Rev. Wright revisited
Apparently my last blog caused a bit of a stir.
First off, I must say that I have never been a member of a Black Church, and I put my foot in my mouth when I said that (I seem to be doing that lately and it has nothing good has come from it). I was raised Catholic and went to Catholic school for all of my primary and secondary education, where I was the minority. I never had problems in regards to my race. But I did excel academically, and I believe that was due to the high expectations that my parents and teachers had of me. Those high expectations was not those around me saying "You have to succeed," it was people saying "You can and will succeed in whatever you do." While people argue about how to fix education, I feel it starts with having those high expectations. Sorry for the tangent, but I needed to say that. So back to Black churches. I have never been comfortable with a race label on a house of worship. That is quite offensive to me. I wonder how Jesus would feel about that? I understand why Black churches at one time were very important, but I think it is time to seriously question if designating some churches as "Black" is a good thing in our society. We are trying to bring people together and find common ground on issues that affect us all (although the media wants you to think otherwise).
As for Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and others like them, I stand by what I said. They need Black people to feel like victims or they would disappear into oblivion. It is their claim to fame.
As for the article that prompted the previous blog, I do not often agree with conservative columnists, but I did agree with Arnold Ahrlet on this particular topic. Monday through Friday, I receive a email from Jewish World Review, which is a compilation of the top conservative columnists from around the country. I do not agree with them the vast majority of the time, but I think it is important to get another view point. It also helps me lay out my arguments to support my stance on issues. Unfortunately, many who claim to liberal are quite close-minded and try to silence those who may not have the same viewpoint. That is not liberal. We must let people express their point of view even if we do not like it. And we must speak up when we disagree in a civil and intelligent manner.
As for becoming a featured blogger, I will seriously consider it when I am done with classes and full time research. I am a grad student and life is a little hectic but things will get better Mid-May. This is not my best blog, I just wrote whatever I was thinking (I usually write an article in Word and edit it to death before posting). Thank you for you comments and I look forward to expressing and listening to the views expressed here on crossleft.org.
- klhayes's blog
- Login or register to post comments
are things better for poor black folk?
Kristie,
I find your comments about the black church and Revs. Sharpton and Jackson a bit harsh.
As for the good reverends, they continue to be voices for social justice. They were the first to step up to the plate to advocated for peace with Iraq. I remember seeing them speak at rallies in DC during the lead up to the war. They are powerful advocates and voices for social justice. Rev. Sharpton has also launched campaigns within the African American community to raise the expectations of which you speak and to get folks to stop calling each other the n-word.
I agree with you that there have been major strides in civil rights and that middle and upper class African Americans have seen significant gains in their own economic and social mobility. Perhaps we do need to reconsider issues based on that fact.
However Kristie, I think we need to realize that for the African Americans in poverty, that life is probably worse today than it was in the Civil Rights era. Violence and crime is worse. Educational and residential segregation is worse, even if that segregation is de facto rather than de jure. There is a significant and ongoing role for the black church within this context. And let's be clear, black churches don't exclude white people. There are plenty of white people at Rev. Wright's church just as there are at many traditionally black churches.
We live in a time where race is not nearly as cut and dry as it used to be. Racism still exists in significant institutional forms, and it also cuts across class lines in ways that require a more complex analysis of the problems we face as a nation.
Good news and bad news
Bill,
I've good news and bad news for you. The good news is, you're in charge of your life. And the bad news - you're in charge of your life.
I learned, at age 21, that life goes on, no matter what you do. To paraphrase the old 60's saying, "Manure happens". I say "Manure happens - because it fertilizes, be thankful." When I lost the sight of my left eye at age 16 I underwent the classic stages of death; denial (shock), anger emotion), bargaining (pleading with God), preparatory depression and acceptance (increased self reliance). Once I accepted the fact that my sight was gone and would not return I picked up my life and got on with it, put myself thru college and started a whole new professional career.
Later in life I learned that we all go thru these 5 stages when we lose a job, a marriqage, death of someone close and similiar life changing events. I call them "Little Deaths and New Beginnings."
If we could not transcend the circumstances of life, no progress would have been realized thru-out history. As applied to the African-American communities, just look at the resources available to them. If they, as Sen. Obama I believe is challenging them, can get past the "whiteman did this to me", then they can escape the sense that they are victims. You are what you think you are. If you think like a victim, you'll act like a victim and be treated like one.
Much progress has been made by African-Americans. Just look at the wealth they have. Black athletes, entertainers, entrepreneurs, politicians and the like control billions of dollars. Eg. the rapper Jay Z made $115 last year. Where did he spend it? On several homes, cars and the like. Did he invest it in black community? I'd like to know.
With all this money do they invest in black enterprise zones? How much do they give back? That answer, in this context, is not important. The fact is they have billions of dollars to re-invest. I meet alot of black people each week. As soon as they get the means, many of them move to the suburbs, buy a nice home and cars and the like. They live the so-called "American Dream". But do they give back, help others out of the ghettos? I don't know for certain but it sure doesn't sound like it. Their churches can be investment channels, once they change their attitudes, "Get an attitude of gratitude."
