Salvery: 150 Years Later - Part 2 of 2

Part Two

Every Sunday morning, millions of Americans put on their “Sunday best” and head off to church.  Modern church in America has taken on a wide variety of skins these days.  The ideal church description includes monikers such as traditional, contemporary, seeker-friendly, house church, modern, and post-modern, all in an attempt to remain relevant to today’s culture and to offer the ideal church for all individuals.  And so we choose…or we think we do.  Perhaps the choice is already made for us?  Lying just below the surface is the shrewd truth, that all of these institutions, no matter the denomination or religion, are very much the same.  Their voice speaks of one “truth”, but many ulterior motives loom below the surface.  To describe these motives as “sinister” (albeit naive) would not be too harsh. 

I was once a very active participant in the perpetuation of this system.  For a time, I served as a pastor of a small “evangelical Christian” church.  Try as I might, I found myself moving into compromise; doing what I needed to do in order to keep the attendance growing, the people pacified, and to forward the prevailing dogmatic “truth”, rather than doing what I knew in my heart to be right.  In the end, I refused to sell out and knew that the only answer for me was to move away from the system… but many do not.  Only after walking completely away from church did I realize the extent to which we were all enslaved.  Dietrich Bonheoffer once said, “The church is the church only when it exists for others.”  That is freedom; looking beyond our own selfish felt needs, desires and insecurities.  That does not honestly describe most of my past 40+ years of church experience.

So, what if the system that (we) have developed to “set us free” is the very system that enslaves?  Thomas Merton wrote that we set people free, “…not by telling slaves to be free, but by telling people who think they are free that they’re slaves."  What might our freedom look like if we were to break out and begin to think for ourselves?  Ask questions.  Do the hard work of finding the answers rather than waiting for someone else to tell us what to believe.  Our faith becomes more about listening rather than speaking; more about others than about what we want or even what we think.  In the end, we may land in the same place in our thoughts and beliefs, but they will hold infinitely greater sincerity and worth.  The world just might be much bigger than we “believe in.”      

Like the institutional religious system, in general institutional systems have a tendency to create limiting paradigms, destroy critical thinking and diminish individual identity. The problem may not be a church problem at all, but rather an institutional problem.  I suspect many of the same concerns could be raised about the educational system, the political system, the corporate system, the financial system, the family institution… 

…and even the institutional thinking we integrate into our own lives.  Every day, I see friends and family bustle through life busily engaging in tasks that they feel they “have” to do.  We adjust our behavior, our appearance and our personalities in an attempt to “fit in”, however that is defined on any given day.  We spend so much of our time, energy, and money in an attempt to be what we think other people want us to be.  Then, we use this busy-ness, and a myriad of other excuses, as justification for doing little of worth in our lives; a slave to excuses and obligations. 

Again, what Thomas Merton said seems appropriate when he suggests that we set people free, “…not by telling slaves to be free, but by telling people who think they are free that they’re slaves."  About this, Richard Fournier has written, “This artificial reality is the matrix we live in with our false selves. By and large we are oblivious to any other reality or possibility.”  "Oblivious" is such a strong and appropriate word.  Defined, it means lacking active conscious knowledge or awareness; not aware of or not concerned about what is happening around one; unmindful; unconscious.  It is much stronger than having simply forgotten, but even implies an intentional egocentric desire to remain outside of understanding.  When we consider our own awareness of oblivion within ourselves, it is possible that we might just be too oblivious to accurately consider our own state of oblivion.  Just because we might think we are basking in the attributes of abolition does not mean that we have become truly free. We can never become truly free until we first come to sincerely recognize the excuses, obligations and insecurities that are keeping us confined.

Perhaps, a deep and honest self-assessment is in order… or perhaps we might need the help of a very good and honest friend; someone who we fully trust and respect and who can speak candidly.  The ancient Jewish prophet Isaiah once said of himself, “God has anointed me and sent me to tell of the good news to the poor, to bind up the brokenhearted, to announce freedom to all captives, and to pardon all prisoners.  And to announce the year of God’s grace—.“  Some religious systems might try to narrowly define this “freedom” for you, but that is not what Isaiah says.  What is “good news to the poor”, but help with their needs; what do we need when “brokenhearted”, but a kind and listening ear; what do "captives" want, but an open door; what do "prisoners" need, but sweet relief from guilt and consequences; what do all long for, but freely given, unearned favor and love?  This is the “Grandma Moses” that I want by my side as I move through this journey from slavery to freedom.  But before I begin the journey, I first need to see and then I can be…

The Civil War and the 13^th Amendment were highly effective at accomplishing their prescribed goal of outlawing and freeing us from our recognized “slavery and involuntary servitude”.  But after 150 years, for some unknown reason we continue to voluntarily enslave ourselves.  True freedom is so close at hand, but we need to be willing to look deep inside ourselves, step out of deeply held paradigms, recognize and set aside ulterior motives…

I am going to sum up my thoughts on this by encouraging you to watch the following video of Dan Caro on Dr. Wayne Dyers series “Excuses Be Gone”.  At the age of 2, Dan was very severely injured, but you have to hear the freedom in his voice and in his music.

