After reading this, watch the foreign policy debate on Friday, Sept. 26th and decide for yourself who would be better at handling foreign affairs as our next president. I've tried to document all of my statements from a variety of news and information sources.
Summary: In respect to foreign policy initiatives, Obama has been ahead of national opinion, and both McCain and the Bush administration, in suggesting deft and bold strategies to address national security in a comprehensive manner. Namely, he stated the Iraq War was a bad idea from the beginning, supports attacking Al-Queda bases in Pakistan, supports the effort in Afghanistan, suggests direct talks with Iran, and advocates a timetable for withdrawal. ALL OF THESE POSITIONS are now supported to some degree by the Bush Admin. and McCain, even after they ridiculed him for months, if not years. This is a man with vision who is keen and able to stick to his overarching beliefs even as he makes on-his-feet decisions based on solid intelligence and information. After being misled for 8 years, I look forward to being led by this man into a more peaceful world and stable economy.
1. IRAQ WAR - Obama was against the Iraq war from the beginning, and now most Americans think the Iraq war was a bad idea. He's not against all wars, just rash and dumb ones, and argues convincingly that this war is a distraction to the real issues that face Americans everyday. Read his Oct 2002 speech here; it's rather short and VERY powerful. Meanwhile, Bush and McCain played up the war drums with information now unequivocally proven as false. This previous link also details how McCain has changed his tune on Iraq, from being completely in line with the Bush Strategy/Doctrine to now trying to differentiate himself.
To me, this fact shows Obama has profound judgment on military matters (no matter the intelligence) and is a solid student of history. He takes it seriously when we send young men and women to the battlefield to kill.
2. PAKISTAN - Obama was the first propose US counterattacks into Pakistan over a year ago (Aug. 2007), reiterating the fact that Al-Queada and their Taliban supporters orchestrated the Sept. 11th attacks and they are the real threat to America. In Feb. 2008, McCain blasted Obama for suggesting bombing our ally, Pakistan, when Obama was saying we needed to attack the Al-Queda bases if the intelligence is good, not just bomb indiscriminately. Bush also criticized Obama for threatening to attack Pakistan. Even so, the Bush Administration was attacking Pakistani targets without the Pakistani government's permission then, six months after Obama advocated for it, and now it's an openly acknowledged fact. Here is a good summary of this ongoing debate. Granted, Bush did say the US would attack Al-Queada targets in Pakistan in 2006, but later ridiculed Obama for saying the same thing in Feb 2008 during the campaign season.
To me, this fact shows Obama has surrounded himself with keen policy advisors and has access to little-known information, and will weather politcal attacks for what he knows is the right thing to do. This also is the beginning of the duplicity we now see that's so apparent in the McCain campaign.
3. AFGHANISTAN - Obama's been criticizing the bombing raids and calling for more troops in Afghanistan for at least a year. Obama has taken the issue of Afghanistan seriously since 2002, when he gave his address on the Iraq War. That same year, McCain said catching bid-Laden wasn't "that important" and in 2003, that the US can just "muddle through in Afghanistan". After years of Obama touting the need for focus on the war in Afghanistan, McCain now seems to agree on a surge there.
To me, this fact shows Obama is focused on making the US safer by intently and hotly pursuing those perpetrators of Sept. 11th, and not straining our military or distracting our focus with a misguided war in Iraq.
4. IRAN & SYRIA - Obama has stated for over a year and a half that he would engage Iran (and Syria) diplomatically. Bush and McCain both laughed at this idea, saying we can't negotiate with terrorists, even though Obama also says we don't negotiate with terrorists. In May 2006, after everyone had come to agree that talks with Iran were necessary, Bush agreed to indirect talks with Iran. Even Kissenger now agrees direct talks with Iran are necessary, "without conditions"! The only ones holding out on pursuing this avenue for peace are Bush and McCain.
To me, this fact shows Obama is willing to use all means, and especially put diplomacy first, to ensure we have a stable world order and prevent our enemies from threatening us or our allies. It also shows me that Obama's opinion is held by the majority of foreign policy experts and advisors.
5. "THE SURGE" - First, I should let Obama outline his plan for Iraq himself and address the surge issue, as he did in July 2008 in the New York Times. The surge has now allowed a limited drawdown of US troops in Iraq, and freed up these forces to now serve in Afghanistan. While violence was reduced, Maliki did not list increased troop levels as a factor to bringing calm to Iraq. Furthermore, most of the benchmarks for Iraq have not been met, the primary reason for the surge as stated by Bush; British withdrew from Basra, leaving peace; and the "surge" level is the same as the troop levels in Dec. 2005. Read more here. Hopefully now with the relative calm in violence, Iraqi politicians can now make political progress - and we should hold them accountable by gviing a time table.
To me, this fact shows Obama is willing to acknowledge the success of his rival's plans, ideas he disagreed with, to now use this success to further his own plans of moving us out of Iraq. He is a practical politician who fight's for what is right (ending the occupation) no matter how we get (out of) there. Withdrawing from Iraq is still the goal, but it will be undertaken with care and deference to good military commanders like Petraeus.
