Death in the interdependent web, radicalism in religion, and advice for combating fascism

Death in the interdependent web

The Rev. Dr. Tim Jensen, who among other things blogged about his 18-month battle with cancer as "the Eclectic Cleric," died on August 9. His brother Erik wrote an announcement the next day. The announcement, and the responses to Jensen's death, reflect the extent to which the Internet not only strengthens existing relationships, but creates new ones.

I know that he would have wanted me to thank all of you for your support in his battle with cancer and with your friendships, whether they were lifetime friendships or had lasted only for a short while. Your support gave him great strength and happiness, not only in his valiant struggle with cancer, but throughout his entire life. ("One Day Isle," August 10)

The Rev. Kit Ketcham followed Jensen in two pulpits.

When I learned that he had been diagnosed with lung cancer, my heart sank, but I was sure he would beat it. How could that spark be put out?

But it has been. Yet, somehow it still is here. Tim also served the congregation where I am right now, during a very tough year of growth and learning for them. He encouraged them in their work and helped them take steps forward. It may be true that our work in the world is how we are immortal. ("Ms. Kitty's Saloon and Road Show," August 10)

"PolityWonk" reflected on our "world of unjust death."

There are folks who would say that we die when we have nothing left to live for. I will accept this as a humanist version of the same thing: that each of us is unique, and the fulfillment of that uniqueness is our covenant with birth. But death poses a different question. I knew Tim well enough to know he had a few bothersome personal habits -- the cigarette, the extra dessert -- but also to know that he did not indulge these deeply, not even to the extent of many folks who live into the record books. There is simply no way to look at his death outside the tragedies of that earlier era he studied, the one in which too many of the good died young. There is nothing to say in my mind, except, this is a scary injustice. ("PolityWonk," August 11)

The Rev. Thom Belote had a long relationship with Jensen.

My relationship with Tim was multifaceted. We were colleagues. We were friends. I considered him my mentor and he considered me his protégé. And yet, all of these ways in which we were related were secondary. He was my minister, my pastor; I was his “parishioner.” As a life-long Unitarian Universalist and as a minister for the past 6+ years I have been ministered to by my colleagues more times than I can count. That is what we do as colleagues. But care does not define my relationship with those colleagues. They’ve been colleagues, friends, teammates, advisors, mentors, advisees, mentees, and so on. But, I have had only two other colleagues besides Tim whom I have been able to call my minister first, and all those other things second. How do you minister, I mean really minister, to your minister? ("RevThom," August 11)

Public discourse and healthcare in America

David Pyle comments on how the breadth of what America is, is obscured by the painfully heartfelt expression, "I want my country back!"

What has fascinated me about this phenomena is that it is one of the clearest expressions of the results of idol worship in recent memory that did not directly have to do with God. The energy, the feelings and emotions that people express when they shout a tearful “I Want My Country Back”, has nothing to do with their country being taken away, but rather with the idol they had made of their country being proven to be insufficient to encompass all that America is. ("Celestial Lands," August 11)

The Rev. Kit Ketcham compares this national situation to that of churches who resist change (even when necessary).

Is the stubborn church at war with itself the true picture of religious faith? Is the nation at war with itself the true picture of democracy? There is an inherent right to dissent, both in our churches and in our nation. The danger comes when that dissent is fueled by lies and paranoia. ("Ms. Kitty's Saloon and Roadshow," August 11)

The Rev. Fred L. Hammond responds to those who say they "are afraid of Obama because he is a socialist."

And just what is so bad about socialism? The countries that are socialist democracies last I knew were our strongest allies and friends in the world. These countries tend to defend our most outrageous decisions like invading Iraq. I mean they are our staunchest friends not enemies. Friends can learn from friends. Perhaps we could learn from them about how to better care for our citizens. ("A Unitarian Universalist Minister in the South," August 11)

Chip gets down to basics:

This is not about politics, it is not about conservative vs. liberal, it’s about doing the morally right thing, and offering better health care to more people. ("The Yes Church," August 12)

Beacon Press's "Beacon Broadside" has an essay by author Kai Wright:

If ever there was a "teachable moment" about race in modern America, now is it. With the birthers and the reparations conspiracy theories and the Nazi imagery at health care meetings, someone's gotta explain why all these white folks are wilding out. We need an articulate, impassioned race man to clarify things. But not Al Sharpton; I say pass the mic to Jim Webb.