Slavery: 150 Years Later - Part 1 of 2

Part One

At 4:30 a.m. on April 12, 1861, Confederate artillery opened fire on the Federal Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor.  Although the Union garrison returned fire, they were significantly outgunned and, after 34 hours, Major Anderson was forced to surrender and agreed to evacuate.  This was the start of the American Civil war; a war to whose intention, arguably, was to abolish slavery.  As a result, slavery was officially abolished with the 13^th Amendment, passed by Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified on December 6, 1865.  The text reads,

“Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

So on this, the 150^th anniversary of the start of the Civil War, where do we really stand on the issue of slavery in America?  Is this “Land of the Free” as free as one might have hoped when they donned their blues and set off to give their life for the sake of another man’s independence?  Let’s consider a few things together… 

There is an extreme dichotomy in the distribution of wealth in America.  A friend recently read an article that said the greatest determining factor for a nation’s long-term success is not its form of governance or type of economic system, but rather the discrepancy between its wealthiest and poorest citizens. The distance between the wealthiest and the poorest is a great chasm and the gap seems to be widening.  In 2010, the average household income was $46,326/year, which accounts for nearly 50% of all Americans, while the top income earners ($200,000/year and up) only account for 3%.  What is even more fascinating, is how even amongst the super wealthy, income is not distributed evenly.  There are approximately 146,000 (0.1%) households with incomes exceeding $1,500,000 a year.  Even at that, the top 0.01% of households had incomes of $5,500,000 and accounted for 11,000 households.  The 400 highest tax payers in the nation brought in a stunning $87,000,000 a year. (Source)  Now that is a very oddly shaped bell curve.

These numbers could lead us to think that this is a problem with “those rich people”, but that is untrue.   Consider what I once heard on a radio broadcast; if you are a two income family, own your own home, and have two vehicles in the driveway, you are among the top 3-5% of the wealthiest people in the world.  If it is a “rich people” problem, then it might just be our problem.  Poverty is dispensing overwhelming bondage to millions of Americans.  In 2011, the official “poverty level” for a family of 4 is $22,350.  My family is a family of 4, so to me this is not a statistic, it becomes personal.  Could we live on $22,350?  Could we live on $32,350… $42,350… numbers nearly twice the “poverty level”, but… 

Statistics can be helpful but too often serve to depersonalize the situation and to ignore the true problem.  So, the statistics don’t do it for me.  But names and faces do.  Think for a moment, if you will.  Try to put a specific name to the “poverty level” statistic.  Do you have one?  ( I understand that it may even be you.)  If you can’t think of at least one name in under a minute, then it might just be you who is the modern-day slave owner, holding others in “involuntary servitude”.  They don’t want to be there and we have the key to unlock their cell door.  Are we willing to use it?  So much of our energy is squandered on earning more money, managing our investments, and maintaining the material possessions that we acquired with that money.  We could lighten all of our burdens by realizing that, at some point, enough is enough.

The other day, I was talking with a friend who has his own business.  He told me that he has to budget 42% of his income, straight off the top, to avoid getting crushed by the burden of taxes on April 15^th.  A hard working man, trying to supply an honest living for his family, is made to give away nearly half of his earnings to be spent by someone else.  We love to deride the government for these high taxes and seem to feel well within our rights to do so.  The nearly constant chatter from the popular prickly pundits may be partly to blame for the perpetration of our antagonistic response to the system of taxation.  “The right, left, and in between are all at fault for the failed system”, seems to be the reigning voice.  Blame is the game rather than results.  Even if we could focus on results, “results” look different to all stakeholders.  All stakeholders want lower taxes, but no one wants their service to be the one to receive decreased funding.  As soon as a tax-saving measures are suggested, that special interest group loads up a bus and heads off to Washington to rally for their cause…and nothing ever changes.

Perhaps it is not the burden of taxation that is holding us enslaved, but rather it is our own narcissistic greed.  What might this entire conversation sound like if we began to respond with, “Yes, I could live without all of that.  My special interest is not more important than yours and I am willing to voluntarily concede to that.  Let’s work together to accomplish a greater good.”  In 1773, the colonists began the fight for representation with our taxation.  It would be interesting to consider what America might look like if we had representation without taxation.  The system of taxation would become obsolete if, rather than waiting for “them” to demand it from us, we were to voluntarily give (time and money) to address issues that were apparent within our own small sphere of influence.  We say that our problem with high taxation has to do with the way “those representatives” spend our money, but that is simply a smoke screen to mask our true darker nature.  It is interesting to me that we can voluntarily give billions of dollars to the sports and entertainment industries (even while being taxed at 42%).  What might taxation and governmental reform look like if we each voluntarily funneled even some of that money away from entertainment and into diverse and tolerant services?  If we long to dispel the "tyranny of socialism", then give it away before "they" even ask for it.  The money is there, but are we...am I willing?

