July 2016 - Page 2 of 2 - Country Parson

Reflections on the Last Three Days

July 9, 2016 Steven WoolleyLeave a comment

Tears, anguish, anger, frustration. As with many others, they are my feelings this morning. Feelings like that can inform thinking, but they are not a substitute for thinking. Thinking requires time for reflection in which feelings can be checked against available evidence, and possible decisions can be evaluated against likely consequences. Thinking is what enables us to deescalate violence, to refrain from acts of revenge, and to consider how the good of others might be served by what we say and do. Thinking is what opens the door to the possibility that the others, whose good we seek, can be, perhaps should be, others who are not like us. Thinking is what enables us to know when it’s time for action, what that action should be, and how it contributes to building up the community in justice.

I’ve been thinking about the assassination of cops in Dallas who were doing their work peacefully among those at a peaceful rally. Yes, as a nation we have a problem with what is called police violence, but too much of the protest has not been about solutions. It’s been about making cops, all cops, the enemy. Making enemies is what leads to what happened in Dallas. It’s an inexcusable outrage. I work with cops. I like cops. Around here they work for the community and with the community, and they do it well in spite of the danger of being in harm’s way at any moment. As our chief said today, “All of us are part of this community, have family and friends who are part of the community, and have well established relationships in the community. It’s not an us vs. them, it’s just us. Now is the time to work at strengthening the relationships we have and making new ones.” — Walla Walla Police Chief Scott Bieber

I’ve been thinking about the killing of black men and women, and whether “Black Lives Matter.” You bet they do, but they haven’t mattered much for a very long time. We have to be honest about that, and there are way too many of us for whom they still don’t matter. We have to be honest about that too. The Civil War ended officially in 1865, but it’s not over, not really. The civil rights acts of the mid 1960s were signs that the end might be near; that was fifty years ago and we’re not there yet. Until we can say Black lives matter, it’s a delusion to say all lives matter. It’s nothing more than a way to avoid hard truths, avoid responsibility. I wrote this a few days ago, but it bears repeating that some of us must be reminded that the nation is not going back to some mythical (whiter) better time. If we are to be true to our American Dream we can only go forward into a future that embraces a more diverse population that is less divided, offering more equitable opportunities, and from which new social values will emerge that will strengthen the fabric of society in new ways. Moreover, we, and and that includes me, whose birthright has given us precedence over all others for access to the rewards of the American Dream can no longer claim it be ours alone. The biggest obstacle confronting us is that we are not inclined to share.

Who’s to blame? Social media was flowing with angry words of blame this morning. Blame is the coward’s way out. Blame is an excuse to avoid responsibility. Blame is a tool for putting our guilt on the heads of others. Blame has been the weapon of choice for self aggrandizement by national leaders who are leading us toward self destruction, the so called Freedom Caucus and friends chief among them. If we want to be a community at peace, each of us must take the responsibility to be honest about how our own beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors contribute toward building up or tearing down. As Jesus said, …”how can you say to your neighbor, ‘Friend, let me take out the speck in your eye,’ when you yourself do not see the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor’s eye.”

Taking Delight in that which Delights the Other

July 8, 2016 Steven WoolleyLeave a comment

Take delight in that which delights the other. I wrote a piece on that some years ago, and it’s time for it to come up again because it came up in a conversation with a young friend of mine who has been married almost ten years, and has discovered that his wife really enjoys doing certain things in which he has absolutely no interest. To his surprise, the reverse is equally true. She’s not really into some of his favorite sports. Are they growing apart? What should he do about it?

The healthiest and happiest marriages I know of are characterized by flexibility, forgiveness, trust, and delight in that which delights the other. By flexibility I mean that while they never lose touch with each other, they also have significant degrees of freedom to explore and experience new things, each on their own. It also means that there is no place for fundamentalist ideas about the man being the ruler of the household, or that being made “one flesh” implies a melding of two personalities into one entity dominated by one of them.

