When we look at everything going on around us in the world, the easy road often seems to complain, to criticize, to withdraw, to blame. Looking back on 2013, I see so much to be thankful for.
I am thankful for those with vision in the field of medicine who dream and work for cures to cancer, Parkinsons, and the myriad of illnesses that plague us. I am thankful for those who dream of a day when the human right of health care is a reality. I am thankful for the multitude who sacrifice their personal comfort and time making others comfortable.
I am thankful for the selfless millions who give to provide food for the hungry and the thousands who serve that food to families and homeless. I am thankful for agencies dedicated to the reduction, if not the elimination, of hunger in my community, state, country, and the world.
I am thankful for the generous throngs who give coats off their backs or out of the surplus of their clostes so others can be warm. I am thankful for individuals and organizations who brave the elements to find the neglected and bring them in for food, warmth, and clothing.
I am thankful for teachers who sacrifice higher salaries to serve and educate the next generation, sharing dreams, inspiring the next scientists, doctors, public servants, and teachers. I am thankful for these unsung heroes who give out of their own resources to supplement meager teaching provisions so their students will not be neglected.
I am thankful for the caring who visit those in prison to let them know they are humans of worth and dignity and valued as human beings.
I am thankful for the millions who have and continue to preserve our freedom.
I am thankful for poll workers and canvasers who strive to keep the vision of democracy alive for every citizen.
I am thankful for those who bag my groceries and smile warmth and cheer while earning a minimum wage. I am thankful for everyone who supports a living wage.
I am thankful for those who march and protest to remind the rest of us that the dream has not been fully realized yet.
I am thankful for those who serve in public office with humility, honesty, and a passion for everyone.
I am thankful for every person of goodwill, yearning for peace, living the peace so desperately needed in our world, and dedicated to the elimination of violence in our society and world.
My hope and resolution for 2014----to recommit and act in a way that serves others in becoming the people and world we are capable of being.
HAPPY NEW YEAR!
Thursday, December 26, 2013
Friday, December 20, 2013
Imagine a world lit by divine light
Imagine a world lit by divine light! According to the Genesis myth, this is exactly what happened "When God began creating the world," a more correct translation of Genesis 1:1. It was divine light, not physical light. Physical light did not come until day four when God created sun, moon, and stars. It was divine light, and it was present from the beginning. The creation story is about the divinity of the earth and ALL that is in it. The text says, affirms, insists that creation is good----God says so! The text says that before God's light gave warmth and illumination, the earth was a formless void and darkness. This first light and darkness are not good and bad, right and wrong, truth and falseness. Good and evil do not enter God's good creation until humans disobey, and that doesn't happen until Genesis 3. The divine light fills the dark void with meaning and purpose, fills it with God! God is in everything and everything is in God!
It is our failure to recognize the divine light in creation, in ourselves and others, that hides and obscures the potential brilliance yearning to be free, longing to be shared and embraced, inviting all creation to become that for which and to which we were created.
That light, God's light, divine light finds its greatest expression and truest incarnation when creatures yield to the creator, love completely selflessly, seek peace, and mirror the compassion and generosity first given to them.
Love, peace, humility, service to others before consuming ego and conspicuous consumption. The gifts of creation are for the benefit of all, not the hoarding of the few. Divine light exposes the hidden, dark corners of our selfishness and always, always invites our surrender and commitment to divine purposes in the world.
It is the season of light: Feast of Dedication/Festival of Lights, Advent Candles, Islamic New Year and new light of fresh starts, Devali, and on goes creation's longing for oneness with Creator and creatures.
The children's song was never more true and compelling: "This little light of mine, I'm going to let it shine." May we all, everyday, in every way.
It is our failure to recognize the divine light in creation, in ourselves and others, that hides and obscures the potential brilliance yearning to be free, longing to be shared and embraced, inviting all creation to become that for which and to which we were created.
That light, God's light, divine light finds its greatest expression and truest incarnation when creatures yield to the creator, love completely selflessly, seek peace, and mirror the compassion and generosity first given to them.