Part Two is coming next week...

Playing the Trickster

Within the mythology of nearly all cultures there exists this whimsical character known by such names as Hermes, Coyote, and Mercury, but always playing the role of the Trickster.  In his book “Trickster Makes this World”, Lewis Hyde speaks of Trickster as:

They are the lords of the in between.  A trickster does not live near the hearth; he does not live in the halls of justice, the soldier’s tent, the shamans hut, the monastery.  He passes through each of these when there is a moment of silence and he enlivens each with mischief, but he is not their guiding spirit.  He is the spirit of the doorway leading out, and the crossroad at the edge of town (the one where a little market springs up).  He is the spirit of the road at dusk, the one that runs from one town to another but belongs to neither.

In short, trickster is a boundary-crosser.  Every group has its edge, its sense of in and out, and tricksters are always there, at the gates of the city and at the gates of life, making sure there is commerce.  He also attends the internal boundaries by which groups articulate their social life.  We constantly distinguish-right and wrong, sacred and profane, clean and dirty, male and female, young and old, living and dead-and in every case trickster will cross the line and confuse the distinction.  Trickster is the creative idiot, therefore the wise fool, the gray-haired baby, the cross dresser, the speaker of sacred profanities.  Where someone’s sense of honorable behavior has left him unable to act, trickster will appear to suggest an amoral action, something right/wrong that will get life going again.  Trickster is the mythic embodiment of ambiguity and ambivalence, doubleness and duplicity, contradiction and paradox.

In my mind’s eye, Trickster looks like the bumbling belled jester, being guffawed at as the buffoon, all the time smirking slyly under his tasseled hat at the knowledge that he is indeed in control.  He is rude, raunchy, unpredictable, unreliable and perhaps even unproductive.  If Trickster were in a school classroom, he might well be labeled as the class clown, a bad seed, a trouble-maker.  But, in spite of this perception, he is one who can easily swallow his pride because deep within, his behemothic confidence relinquishes all derision.  I see him wit-fully and creatively showing that the boundaries in our lives are something that we have made up and that they can (and perhaps should) be changed.   He cares not what others think of him because he has a greater purpose that may rarely ever be seen; but when perceived, it is a remarkable awakening.
One of my favorite Trickster stories is from the Islamic poet Rumi.  The story goes like this…

A dervish knocked at a house to ask for a piece of dry bread, or moist, it didn’t matter.
“This is not a bakery”, said the owner.
“Might you have a piece of gristle then?”
“Does this look like a butcher shop?”
“A little flour?”
“Do you hear a grinding wheel?”
“Some water?”
“This is not a well.”
Whatever the dervish asked for, the man made some tired joke and refused to give him anything.  Finally, the dervish ran into the house, lifted his robe, and squatted to take a shit.

“Hey, hey!”
Quiet you sad man.  A deserted place is a fine spot to relieve oneself, and since there’s no living thing here, or means of living, it needs fertilizing.”
The dervish began his own list of questions and answers.
“What kind of bird are you?  Not a falcon, trained for the royal hand.  Not a peacock, painted with everyone’s eyes.  Not a parrot, that talks for sugar cubes.  Not a nightingale, that sings like someone in love.  Not a hoopoe bringing messages to Solomon, or a stork that builds on a Cliffside.  What exactly do you do?  You are no known species.  You haggle and make jokes to keep what you own for yourself.  You have forgotten the One who doesn’t care about ownership, who doesn’t try to turn a profit from every human exchange.”

As a teen, I was commonly labeled as a class clown (I think I still have the ribbon from 1980 to prove it), as an “anti-establishment type”, or as one who likes to “stir up trouble”.  Perhaps that was just my adolescent nature, so often common in us at the know-it-all early teen-ages.  But perhaps I have always had a bit of the dervish in me, with that wry twinkle in my eye that says, “I see where you might view me as rude, raunchy, unpredictable, unreliable and perhaps even unproductive, but I know it is there for a purpose.”  Shortly after entering college, I dove into the world of art, finally finding a “voice” for the trickster deep within.  And oh, what a tool art can be to play the Trickster.


As an adult, I have come to see that I am never comfortable with normalcy, always longing for change, and learning to consistently ask the large “why” questions.  That “stir up trouble” nature, once refined (although few might call me refined), becomes more aptly recognized as Trickster.  To those that embrace their boundaries, this often is misunderstood as obnoxious, annoying, offensive, even threatening.  But to those who long for freedom, Trickster makes this world.


A few weeks ago, after having sat in several leadership meetings with my Principal, he stopped by my room and paid me what I considered to be one of the greatest compliments of my life.  He said, “I really appreciate you.  You have the ability to make people think about things differently.”  I smiled, thanked him for the kind words and, in the solitude of my mind heard a little voice say, “Playing the Trickster…”


Come along and play with me…


An audio conversation with Lewis Hyde, the author of “Trickster Makes this World: Mischief, Myth and Art” can be found at <http://www.homepages.indiana.edu/040904/text/conversations.shtml>