6. TIMETABLE - We know Obama has been advocating for a withdrawal timetable since Jan 2007 (a full year and a half ago). Never has anyone wanted to see us leave in defeat, which I define as another state supporting terrorism against us. Obama-Biden's plan states that while there will be no permanent bases in Iraq, a residual force will remain to protect vital national security concerns. Read their entire plan here. Yet now the Iraqi government is calling for a timetable, even citing Obama's proposal as a good guideline, and the Bush Admin. is even showing signs of agreement as of August! Even McCain thinks the timetable, or the Republican euphemism "horizons for withdrawal," is a good idea, praising Obama's proposal, even thought he thinks getting our troops home is "not too important". As Iraq's President Maliki himself stated, “Who[ever] wants to exit in a quicker way has a better assessment of the situation in Iraq.”
To me, this fact shows Obama knows what it takes to stick it out with a politically unpopular decision, only later, after weathering the ridicule and questioning of experience, to see his plans vindicated.
Summary: In respect to foreign policy initiatives, Obama has been ahead of national opinion, and both McCain and the Bush administration, in suggesting deft and bold strategies to address national security in a comprehensive manner. Namely, he stated the Iraq War was a bad idea from the beginning, supports attacking Al-Queda bases in Pakistan, supports the effort in Afghanistan, suggests direct talks with Iran, and advocates a timetable for withdrawal. ALL OF THESE POSITIONS are now supported to some degree by the Bush Admin. and McCain, even after they ridiculed him for months, if not years. This is a man with vision who is keen and able to stick to his overarching beliefs even as he makes on-his-feet decisions based on solid intelligence and information. After being misled for 8 years, I look forward to being led by this man into a more peaceful world and stable economy.
1. IRAQ WAR - Obama was against the Iraq war from the beginning, and now most Americans think the Iraq war was a bad idea. He's not against all wars, just rash and dumb ones, and argues convincingly that this war is a distraction to the real issues that face Americans everyday. Read his Oct 2002 speech here; it's rather short and VERY powerful. Meanwhile, Bush and McCain played up the war drums with information now unequivocally proven as false. This previous link also details how McCain has changed his tune on Iraq, from being completely in line with the Bush Strategy/Doctrine to now trying to differentiate himself.
To me, this fact shows Obama has profound judgment on military matters (no matter the intelligence) and is a solid student of history. He takes it seriously when we send young men and women to the battlefield to kill.
2. PAKISTAN - Obama was the first propose US counterattacks into Pakistan over a year ago (Aug. 2007), reiterating the fact that Al-Queada and their Taliban supporters orchestrated the Sept. 11th attacks and they are the real threat to America. In Feb. 2008, McCain blasted Obama for suggesting bombing our ally, Pakistan, when Obama was saying we needed to attack the Al-Queda bases if the intelligence is good, not just bomb indiscriminately. Bush also criticized Obama for threatening to attack Pakistan. Even so, the Bush Administration was attacking Pakistani targets without the Pakistani government's permission then, six months after Obama advocated for it, and now it's an openly acknowledged fact. Here is a good summary of this ongoing debate. Granted, Bush did say the US would attack Al-Queada targets in Pakistan in 2006, but later ridiculed Obama for saying the same thing in Feb 2008 during the campaign season.
To me, this fact shows Obama has surrounded himself with keen policy advisors and has access to little-known information, and will weather politcal attacks for what he knows is the right thing to do. This also is the beginning of the duplicity we now see that's so apparent in the McCain campaign.
3. AFGHANISTAN - Obama's been criticizing the bombing raids and calling for more troops in Afghanistan for at least a year. Obama has taken the issue of Afghanistan seriously since 2002, when he gave his address on the Iraq War. That same year, McCain said catching bid-Laden wasn't "that important" and in 2003, that the US can just "muddle through in Afghanistan". After years of Obama touting the need for focus on the war in Afghanistan, McCain now seems to agree on a surge there.
To me, this fact shows Obama is focused on making the US safer by intently and hotly pursuing those perpetrators of Sept. 11th, and not straining our military or distracting our focus with a misguided war in Iraq.
4. IRAN & SYRIA - Obama has stated for over a year and a half that he would engage Iran (and Syria) diplomatically. Bush and McCain both laughed at this idea, saying we can't negotiate with terrorists, even though Obama also says we don't negotiate with terrorists. In May 2006, after everyone had come to agree that talks with Iran were necessary, Bush agreed to indirect talks with Iran. Even Kissenger now agrees direct talks with Iran are necessary, "without conditions"! The only ones holding out on pursuing this avenue for peace are Bush and McCain.
To me, this fact shows Obama is willing to use all means, and especially put diplomacy first, to ensure we have a stable world order and prevent our enemies from threatening us or our allies. It also shows me that Obama's opinion is held by the majority of foreign policy experts and advisors.
5. "THE SURGE" - First, I should let Obama outline his plan for Iraq himself and address the surge issue, as he did in July 2008 in the New York Times. The surge has now allowed a limited drawdown of US troops in Iraq, and freed up these forces to now serve in Afghanistan. While violence was reduced, Maliki did not list increased troop levels as a factor to bringing calm to Iraq. Furthermore, most of the benchmarks for Iraq have not been met, the primary reason for the surge as stated by Bush; British withdrew from Basra, leaving peace; and the "surge" level is the same as the troop levels in Dec. 2005. Read more here. Hopefully now with the relative calm in violence, Iraqi politicians can now make political progress - and we should hold them accountable by gviing a time table.