Love, peace, humility, service to others before consuming ego and conspicuous consumption. The gifts of creation are for the benefit of all, not the hoarding of the few. Divine light exposes the hidden, dark corners of our selfishness and always, always invites our surrender and commitment to divine purposes in the world.
It is the season of light: Feast of Dedication/Festival of Lights, Advent Candles, Islamic New Year and new light of fresh starts, Devali, and on goes creation's longing for oneness with Creator and creatures.
The children's song was never more true and compelling: "This little light of mine, I'm going to let it shine." May we all, everyday, in every way.
Monday, December 9, 2013
Summary of definitions of moral
I apologize for taking so lomg in getting back to you as promised. My only excuse is Thanksgiving and the death of a very favorite cousin.
So, here is a "general" description of the responses you graciously shared.
(1) About half of you described your moral framework as religiously or spiritually defined, everything from overt revelation to a universal foundation of consciously avoiding harm to others.
(2) About half of you described what Bishop James Pike in the sixties called "situation ethics." I'm sure this "principle" had been around for a very long time before he popularlized it, but it became a buzz word in philosophy/religion circles.
Some of you implied that we are born with this sensitivity or inner awareness, others hinted at the possibility that morality is taught, learned. You are a wonderful microcosim of every moral position I have ever encounterted.
Along the way I was offered a model for making moral judgments that I found particularly challenging and helpful [I would never claim that I follow it everyday!]. This model says that you begin with a clear understanding of the moral principles/foundation you accept as defining your life and your relationship to the world. With that foundation to guide you:
(1) objectively and as clearly as possible "describe" the way things are.
(2) using your moral principles "describe" the way you believe/think things should be.
(3) now choose and act in a way, determine a course of action, to get from (1) to (2) that is consistent with your moral principles.
(4) revisit frequently to be sure you remain faithful, true to your principles and plan of action.
Obviously this isn't rocket science. But there is a world of difference between saying and doing.
In my opinion, and everyone's got one, most of us are inconsistent and fail to live by the principles we self-righteously proclaim. In the end it is our self-centered and prejudiced desires that drive us and determine the positions we take on practically every issue.
But no one is perfect and what are goals for but to challenge and encourage us. If we share the same goals---a healthy environment, elimination of hunger, a safe world for everyone---then is it too much to believe that reasonable people of all political and moral persuasions can come together and solve the problems facing our generation?
As Mother Teresa said, we are not called to be successful; we are called to be faithful.
So, here is a "general" description of the responses you graciously shared.
(1) About half of you described your moral framework as religiously or spiritually defined, everything from overt revelation to a universal foundation of consciously avoiding harm to others.
(2) About half of you described what Bishop James Pike in the sixties called "situation ethics." I'm sure this "principle" had been around for a very long time before he popularlized it, but it became a buzz word in philosophy/religion circles.
Some of you implied that we are born with this sensitivity or inner awareness, others hinted at the possibility that morality is taught, learned. You are a wonderful microcosim of every moral position I have ever encounterted.
Along the way I was offered a model for making moral judgments that I found particularly challenging and helpful [I would never claim that I follow it everyday!]. This model says that you begin with a clear understanding of the moral principles/foundation you accept as defining your life and your relationship to the world. With that foundation to guide you:
(1) objectively and as clearly as possible "describe" the way things are.
(2) using your moral principles "describe" the way you believe/think things should be.
(3) now choose and act in a way, determine a course of action, to get from (1) to (2) that is consistent with your moral principles.
(4) revisit frequently to be sure you remain faithful, true to your principles and plan of action.
Obviously this isn't rocket science. But there is a world of difference between saying and doing.
In my opinion, and everyone's got one, most of us are inconsistent and fail to live by the principles we self-righteously proclaim. In the end it is our self-centered and prejudiced desires that drive us and determine the positions we take on practically every issue.
But no one is perfect and what are goals for but to challenge and encourage us. If we share the same goals---a healthy environment, elimination of hunger, a safe world for everyone---then is it too much to believe that reasonable people of all political and moral persuasions can come together and solve the problems facing our generation?
