The Wheat and the Chaff Rotating Header Image
Online Conversations from the Union Theological Seminary Community

God Is Gay

I'd Rather Love A Jesus Who Loves Us All

It’s National Coming Out Day today. We’ve also heard a lot lately about LGBTQ teen suicides. If you haven’t yet, I implore you to read Rev. Dr. Patrick Cheng’s Huffington Post article on the suicides, Rev. Irene Monroe’s Huffington Post article on bullying and homophobia and spend some time in thoughtful reflection on what your church has or has not done for LGBTQ people whether they are teenage, pre-teen, adult or senior.

I am not gay, and cannot therefore offer a queer perspective on these issues. I defer to others that they might speak for themselves as regards their own pain and joy. But homophobia is my problem too. It is my problem because it hurts people I love. It is my problem because too many people cloak their prejudice in the language of faith and that hurts every person of faith. It is my problem because every day straight allies neglect to speak out against it is another day that homophobia remains a “socially acceptable” prejudice. It is not acceptable. If we profess that we are made in the image of God, then God is also a gay man, a lesbian, transgender, transsexual, gender non-conforming AND yes heterosexual too.

If God is a God of justice, mercy and righteousness, then God is queer. God is with the terrorized young people of our world–never in judgment but always in love.

The Middle Class Dilemma: More or Enough?

Two seemingly unrelated stories led off NPR’s Morning Edition today. One was the story of an Arizona family who decided not just to live within their means, but to live within their needs. The other, more vexing story, was about an obscure bit of financial jargon: “Quantitative Easing.” For all you normal people out there, quantitative easing “means creating massive amounts of money out of thin air with the hope of getting the economy back on track.” These two tales of financial austerity and financial magic appear tangential at best. But, my goodness, they are so deeply interconnected. In an America where a privileged class psyche permeates much of our culture, the word austerity sounds synonymous with the gallows–a kind of torture for which one would never volunteer. The Donnell family sees it differently.

The median household income in America is $50,000 a year. The Donnell’s live off exactly that number. They used to earn two times that, swimming in the river of the American myth of prosperity, and living by an ethos of, as Gregg Donell puts it, “the need for more things.” They stopped living that way, though, beginning to recognize and appreciate their gifts rather than succumb to the desire to buy them.

Quantitative easing is something altogether different. Its a complex word with a simple meaning. Remember when your parents would tell you money doesn’t grow on trees, they were right; it can come out of thin air. QE is essentially what happened in the 2008 stimulus package that went out to major banking centers. Firms possessed large bundles of bonds no one would buy so the Federal Reserve bought them. And here’s the trick, they did it with a surge of money right off the press.

QE is an answer to the necessary task of keeping our economy afloat. And as Paul Krugman argues another wave of stimulus money is very necessary, even if it is politically unappetizing. QE exemplifies the paradox of our current economic state. If we don’t funnel money into credit lending institutions our economy sinks further, but when that money for nothing is handed over it sets a priority for the way we organize our society. And that’s what’s troubling about QE: it’s a lesson in how our supply-side economy works vis-à-vis how we act as a society. The Federal Reserves’ money out of thin air goes into the major financial firms which,  further fuels speculation, further widens the income gap, further allows exploitation of limited resources, and further instantiates a psychological entitlement for the proverbial “more.”

The question I have is does this pattern of economic practice continue to delay the inevitable? That is, as a country we have been living beyond our means for far too long. Is austerity really our enemy?  I wonder what would happen if middle-class families started making financial decisions the way the Donnell’s do: living by what they need rather than living through the desire for more. Of course a large spending freeze doesn’t sound good to any economist, but what would it mean to finally realize we have more than enough to live content lives. The Niebuhrian in me tells me to get real, but what a hope. More Donnell families might just have the power to do something radically sublime. It may instill enough humility that we can move from conversations about quantitative easing and the desire for more to conversations about the joys of living with enough. Oh but the doubting question remains: can middle-class families make such radical financial  statements, or be faulted for not doing so, when the seduction of wealth continues to always beckon one nigh?