To me, this fact shows Obama is willing to acknowledge the success of his rival's plans, ideas he disagreed with, to now use this success to further his own plans of moving us out of Iraq. He is a practical politician who fight's for what is right (ending the occupation) no matter how we get (out of) there. Withdrawing from Iraq is still the goal, but it will be undertaken with care and deference to good military commanders like Petraeus.
6. TIMETABLE - We know Obama has been advocating for a withdrawal timetable since Jan 2007 (a full year and a half ago). Never has anyone wanted to see us leave in defeat, which I define as another state supporting terrorism against us. Obama-Biden's plan states that while there will be no permanent bases in Iraq, a residual force will remain to protect vital national security concerns. Read their entire plan here. Yet now the Iraqi government is calling for a timetable, even citing Obama's proposal as a good guideline, and the Bush Admin. is even showing signs of agreement as of August! Even McCain thinks the timetable, or the Republican euphemism "horizons for withdrawal," is a good idea, praising Obama's proposal, even thought he thinks getting our troops home is "not too important". As Iraq's President Maliki himself stated, “Who[ever] wants to exit in a quicker way has a better assessment of the situation in Iraq.”
To me, this fact shows Obama knows what it takes to stick it out with a politically unpopular decision, only later, after weathering the ridicule and questioning of experience, to see his plans vindicated.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Competing Moralities? Republicans & Democrats
In an essay, "What makes people vote Republican?" (I encourage reading the article in full - quite enlightening - but a breif summary follows), Professor of Moral Psychology at UVA Jonathan Haidt argues (convincingly) there are various ways of describing morality that can be divided into five various spectra, or what he calls "psychological systems":
1. harm/care
2. fairness/reciprocity
3. ingroup/loyalty (from tribalism)
4. authority/respect (from hierarchy/ordering society)
5. purity/sanctity (carnality=degrading, renunciating=noble)
The first two trace their roots to John Stuart Mill, who is one of my favorite writers and wrote a definitive work on liberalism: On Liberty. These two emphasize an individual's rights and implores people to voluntarily join the organization. Those who lean liberal (Democrats) tend to focus on these two moral spectra at the exclusion of numbers 3-5.
The final three, in contrast, use not the individual as the basic organizing principle, but the family or other small social unit. This line of thought traces its root to Emile Durkheim, and "A Durkheimian society would value self-control over self-expression, duty over rights, and loyalty to one's groups over concerns for outgroups."
Those who lean conservative (Republicans) tend to hold all five spectra/systems in their morality beliefs. Few in American would disagree with the first two morality spectra, but the final three may seem archaic or too traditional for modern-day liberals. However, for liberals to fully understand why people vote Republican, they must understand all five spectra of morality.
Prof. Haidt suggests ways the Democrats could do this: in loyalty, emphasizing diversity in unity by fighting racism, sexism and other phobias; in authority, personal responsibility and costs for not joining a group; and in purity, emphasizing the environment and condemning materialism.
There is no silver bullet, but understanding this framework will help both sides understand each other better... and realize we're all on the same human spectrum.
***Afterthoughts***
So then, are morals just social constructions passed down to us by the traditions of society? Some would argue this. Other would argue the Bible to be our guide, others tradition, others reason... and still others experience. These are the four pillars of theological argument (Scripture, tradition, reason & experience), and various pillars can be emphasized to bolster or tear down an argument.
I tend to lean towards Kant's categorical imperatives. He believes in a universal morality where you only will what you would want others to will, treating every human being as an end rather than a means and acting as if we all were legislating members.
Sounds a lot like Jesus' summary of scripture, aka the Golden Rule.
1. harm/care
2. fairness/reciprocity
3. ingroup/loyalty (from tribalism)
4. authority/respect (from hierarchy/ordering society)
5. purity/sanctity (carnality=degrading, renunciating=noble)
The first two trace their roots to John Stuart Mill, who is one of my favorite writers and wrote a definitive work on liberalism: On Liberty. These two emphasize an individual's rights and implores people to voluntarily join the organization. Those who lean liberal (Democrats) tend to focus on these two moral spectra at the exclusion of numbers 3-5.
The final three, in contrast, use not the individual as the basic organizing principle, but the family or other small social unit. This line of thought traces its root to Emile Durkheim, and "A Durkheimian society would value self-control over self-expression, duty over rights, and loyalty to one's groups over concerns for outgroups."
Those who lean conservative (Republicans) tend to hold all five spectra/systems in their morality beliefs. Few in American would disagree with the first two morality spectra, but the final three may seem archaic or too traditional for modern-day liberals. However, for liberals to fully understand why people vote Republican, they must understand all five spectra of morality.
Prof. Haidt suggests ways the Democrats could do this: in loyalty, emphasizing diversity in unity by fighting racism, sexism and other phobias; in authority, personal responsibility and costs for not joining a group; and in purity, emphasizing the environment and condemning materialism.