I learned that no matter what cards life deals you, you play them the best you can. Sure, you lose a hand or two, but in the losing you learn how to play better. Manure (losing) happens because it fertilizes (you learn to be a better player), so be thankful. If you think like a victim, you'll play like a victim and the rest of the players will steal you blind.
We are in charge of our life. It's how you play the cards life deals you that makes you the victor or the victim. It's always your choice! Some days I feel like the victor and yes, somedays I feel like the victim. I must remind myself that I am not a victim, I have choices; align with God's energy and thrive, passively flow with the current
and bounce off the rocks or oppose the flow, try to dam it
and be damned in the process. I am in charge. I always know God's help is available (to give me the insights I need) and with the guidance of Jesus as the Wayshower and many other enlightened teachers, I make it each and everyday. I'm in charge.
T'ain't easy McGee but I can do it, we all can. In fact Bill, that's the fun. Jus' keep on keepin' on! Live, love and laugh. We're all winners!
Rich
Playing the cards you're dealt...
...the best you can is fine. I've been doing it and keepin' on keepin' on for almost 77 years now. And as the Stephen Sondheim songs says, "I'm still here".
Nevertheless, and but, and however...when bombs drop or the dam breaks just a little ways upstream, it's hard for me to see that the people who are affected are "in charge". They might not have any choices at all, or any time for choice before they're destroyed.
"I am in charge" is a good line for a motivational speaker, but I think it fails as an analysis of life. society, and history. Rejecting a passive victimhood is good -- I fully agree. Learning to be in charge of your responses and attitudes, playing the dealt cards as best you can -- that's all good. But are all cards playable? Do you really mean to deny that there are actual, objectively describable victims? Do you believe that "you are what you think you are" is all that there is to say about the interaction of identity, personal agency, and external conditions and forces?
Bill
Increased awareness
Bill,
The examples you use; bombs dropped, dam breaks, still involve choices, some on a greater scale then others. Bombs dropped. Why? Are we aware that we are part of a larger society, one that has persons willing to use extreme violence to achieve their personal goals of revenge?. How did we produce the Oklahoma bombers?, the Columbine, Virginia Tech etc. shooters? This takes a higher level of education then many people have and a willingness to confront the past, social and personal.
If you live downstream from a dam, you 1st must be aware of your location, and 2nd that if you stay there you are chosing to put yourself at risk. Just like living in a flood plane, near a beach in hurricane territory, sking on an avalance prone mountainside, living in eathquake zones we must be aware of the risks. Failure to recognize the risks is no excuse to feel like we are victims. Just learn and play the cards dealt you, if you survive. If you don't at least your death can serve as a warning of danger to others.
Bombs dropped. As an example of social awareness let us take an honest look at our recent history with Iran. I recently visited the Eisenhower estate near Gettysburg. There, quite blatantly as part of the Ike's history, is the claim that he chose to restore the Shah in 1953. This was touted as his most significant foreign policy achievement. Yeah, right. So how did the people of Iran feel about that? Wouldn't you feel a certain "level of animosity", even hatred, towards some foreign power who came here and overthrew our government? Who were we to interfer in the internal affairs of another country? To what ends did we do so? Might not oil be a part of the why we chose to restore the Shah? Not only did we restore him, we also tried to instill our values on a proud people with 5 millenia of history, to downplay their Muslim social values. No wonder they resent our government. I am currently researching this whole issue.
If "Islamic terrorists" bombed the twin towers, part of the answer to the "Why?" is rooted in the energies we have generated. While there is no excuse for the bombing, the fact that it happened it should sound like a clarion call to look at what part we may have played in generating these energies. We are not blameless victims of some demented people. These people thought they were doing the will of God. Who's right and who's wrong? The answer is - both.
Similiarly the issue of slavery requires a deeper analysis. Black on black slavery goes back several millenia. Whole west African empires were built by blacks enslaved by other blacks. Who captured and sold Kunta Kinte into slavery? Other blacks. Slavery is a human family issue, not confined to one race or another. When the African-American community fully recognizes this they can then begin to remove "the splinters of rascism", from their eyes, forgive themselves for making whites the total fall guy. Yes, whites did play an important part. When the white community fully and mutually embraces our history we can then begin to move on as a nation. Our mutual history begins back in Africa and in Europe. As the Bible says; "You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free". Let us free ourselves by knowing the truth of our mutual enslavement.
'Nuff for now.
Rich
Awareness, choices, and constraints
Rich,
You didn't directly answer the questions I asked: "But are all cards playable? Do you really mean to deny that there are actual, objectively describable victims? Do you believe that 'you are what you think you are' is all that there is to say about the interaction of identity, personal agency, and external conditions and forces?"
Instead, you moved from the individual level to the societal level. When it comes to that kind of analysis and issues of "blowback", you're preaching to the choir: I'm steeped in the anthropological systems analysis type of thinking.
