Author: Doug Slagle

(c) Doug Slagle, Minister to the Gathering at Northern Hills, All Rights Reserved

Please click here to listen to the message or see below to read it.

I am a recovering conflict avoider.  I still have a ways to go to be fully recovered.  Whenever conflict, or the possibility of it, comes my way, a sense of dread fills me.  My fight or flight instinct kicks in and fears often make me want to avoid the challenge and the potential hurt of a difficult conversation.

Many psychologists and psychiatrists say conflict avoidance comes from being raised in families where conflict is ever present – but never effectively dealt with.  Children learn to walk on eggshells because a parent can erupt at any time.  Such kids also learn to do their best to maintain outward peace  – even if negative emotions are roiling beneath the surface.  And such kids grow into adults who do the same.  Unfortunately, that’s been me and sometimes still is – even though I know and appreciate that honest and gentle communication is the surest way to solve disagreements.

What I’m learning how to do is have difficult conversations with other people – those who I’ve disappointed, those who disappoint me, or those who have different opinions from mine.  What I struggle with is the idea that disagreement or disappointment often leads to conflict – and most people define conflict the same as the Merriam-Webster dictionary.  Conflict, the dictionary says, is a serious disagreement that usually results in angry argument.

The truth, I believe, is that conflict need NOT be defined as “usually resulting in angry argument.”  Conflict can instead be a temporary and even compassionate sharing of different viewpoints that, if effectively handled, can result in peaceful resolution.  Whether or not peace will come to the Korean Peninsula, for instance, the war of angry, insulting and bellicose words has mostly ended and given way to respectful conflict – one where disagreements are discussed without rancor.  Peace, reconciliation and unity are suddenly real possibilities all because the various sides are engaging in difficult conversations in a respectful and even friendly manner.

How people engage in difficult conversations, therefore, is key.  Will the conversation produce something constructive and helpful?  Or will it create greater hostility and resentment?  Will it solve the disagreement so that both sides are satisfied?  Will each side gain something they did not have before?  Will they remain in community – as friends, colleagues, family members, partners, or church members?  Or will they be even more divided?

For me, to conduct an effective difficult conversation, I believe there are several practices to follow.

First, when planning a difficult conversation, I should share with the person, in advance, what I want to discuss – something I’ve mistakenly not always done.  It’s important not to blindside someone.  I should then approach the conversation with a completely open mind.  That means I don’t have an agenda to rebuke or argue, but rather to learn and respond accordingly.  In other words, I should be curious about the other’s feelings and thoughts.  I should avoid using words like “always” or “never” – they are too absolute.  I shouldn’t point fingers or blame.  I shouldn’t demean, humiliate or judge.

During the conversation, my focus should be on what I’m hearing, and not on what I’m saying, or want to say.  Good listeners, I believe, are usually the wisest people in any conversation – they want to learn, they mirror back what the other has said in order to signal they understand, they never interrupt, and they offer only brief, clear and modest thoughts or opinions.

In difficult conversations, I should be friendly but direct in what I say.  When I do share opinions, I must clearly state them and make sure the other understands me.  Yelling, name calling, or verbally attacking is never helpful.  Anger puts the other on the defensive and either results in them yelling back, or shutting down the conversation.  If one feels anger, most experts advise the person delay the difficult conversation until strong emotions have passed.

I should also endeavor to discern the other’s feelings.  That involves using intuition and strong listening skills – to read between the words for underlying emotions.  I should also gently share my feelings about an issue.  Whenever we use “I” statements and share only our feelings about something – and not accusations – we allow empathy to grow.  Our feelings are our feelings and nobody can contradict them – even if we might disagree with why they are felt.  Sharing of feelings is a way to build intimacy and person to person connection – all in order to defuse possible tension.

I shouldn’t abandon a difficult conversation without a resolution – either by arriving at an agreed solution or by agreeing to continue talking at a later time.  I must try my best to find areas of common ground or agreement with the other.  That involves giving up my desire to be right and emerge the winner.  Productive conversations should not be competitions but rather, as I said earlier, opportunities to solve a problem.  I believe the best solutions are ones where both people win and neither loses.

The irony of this suggestion is that unless both sides feel they win something, both sides will end up losing everything.  The loser will be disappointed, frustrated and less willing to stay engaged in further addressing a problem.  The victor may think he or she has won, but without a cooperative partner to solve the problem, long range success is rarely possible.  He or she won a proverbial battle, but lost the larger war. 