There is no silver bullet, but understanding this framework will help both sides understand each other better... and realize we're all on the same human spectrum.
***Afterthoughts***
So then, are morals just social constructions passed down to us by the traditions of society? Some would argue this. Other would argue the Bible to be our guide, others tradition, others reason... and still others experience. These are the four pillars of theological argument (Scripture, tradition, reason & experience), and various pillars can be emphasized to bolster or tear down an argument.
I tend to lean towards Kant's categorical imperatives. He believes in a universal morality where you only will what you would want others to will, treating every human being as an end rather than a means and acting as if we all were legislating members.
Sounds a lot like Jesus' summary of scripture, aka the Golden Rule.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
The Subtle Knife
I just finished Book II of the trilogy, His Dark Materials, by Philip Pullman, entitled The Subtle Knife. I enjoyed but was not very impressed by the first one, The Golden Compass, and also heard the movie wasn't very good. The second book, however, is wonderful. The first one set the stage for a wonderful world, and the second takes it a runs away with the ideas and concepts and characters (similar to the first and second Matrix movies). I highly recommend it to anyone interested in a fantasy-exploration of original sin and the question of "What is consciousness?"
I also found this quote most interesting:
"I found folly everywhere, but there were grains of wisdom in every stream of it. No doubt there was much more wisdom that I failed to recognize. Life is hard, Mr. Scoresby, but we cling to it all the same." (281)
This line of thinking falls well into my trial-by-error philosophy, similar to the "trial-and-error" method used by many. Inevitably we will come up short in our endeavors, as we reach the limits of ourselves or others. Yet even in the shortcomings were are graced with nuggets of knowledge that help illumine our minds.
And the other related thought is also important: Indeed, life is hard, yet it's all we have. So cling to it - it's a choice we make every day.
As I'm reminded in the film The Dead Poet's Society, Carpe Diem!
Have you seized the day today?
I also found this quote most interesting:
"I found folly everywhere, but there were grains of wisdom in every stream of it. No doubt there was much more wisdom that I failed to recognize. Life is hard, Mr. Scoresby, but we cling to it all the same." (281)
This line of thinking falls well into my trial-by-error philosophy, similar to the "trial-and-error" method used by many. Inevitably we will come up short in our endeavors, as we reach the limits of ourselves or others. Yet even in the shortcomings were are graced with nuggets of knowledge that help illumine our minds.
And the other related thought is also important: Indeed, life is hard, yet it's all we have. So cling to it - it's a choice we make every day.
As I'm reminded in the film The Dead Poet's Society, Carpe Diem!
Have you seized the day today?
Friday, August 8, 2008
Stacked Deck
I recently read this post by Judith Warner from the NYTimes.com who talks about how many younger people are seeing the success of the historic struggles of equal rights as establishing rules that can be bent to favor some over others. The answer is to cheat wherever possible to get ahead. It gives the particular example of high school students reaching back generations to find a minority in their blood so they could mark their ethnicity other than 'white.'
Our democracy has become a meritocracy. Everyone is in competition, and only the strongest (or most deserving, successful, cheat-savvy, etc.) survive to compete the next day.
In another blog by Dan Schnur, I read about how the campaigns are turning negative, trying to prove their opponent is not trustworthy as president of the U.S. In this situation, we have lost all trust in our fellow brother and sister.
In an age when we're closer to our IM buddies than our neighbors, we need more person-to-person, face-to-face time with each other - for discussion, for dialogue, for discerning our communal call to be a people of faith and love and hope (1 Cor 13).
Whatever life deals us, let us encourage one another in the faith, that God is the giver of Light of all good gifts (James 1:17), and God is there with us through the muck AND the open road. May be thankful, may we be humble, may we be hopeful for a better tomorrow for all beings everywhere.
Our democracy has become a meritocracy. Everyone is in competition, and only the strongest (or most deserving, successful, cheat-savvy, etc.) survive to compete the next day.
In another blog by Dan Schnur, I read about how the campaigns are turning negative, trying to prove their opponent is not trustworthy as president of the U.S. In this situation, we have lost all trust in our fellow brother and sister.
In an age when we're closer to our IM buddies than our neighbors, we need more person-to-person, face-to-face time with each other - for discussion, for dialogue, for discerning our communal call to be a people of faith and love and hope (1 Cor 13).
Whatever life deals us, let us encourage one another in the faith, that God is the giver of Light of all good gifts (James 1:17), and God is there with us through the muck AND the open road. May be thankful, may we be humble, may we be hopeful for a better tomorrow for all beings everywhere.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
The Dark Knight
I recently saw the Dark Night, the most recent Batman movie, excellently directed by Christopher Nolan and wonderfully written by him and his brother Jonathan. I think the movie explores some great themes on what terrorism does to a society, and how we might respond - explored here on another blog.
I had some thoughts of my own about the movie, especially as it relates to fate and free will. It won't make much sense without seeing the movie, and there are some spoilers... so see it!
Each of the movie's 3 main characters (let alone the others, like Rachel, the mayor & Gordon, who offer their own views on the situation) have a different worldtview, which plays into how they respond to terror, coming from being dealt a “bad hand” (Batman’s parents gunned down, the Joker’s abusive father, Dent’s love loss).