But lets look at the example of the bombs dropping. I was thinking of, say, some Iraqi woman in Baghdad where US aircraft have been dropping bombs on civilian neighborhoods. Where's her agency, her power to choose? No amount of awareness of 'the violence in the system' and the violence added by the occupation system gives her the power to choose or gave her the power in the past to have changed the system in which she's lived or, if she's poor, even to have changed the place where she lives, aside from perhaps having fled from one neighborhood to another as a reaction to sectarian "cleansing" of mixed neighborhoods.
The school shooters? I was thinking of some of those who were gunned down who had no part in creating the pathologies manifested in the school social systems and in the personal psychologies of the shooters. The "we" that produced the Oklahoma bombers and those young shooters is more than the sum of all the individuals in this country. It's a "superorganic" We -- that is, the way We are technologically, institutionally, and ideologically organized. The young people who were killed didn't make the bad choices that produced the cultural systems of the USA which in turn helped produce the pathological killers. Neither did you or I.
Downstream from a dam? A 10 year old doesn't make the choice about where to live. Many places that are particularly vulnerable are in the poorer sections of cities and towns. Southern tornadoes disproportionately hit trailer parks and low-lying cheap housing. Some people, like the 10 year old child, have no agency in choices of places to live. Others have limited options. Sometimes no viable options. On the other hand, some rich folks heedlessly choose beach homes. But others didn't freely choose to be poor and to live in the Lower Ninth Ward of New Orleans.
As for our history with Iran in my lifetime, I'm completely on the same wavelength as you. The same goes for the Twin Towers and "blowback". But what does that have to do with a young man who worked for a messenger service and had just delivered some documents to a top story office in the first tower as the plane crashed into it? Isn't he a victim of circumstances? Would you really say that he made the wrong choice of occupation and of the city to live in, and should have been aware of the risks that some angry and extremist Muslims would attack New York and would choose a tall target that effectively symbolized the Powers That Be which they wish to bring down? Did he somehow choose our Middle Eastern policy? (If he had supported it or opposed it, it would have made no difference to the Deciders.)
In Albany NY, I don't hear advocates complaining about slavery. Nor are there great resources available to the local African-American inner city neighborhoods. The resources earned by those who have made it but who, to a great extent, leave and don't give back to their original communities mean nothing to some kid whose school is lousy, whose neighborhood is a scene of frequent shootings where drugs and gangs abound, where affordable housing is limited and many houses are boarded up, where unemployment is high and access to jobs is low, and where many of the kid's Wayshowers are showing the way only to prison -- a way that's greased by the biases of the criminal justice system.
Indeed, neither a passive nor a reactive sense of victimhood gets one to a good place. But the experience of victimization sometimes gets converted into a passion for justice. Either way, with or without victimology, victims exist. I think of Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Medgar Evers. They took charge of their lives. They didn't think like victims or play their cards like victims. And no, the rest of the players didn't steal them blind. But some of the other players accused them of not playing by the rules and shot them dead, instead.
Bill
Mature levels of awareness
Bill,
Regarding awareness, we must deferentiate between minds; babies, young children, adolescents and adults. To the degree that we have the ability to be aware, we have choices. Only the youngest could be considered "actual, objectively describable victims". And even they are questionable in that many metaphyscians believe we chose the environment into which we are to be born prior to coming back; our parents, culture, and any handicaps etc.
As Nancy, in her post on Hell, reminded me, Origen was an early Christian church leader but his teachings on Reincarnation and the like were struck out by others in the 5th century, so we have to rediscover his version of universal truths. As I believe we are here to learn lessons from an eternal cosmic curriculum, that Our Creator and the great enlightened teachers such as Jesus are our teachers, the universe is our university, our lifetimes are our classrooms and we are the students, Origens teachings are of great interest to me. I participate in CrossLeft in order to learn more about Jesus from other folks. I come from the context that Jews, Christians and Muslims are all children of Abraham, thus I have a strong interest in learning the worldviews beyond the boundaries of Christendom.
Re: the Iraqi woman, she does have a choice, to leave altogether such as 2 million others Iraqi's have. And as for the high school shooters and their targets, we all should be aware that adolescence is a time of high passions and lesser intellectual understanding. We don't know, beyond what the media briefly tells us before they rush off to the next hot topic, the relationship between the shooters and those shot, so it's not very productive to pursue this. All I know is that teenagers and young adults are in the process of determining their place in the social pecking order and are very aware of how they hurt others, in many cases deliberately, so yes Bill they have choices. It is our duty as adults to ensure they have the proper guidance as to the most benefical choices to make.
You say that "the young people who were killed didn't make the bad choices that produced the cultural systems of the USA which in turn helped produce the pathological killers". True in the megascale but at the local scale they are active participants in the cruelity of the pecking order. So I repeat, they have choices and we have responsibilities. As we all know it takes a whole village to raise it's young.