You Don’t Look Like Rosa Parks

Rosa Parks' mugshot, courtesy mindfully.org

Tuesday’s New York Metro newspaper headline about the Park51 center read “You Guys Don’t Look Like Rosa Parks To Me”. The article was slightly less pugnacious, but the question remained about Ms. Parks, the Montgomery Bus Boycott, Dr. King and the current predicament not only of the Park51 center but of Muslim believers in America in general.

Rosa Parks is presently an honored and cherished part of United States history. She was not in 1955. In 1955, Rosa Parks was a trouble-maker. She was not honored by the establishment for her courage, but was derided as disruptive. Why couldn’t she just let the system exist in peace? Why did she have to remind the white citizens of Montgomery that there were black citizens in their midst who paid the same taxes and the same fares on the city bus?

So too, unfortunately, today. Why does Park51 have to be in lower Manhattan? Why can’t these troublesome Muslims just exist somewhere out of sight where we don’t have to do anything more than pay lip-service to the plurality of cultures in our nation? Why indeed.

The why is the same for Rosa Parks and for Park51. The why is because it is hypocrisy to say that those different from the majority can only exist if they are out of sight and do not trouble our conscience.

Abraham Atari

The Bible Online game

http://bulk2.destructoid.com/ul/182347-header.jpg

I used to be really good at being God.

At least, that’s how I thought of it when I played Sim City in my younger days. I’d plot out the land with high density forests, flowing streams that poured down mountains, and rolling hills that would fall into the ocean border on one end of my screen. It was beautiful; Pandora beautiful.

Then I would efficiently deface that work of art with my very own Sim City. A baseball stadium here, a few sky-scrapers there – all those engineered works of art. You could be God and a city planner all at once. But if you just wanted to be God, well, here’s your chance.

Just yesterday German based FIAA GmbH released the beta version of The Bible Online: Heroes, the first installment of a series of MMORTS (massively multiplayer online real-time strategy) “games” based on the Bible. And you’re like, whaaaaat?? It’s actually pretty simple. Just think Sim City or The Simms, but for Genesis. You can play the role of Abraham or another tribe leader: build a society, declare war on other society, even manage a budget. But as Rachel Wagner in Religion Dispatches points out, you get to play the role of God and that of Abraham. You’ve got to think that Isaac scene gets intense.

It raises some questions about how playing this game will sway one’s interaction with the Bible. The game will not be replacing old narratives; rather, it allows players to create new narratives in the gaps of stories. What is this kind of modern-day midrash?

I already tried to start my own account, but it doesn’t look like FIAA is allowing use from my “region”. I haven’t quite figured out what that region is, but I’ll look into it. Comment here if you have any success in the sandals of Abraham.

Other Links:

CNBC Story

Old Religion vs. Civic Religion

Arizona Snowbowl

Arizona Snowbowl and the Hopi Reservation

Over the weekend, the Wall St. Journal reported about a conflict between the Hopi people and a ski resort. At issue in this conflict is the plan from Arizona Snowbowl (the resort) to use recycled water to make artificial snow in an expansion into land that the Hopi and several other indigenous peoples believe to be sacred. What is interesting here is less that this is a possible church-and-state issue regarding religious rights. Rather, it is a conflict between two religions: the Hopi’s and American Civic Religion.

The Hopi object on two grounds: first, that the water originally proposed was non-potable sewage water; second, that making artificial snow is an affront to the sovereignty of Nature. Nature decides when it snows, not the manager of the ski resort. The response from the government has been in defense of that most sacred tenet of Civic Religion: the right of a business to operate and make money. To be sure, the American fervor in supporting the Church of the Almighty Dollar is rarely less intense than what could be found at a revival meeting.

What insights might we gain from asking the question about a conflict between religions rather than a conflict between a religion and a secular state? Wouldn’t the issue be different if it were two churches vying for the same plot of land for a sanctuary? What about the Temple Mount in Jerusalem?

Guest Writer Pia Chaudhari: On “Good Grief”

NY Times illustration for Dr. Francis' article

Guest writer Pia Chaudhari is a Ph.D. candidate at Union in Psychiatry and Religion.