I had some thoughts of my own about the movie, especially as it relates to fate and free will. It won't make much sense without seeing the movie, and there are some spoilers... so see it!
Each of the movie's 3 main characters (let alone the others, like Rachel, the mayor & Gordon, who offer their own views on the situation) have a different worldtview, which plays into how they respond to terror, coming from being dealt a “bad hand” (Batman’s parents gunned down, the Joker’s abusive father, Dent’s love loss).
Dent sees the world completely through the lens of chance, of fate and causality. By chance he lives another day and doesn’t get shot in the courtroom, and by chance he lives through the Joker’s attack on the armored van. He’ll take his chances. But what irks him is when those chances are coerced by people behind the scenes - as the Joker explains to him in the hospital bed - and then he feels cheated. He goes on a killing spree, but still leaves it to chance (a flip of a coin) whether they live or die; more of a way to absolve him responsibility of their deaths, and instead blame it on fate/the coin.
The other two characters respond different to the theme of free will and fate. Batman continually exercises his free will, fighting on behalf of the innocent/good versus the forces of evil. He believes there is always a choice to fight, yet all the while realizes that he could very well lose everything, and all his efforts might be in vain.
The Joker has the most interesting and terrifying response- he seems to see the world as a terrible place, having lost faith in people (like Dent) in being good. Yet he refuses to believe in fate either, choosing instead to control the situation before him (as Gordon says, the Joker wanted to be caught, wanted to be held in central command so he could blow it up). Ironically, the Joker’s amazing and careful planning ends up creating the most anarchy of all, and everyone else is left in the dust trying to catch up to him.
So as the US responds to terror, do we become controllers and believe that it’s better we’re in control rather than someone else (the Joker), do we become fatalists and believe it’s all just a matter of chance (Two-Face), or do we become believers in the good and choose to fight evil wherever we come across it, promoting good even in the face of staggering odds (Batman)?
Update: For another excellent piece on what the Dark Knight means for us, please see this NYTimes Op-Ed Piece by Johnathan Lethem: "our good faith with ourselves is broken, too, a cost of silencing or at best mumbling the most crucial truths."
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Consent v. Effort
"The chief act of the will
is not effort
but consent."
Thomas Keating uses these words as he talks about comtemplation, and what to do when confronting difficulties in prayer: Will I accept (consent) difficulties or will I fight (effort) them?
I wonder what would happen if we took this approach to life in general. Certainly there are particular things we should not accept, perhaps letting the crisis in Darfur go on or preventing people from getting emergeny food or housing assistance.
Yet far too often we are prone to disagree with people and as a result remain stagnant in our own preconceptions. Nicholas Kristof's recent article does a wonderful job explaining how people tend to interpret the same information to solidify their positions and buttress their preconceived notions... often with the effect of reinforcing prejudice.
What if we were more inclined to accept the difficulties in understanding one another, rather than reeling out of control with every bump in the road?
This past weekend I had a wonderful retreat with my Trinity community house members. As part of our time together, we made an "affirmation circle," where we chose one person at a time to affirm, giving them positive feedback to what they mean in our lives and to the life of the house. It was an incredibly powerful and moving time... and without criticism.
Let us be more prone to consent to the things we cannot change, and use effort only when their is a clear injustice. In this way, let us promote unity rather than disunity, and peace rather than conflict.
is not effort
but consent."
Thomas Keating uses these words as he talks about comtemplation, and what to do when confronting difficulties in prayer: Will I accept (consent) difficulties or will I fight (effort) them?
I wonder what would happen if we took this approach to life in general. Certainly there are particular things we should not accept, perhaps letting the crisis in Darfur go on or preventing people from getting emergeny food or housing assistance.
Yet far too often we are prone to disagree with people and as a result remain stagnant in our own preconceptions. Nicholas Kristof's recent article does a wonderful job explaining how people tend to interpret the same information to solidify their positions and buttress their preconceived notions... often with the effect of reinforcing prejudice.
What if we were more inclined to accept the difficulties in understanding one another, rather than reeling out of control with every bump in the road?
This past weekend I had a wonderful retreat with my Trinity community house members. As part of our time together, we made an "affirmation circle," where we chose one person at a time to affirm, giving them positive feedback to what they mean in our lives and to the life of the house. It was an incredibly powerful and moving time... and without criticism.
Let us be more prone to consent to the things we cannot change, and use effort only when their is a clear injustice. In this way, let us promote unity rather than disunity, and peace rather than conflict.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Roasting Marshmellows
Getting our hands & minds ready to roast 'mellows
Luke was not only a Doctor, but also our Examiner of Marshmellows
Talitha: Burn Baby Burn
Notice the angle of her elbow - so precise
Burned 'mellows Galore
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Trinity House Retreat
This weekend Talitha, Elizabeth, myself, Andrew, Erin and Luke (from L to R)
all took a retreat to Mission Springs, CA (about 1.5 hours away).
There we relaxed in the sun and spent time together, reflecting on the past year
and affirming what each of us mean to the house and each other.