All of this has gotten us off the main point I was making, that the African-American coummunity has huge resources fiscally to greatly reduce poverty in its own ranks. All it needs is strong enlightened leadership. Dr. King, Malcolm X and Medgar Evers played the cards dealt them quite well. They serve to remind us that we can transcend our circumstances if we are aware of our choices, and have the courage to take full responsiblity for the consequences of our actions.
In Albany and many other communities potential great resources exist IF the national black community has the foresight and courage to marshall them. Again I say that the black athletes, entertainers and entrepreneurs have billions of dollars available to them. If they invest in black entrepreneur zones, they will draw in non-black monies and greatly expand their capabilities. I am very tired of hearing how oppressed they are. The only oppression that exists, is the notion in their mind that they are victims. I hope Sen. Obama can inspire them to help themselves. Rev. Jesse Jackson seems to have gotten the message. How much headway his Operation Bootstrap has made is now under study.
That's the challenge, to see that we are not truly victims. As our founders said, "We are endowed by Our Creator with certain inalienable rights---" These rights are our birthright gifts from a benevolent Creator. Let us all use our gifts to the benefit of all. My studies in Quantum Physics, Jungian psychology, and various other hard and social sciences has lead me to understand that we live in an intimately, interconnected, interactive and interdependent universe, a vast cosmic web of energies constantly expanding and learning. We all need one another. We and Our Creator are one.
Rich
re: maturity, awareness, choice
Rich,
I'm glad to see you've emended your initial statement so that at least the very young could be considered "objectively describable victims". But I'm still not satisfied with your argument or your reasoning. Leaving aside for the moment the question of reincarnation, there's more to the questions surrounding the issue of choice, of being "in charge" of one's life.
First, I note that you haven't yet rejected my example of the messenger service employee on 9/11. What would be your argument for rejecting the idea that he was a victim of circumstances, and that, instead, he had failed to take charge of his life and thus, presumably, shared in the responsibility for his own death?
Re: the Iraqi woman. You say that her in-charge choice is to leave Iraq. That seems rather heartless to me, as it assumes that she has the resources to make an absolutely unfettered, unconstrained choice.
What if she doesn't have the money to pay her way? Or had the money, left, ran out of money and had to return, as many have had to? What if she had made a different but reasonable choice after having been driven by Sunnis out of her mixed neighborhood in Baghdad, losing everything, perhaps including her husband, and had then gone to live with a son in Sadr City, a safe Shia neighborhood, where the Mahdi Army militia protects her and where there was an ongoing freeze or ceasefire? How was she to know that the Iraqi Army would attack the Mahdi Army in Basra and that all hell would break loose in Sadr City as a result? Must she have complete knowledge of all things that might affect her adversely, up to and including foreknowledge of coming events, before she can be considered to have taken appropriate charge of her life? Having made a reasonable taking-charge choice, I see her as still being a victim of circumstances when a US plane drops a bomb on her and her son's house.
In the same way, I see MLK, Malcolm X, and RFK as being victimized by their assassins, even if they made taking-charge choices and didn't live their lives in terms of victimhood.
The bullet-recipients in school shootings? Aside from considering teachers who got shot, one can't assume that those who were shot (pretty much at random) were all participants in the cruelties of social pecking orders. Loners, peaceful outsiders, and those who are bucking the system get shot, too.
Their are so many examples one can cite. Last night I saw video of Haitians who are being slammed by food shortages and high prices. Government subsidized food isn't available; black market prices are out of reach. One low-income woman told of having to pull her son out of school so he could earn a little money so that the family can eat. How is she not a victim of circumstances? She's doing what she can to "take charge of her life", but she can't take charge of those circumstances.
Think of iatrogenically caused deaths or of the crane that fell over in NYC and crushed a house, killing and injuring people. Wherein is their failure to take charge of their lives vis-a-vis these particular circumstances?
Another very large issue is that of individual psychosocial development. Pre-natal and post-natal stresses and conditions, nutrition, family dynamics, social orders and communication systems, all these not only affect a person's "psychology" but also the expression of genetic factors and the structure of the developing brain. This shapes the processes for making choices later in life. It would seem, then, that no choice comes about in a purely free and autonomous way.
Thus, my view is that everybody has choices, but all choices are constrained by circumstances. And we all, no matter how good or free or in-charge our choices may be, or seem to be, can become victims. (A pessimist would say that we're all. in some ways, victims. My wife quotes one of her old friends who'd say "everybody's parents have done them in in one way or another." Even one of my sons said that I had deprived him, his sister, and his brothers of the experience of full adolescent rebellion. At the height of his adolescence, he had merely thought that I was faintly ridiculous. Otherwise I was too reasonable and authoritatively anti-authoritarian, and didn't give them good reasons for rebelling against their non-victimization.)
So - I see that the spiritual challenge, which I think is never totally met, is to work at freeing oneself from the over-determining forces of sociocultural systems, ideologies, and The-Powers-That-Be's self-serving frames of reference. As followers of Jesus, we are paradoxically to become different kinds of slaves, walking in the Way, free to love as he loved, constrained by his peculiar freedom.