In response to the New York Times Op-Ed of August 14, 2010 titled ‘Good Grief ‘by Allen Francis, I wish to share my relief in Dr. Francis’ defense of the sacred rituals of mourning and the process of grief and its resolution.

What is frightening about the proposal for the DSM 5 to label common symptoms of grief as major depressive disorder is that it is symptomatic of the splitting of our fast-paced, technology-oriented, scientifically-minded society away from the roots of deep human wisdom and experience. Much necessary good has come from the advances in psychiatry of the past 150 years, but scientific reasoning can not and should not replace the capacity for deep feeling or the derivation of meaning in our lives. In our culture’s quest to promote a life entirely free of pain, we risk losing our own deepest capacities for joy. If we as a society are no longer willing to tolerate the suffering that comes with loving, with caring, with being human in an uncertain world, then we will no longer be able to tolerate love, care or the uncertainties of being human. There is no drug which will make life free of suffering or uncertainty, but there is comfort and healing to be found in loving relationships, trusted community and sacred rituals–all of which we risk losing at our own deep peril.

On Being “Christian”. Or Not.

Thirteen percent of American citizens do not believe Barack Obama when he says he is a Christian. I’m hardly an apologist for the political status quo, but it seems like you might not have to look too hard to find thirteen percent of American citizens who wouldn’t believe Barack Obama if he said the Earth orbited the Sun instead of the other way around. While some of these folks are being rebutted, it still raises an issue worth thinking about: who gets to say who’s “Christian” and who’s not?

I’ve been surprised to be on the outside of that consideration before. My wife jokes that I’m a “heathen Protestant”, but that’s in good fun. I did have a professor remark that we were all Christians in a classroom, with the aside “or near enough to it” directed my way referencing my Quaker beliefs. Sure, I could have argued that George Fox was pretty thorough-going as a Christian and that the majority of Meetings worldwide are more likely to be mistaken for a Methodist Church than anything outside the umbrella of generally considered “Christian” belief, but frankly I’m tired of doing so. When I first started attending Meeting in the mid-1990s, I had to explain to my mother that yes: Quakers believe in Jesus Christ. Generally. We’re just not compelled to do so by authority. And that’s where it gets complicated.

To my reading of the Gospels, Jesus didn’t lay out too many dogmatic guidelines for a church to follow his teachings. Anything we have that we can turn to for such guidance comes from at least twenty to thirty years after the crucifixion: a very long time indeed in an oral culture. So without firm guidelines, we turn to a version of the “No True Scotsman” fallacy in defining the beliefs of others for them. For those unfamiliar, this circular argument runs as follows:

  • No Scotsman eats sugar in his porridge.
  • Angus from Glasgow eats sugar in his porridge.
  • OK, fine then. No TRUE Scotsman eats sugar in his porridge.

And we do this all the time in Christian communities. “No Christian would do or believe X” becomes “No TRUE Christian would do or believe X” when confronted with a Christian who has in fact done or believed X. So Billy Graham’s son has decided that no TRUE Christian can behave or believe as Barack Obama does. Thankfully, it’s not up to Franklin Graham to decide what does or does not constitute a true Christian. And quite frankly if being a TRUE Christian means following Franklin Graham, I’d rather be false.

Christianity – “ity” = What, exactly?

Noted vampire author and Catholic Anne Rice recently announced that she was quitting Christianity in the name of Christ. She intends to keep her beliefs but is so put off by the Catholic hierarchy’s teachings and public pronouncements on feminism, child abuse and human sexuality that she will no longer adhere to any particular sect or denominational affiliation within the broader church. There is already a National Public Radio interview and several blog responses at the Washington Post.

I admit that I have a very mixed reaction to this kind of announcement. I personally have been a bit of a spiritual wanderer in my day. I was baptized in the United Methodist church, raised Moravian, convinced Quaker, married by a Catholic priest, tried to be in the United Church of Christ for a bit, began a Zen Buddhist practice and settled back down as a Quaker (and Buddhist) again.