We prayed, too: Luke the "Imam" as Erin just laughs...
On our way up to the firepit, where we had "hobo-packets" for dinner:
foiled packets with all kinds of goodness inside.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Calvin and Faith
Today in Theology we talked about what John Calvin's answer was to the question of the semester: What is faith?
For Calvin, faith is the knowledge of God's good will in our lives (primarily through Scripture and Tradition); the trust or confidence in this knowledge that God is love and loves us; and, the boldness of action to respond to our belief in the knowledge of God.
In the Age of Information, I think too often we stop short of going beyond the first element. We receive new knowledge everyday, especially through the news cycle. But do we really believe it, especially when there are contradicting perspectives? And when do we ever take action?
NPR has a wonderful program series called This I Believe, where people give their various perspectives of what they believe. I have yet to hear one that did not talk about how what they believe affects how they live.
What do you believe? I'm not asking what you think, but what do you put your trust in, and how do you act based on this trust?
In this sense, we all act based on the belief in something - that the ground will not fall out beneath us, that the economy is (not) in a recession, that we will be around to withdraw from our IRA or Social Security accounts...
We all live by faith. Now let us live out our faith consciously.
For Calvin, faith is the knowledge of God's good will in our lives (primarily through Scripture and Tradition); the trust or confidence in this knowledge that God is love and loves us; and, the boldness of action to respond to our belief in the knowledge of God.
In the Age of Information, I think too often we stop short of going beyond the first element. We receive new knowledge everyday, especially through the news cycle. But do we really believe it, especially when there are contradicting perspectives? And when do we ever take action?
NPR has a wonderful program series called This I Believe, where people give their various perspectives of what they believe. I have yet to hear one that did not talk about how what they believe affects how they live.
What do you believe? I'm not asking what you think, but what do you put your trust in, and how do you act based on this trust?
In this sense, we all act based on the belief in something - that the ground will not fall out beneath us, that the economy is (not) in a recession, that we will be around to withdraw from our IRA or Social Security accounts...
We all live by faith. Now let us live out our faith consciously.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
War At What Cost
Please see Nicholas D. Kristof's excellent article, which inspired this post.
Last week marked the 5-year anniversary, if one can call something so tragic in what's often used as a celebratory term, of the Iraq War. A group of seminarians and myself held a nighttime candlelight vigil, walking around campus and singing hymns for peace. We then gathered at the top of the hill to circle around and pray for those suffering from the war.
We've now passed the "Four Thousand Mark" in Iraq, a number none of were hoping we'd make: 4,000 servicemen and women dead, and another 30,000 injured and 100,000 diagnosed with a mental health issue like PTSD.
The $20 billion we're spending each month is the equivalent of $411 million per day or $5,000 per second... ... ... ... ... ... there goes my starting salaray as a pastor. A Congressional study found that the money spent each day in Iraq could fund an additional 58,000 children in Head Start or give 153,000 students Pell Grants for a year!
Total estimates for the war range from 1.2 to 3 TRILLION DOLLARS! Many are saying the war spending has had at least some effect on the current economic crisis. And yet we've borrowed all this money to pay for the war so far, as if we're charging the whole thing on credit. We (as in, my generation) will be paying for this war more than just with our lives, but with our livelihoods.
Since the so-called "surge" I do think there has been marginal 'success', if one can call a reduction in violence to now about one soldier's death a day, 'better.' The problem is that we're part of the 'solution', and as long as we're part of the solution, we'll be in Iraq indefinitely. Some think that's the card we have to play, but don't forget that 88% of active and retired military personnel believe Iraq is stretching our military forces dangerously thin.
Let's work for peace and pray our troops return home safely. Let's ask ourselves how we can best spend our resources. And let's work for a better tomorrow for all.
Last week marked the 5-year anniversary, if one can call something so tragic in what's often used as a celebratory term, of the Iraq War. A group of seminarians and myself held a nighttime candlelight vigil, walking around campus and singing hymns for peace. We then gathered at the top of the hill to circle around and pray for those suffering from the war.
We've now passed the "Four Thousand Mark" in Iraq, a number none of were hoping we'd make: 4,000 servicemen and women dead, and another 30,000 injured and 100,000 diagnosed with a mental health issue like PTSD.
The $20 billion we're spending each month is the equivalent of $411 million per day or $5,000 per second... ... ... ... ... ... there goes my starting salaray as a pastor. A Congressional study found that the money spent each day in Iraq could fund an additional 58,000 children in Head Start or give 153,000 students Pell Grants for a year!
Total estimates for the war range from 1.2 to 3 TRILLION DOLLARS! Many are saying the war spending has had at least some effect on the current economic crisis. And yet we've borrowed all this money to pay for the war so far, as if we're charging the whole thing on credit. We (as in, my generation) will be paying for this war more than just with our lives, but with our livelihoods.
Since the so-called "surge" I do think there has been marginal 'success', if one can call a reduction in violence to now about one soldier's death a day, 'better.' The problem is that we're part of the 'solution', and as long as we're part of the solution, we'll be in Iraq indefinitely. Some think that's the card we have to play, but don't forget that 88% of active and retired military personnel believe Iraq is stretching our military forces dangerously thin.