As Mother Teresa said, we are not called to be successful; we are called to be faithful.
Friday, November 22, 2013
Question: How do you define "moral"?
I have a question and need your help. If you care to respond, I will tabulate and share with all who participate.
How do YOU define moral? I know what the dictionary says: relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior, conforming to a standard of right behavior, sanctioned by one's conscience or ethical judgment. But how do you "know" what is right?
Some textbooks divide actions into moral, immoral, and amoral categories. I agree that 2 + 2 = 4 is amoral, but I am sympathetic with Kierkegaard's insistence that all decisions/actions are either moral or immoral. What do you think?
Textbooks also teach that actions/decisions are moral based on (1) principles regardless of consequencies or (2) determined by the consequencies of the action. With regard to #1 for example, it is wrong (immoral) to lie, despite the consequences. With regard to #2, the morality of the decision/action is determined by the consequences. For example you are hiding Jews in your attic and the Gestapo asks you if you are hiding Jews. You answer that you are not (lieing). Many of us would say this decision/action is moral based on consequences.
But there is a fundamental, prior question. How do YOU determine/decide the values you will use in making moral decisions? There are more options than I have time or space to identify. Brief list: religious/revelation; rational (Kant's Categorical Imperative); utilitarian; hedonistic; legalistic etc etc.
Example and this is not a political question: when it comes to healthcare, do we make our decision on the basis of human need, religious principles, or monetary reality? I think all make compelling cases, but how do I decide what is the "moral" decision? and does one have to be right and all others wrong?
When I have chosen my moral frame of reference, there is the challenge of moral judgment, how do I make a moral decision about anything? That is a question for later.
I hope you will join the discussion. Peace.
How do YOU define moral? I know what the dictionary says: relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior, conforming to a standard of right behavior, sanctioned by one's conscience or ethical judgment. But how do you "know" what is right?
Some textbooks divide actions into moral, immoral, and amoral categories. I agree that 2 + 2 = 4 is amoral, but I am sympathetic with Kierkegaard's insistence that all decisions/actions are either moral or immoral. What do you think?
Textbooks also teach that actions/decisions are moral based on (1) principles regardless of consequencies or (2) determined by the consequencies of the action. With regard to #1 for example, it is wrong (immoral) to lie, despite the consequences. With regard to #2, the morality of the decision/action is determined by the consequences. For example you are hiding Jews in your attic and the Gestapo asks you if you are hiding Jews. You answer that you are not (lieing). Many of us would say this decision/action is moral based on consequences.
But there is a fundamental, prior question. How do YOU determine/decide the values you will use in making moral decisions? There are more options than I have time or space to identify. Brief list: religious/revelation; rational (Kant's Categorical Imperative); utilitarian; hedonistic; legalistic etc etc.
Example and this is not a political question: when it comes to healthcare, do we make our decision on the basis of human need, religious principles, or monetary reality? I think all make compelling cases, but how do I decide what is the "moral" decision? and does one have to be right and all others wrong?
When I have chosen my moral frame of reference, there is the challenge of moral judgment, how do I make a moral decision about anything? That is a question for later.
I hope you will join the discussion. Peace.
Sunday, November 17, 2013
I have a choice.
I have a choice, everyday in everyway.
The world is full of hatred from person on person to party on party to nation on nation. The end of hatred is separation and a failure to recognize the potential good in the face of those I disagree with. Hatred leads to failing to accept the things we have in common and seeking the common good we yearn for. Hatred ends in demonizing others creating barriers to love and compassion. I have a choice to contribute to the chaos and confusion or to say and live a better way.
The world is full of anger and fear between races and religions and ideologies. Anger leads to name calling and stereotyping and "deafness" that prevents me from listening to those I disagree with and refusing to consider the possibility that they are well-meaning as well and desire many shared values that our anger has prevented us from clarifying. I have a choice to contribute to the chaos and confusion or to say and live a better way.