I know that there is some irony to my agreeing with David Wolpe, who makes the request in his blog response to “[y]oke your spirituality to a system. Be religious.” I hear in Wolpe’s admonition an echo of Karl Rahner’s thoughts on the church. Rahner advised that it was allowable to leave the denomination or faith in which one was born and raised, but that this should be an absolute last resort. From Rice’s words of frustration it seems like it may be the absolute last straw for her. Of course, Rahner, and I presume Wolpe as well, would rather hear that she’d left the Catholic church for another established church.

What might it mean to be Christian without identifying with Christianity in any of its varied and conflicting forms? Is religion only about an inner spiritual feeling–a purely vertical “I-Thou” with the divine–or is there a necessary community component to it? I can’t help but feel that the latter is true. There must be some horizontal, Earth-bound relationship among believers for “religion” to happen. Falling back on Rahner again, I see this more as a move out of the Visible Church and into the Invisible Church. Or, to quote Max Carter quoting a Quaker advice, “Christianity is not a notion but a way.” If it is a way, then can we believe it without being involved with it even in its messy, shameful progress toward enlightenment and salvation?

Guest Writer: Charlie Becker Hornes “I Might Be ‘Fat’ Today, But God Knows I’m Happy”

Charlie Becker Hornes, M.Div. ’10 writes in response to the comments posted to the YouTube video about Glenn Beck.

The author in 2004

I have taken some pretty good punches this week on YouTube directly and indirectly regarding our Union’s response to Glenn Beck video:

• “I think that first chick missed the part about gluttony maybe? Kinda hypocritical.”

• “This vid is full of fail. The only reason a person who thumbs this up is if they hate GB.
You got a fat white b*tch telling that a class changed her life? Please, do mankind a service and stop consuming so much of our natural resources.”

• “This was very helpful. I now know of one school that my child will NOT be attending. Looks to me to be filled with wombats, freaks, losers, and asexuals.”

• “’You’re actually in a famous room where I took his class 70lbs ago. I want to invite you into this iconic room and just show it to you. Here’s a door. And wood. And oh look a chair. Is it lunch yet’ A lot of winners there at Union”

• “Why don’t you people dress a little better?”

• “Why are Americans fat?”

• “Is she pregnant?”

We have taken hits about our looks, our education, even clear concerns about our sexual orientation… to get straight to the point… some people have still very much missed the boat. I am fine if someone criticizes me or even disagrees with me when it comes to my opinion on issues. I am not fine when attacks are made based on straight-up appearance. This just underscores the heart of the Liberation Theology debate. This is one of the many underpinnings of the problems in our current world, especially here in the United States that clearly needs to continue to be addressed. People judging people based on what they look like. This has been going on for so long and people have been abused, killed, lynched and attacked because of it. Enough already.

Yes, as Mr. Beck clearly states, Liberation Theology has much to do with the two categories of the Oppressor and the Oppressed… but there is so much more to it than just that. And, no, it is not about Communism or even Socialism and Marxism. For me, it is about an attitude of compassion for each other and for the opportunity to allow God’s law to break into the world… not the law of humanity, which in the current state of our world, people are denied their humanity and existence based on externals such as race, skin color, sexual orientation, religion or even what country they originate from – not to mention what they might weigh. No, this is about granting basic human rights to our fellow humans at all costs, no matter what, because all humans deserve their dignity. This country has a poor track record in this department no matter how you decide to twist the historical records, and we white people have quite a lot to still answer for. Including you, Mr. Beck. Including me.

Union has changed my life, and it was not just Dr. Cone’s class – it was an intense, three year, grueling process of insane reading, junk food and New York City pizza eating, intense paper writing, all night-ers, discussions – even arguments and the breaking down of all of the preconceived, unknown and arrogant notions that I walked into this program with. In short, these past three years, although extremely difficult, have forever changed my life on my view of the world, how I view and treat other people, and mostly, how I now view myself as a small part of a greater community of many different types of people.

The term “othering” is seen in two ways. One has a negative quality in which we base a human’s worth on qualitative means such as skin color and “race,” along with other factors such as citizenship, sexual orientation, gender, religion, etc. In this way, we “otherize” another in order to, for lack of a more academic phrase; simply feel better about our own selves, which denies them their humanity and dignity. This is polarizing and divisive.