Let's work for peace and pray our troops return home safely. Let's ask ourselves how we can best spend our resources. And let's work for a better tomorrow for all.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Pain at the Pump
After reading a NY Times Opinion piece...
My dad arrives tomorrow for a camping trip down to Big Sur, and that got me thinking about gas prices. (Ever since Emily's been here, I've let her use my car under the condition that I pay for insurance and she pays for gas.) While the average national price per gallon is a record $3.28, the average price in California is around $3.60. And yes, we have higher gasoline taxes here, among other things.
While oil is now over $100-a-barrel, U.S. consumer demand actually fell the first couple months of the year for the first time since 1997. Even so, the world demand shows no sign of diminishing, with India and China fastly coming on board to the age of personal, motorized transport we Americans have been enjoying for several generations. Meanwhile, oppressive regimes in Iran, Russia, Venzuela and Sudan are all benefiting with record profits.
I agree with the NY Times editorial piece that we need a new energy policy, and no, ethanol is not the answer. We need to harness renewable sources like wind, water and the sun, and progress is being made, from upstart companies to the well-entrenched. Our government should invest in R&D for these technologies, rather than focusing exclusively on oil.
Meanwhile, let us be economic in our consumption, walking or biking when we can and carpooling as much as possible. If we are self-disciplined in our desires, we can be good stewards of our limited resources.
(I suppose going down to Big Sur isn't necessary, but once there we'll be sure to hike a lot... and post some pictures!)
My dad arrives tomorrow for a camping trip down to Big Sur, and that got me thinking about gas prices. (Ever since Emily's been here, I've let her use my car under the condition that I pay for insurance and she pays for gas.) While the average national price per gallon is a record $3.28, the average price in California is around $3.60. And yes, we have higher gasoline taxes here, among other things.
While oil is now over $100-a-barrel, U.S. consumer demand actually fell the first couple months of the year for the first time since 1997. Even so, the world demand shows no sign of diminishing, with India and China fastly coming on board to the age of personal, motorized transport we Americans have been enjoying for several generations. Meanwhile, oppressive regimes in Iran, Russia, Venzuela and Sudan are all benefiting with record profits.
I agree with the NY Times editorial piece that we need a new energy policy, and no, ethanol is not the answer. We need to harness renewable sources like wind, water and the sun, and progress is being made, from upstart companies to the well-entrenched. Our government should invest in R&D for these technologies, rather than focusing exclusively on oil.
Meanwhile, let us be economic in our consumption, walking or biking when we can and carpooling as much as possible. If we are self-disciplined in our desires, we can be good stewards of our limited resources.
(I suppose going down to Big Sur isn't necessary, but once there we'll be sure to hike a lot... and post some pictures!)
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Prophetic Preaching: The Same Light
Written at 6am when I couldn't return to sleep...
This morning I awoke from a dream where I was in church and a preacher was (once again) declaring homosexuality as a sin. The unique part was that he opened up the space for a time of questions/comments after the sermon. (I have often wondered what would happen if preachers did this after any sermon.)
The air was very thick. I could feel the blood pumping through my veins, my muscles straining yet frozen where I was. A few people were crying. A thousand and one reasons came to my mind why I disagreed with him, but my final answer did not arrive until I awoke.
You see, I believe that 3,300 some years ago, a group of people cried out to their god and were delivered. They had seen a great light, and they had believed.
Later, when their ancestors were straining under the oppression of the Romans, they cried out once more, except this time the light shed to the whole world. Yet over time, humans tried to put this light out, and its message grew dimmer and dimmer.
Until once again, this very light led the African slaves out of slavery, gave the women freedom to vote, through off the yoke of colonialism in India, and continues to reveal itself in miraculous ways. Today, that same light still shines, and will lead us beyond ourselves and our debate about homosexuality.
So getting back to my answer... we are to embrace one another, to gently and firmly seize hold of the other, to physically bridge the divide as our emotions and thoughts catch up. As our chapel preacher and Marin Interfaith Director invoked Friday, we need to have more face-to-face encounters with 'the other'.
My answer is a hug. And not just one, but many, many hugs... symbolizing the gracious nature of our Loving God, shining through in the person(a) of Jesus Christ.
This morning I awoke from a dream where I was in church and a preacher was (once again) declaring homosexuality as a sin. The unique part was that he opened up the space for a time of questions/comments after the sermon. (I have often wondered what would happen if preachers did this after any sermon.)
The air was very thick. I could feel the blood pumping through my veins, my muscles straining yet frozen where I was. A few people were crying. A thousand and one reasons came to my mind why I disagreed with him, but my final answer did not arrive until I awoke.
You see, I believe that 3,300 some years ago, a group of people cried out to their god and were delivered. They had seen a great light, and they had believed.
Later, when their ancestors were straining under the oppression of the Romans, they cried out once more, except this time the light shed to the whole world. Yet over time, humans tried to put this light out, and its message grew dimmer and dimmer.
Until once again, this very light led the African slaves out of slavery, gave the women freedom to vote, through off the yoke of colonialism in India, and continues to reveal itself in miraculous ways. Today, that same light still shines, and will lead us beyond ourselves and our debate about homosexuality.