Even that freedom is shaped by circumstances: nothing could be more relativistic than doing unto others as you would have them do unto you. The (abstract) absolute of treating others as having unique dignity which is always to be respected is, in practice, shaped by the different and conditioned ways that individual dignity is expressed, felt, and experienced by others. ( I continue to prefer to avoid those who in, say, their sado-masochism would want to do unto me as they would want me to do unto them.)
From my own studies and experience, I also see us as living "in an intimately interconnected, interactive and interdependent universe". At least that's what I see in our human universe of cultural and ecological systems. And that's why I see unconstrained "free" choice as impossible, since it occurs within a greater web of influences. In a universe of immanence and transcendence we are paradoxically One and Not-One. The Web and the Node are, perhaps fractally, One yet also distinct, operating at separate levels.
More on the resources of the African-American community later, as this has got very long. Ditto for reincarnation.
Bill
Reincarnation - Origen
Bill,
Snce I'm the one who brought up the subject of Origen teaching reincarnation, I'll add a comment to your statement that there is disagreement as to what he taught. The one book on Origen that I have in my personal library is ORIGEN: AN EXHORTATION TO MARTYRDOM, PRAYER, AND SELECTED WORKS, translated by Rowan A. Greer of the Yale Divinity School. Dr. Greer affirms Origen's teachings of the pre-existence of souls and calls him a Christian Platonist. Greer describes Origen's cosmology as: "an elaborate setting for the drama of the soul's pilgrimage from innocence to experience and to the perfection that represents its destiny." (page 28)
Greer also states in his Introduction: "Methodius of Olympus, who died about 311, became the leader of opponents to Origenism. The central issue was Origen's peculiar view of the resurrection and his denial that "this" body will be raised. As well, Methodius rejected Origen's belief in the pre-existence of souls and attacked his interpretation of Scripture." (page 29)
That said, I would affirm your own search for truth through a variety of sources.
I think there is a fine line between helping others and interfering with others. My neighbor is a example. While working in a military hospital laboratory, she became chemically sensitive to the point of having to retire on disability. At the time she moved next door, I was a member of a healing meditation group. I asked her if she would like for us to send her healing energies. As a fundamentalist Christian, the idea frightened her. Through the years, I have watched her suffer and try one doctor after the other. Slowly she progressed into natural healing. With each new discovery about our body's energetic field, good nutrition, even some information that her church condemns, she has grown excited over her newfound knowledge. Her health is better, but she continues on her search for total wellness. She admits that without her illness, she would not have explored fields outside her orthodox Christian teachings. Even though, I could have told her everything she has learned, it would not mean the same. She had to learn on her own. But, I have been beside her as she learned. There have been times when I made suggestions, mainly to let her know that if she is ever ready, I can give her additional information. She has seldom listened, I think, because her soul knows she must find truth on her own. Her soul has chosen to use her illness to lead her into truth.
Recognizing reincarnation can help us learn compassion. We are all on our unique spiritual journeys ... we are all doing the best we can at any point in time. On the other hand, Jesus taught that we are our brother/sister's keeper. We can be with and love each other as we learn, ready to lend a helping hand when it is requested.
Since God granted each of us the free will to choose how we will live our lives, I have no right to insist that my neighbor follow certain techniques for healing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: the young children in Iraq ... I weep seeing them too. According to Dr. Richard Boylan, in his book on STAR KIDS, the majority of children born in recent years incarnate to assist our planet in some way. These are highly advanced children. Based on Dr. Boylan's research, I believe these children very likely chose to be present in Iraq for the short period of their lives as a source of light and love. Many of us have held our children or grandchildren in our arms the day of their birth and commented, "this is an old soul ... look into his/her eyes. I actually felt intimidated looking into my grandson's eyes only hours after he was born. Now, at age 15, his energy field is extremely comforting. The kids at school follow him around, somehow knowing that they feel more secure in his presence. This is not the result of a brand new soul incarnating into a physical body for the first and only time. His innate wisdom alone would belie that concept of life.
Not all who suffer are reaping what they sowed. In fact, many souls incarnate to assist those in their family-of-origin to learn a particular soul lesson. Serving others in this manner is an excellent, positive way to pay off negative karmic debt. In fact, service to others is the best way to pay off karmic debt. We "reap what we have sown" but are given the privilege to choose how we will do the reaping.
In the end, God's universal laws are based on absolute love.
P.S. When I pray for someone, I pray for their "highest good" ... not for a particular way in which I think the prayer should be answered. That way I am giving them my love and prayerful energy, while not interfering with their free will or their soul's choices.
More -- this time on reincarnation
Rich,
Like you, I come from a context wherein Jews, Christians, and Muslims are all understood as being "Abrahamic". At least as regards Christians and Jews, I learned about that at first hand as a child, preparing for bar mitzvah during the year and then spending most summers at one or another of two "Hebrew Christian" summer camps run by my two of my father's sisters and their husbands, all of whom were converts from Orthodox Judaism to Christianity. These uncles by marriage were ordained ministers with missions in Jewish neighborhoods in Chicago and Toronto, respectively. (One was Presbyterian and the other Anglican.)