A more positive view comes from Fred Craddock when he gives a nuanced idea of what it means to come into the space of the “Other” in his aptly titled homely, “Othering.” In this light, we break down such barriers, and remove the boundaries caused by fear that keeps us from really coming to know the real humanity of those we deem “our neighbors” but whom we find different or other than us in one form or another. Especially those who might seem just so frighteningly different from who we tend to think we are.

It is sad that people like Glenn Beck make a living off of instilling these fears into the hearts of our nation and then plays off of them to make a buck, or to promote a form of clever-racism that has the obnoxious lead out of “folks, I am not a racist.” People like him are divisive. He is not one who falls on the side of compassion for others. Instead, he is preaching the poison of fear and the negative connotation of “Othering” that continues to feed a systematic machine in this nation, which only leads to more suffering, poverty, injustice, abuse and a climate of people who refuse to look out for the widow and the orphan in our very own communities – which is in fact what the New Testament teaches us primarily. It is not the widow or orphan that might look like us or think like us that is the only concern. What about those who are totally different from us, believe differently, look differently, and might have a different life style than we do? Do they not deserve humanity and dignity too? It is those others who also, if not more so, deserve compassion from each and every one of us if we are able to extend a helping hand, or at least an acknowledgment of their humanity if we are to truly “love our neighbor as our self.”

These are the things that I have learned at Union Theological Seminary. My belief today in justice for all of my neighbors exceeds race, borders, class, skin color, sexual orientation, gender and religious beliefs… just to name a few.
Today, if there is someone that I can help, I hope to be able to extend that hand. I hope to make it my life’s work.

My fellow students and I have taken some real hits this week, and that is okay. Most had little to do with what we actually said, and were, instead, focused on our external qualities.

For me, it had to do with my current weight.

Being healthy is a very important priority and it should be for all of us.

Well, there are a few things people might want to know about me. You might be surprised to now that I moved to New York City fifteen years ago to be an actress and a model, which I was relatively successful at for ten years. At least my husband is quite impressed with my CV.

I was a member of all of the Unions, and had a pretty extensive and impressive theatre, film, TV and commercial resume as well as a nicely put together modeling composite. Although I was consistently a size 6, and believe me, I worked hard to be that size, I was constantly told by my agents that I was always a borderline “plus size” model… and those are killer words in the modeling business. I have done my fair share of intense exercise, dieting, no carbs, crazy-healthy lifestyle and internal self discipline, self loathing and scolding just so that other people thought I looked “good enough” and let me tell you… I am tired of hearing about what people think I should look like.

I probably could have done pretty well as an actress. I worked hard and seemed to be relatively talented. I left the field of acting of my own accord, however. Though I am sure the business is great for others, I was never happy, regardless of how low my weight was, or what exciting new jobs I had coming up. For me, I had a constant feeling of emptiness and dissatisfaction with my life, despite some exciting successes.

Although I have always been a person of faith, over the years my connection to my Presbyterian faith was reawakening, and I was only finding myself truly ever happy when I was volunteering and being of service in my community through a relationship with God, which I very much believe God initiated within me. For me, helping others through my life of faith became the only true happiness that I have ever known. My career as an actress and model offered me no outlet to be of service to my community and I learned in time that I was just in the wrong career. I was always too busy running around completely self-absorbed and worrying what people thought of me to stop and help anyone else out for a change. Obviously, God had other plans for me.

Over the years, I have been able to find some real joy and contentment in my life, just being me, knowing that I am okay exactly how I am today. This faith based initiative I took on personally finally lead me to Seminary, and thank God, I was lead to Union because this institution is a place that instills the idea of service and justice into its students’ lives of faith in a most remarkable and life changing way. It not only changes our lives, it will change the lives of all of the people we help in our lifetimes. Coming here is an amazing experience.