Forgiveness, of course, has to do with the reality that married people fail each other from time to time in all kinds of ways, sometimes intentionally, but usually not. Forgiveness is about reconciliation, and reconciliation is about confession, acceptance of responsibility, and amendment of life. Think of it as a continuing series of mostly small mid-course corrections that are made throughout life together. Forgiveness also means something else. We talk about the characteristic of forgiveness in something that can accommodate an inexperienced or not very competent user. A friend has a horse who is forgiving of inexperienced riders. Another friend flies a small plane he says is forgiving of pilots who are good enough but not experts. You get the idea. Forgiveness and flexibility have a lot to do with each other.

Trust means that each partner has faith that the other will not betray or hurt them, at least not intentionally, and certainly not in any life shattering way. My friends Ernie and Margaret have been married for over sixty years; they each say that trust means they know the other will be there for them and with them. Trust means being dedicated to the integrity of the relationship. Trust is never a one way street. For trust to be present, it must go in both directions. Trust also encompasses the venial sins of which we are all guilty, embracing them in forgiveness (as understood above). “I trust that you love me even if I am not very lovable today.”

So that brings us to the main event: take delight in that which delights the other. It’s not unusual for lovers in their courtship days to crow about how much they like the same things, and it’s true. But a maturing relationship soon reveals that each has his or her own interests not shared by the other. There are new things to learn, experience, try, and work at that may have little appeal for the other. For some that means growing apart. It can mean the end of the marriage, but it shouldn’t. The key is to take delight in that which delights the other. Here are some personal examples. My wife was a competitive runner. Running as sport is of zero interest to me, but I was delighted (found happiness) in the delight that running gave to her. I love to snorkel and have enjoyed free diving. She is not comfortable snorkeling, and worries about any free diving I still try to do, but she takes delight in how happy it makes me feel. She’s an artist. I’m a writer. We work in separate spaces, and keep them far apart. But we each take delight in the delight that other has in the work they do. Those who learn to take delight in that which delights the other are the ones who stand before their friends on their fiftieth or sixtieth wedding anniversary as a couple still passionately in love with each other, even though one is into quilting and the other plays golf every day.

Yes, it’s wonderful to discover how much you and your loved one have in common, and to celebrate it as often as possible. But it’s never too early to begin the process of learning how to take delight in that which delights the other. In the end it will take your romance to ever higher, more enduring levels.

Another Reality Check for Progressives

July 6, 2016 Steven Woolley7 Comments

It should not be hard to understand why at least some Brexit voters did what they did, and are not sorry about it even after being told about the disastrous effects it would have, and is having, on the British economy and the stability of world order. Let’s say you are someone living in the Midlands on barely enough to get by, and with little prospect for anything better. Or suppose you are living in a tiny, overcrowded apartment in a big city with little hope of joining the ranks of the well off. So what if the British economy tanks? You are already in recession, if not depression. How much worse could it get? Not much. Maybe it would do some good for the high living swells in London to find out what it’s like to hurt a little. So what if the stock market takes a dive? You don’t have any stocks to worry about. If imports become more expensive, what does it matter? You can’t afford them anyway. If it’s more difficult to export, so what? How can that hurt you? If the Pound sinks to rock bottom, well, you don’t have many in your pocket as it is. Who cares? World order? What the heck is that? Just read the papers or watch t.v., there doesn’t seem to be much order in the world as it is. What you want is protection, security, and a better chance at a better life.

The politicians who run the country have never cared one way or the other about you, and you don’t care about them either. Conservative, Liberal, Labour, some goofy Green Party, what difference does it make?

Pay attention American political leaders. That same attitude infects a very large segment of the American population as well. It’s one reason Trump is doing as well as he is. If nothing else, he’s sticking it to the political elite, and blasting away with atrocious political incorrectness that echoes the underlying prejudices of a public that knows how morally disreputable they are, but they feel that way anyway. They know they should change, but they don’t want to, and they aren’t going to.