        History shows this to be true.  Germany, for instance, was humiliated by the peace treaty at the end of World War One.  It was forced to pay huge reparations to the winning allies and much of their economy was destroyed or given to the victors.  Those harsh measures directly planted seeds of resentment and anger in Germany that helped Hitler’s rise and the start of World War Two.

In that regard, I wish people were less averse to win-win resolutions that by necessity require give and take.  I therefore lament negative connotations associated with the word “compromise.”  “He was found in a compromising position” or  “She compromised her principles.  Etc.”  In today’s world, compromise is seen as a sell-out and the forsaking of one’s beliefs.  But I believe that is true only in extreme situations. 

Instead, as the philosophical father of conservatism, Edmund Burke once said, compromise is the foundation on which all human society is based.  Every day, each of us make many compromises or concessions so that we can live at peace with others.  Marriages and relationships had better be rooted in loving compromise, or else they’ll never last. 

        Our U.S. constitution is a hallmark of compromise.  It gives a lot of power to the people through Congress because the constitution framers were wary of a too strong executive, or king-like tyrant.  But the framers also feared mob rule, like what happened during the French Revolution, and so significant power was also given to the President.  And both the President and Congress are subject to the rule of law as determined by the judiciary.  This balance of power government is compromise in action – one that insures democracy without chaos.  Over the long haul, despite many difficult times that would have destroyed other systems, the American style of government, while not perfect, has survived.

One reason for that is our respect for minority rights.  America is governed by majority rule, but the rights of those who lose are not denied,  nor is the opportunity for the minority to still have influence.  Throughout much of our history, rights of the minority have insured smooth transitions of power.  It’s a stunning scene played out every four or eight years when one side gives up power without resorting to violence or revolution.  Americans know that even in victory the majority must often compromise with the minority to get anything done.  And there’s also the likelihood that one day the minority will be back in the majority.  For me, this emphasizes the paramount importance that participants in any disagreement or difficult conversation NOT take a “my way or the highway” attitude – a “I must win or else I quit” approach.

I hesitate saying this but “my way or the highway” thinking is less than enlightened.  It’s what some children do during playground games – they win or they pout and stomp away.  Better yet would be if children and adults engaged in more cooperative activities in which everyone wins.

That underscores my support for win-win compromises.  You may not achieve 100% of your goal – but I won’t either.  Instead, we’ll each gain perhaps 50% of what we want…….and that 50% is more than what we had at the outset.  Anybody who forsakes half a pie because they can’t get the whole pie is not wise, in my opinion.  Such people have made a desired perfect outcome become the enemy of a good outcome.  Yes, some of what a person wants or believes is not achieved.  But all is not lost.  Much has been gained.  And what has not been gained now, may be gained in the future.

Most importantly, what is achieved is unity, mutual respect and continued connection with one another.   And those accomplishments are not trivial.  The success or failure of the human endeavor depends on cooperation.  All of us not only belong to the one human family, we rely on it.  We each do our part to support, love and compromise with one another so that the entire family can live in peace.

Some of you might quickly say the ideal of human equality is a core value that should never be compromised.  I totally agree.  But cooperation between 8 billion people is tricky business.  It requires continued difficult conversations to achieve workable solutions so that all can live together.  It’s in the thousands of difficult conversations people have every day that we find compromise – precisely in order to affirm we are an intelligent and spiritually attuned species capable of selfless love for others.

Compromise for the greater good goes far beyond simple platitudes.  It’s a vital ethic that many believe, but so few excel at practicing.  Even as I’m learning not to avoid conflict and instead engage in peaceful dialogue, I still mess up.  I fail to listen as much as I should.  I fail to stop, ponder and seek to understand underlying emotions of the other.  Too often I think I’m right, I marshal all of my best arguments, and then I speak – gently, but without empathy.  I often don’t concede the other may have a point.  I also don’t really hear what they are saying.  Most of all, I’m not always willing to accept less than what I believe is right.  As with so many things, my ego gets in the way. 

        Ultimately, what I must do is have a difficult conversation with me.  “Get over yourself Doug.  Contrary to what you think, you’re not always right……….and you’re definitely not as smart as you believe.  Shut up.  Listen.  Show compassion to the other person.  Hear and feel their emotions.  Be willing to concede other ideas are often better than yours.  In four simple words, Doug, practice what you believe.”

