Davison's Doodle

Non-Anxious

Being non-anxious might be the hardest thing in our culture.  Our culture and economic system is driven by anxiety.  I’ve attended seminars and workshops that teach persons how to be a “non-anxious presence” in conflicted situations where you are the ambassador, ombudsman, or peacemaker.  It is also an important attitude to embody, rather than skill, when one is immersed in changing a system, involved in argument, or feel threatened.  (As an aside, have a gun at the fingertips does not make one non-anxious.)  I am not very good at being non-anxious when I perceive that my companion or immediate family is being bullied, threatened, or taken advantage of by a system.  I’m not very good at being non-anxious when those I advocate for are being taken advantage of by a system.  I’m learning to be non-anxious about serving in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in ministry, this vocation I’ve given my life.  The table in our expression of Christian witness is open to everyone, fundamentalist to humanists, as is the call to love God and love your neighbor as yourself.  There are days that I don’t feel welcome even though I know the table is open to me.  I imagine that is how some of my colleagues and some of our congregations feel about our denomination’s continued evolution that is theological, practical, and social.  I know that is how I feel when, from my perspective, our denomination “devolves.”

I imagine anxiety about change, status, and the power to decide is driving much of conflict and division in our denomination as well as our Nation.  White patriarchy, as the dominant system in our country, is battling to retain power as the melting pot is turning over.  The idea that our country is more like a “stew” than a melting pot divides rather than unites.  The patriarchy in our nation is, right now, making it harder to vote for people of color, for 18-30 year olds, and for the elderly in many places in our country and much of the 4th Estate is owned by corporations that need the patriarchy to maintain power so the evening news no longer critically reports on such things.  It’s bad business.  Better to cover the words of a woman that cooks southern food than shine the light on the system.  When a Republican official in Pennsylvania can openly talk about changing voter laws to ensure that the Republican candidate for President will win elections, and yet SCOTUS removes important provisions of the voting rights act, it makes me skeptical about the intentions of these seats of power.  I know they are working to balance the scales.  That might be the best lens through which to view the work of SCOTUS right now.

Anxious times for many, but not those that hold elected office in DC nor Oklahoma right now.  Many that call themselves Republican can quote scripture, but cannot love their neighbor as themselves enough to craft humane immigration law, fair tax law, nor grasp the concept that healthcare in the 21st century, and the last, is an important part of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  That matters no matter the faith you proclaim or not.  That is the uniqueness of America’s character that our elected officials govern together and don’t “reign.”  Reign, is the only word that seems to fit when I see the work of Republican legislatures from Texas to Virginia.  Fighting, sometimes hiding in the night to do their work, to “reign” and alter our system to slow the turning over of the melting pot.  That is what it appears the patriarchy is doing.  I don’t know what minority allies are promised, but my guess is it will not alter life for their communities as much as enrich their own holdings.  Why isn’t anyone in the mainstream 4th Estate asking what is the intent behind the new voter laws in so many states?  Why isn’t anyone in the mainstream 4th Estate asking what is the intent driving state legislatures to close health clinics that serve women?  Because we are acting like a stew rather than a melting pot.

Enter this guy, Seth, a marketing professional who sends pithy emails, that I subscribe to receive, each day.  This morning it was titled, The Opposite of Anxiety.   A paragraph and a link to read more.

With disappointment, I note that our culture doesn’t have an easily found word for the opposite. For experiencing success in advance. For visualizing the best possible outcomes before they happen.

Writing yourself fan mail in advance and picturing the change you’ve announced you’re trying to make is an effective way to push yourself to build something that actually generates that action.  Click here to read more.

An Informative Balance as Our General Assembly Nears

First, a hat tip, to my friend Brandon for highlighting this piece by David Brooks in The New York Times.  I like reading Brooks, but I’ve fallen out of my reading pattern this summer.  Brooks calls this column, “The Secular Society,” a “book report” as he writes about Charles Taylor’s, A Secular Age.  No doubt that there are some within my expression of Christian witness, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) that feel threatened by “secularism.”  I am not one of them.  I am old enough to remember “blue laws” that disallowed certain items to be bought at the grocery store on Sunday and I can remember when most stores were closed on Sunday.  I can remember that little league was a week day summer activity and extra curricular sports in school stayed away from weekend practice.  That was before soccer, youth sports traveling teams, and a generation of parents that use sports to keep their kids “out of trouble” or use sports as way to the economic easy life through their kids.  Yes, that was an oversimplified judgement.  My apologies.  You may be wondering what does Brook’s column have to do with my practice of Christianity or my expression of Christian witness?

Orthodox believers now live with a different tension: how to combine the masterpieces of humanism with the central mysteries of their own faiths. This pluralism can produce fragmentations and shallow options, and Taylor can eviscerate them, but, over all, this secular age beats the conformity and stultification of the age of fundamentalism, and it allows for magnificent spiritual achievement.(1)

As my denomination gathers in Orlando at the end of this week our family of faith continues to try to make sense of how we will share table with each other as our own orthodox believers fight “secularism” and what some might call “theological impurity.”  The liberals continue to wonder why our denomination is “blending in” to the Christian religious landscape of America rather than claim our historicity as “questioners,” our founders spirit of education, and an ecumenism that does not seek the lowest common denominator of faith.  I think we are a denomination trying to figure out, some might say “discern,” what hospitality means at the table in the 21st century, and “who” or what constituency group gets to define what a Disciples identity of hospitality will mean in our culture.   When you think through the ecumenical or Christian Unity movements I think one could argue that in our culture these have been a success.  In our American context, a church is a church.  Some meet in buildings and some store fronts.  Some have traditional hymns and some have either professional bands or garage bands playing.  Some have symbols that indicate something mysterious and important happens in that space and others look like concert venues or coffee bars.  Some have seminary trained preachers or ministers and some are suspicious of persons with degrees from accredited institutions of higher education.  Who speaks for generic Christianity in our culture?  Is it people like Rick Warren, Pat Robertson, Creflo Dollar, Cardinal Dolen, or Brian McLaren?  Is it institutions like ORU, Liberty, or Regent?  Often, these persons or institutions are the face of Christianity in America and they represent an orthodox to fundamentalists perspective that is consumed as “normal” Christianity.  It is a “rich” time to be a believer or a practitioner.  I am much more concerned with one’s practice than their beliefs about Jesus, and for me, that is what hospitality is based in and upon.

The Secular Society
David Brooks | The New York Times | July 8, 2013

Taylor’s investigation begins with this question: “Why was it virtually impossible not to believe in God in, say 1500, in our Western society, while in 2000 many of us find this not only easy but even inescapable?” That is, how did we move from the all encompassing sacred cosmos, to our current world in which faith is a choice, in which some people believe, others don’t and a lot are in the middle?

This story is usually told as a subtraction story. Science came into the picture, exposed the world for the way it really is and people started shedding the illusions of faith. Religious spirit gave way to scientific fact.

Taylor rejects this story. He sees secularization as, by and large, a mottled accomplishment, for both science and faith.

______
Note

1. David Brooks, “The Secular Society,” The New York Times, July 8, 2013. (accessed July 9, 2013: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/09/opinion/brooks-the-secular-society.html?ref=opinion&_r=1&)