I read the Facebook entries of people I know well as otherwise decent people, but their posts are filled with unrestrained vitriol for President Obama and Hillary Clinton. Why? Because Obama is the visible sign that their place at the top of the race and power pyramid is collapsing under them right in front of their eyes, and because Hillary represents everything they hate and distrust about the political establishment, regardless of party. Since these Facebook friends have never expressed any outrage over, or knowledge about, real and egregious crimes and misdemeanors by officials in previous governments, it suggests that something else is at play. What might that be? It’s classical scapegoating related to a profound disconnect between the conditions of their lives in the communities where they live from the parts of the economy that are doing well for a select few. That’s combined with a deep distrust of elected representatives whom they believe are bought an paid for by big money interests. Oddly enough, the part of the country in which I live has a history of electing representatives who run as conservatives on social values, but whose legislative records do serious damage to the economic issues most important to the people who are being elbowed out of the American Dream. Yet they get reelected by large margins. It is a disconnect of stunning proportions. Even odder, they are aided and abetted by substantial numbers of relatively wealthy folks who have done quite well these last few years, but who, I suspect, are disappointed that they are poor millionaires instead of rich millionaires. They are also angry at the prospect of no longer being recognized as having the legitimate, rightful power and position that they believe is their birthright. It’s a strange business. Some will vote against their own best interests because they don’t understand the consequences of their actions, or because they figure they can’t be hurt much more, and besides, maybe it’s time to take the corporate and political elite down a few notches. Others will vote to protect their place on the top of the pile. There are scapegoats in abundance to justify it.

What to do? More than anything, I believe that centrist candidates must be willing to talk with them, not to them; respect them as important members of the community; and demonstrate that informed constituents can have genuine access to the legislative process with real influence. That, at least, has to be a start. The next part is harder. With calm words of certainty, thought leaders need to be forthright about taxes as investments by the community in the community, and it’s time for serious talk about what we want to and need to invest in. We have to get over the delusion that taxes are bad, lower taxes are better, and no taxes are best.

With equally calm words of certainty, thought leaders must make it clear that the nation is not going back to some mythical (whiter) better time. If we are to be true to our American Dream we can only go forward into a future that embraces a more diverse population that is less divided, offering more equitable opportunities, and from which new social values will emerge that will strengthen the fabric of society in new ways. That’s a hard sell. It won’t be easy.

What about the folks whose birthright gave them precedence over all others for access to the rewards of the American Dream? It will no longer be theirs alone, and they are not inclined to want to share. That’s an even harder sell.

Amos and Us.

July 5, 2016 Steven WoolleyLeave a comment

Liturgical congregations will hear from the prophet Amos over the next several Sundays. He’s always been my favorite of the ethical prophets. More than others, he enumerated the sins not only of Israel, but also of the surrounding nations. They are worthy of our attention because they are the sins of our modern world as well. Moreover, they imply the characteristics of a political agenda that might find favor in God’s sight, and they offer some simple words of guidance for those of us who profess faith in God. I’ll leave it to you to read Amos for yourself to see what you think, but here is what I think such an agenda might look like.

Even for enemies do not use the food of the people as a weapon.
Refrain from ethnic cleansing.
Maintain integrity in international negotiations and relations.
Foster civil harmony.
Provide for security of persons and possessions.
Show respect for legitimate civil authority.
Establish economic policies and practices that are fair to all, with an emphasis on the poor, oppressed, and marginalized.
Be fair and honest in all areas of trade, commerce, and personal relations.
Prohibit confiscatory interest rates on loans.
In fairness and with honesty, show no partiality in any application of justice.
Establish policies and practices that remove barriers to success in life, especially barriers that have been erected against the poor, oppressed, and marginalized.
Establish policies and practices that encourage constructive work for all and respect for all work.
Establish policies and practices that encourage fair taxation, and discourage inequitable patterns of income and wealth.
Refrain from arrogant, undue pride of nation or family.
Establish policies and practices that show generosity and compassion for the suffering, needy, oppressed, and marginalized.