Perhaps trying to make sense of that gave me the motivation to become an anthropologist and to try to learn the lifeways and worldviews of other peoples. That, in turn, affected my own development. Dancing the Ute Sun Dance, with its syncretism of Christian, Plains Indian, and Great Basin Indian religious ideas and practices was one influence. Another, which played a direct role in my Christian conversion experience, was my study of Chinese language and culture -- a superficial knowledge of Chinese religion and the concept of the Tao shaped both the visual imagery of that experience and my understanding of Jesus as Way and as Way to the Way . So I firmly believe that going beyond the boundaries of Christendom is a good and necessary thing.
Saying that, I still have problems with the idea of reincarnation.
But first, as an aside, I have a quick and only superficially informed comment about Origen: identifying him as a believer in reincarnation is problematic. There's much disagreement about what his opinion actually was. One (Roman Catholic) translation of his Commentary on Matthew shows him as explicitly rejecting reincarnation: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/101613.htm: "In this place it does not appear to me that by Elijah the soul is spoken of, lest I should fall into the dogma of transmigration, which is foreign to the church of God, and not handed down by the Apostles, nor anywhere set forth in the Scriptures..."
Also, while it's instructive to learn of others' versions of universal truths, that alone isn't a good reason for accepting and adopting any particular version that we discover or rediscover.
What bothers me about taking reincarnation as a working hypothesis is that it's compatible with (but, of course, doesn't require) a certain kind of indifference to other people's problems. Whether a soul is living a current life because of free choice or because of 'bad karma', there's a temptation, or perhaps a tendency, to take that as a reason for not interfering in whatever situations another person is experiencing. The principle might be "that's a lesson that they need to learn", either by way of accumulating enlightening experience or by way of punishment.
That fits in with a line of anthropological thinking that the idea of reincarnation is part of a complex of religious ideas that served as an adaptation to the oppressiveness of the early despotic forms of government that developed and managed large-scale irrigation systems -- what's been labeled "Oriental Despotism" or "the hydraulic state".
Although compassion is a Buddhist value, being publicly unresponsive and resigned to the sufferings caused by governments' arbitrariness and cruelty had adaptive value for the subjects of a heavy-handed bureaucratic state apparatus. That's a very different approach from the prophetic values that suffuse the Hebrew Bible. Jews are supposed to complain and then take action against Pharaohs.
One of the characteristics of the prophetic tradition is empathy as contrasted with sympathy. The Passover Seder is remarkable in insisting that this isn't just a celebration of what was done for others in the past: it was experienced by you. The imagery is that you were there, you were set free. It then is supposed to impel you go forward, doing the same freedom work with others who are in bondage.
In contrast with the prophetic tradition, the reincarnation traditions seem to focus on compassion as something that's kept to the private sphere and, perhaps, contributes as much, or more, to one's own process of development as it does to the object of one's compassion. The emphasis is on inner transformation leading to ultimate personal salvation. It seems to me that there's less connection with efforts to bring about societal changes that lead toward justice.
Modern Buddhists, however, are seeing and discussing the possibilities of building on the concept of selflessness as a basis for a theory of social justice. And, conversely, as we know all too well in the US, Christianity has its own tendencies for emphasizing personal salvation rather than justice. So I'm not positing some absolute distinctions here, nor implying that anyone who believes in reincarnation must therefore be lacking the prophetic qualities that I value.
Reincarnation; self and others
Bill,
After reading your thoughtful reply I find that we are, again, thinking along similiar lines. I, like you, at 1st had a bit of a time with the concept of reincarnation. I also thought ist was quite self centered, an easy cop out to avoid taking responbilility for my actions, and a part of it is, rightfully so. It makes you sit down with yourself and ask why am I here and what am I to do in this life, has the possibility a possible past life influenced, help set the stage, in part for this one? Heavy stuff!
I'm glad to hear that you now see that modern Buddhism and it's sense of compassion, of selfless service to others, can be very outward focused and thus very productive, adding greatly to the search for world peace. As you said in another piece, Buddhism is always changing.
I came to a belief in reincarnation from a profound sense of spiritual deja vu. I kept experiencing the same reocurring situations, and began to ask myself, "Why am I do this over and over? Rich, you'd think by now you'd have learned!"
Then it stuck me, I was here to learn lessons from some (as yet to me) unknown curriculum. It answered several questions, like "What is the purpose of my life?" "How do I know what lessons I am here to learn?" "How would anyone know the lessons they chose and why?" It's these "one foot nailed to the floor", those "Oh no, not again", those "banging my head against a wall" sort of situations that reveal the individual lessons I need to learn, anyone has to learn. Then I asked how can I learn these all in one lifetime? How can I learn what it is to be a woman, to be a person of another racial group, of another culture, economic circumstance, in a body crippled either by birth, disease or accident and the like, all in one lifetime? And Where did I get certain inherant talents?