We’ll engage in a difficult conversation next Sunday and in the days and weeks beyond about Black Lives Matter.  It’s an important conversation to have – one that UU officials tell me is going on in virtually every UU congregation in the country.  Just as I must not avoid potential conflict on important matters, so should we not avoid this difficult conversation.  I trust we will prove that we can and do practice what we believe.  We will be decent, respectful, compassionate, open minded and compromising people in this conversation – remaining united as good friends, and seeking ways to bridge divides by creating a “we all win” outcome. 

It is in our power to do what is right – and that statement is not my advocacy for either position.  To do what is right in the next few weeks means each of us will check our egos at the door.  It requires we deeply listen to one another, that we understand and acknowledge the legitimate feelings of every member, that we not blame or judge, that we work for compromise, and that we each pledge not to abandon this place if you or I don’t get what we want.  We’ll resolve instead to continue to serve this congregation, we’ll allow our better angels to shine, and we’ll continue being involved and engaged in doing good and important things here.  Let’s have this difficult conversation and make it one of the best and most inspiring moments in our church history.

I wish you all much peace and joy.

         I also now welcome your thoughts on this topic and my message.

Please click here to listen to Mr. Mayberry’s message:

Please click here to listen to Ms. Lindeman’s message:

(c) Doug Slagle, Minister to the Gathering at Northern Hills, All Rights Reserved

As many of you know, this congregation lost a beloved member this past week, and husband of a beloved member.  John Spiess was a long time member and servant to this congregation and, while he’s been mostly away these last few years battling his illness, he continued his support of GNH by encouraging Marti and by participating in our auctions.

And my message topic today expresses something I believe John exemplified.  Only he and his family may know his innermost thoughts but outwardly, John was courageous these last years as he faced dying.  He was originally told he had months to live, and yet he lived and fought for four years.  His friends tell me he never lost his famous sense of humor.  I was a witness to that a few times.  Last September at a Labor Day fireworks dinner I had put in last year’s auction, I greeted John by saying it was good to see him.  He quickly joked, with a smile, that he was glad to be seen and not viewed.  But John was seen in a figurative sense many times – and he still will be.  Three weeks ago he held his newborn grandchild for the first time – an infant he had pledged to hold on and live in order to meet.  And so I honor him this morning as an exemplar of someone who did his best to live fully as long as possible…

Thanataphobia is the clinical term for a fear of dying.  Just over 20% of people suffer from it to a significant extent.  That is slightly lower than the percent of people who have a strong fear of public speaking.  The comedian Jerry Seinfeld joked about this once by saying that at any given funeral, it’s perhaps better for a person to be in the casket than delivering the eulogy!

80% of people confess to being uncomfortable talking about death.  And that figure translates to the 80% of Americans who die without their affairs in order.  Some people may have executed a basic will, but they have not organized their lives, finances and end of life plans such that loved ones clearly know how they would like to die, how they want to be remembered, and how their property should be efficiently distributed.

A large majority of doctors do not adequately talk about dying with their seriously ill patients.  Many doctors consider a patient’s death a failure so they do all they can to prevent it – even when they know there is little chance of improvement.  The average time in Hospice Care is therefore two weeks, when it could be much longer to allow for greater comfort and emotional support to the patient and his or her families.  Unneeded medical care results in a financial windfall for doctors, hospitals, and the pharmaceutical industry.  Almost $100 billion dollars are spent each year in medical care for Americans during the final two months of life.

Virtually all Americans say they want to die in their homes.  But 75% of people die in hospitals, intensive care units or skilled nursing facilities.  If most of us want to die at home, why isn’t that happening?  While some have Living Wills that allow for death if one is artificially kept alive by machines, very few people execute what is called an Advance Care Plan – a document that specifically and legally outlines the kind and level of care one wants near the end, and cannot speak.  An Advance Care Plan can also specifically state where one wants to die.  It is possible in most cases to arrange to die at home with Hospice care providing comfort and pain management.

Very few people pre-plan and pre-pay for their funeral arrangements.  This results in many families overspending on funerals, burials or cremations because they do not know what their loved one wanted – and they don’t wish to seem cheap as a result.

What we have is a culture that fears death and avoids discussing it in honest and forthright ways.  Experts say this is true for people of every religion and every nation.  We intellectually know we will die, and most of us have formed beliefs about what happens to us after we die, but a large majority of us have not found peace with dying such that we plan for it, talk about it, and most importantly of all, approach it without fear.

Unfortunately, however, our fear or discomfort with death results in significant costs to us as individuals, and as a society.  We spend, as I’ve said, huge amounts of money trying to medically prolong life and not nearly enough to insure quality of life and a natural end of it.  Added to extra medical costs are what we spend on expensive funerals and on legal work to appropriately distribute the money and property of those who did not put their affairs in order.