The world is full of violence and people whose first and only answer is the forceful, hostile imposition of their narrow, destructive perspective on all who offer alternatives. Many times this violence is perpetrated by so called religious people condoning their hostility in the name of their god. Sometimes they are honest enough to recognize their actions have no religious justification. I have a choice to contribute to the chaos and confusion or to say and live a better way.
Ignorance, hatred, anger, and violence end in the disintegration of social fabric, the common good, and a higher human purpose and goal. I have a choice to contribute to the chaos and confusion or to say and live a better way.
Martin Luther King Jr said the life worth living is the life lived in service to others. I think it was Mother Theresa who said we are not called to succeed, only to serve. No one said it would be easy!
The world is full of hatred from person on person to party on party to nation on nation. The end of hatred is separation and a failure to recognize the potential good in the face of those I disagree with. Hatred leads to failing to accept the things we have in common and seeking the common good we yearn for. Hatred ends in demonizing others creating barriers to love and compassion. I have a choice to contribute to the chaos and confusion or to say and live a better way.
The world is full of anger and fear between races and religions and ideologies. Anger leads to name calling and stereotyping and "deafness" that prevents me from listening to those I disagree with and refusing to consider the possibility that they are well-meaning as well and desire many shared values that our anger has prevented us from clarifying. I have a choice to contribute to the chaos and confusion or to say and live a better way.
The world is full of violence and people whose first and only answer is the forceful, hostile imposition of their narrow, destructive perspective on all who offer alternatives. Many times this violence is perpetrated by so called religious people condoning their hostility in the name of their god. Sometimes they are honest enough to recognize their actions have no religious justification. I have a choice to contribute to the chaos and confusion or to say and live a better way.
Ignorance, hatred, anger, and violence end in the disintegration of social fabric, the common good, and a higher human purpose and goal. I have a choice to contribute to the chaos and confusion or to say and live a better way.
Martin Luther King Jr said the life worth living is the life lived in service to others. I think it was Mother Theresa who said we are not called to succeed, only to serve. No one said it would be easy!
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Baseball: the apex of human evolution
Baseball is the greatest invention in the history of homosapiensapiens.It is the greatest metaphor for life yet contrived by the human mind. It embodies the myth of the eternal return. It challenges individual excellence and communnal cooperation while holding out the promise of victory and acceptance of defeat. It is as real as it gets!
Just think. We prepare (gestation) for the big game (life) under the watchful eye of the coach (mother and father). We enter the stadium as a team/community. We sit together on the bench waiting our turn to make our individual contribution for the good of the cause. We step to the plate (home base, safety, warmth of the womb, arms of loved ones) with one objective: round the bases and return home adding to the team score. Sometimes we get a pass (walk) and sometimes we fail (strike out). Sometimes we get a base hit and progress through the journey. Sometimes our trip is cut short. We get to first, advance to second, round third, and head home. There are no guarantees and there are plenty of obstacles standing in our way, such as a hostile world (good opposing pitcher, excellent fielders, poor preparation and execution on our part, you name it). But when it is all said and done, we celebrate or suffer together. Supporters and distractors can only sit and watch. We participants experience the joy or pain. Baseball asks for the best from each of us for the common good. Yes, there are winners and losers, but the game, the game goes on.
If you're interested, there is no better history than Ken Burns' documentary done for PBS. He just needs to take us into the extra innings now. A short and poetic book by Bartlett Giamatti (commissioner who banned Pete Rose and a past president of Yale) entitled A Great and Glorious Game. It is a MUST read. Allen Barra has a very intersting comparison of Mickey and Willie (I don't have to give last names for real fans) entitled Mickey and Willie. Ron Gidrey's Driving Mr. Berra is delightful, especially for Yankee fans.
Peace to all.
Just think. We prepare (gestation) for the big game (life) under the watchful eye of the coach (mother and father). We enter the stadium as a team/community. We sit together on the bench waiting our turn to make our individual contribution for the good of the cause. We step to the plate (home base, safety, warmth of the womb, arms of loved ones) with one objective: round the bases and return home adding to the team score. Sometimes we get a pass (walk) and sometimes we fail (strike out). Sometimes we get a base hit and progress through the journey. Sometimes our trip is cut short. We get to first, advance to second, round third, and head home. There are no guarantees and there are plenty of obstacles standing in our way, such as a hostile world (good opposing pitcher, excellent fielders, poor preparation and execution on our part, you name it). But when it is all said and done, we celebrate or suffer together. Supporters and distractors can only sit and watch. We participants experience the joy or pain. Baseball asks for the best from each of us for the common good. Yes, there are winners and losers, but the game, the game goes on.