The answer was again simple. I must have acquired certain knowledge and skills in a prior existences and my soul remembered them and brought them into this life. From this I intuitied that, 1. there must be a cosmic curriculme, 2. Our Creator (God) is the teacher, 3. the universe is our university, 4. our lifetime(s) are the classroom and 5. We, myself and all others, are the students.
From quantum physics I learned that energy once created never ceases to exist. So I asked myself, "Is this all that there is to existence?" Are we are just born, live and then die? Seems like a waste of energy to me, a meaningless exercise in futility. To give my life meaningful meaning there has to be an on going eternal process, a vehicle that carries on. That vehicle is, I believe, my soul, my unique assemblage of eternal energy.
Carl Jung and Wolfgang Pauli set forth the concept of Synchronicity, an acausal connecting principle. Some scientist have also seen a theoretical grounding for this concept in quantum physics, fractal geometry and chaos theory (stuff that is way beyond me). Jung also developed the concept of a collective unconscious, a mind that is common to all human beings, that holds the collective memories, experiences and wisdom of the human race. He also developed universal archetypes. Using Jung's work Elizabeth Myer-Briggs devised the famous 16 personality types. Having taken the Myer-Briggs personality test several times I found that; 1. I could much more readily understand who I was and why I interact with others in certain ways and 2. that I changed over time.
I have brought all this seeingly unrelated science and psychology knowledge together in my own unique way. Jesus spoke of life eternal. I can buy that, embrace it and live in the joyful knowledge that I must learn as much as I can this time 'round, to save energy from being wasted in a future existence and excelerate my "graduation", whatever that is. I'm still searching for that answer.
The good news is that I 1. don't have to learn it all in one lifetime and 2. if I mess up, I'll have time enough to try again. One of the underlying themes of my life has been one of service to others. I suspect this is both "a carried over experience" i.e. spiritually inherited and one of the major lessons I am here to learn.
'Nuff for now.
Rich
More, on African-American community resources
Rich,
When you write "the only oppression that exists is the notion in their minds they are victims" you seem to be skipping over the real (and objectively measurable) differences between "whites" and "blacks" in income, health, mortality, educational access, arrest rates, imprisonment rates, and sentencing standards. And that's including middle and upper income blacks in the statistics. If you look only at the "left-behind" southern rural and inner city urban blacks, the picture is much worse. For those folks, the situation is generally worse than it was in the old Jim Crow days, before the Civil Rights Movement.
This lousy situation comes out of a complex post-Civil-Rights history and isn't mainly about overt racism and individuals' bigotry, but rather is about economic changes and about institutional and other structural barriers, commonly referred to as institutional racism. For those in the lower income ranges, the range of possibilities has narrowed and, along with it, the sense of hope that accompanies expanding possibilities has been greatly diminished.
That's one set of issues we can argue about.
Another is the idea that the African-American community has huge fiscal resources for reducing poverty, based on the wealth of athletes, entertainers, and entrepreneurs. I think there are several problems with that formulation of the situation.
One, there are African-American communities but not really one "African-American community", just as there is no unitary "white community". We don't expect white entertainers, athletes, and entrepreneurs to devote themselves to reducing poverty in "the white community" or even in specific poor white communities. Black or white, they're generally imbued with the ethos of making it in a capitalist system.
The historical process in black communities is that the economically successful move out of the inner cities and into suburbs, leaving behind communities that are more uniformly poor. Calling for foresight and courage to marshall their resources to revive and rescue the communities they left behind is no more likely to be successful than it would be to ask any other geographically mobile Americans to do the same. That particular kind of foresight and courage, based on conscience, understanding, and deep commitment is not typical of our culture.
And then those who actually do 'good works' generally don't apply themselves to general systemic problems. Instead, focussed single issues get the bulk of charitable donations. And investments are made with profit in mind; general economic development for the common good is not likely to be a strong consideration.
Even the mega-wealthy philanthropists like Buffet and Gates don't direct their efforts to community development the way that the old Community Action Programs were supposed to do back in the War on Poverty days.
Wealthy African-Americans can be expected to act in a similar manner. In all groups, some few will give back to the specific communities they grew up in, in rather scatter-shot ways. But Albany, for example, has no great athletic or entertainment superstars, nor any notable entrepreneurs that I've heard of in my 11 years of living here. So generalized African-American wealth will have little significance for our South End or for Arbor Hill. It's not likely that some rich persons, white or black, will suddenly feel a great urge to direct donations or investments to Albany just out of the desire to foster community development for the poor.
The larger question is why should any of us consider that African-American poverty is only an African-American concern and not everyone's concern? Poverty and decreased social/economic mobility for whites and blacks, Native Americans and latino/hispanics, and others, is a national issue which calls for national responses. Whatever demands for reparations for slavery that are still made would disappear if there were a general and genuine national program to invest in depressed urban and rural areas whatever their social/ethnic makeup might be.