I know first hand that our nation struggles with an obesity problem, but society is not completely responsible, with all of the chemicals we are being force-fed through advertisements. Hydrogenated oils, high fructose corn syrup, enriched flour, manufactured wheat, processed sugars, all at cheap costs that undercut any type of organic or non-chemical based product on the shelf, making piles of money for distributors who care nothing about what goes into products and its consumers; only the bottom line. It is hard not to buy the cheap stuff when you are on a budget. Fortunately, it seems like our selections and our consciousness is slowly transforming into a nation that cares about what we eat more than we ever have.

I know from first hand experience. Fast food is cheap… and I am a broke Seminarian pledging a life of service that walked away from a very lucrative career. I will probably just break even monthly once I start paying back my student loans. It is hard to eat healthy and exercise when you are broke, on a budget and on six deadlines. When I do have the time, I am so fried that watching TV with my husband just seems like the better choice. Clearly, there are things that I personally need to work on now that I have graduated.

For me, coming to Seminary and exercising my brain, for a change, these last three years straight, might have caused me to add on several pounds, but the weight I can lose with a healthier lifestyle… what I have learned in the process of getting this degree, I plan to hold onto for dear life. It is incredible for me to read comments about my weight today, so many years after retiring from a career where my weight was what engulfed nearly every waking moment of my self-centered life. I actually really used to care what other people thought and to a fault.

These last few years have been liberating for me. For the first time in my life, I am entirely happy with the person that I am becoming because, in this vocation, I know that I will be spending the rest of my life getting fantastic sleep, knowing that I spent my day helping my neighbor as best I can, whatever my neighbor might “look” like. I may not make my actress salary any more, but my internal joy and satisfaction is well worth the sacrifice. And now that I have my Master’s of Divinity degree… maybe I’ll have some free time to take up jogging again… but this time, only as a way to feel good, staying healthy and sharing a long life with my amazing husband who likes me just how I am.

So, being attacked about my weight might be the catalyst for this response, but my answer is that I might be fat today, but God knows I am finally happy. So for all of you who think that judging people based on what they look like is okay instead of airing on the side of compassion, I say to you… you really need to get a life. I have.

Guest Writer: Shannon Kearns “Open Letter to Serene Jones”

Guest writer Shannon Kearns, M.Div. ’09, responds to President Serene Jones’ recent open letter to Glenn Beck

Dear President Jones:

I write with sadness over your response to Mr. Glenn Beck. I understand that you were trying to counter his hateful speech with humor, however by taking such a tone you made his words something to be laughed at instead of  something to be taken seriously.

You insinuated in your response that Mr. Beck hasn’t read the Bible. I know it was an attempt to be funny but as someone who grew up in a conservative and fundamentalist church I assure you the one thing we did was read the Bible. In fact, I would say that in coming to Union I knew the Bible better than many of my classmates. I say that not to
brag, but to drive home the point that just because there is someone you don’t agree with doesn’t mean they haven’t read the Bible. What I needed from Union was Professors to put the content of what I knew into perspective and practice. I needed someone to explain Liberation Theology, to drive home the historical background of the Scripture, to make me aware of issues outside of my privileged, white upbringing. I got that education at Union and I am thankful for it.

Your response to Mr. Beck doesn’t provide any of that background. It doesn’t explain where he got it wrong. Instead it just sends humorous jabs his way as if Mr. Beck isn’t to be taken seriously. And this is the most dangerous attitude of all. I live in the midwest. Out here everyone knows who Glenn Beck is but no one has ever heard of Union Theological Seminary. When Mr. Beck mentions a book on his show it sells out at the bookstore where I work. He holds sway with many people that Union will never reach. By taking a tone that sounds as if Union is better than Mr. Beck we feed into our own arrogance; an arrogance that assumes that the world should listen to us simply because we are Union. When in reality, outside of elite and educated circles no one really knows who Union is or what we stand for.

As a graduate of Union I beg a better response to Mr. Beck. One that takes seriously the power that he has in the current political climate. One that counters his argument with intelligence, humility and grace. One that moves past poking fun and talks about why his comments are hurtful and harmful. A response that knows that words manifest into actions and that his vitriolic speech can translate into real violence. That is the kind of response that Union needs to be
presenting.

Sincerely,
Shannon T.L. Kearns M.Div. ’09