If you're interested, there is no better history than Ken Burns' documentary done for PBS. He just needs to take us into the extra innings now. A short and poetic book by Bartlett Giamatti (commissioner who banned Pete Rose and a past president of Yale) entitled A Great and Glorious Game. It is a MUST read. Allen Barra has a very intersting comparison of Mickey and Willie (I don't have to give last names for real fans) entitled Mickey and Willie. Ron Gidrey's Driving Mr. Berra is delightful, especially for Yankee fans.
Peace to all.
Friday, October 25, 2013
Open Letter to Friends and Readers
Dear friends and readers,
You have been gracious and patient in letting me think out loud and share my ramblings with you. If I have offended anyone, I apologize. If you do not want to receive notices of postings, PLEASE tell me and I will remove your address from my address book. I have had two objectives from the beginning. (1) to force myself to think clearly and express myself in an understandable way, and (2) to generate thoughtful, respectful, challenging dialogue. I have not desired agreement with everything I have said. I like to be challenged to consider alternatives. None of us is infallible or has a corner on the market of truth. I prefer to get out of my comfortable shell, listen to what others think and why, and evaluate my assumptions. I began as a rabid fundamentalist and have long ago left that intellectual desert. I remain to the left on social issues BUT have become more fiscally conservative in the last ten years [ I do not think we can continue escalating expenses for Social Security or military spending for just two examples. ]
My two most memorable courses at Clemson were English 101 and Logic 101. Every Friday Dr. Hill required us to write an essay on a topic of her choosing. She taught and demanded clarity of thought, organization, and expression. She was wonderful! I don't remember the professor's name in Logic but I clearly remember the list and discussion of errors and pitfalls to logical thinking. I especially remember the professor saying that what so often happens when the strength of our argument is weak or non-existent, we resort to attacking our opponent personally rather than seek answers to his/her argument. I confess I have not always followed that advice but still think it is a worthy principle.
My promise to you, if you continue to tolerate me, is to be faithful to my objectives, to respect you and your opinions, and to "listen" as carefully as I hope to be listened to.
Thank you so very much! Peace, Hal
You have been gracious and patient in letting me think out loud and share my ramblings with you. If I have offended anyone, I apologize. If you do not want to receive notices of postings, PLEASE tell me and I will remove your address from my address book. I have had two objectives from the beginning. (1) to force myself to think clearly and express myself in an understandable way, and (2) to generate thoughtful, respectful, challenging dialogue. I have not desired agreement with everything I have said. I like to be challenged to consider alternatives. None of us is infallible or has a corner on the market of truth. I prefer to get out of my comfortable shell, listen to what others think and why, and evaluate my assumptions. I began as a rabid fundamentalist and have long ago left that intellectual desert. I remain to the left on social issues BUT have become more fiscally conservative in the last ten years [ I do not think we can continue escalating expenses for Social Security or military spending for just two examples. ]
My two most memorable courses at Clemson were English 101 and Logic 101. Every Friday Dr. Hill required us to write an essay on a topic of her choosing. She taught and demanded clarity of thought, organization, and expression. She was wonderful! I don't remember the professor's name in Logic but I clearly remember the list and discussion of errors and pitfalls to logical thinking. I especially remember the professor saying that what so often happens when the strength of our argument is weak or non-existent, we resort to attacking our opponent personally rather than seek answers to his/her argument. I confess I have not always followed that advice but still think it is a worthy principle.
My promise to you, if you continue to tolerate me, is to be faithful to my objectives, to respect you and your opinions, and to "listen" as carefully as I hope to be listened to.
Thank you so very much! Peace, Hal
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)