Remember way back when Webb, a Democratic senator from Virginia and the voice of Appalachia's neglected white yeoman, was sniffing around a veep nod? In the midst of that media moment, he hit on an idea we'd do well to dwell upon. "Black America and Scots-Irish America are like tortured siblings," Webb patiently explained to Pat Buchanan in a May 2008 Morning Joe appearance on MSNBC. "There's a saying in the Appalachian mountains. . . 'If you're poor and white, you're out of sight.'" ("Beacon Broadside," August 13)

David Pyle wants religious faiths to take a higher view.

I still have a sense of unease when someone calls for our faith (or any religious faith) to be involved in the formulation, proposition, or support of policy.

I know that there are those who wish the UUA or other religious denominations would take a more pro-active stance in certain political issues. I know that I am probably in the minority with my discomfort. I do not mean to suggest that UUs as individuals should not participate in the political process (they certainly should) nor do I mean to suggest that the church cannot form relationships with political and advocacy organizations that share its vision of the world.

Because, for me, that’s just it. The mission of the church is not policy, but vision. ("Celestial Lands," August 13)

The Rev. Cynthia Landrum had the opportunity to experience the conversation on the ground when "Somehow, people had gotten word that there was a rally scheduled at 4:30 to protest against healthcare reform, so various local groups got together to state a counter-demonstration in favor of healthcare reform starting at 3:30." Among the things she saw when opponents of healthcare reform arrived:

Among the opponents to healthcare reform was one man holding a sign with a swastika on it with a circle around it and a line through it (a "no" symbol) (Picture from Mlive). The Citizen Patriot article identifies him as Jackson County Commissioner Phil Duckham, and says:

"This is how Hitler started out," Duckham said. "First, Obama took over the auto industry, then the banking industry. We don't need him to take over the health care industry."

This comparison of Obama to Hitler has got to stop. It is inflammatory, inaccurate, misleading, ignorant, and, as I heard someone on NPR say today, it is a denial of the real truth of the Holocaust and what caused it--racism/anti-Semitism. For a government representative, no matter how small the office, to make such a statement, and to be identifying himself as not a private citizen but with his office, is deeply troubling and deeply offensive. ("Rev. Cyn," August 13)

Landrum wrote a letter to the editor about the sign.

The Rev. Debra W. Haffner, executive director of the Religious Institute (www.religiousinstitute.org), a multifaith organization dedicated to sexual health and justice, argues that healthcare reform must provide reproductive healthcare.

Once again, abortion is taking center stage as a key area of public debate. I was called yesterday by a DC colleague and told that the faith community was getting behind "abortion neutrality" in health care reform.

What would that mean? It would mean the public option would not include abortion services and that private options need not include reproductive health care. Translation: poor and low income women would have no coverage for abortion services. Other women, who opt for the public option because they work for a small business, are self employed, or unemployed, would have no coverage.

This doesn't seem like "neutrality" to me. It sounds like selling out women again for political expediency. ("Sexuality and Religion: What's the Connection," August 14)

Radicalism and liberalism

Picking up on a conversation occuring in non-UU blogs, the Rev. Stephen Lingwood ponders where Unitarianism fits in the spectrum between "radical" and "liberal."

Unitarianism has always described itself as liberal, but what does this mean? It's got something to do with being open to new ideas, believing in progress, tolerating diversity with an incremental agenda for bringing about a better world. And perhaps your assessment of liberalism will depend on what you think about the nature of the world, how reformable it is.