So getting back to my answer... we are to embrace one another, to gently and firmly seize hold of the other, to physically bridge the divide as our emotions and thoughts catch up. As our chapel preacher and Marin Interfaith Director invoked Friday, we need to have more face-to-face encounters with 'the other'.
My answer is a hug. And not just one, but many, many hugs... symbolizing the gracious nature of our Loving God, shining through in the person(a) of Jesus Christ.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Power Outage
It’s amazing how much we rely on certain things in life. Call them your “baselines.” Perhaps your baseline is that you will keep your job, have a car that runs or have a loved one always there for you… yet all these things (or persons) will pass you by, sooner or later.
For me, my baseline was electricity. Another big storm has hit the U.S., and this time it’s once again in my neck of the woods, the Bay Area. Powerful gusts over the night eventually knocked out the power this morning.
At first, nothing changed. I still reached for the light switch, looked at the clock and put my food in the microwave. After my experctations weren’t met, I remembered the reality of the situation: there is no power. And I have struggled to feel powerless.
All today, I’ve had to re-think the answers to many of my questions: Don’t know something? Look it up online… oh, wait. Need to email someone? Just… nope. Get some reading done? Snuggle up in a chair and… better be by a window.
Gradually I’ve transitioned into a different state, were power is not just in electrons and time does not feel like eons. I can still read for my classes, write thank you notes (long overdue), reflect on life, play guitar, meditate… and just be, with out the need for excessive energy.
For after all, electricity is a luxury: one-third (over 2 billion) of the world’s population do without it everyday. Taking one more step in solidarity – not by choice, but lived into.
Oh, and how was I able to write this? With the wonderful invention of battery power… only to post it later when all’s back to ‘normal.’
For me, my baseline was electricity. Another big storm has hit the U.S., and this time it’s once again in my neck of the woods, the Bay Area. Powerful gusts over the night eventually knocked out the power this morning.
At first, nothing changed. I still reached for the light switch, looked at the clock and put my food in the microwave. After my experctations weren’t met, I remembered the reality of the situation: there is no power. And I have struggled to feel powerless.
All today, I’ve had to re-think the answers to many of my questions: Don’t know something? Look it up online… oh, wait. Need to email someone? Just… nope. Get some reading done? Snuggle up in a chair and… better be by a window.
Gradually I’ve transitioned into a different state, were power is not just in electrons and time does not feel like eons. I can still read for my classes, write thank you notes (long overdue), reflect on life, play guitar, meditate… and just be, with out the need for excessive energy.
For after all, electricity is a luxury: one-third (over 2 billion) of the world’s population do without it everyday. Taking one more step in solidarity – not by choice, but lived into.
Oh, and how was I able to write this? With the wonderful invention of battery power… only to post it later when all’s back to ‘normal.’
Monday, January 28, 2008
Kenya's Darkest Days
As I write this, the violence continues in Kenya after December's disputed presidential elections. It has not reached levels like that seen (and fled from) by the West in Rwanda, but it's taking on the tone of ethnic cleansing as tribal gangs kill one another in towns across the Rift Valley. The leaders of the two main groups, the government and the opposition, will hopefully begin official talks this week under the mediation of Former UN GS Kofi Annan. (For further information, see this article and check the bbc.com for the latest.)
At this point, I don't know what else to do besides donate money to the Red Cross Kenya, and certainly PRAY. Pray for the political leaders, that a peaceful solution can be reached. Pray for the street leaders, that they will be temperate in the actions and not reprise violence with more blood. Pray for the poorly trained and equipped military personnel, that they have the courage to keep order and the wisdom not to exacerbate the situation. And pray for the people of Kenya, that they will all work for peace, stability and democracy, and not give up on the dreams of their fathers and mothers. A dream of peace, a dream of a nation of their own, a dream of hope for their children.
(So far none of the violence has harmed my friends over there, but there are many I have not heard from... please keep them in your prayers, too: Amos, Michael, Mosogu, Deborah, David, and others in Nairobi - Cathy, Wycliffe, Njeri, Joyce, Andrew, Esther, Beatrice, Nancy, Mary, Sarah - and the YAVs in Kenya this year... and all the families caught up and split up in the turmoil.)
At this point, I don't know what else to do besides donate money to the Red Cross Kenya, and certainly PRAY. Pray for the political leaders, that a peaceful solution can be reached. Pray for the street leaders, that they will be temperate in the actions and not reprise violence with more blood. Pray for the poorly trained and equipped military personnel, that they have the courage to keep order and the wisdom not to exacerbate the situation. And pray for the people of Kenya, that they will all work for peace, stability and democracy, and not give up on the dreams of their fathers and mothers. A dream of peace, a dream of a nation of their own, a dream of hope for their children.
(So far none of the violence has harmed my friends over there, but there are many I have not heard from... please keep them in your prayers, too: Amos, Michael, Mosogu, Deborah, David, and others in Nairobi - Cathy, Wycliffe, Njeri, Joyce, Andrew, Esther, Beatrice, Nancy, Mary, Sarah - and the YAVs in Kenya this year... and all the families caught up and split up in the turmoil.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)