The problem isn't that we need a President Obama to inspire African-Americans to help themselves. I'm afraid that some African-Americans would take that suggestion amiss, as being condescending, since lots of people have been doing that for a very long time. (The Rev. Wright is a good example.)
I'm not aware of what Jesse Jackson is currently doing along these lines -- his old Operation Breadbasket is long gone. I can't find any references to a current Operation Bootstrap. Fill me in?
Bill
It's a matter of will and vision
Bill,
Much of what you say is true, of the past. Yes, folks do gain advantages and move out of the poorer communities, turning their backs on those left behind, and often become quite critical, adopting a "If I can do it, you can too." attitude.
What is lacking here is the will and the vision to pull together, to see the enormous investment opportunities. Regarding the will, at the moment several churches that promote prosperity consciousness are under investigation by the IRS for what you might say are "doing well by doing good". Lavish offices, cars, homes, salaries. Yes actual results do need to be demonstrated, to inspire others but not at the expense of others. They are on the right track but succomb to human temptation, you know "the Devil made me do it".
The vision. I do believe there is a black national consciousness of sort. Being a minority it is easier for them to spiritually congregate. Here in Maryland, the old racial segregation still exists in that I often see majority black comunities, existing within larger white areas. In the past this was done for security reasons, now I believe it is just for the sense of community. In rural MD areas you will quite often see black enclaves built near or around an African-American church. It's an old pattern that still exists here, in this Old South state. Maryland stayed in the Union at the muzzle of a musket. As late a 30 years ago the KKK was burning crosses, not that much longer ago lynching blacks.
If Senator Obama can inspire consciousness of African-Americans with a vision of self empowerment, they have many of the resources. Many of the old legal barriers have been removed, much progress has been made. The answer to the question, "Are they better off now then they were", is yes. Is there more work to do?, more progress to be made?, needs to be made?, yes.
The vision I see is quite an extraordinary one, one not done by other groups. Has it ever been done, I can't think of an example. However can it be done? must it be done? I believe so. Otherwise the old patterns will continue, large numbers of blacks will continue to languish in poverty, not only of the physical but of the soul. If they can do it, just think then the challenge it presents poor whites.
Better yet, if all poor can see how to better use their resources they will inspire other haves to invest in the have nots, and we all gain as a nation. Maybe I am an cockeyed optimist, even a foolhardy dreamer, yet if Jesus were here I believe He would provide the vision and the inspiration for the poor to help themselves and command the better off assist them. I don't for a moment believe Jesus would advocate social welfare. Not social welfare but social workfare. He'd grant all persons the dignity of knowing they can doing it for themselves and help marshall the resources to do so.
Rich
Well said
Well written Bill.
Minority churches
1st off, good luck with your studies. Gotta be nutso time for you! :)
2nd, great postings. Yes, the last did set off things--- but then it doesn't seem to take much to do that of late! :)
3rd, Amen. Sen. Obama has now publically challenged African-American leaders such as the Rev.'s Jackson, Sharpton and Wright to get past their prejudices (to remove the splinter from their eye), to see where their remarks add to racial tension and get past it. It's my conviction that no one has ever been, is now or ever will be, a victim of circumstances. Continuing to reinforce "black victimhood" serves no one, especially they themselves. IMO, it's time that whole generation retired. The African-American community would do well to follow Sen. Obama's more postive, more empowering lead.
4th, "black churches". I work in many communites with high percentages of minority residents. I meet many daily. For African-American's their church is still their most comforting place, giving them a sense of community where they can feel good about themselves and where they can feel safe. For many Hispanics, besides the above, their church is also a place of entry, a place to get their bearings socially. So "Black and Hispanic" churches continue to provide valuable services to their socially individual societies. Someday maybe that will all change, but for now---.
I look forward to hearing more of your worldviews and experiences. BTW where are you studying and what's the focus your masters thesis (if you have one yet)?
Rich
Victims of circumstances
Rich,
I don't understand your conviction that "no one has ever been, is now or ever will be, a victim of circumstances."
Please explain that, as I see a world in which victims of circumstances abound.
Promoting an ideology of victimhood seems to me to be something quite different from recognizing -- or at least concluding, to use a less absolute term -- that there are people, and whole categories of people, who get thoroughly screwed by political, economic, and other circumstances.
Are we to see all those who organize with them and advocate for them as somehow parasitically dependent on promoting victimhood? I think it's possible to deal with grievances, even victimhood, without reinforcing the type of sense of victimhood that's unhealthy and counterproductive. Instead of a blanket rejection of the three Rev.s, I'd like to see some analysis of particular situations and cases. (In the past, I've been both critical of Jackson and Sharpton and supportive of them.)
Btw, there seems to me to be a tension or contradiction between your 3rd and 4th points. If the black church is a haven where people can feel safe, doesn't that say something negative about the external circumstances in which many African-Americans live?
Bill