The problem with liberalism can be seen as it's tolerance of opposition. For example there were plenty of Unitarians fighting against slavery (and we rush to celebrate them today) but there were plenty of Unitarian slave-holders, and we never insisted they cease their involvement in the slave trade. ("Reignite," August 9)

The Rev. Scott Wells wonders "if the collapse of liberal religion has more to do with our sense of comfort in a damaged and damaging world — a sense most people cannot afford — than our collective inability to raise money or leaders. And then there’s the middle-aged skeptic in me that has seen the alternating self-congratulating, self-destructive and bitter modes of real-life radicals, whether they are religious, political or social." ("Boy in the Bands," August 11)

Seminarian Erik Resly argues for a middle way.

It seems there must exist a position between the often belligerent anthropocentrism of radicalism and dangerously complacent neutrality of liberalism. It would affirm the urgency and possibility of communal change, while simultaneously acknowledging the inherent limitations and fragility of the human condition. To my knowledge, Cornel West's 'prophetic pragmatism' comes closest to this description. West carefully balances between tragedy and revolution, tradition and progress, grounding reformist actions and a visionary outlook (Niehburian in tone) in the harsh reality of structural tragedy (reminiscent of Augustine and Du Bois). We must work for justice, but we will only get so far—yet, we keep moving. ("Embodied Fragments," August 11)

Joel Monka looks at the UUA through a conservative lens:

Evidence that the liberal/conservative is a general mindset, rather than a specific doctrine, is amply provided by the UUA. There is no theological requirement I'm aware of that a liberal church must be liberal politically, but if you look at all the Statements of Conscience, Immediate Witness, etc., the UUA has passed, you'll never see a greater collection of (to my conservative eyes) hare-brained, ivory tower, loony-lefty schemes. I'm convinced that someday a bunch of UUs attending a séance will be accosted by the spirit of Karl Marx himself, saying, "Whoa, slow down with the wobbly stuff already, don't [get] carried away..." But that doesn't bother me, for rarer than the UU conservative is the UU radical. Without radicals, a society doesn't act at all, it merely discusses things. A society without radicals comes to believe that by writing a letter to their congressman or holding an after-service forum on a given issue, they have actually done something about it. A radical wouldn't be so fooled. ("CUUMBAYA," August 12)

Fascist America, part two

Sara Robinson follows up on last week's post on fascism in America with seven basic principles.

Writing about fascism for an American audience is always a fraught business. Invariably, a third of the readers will dismiss the topic (and your faithful blogger's basic sanity) out of hand. Either they've got their own definition of fascism and whatever's going on doesn't seem to fit it; or else they're firm believers in a variant of Godwin's Law, which says (with some justification) that anyone who invokes the F-word is a de facto alarmist of questionable credibility. I get letters, most of which say something to the effect of, "Calm down. You're overreacting. We're nowhere near there yet."

Another third will pepper me with missives that are every bit as dismissive -- for exactly the opposite reason. To them, anyone who's been paying the barest amount of attention should realize that America has been a fascist state since (choose one:) 1) 9/11; 2) Reagan; 3) McCarthy; 4) The Civil War; 5) July 4, 1776. For them, my careful analysis and worried warnings are dangerously naive -- clear evidence that I'm simply not seeing the full horror of America as it truly is, and always has been, at least since (insert date here).

Given this general crankiness, I probably wouldn't bother with the subject at all -- except for that final third who keep me going. From them, I've gotten a blizzard of anecdotes, questions, meditations, ideas, suggestions, manifestos, and love letters (including lots of link love). The piece sparked a lot of conversation all across Left Blogistan about what fascism is and what it ain't and what we need to be watching for. And that kind of thoughtful discussion is exactly what I hoped for. I wanted people to start paying attention. ("Orcinus," August 13)

The universalism of Universalism

Rev. Colin Bossen continues to find European Unitarians (and Unitarian Universalists) quite similar to the ones back home.

The most exciting thing I learned about the Edinburgh congregation, and something it shares with some Unitarian Universalist congregations in North America, is that it started out as a Universalist church. ("The Latest Form of Infidelity," August 10)

UU World being of service

Melissa Bartell learned of Laura Pedersen's memoir Buffalo Gal in UU World and thought, "how often does one find a book by a UU woman on mainstream shelves?"

At times funny, at times poignant, and laced with no small measure of self-deprecation, Buffalo Gal is an enjoyable read. ("UUCOC Conversations," August12)