Show awed respect for God’s holy places (including nature).
Have holy respect for all acts of intimacy, especially sexual intimacy.
Engage life in sobriety.
Allow God’s servants to speak freely as God inspires them.
Worship God honestly, intentionally, in heart, soul, and mind.
Refrain from the presumption of God’s grace for one’s self while oppressing others.

What is Common Sense?

July 1, 2016 Steven WoolleyLeave a comment

Someone posted an online article about an armed civilian who took down a robber at a convenience store. It happened somewhere, sometime. A friend who favors unregulated guns wondered why news media don’t report more incidents like this. After all, they prove to him that a well armed citizenry helps make everyone safer. I said they’re not reported on because they don’t happen very often, which led another acquaintance to suggest maybe I haven’t looked hard enough for stories that only make the local press because… . You can see where this conversation was headed. To get there a little quicker, I stood forth for common sense gun regulation.

That opened up the whole question of what common sense is, with my interlocutors claiming that whatever common sense people once had, they have it no longer. I’m not entirely sure what they meant by that, but suspect that, in the context of the conversation, it had to do with the erosion of what they believe commonly held standards of proper social and community behavior used to be. I have to guess at that because the conversation ended.

So, common sense, what is it? “That kid has no common sense!” “Liberals wouldn’t know common sense if it hit them on the head!” “If conservatives had an ounce of common sense they wouldn’t be so pigheaded!” “Used to be that people had common sense; now they don’t!” What does any of that mean? Philosophers have pondered the question for at least 2,000 years, but let’s face it, philosophers are not known for having a lot of common sense, and most of what they have to say is undecipherable by the common man or woman. I’m not sure they’re of much help.

The Shorter OED offers four meanings of common sense. One: an internal sense which is regarded as the bond or center of the five senses. It is what all other senses hold in common. I suppose a common man or woman might say it was what they feel in their gut or heart that makes sense to them. Two: the ordinary, normal, or average understanding about something without which a person would be thought foolish or insane. Three: the general sense of humanity, or of a community, about what is good, sound, practical, and generally sagacious. Four: philosophically, the nature of primary truths. There are those philosophers again. I think we can dispense with number four.

It’s a start. What is common has to be ordinary and broadly shared, we can at least agree on that. Using the OED as a prompt, it seems to me that one kind of common sense is that which we hold in common among our own tribe, and that can be easily communicated across cultures and languages to other tribes. For instance, common sense says that thing is a chair, and that a chair is normally used to sit in. We can all agree on that as a practical matter. Moreover, there is little doubt that our common sense understanding of what a chair is can be communicated across cultures and languages with relative ease. On the other hand, something like chopsticks might be more difficult to explain as eating utensils, but not insurmountably so. It’s just common sense.

It’s just common sense to know what standards of thought and behavior establish the boundaries of what is acceptable in one’s culture. Everyone knows that. Except that the standards are never fixed. They are always changing, sometimes in predictable ways, but often not. The way things used to be seems the right way because the way things are going is uncertain. How are we to know what is acceptable and what is not if the standards keep changing. It was bad enough when they changed slowly from generation to generation, but now they seem to change almost daily, and we don’t like it. Where did all the common sense go? Sometimes nostalgia gets confused for common sense. It isn’t. It’s just nostalgia, which isn’t a bad thing, but it’s not common sense.

Maybe common sense is the ability make decisions accommodating facts and circumstances that make up the reality of the situation while anticipating consequences. I can go with that. Common sense solutions to problems affecting the common good might then be the product of reasonable persons, who have common sense, arguing out an agreement between them in a civil manner. That sounds like common sense to me. I think I’ll stick with it.