But the real tragedy of our fear of dying is the intangible cost we pay emotionally and spiritually.  Families experience great anguish not knowing what to do when a loved one is near death.  They face the same after a loved one passes by not knowing what kind of funeral to plan.  All of that family anguish is caused by many people’s silent dread of dying.  Even worse, a refusal to emotionally and spiritually deal with death when one is alive and well denies a person the ability to embrace and celebrate life!  This results in a sad irony.  Fear of dying essentially causes one to die faster.   Every moment spent fearing death, every ounce of energy wasted worrying about it, is that much less time and strength spent fully living.

For me, I want to conquer my fear of dying such that when I am near the end, or when I face a life threatening illness or calamity, I’ll be as much at peace as possible.  A year ago I saw how my dad’s discomfort with talking about death caused great heartache for me and my siblings when he was dying.  We had no idea what he would want.  Last summer when I underwent surgery to remove two cancers, I was definitely not at peace.  The weeks and days leading up to it, I silently feared dying – either during surgery, or if doctors found the cancers to be more advanced.  With my mom now in a dementia care unit, I fear the possibility I could be her one day – my body alive but my mind essentially dead.  Because of these several ways I’ve confronted mortality, I want to take the road less traveled and ponder my eventual death – all in order to significantly reduce my fear of dying.  It is a fact of life I can’t ignore, and so I know it will benefit me, and my loved ones, if I can be at peace about it. 

Very few people eagerly approach death, but that does not mean we cannot face it much like we do other life events – with gratitude, a loving and positive demeanor, and with generosity – to offer our dying selves to family and friends with as much meaning and life affirmation as possible.

That hope of mine, and my encouragement to all of us, is the title of my message.  May we take the road less traveled and seek to die without fear.

Psychologists say that fear of dying is motivated by several related fears.  Many people fear dying because they fear the unknown, not existing, or eternal punishment.  Other people fear dying because of possible pain and suffering at the end.  Some fear dying alone.  Some fear the loss of control – and how that often comes near the end.  Many fear dying because they don’t feel their lives have meant much.  They fear being meaningless.  And still others fear dying out of concern for what will become of loved ones.   Ultimately, a fear of dying for most people is that they think it will be the absolute worst moment of their lives.  They fear dying alone, forgotten, in pain, helpless or frightened.

But psychologists, psychiatrists – and some ministers – also claim that when we challenge ourselves to think about and confront our fears, then we can lead our logical minds to question the validity of them.  That cognitive self-therapy is possible for our fear of dying.

If we are afraid that we will suffer at the end, most doctors report that while dying can sometimes be painful, it can usually be well managed and even eliminated.  Most reports of those who are dying indicate they are far more positive than their friends and loved ones.  Being near the end often focuses one’s mind on things that are affirming – like remembering the joys and blessings of one’s life.  Medical science has thankfully brought us to the point that most people can and do die pain free and with a generally positive attitude.  Knowing this, and making advance preparations, can help eliminate a fear of suffering at the end. 

And that makes it even more essential that we legally specify how we want to be treated at the end.  We can ask that palliative care, medical assistance that is focused not on treatment but on the elimination of pain and the fostering of comfort, be started early – long before doctors might otherwise recommend.  Telling a trusted Healthcare Power of Attorney person – a close relative or friend – of these wishes and also writing them down in an Advance Care Plan – can help.

And that speaks to the fear some have that they will lose control near the end.  This can mostly be eliminated by asserting control now – by stipulating what we want done for us when we are unable to verbalize choices.  We can legally demand, in an Advance Care Plan, that doctors clearly inform us, or our Healthcare Power of Attorney, of expected outcomes and the likelihood of success for every treatment.  We can forbid treatment or hospitalization unless such actions offer very likely success and recovery to a reasonable standard of living.  Executing an Advance Care Plan requires we confront dying before we die, but it thereby can help reduce fears we have about losing control of our destiny.

We can also eliminate concerns over what will happen to loved ones after we pass.  This involves executing a will and then doing the work to put our affairs in order – organizing assets, titling them in appropriate ways, arranging for and pre-paying funeral costs, and outlining how we wish to be remembered in a memorial service.  All of these are profound gifts to our families and a clear message to them, after we die, that we love them.  None of us want to see loved ones suffer because of our death.

Of greatest importance for all of us is to plunge into an examination of our souls, as I discussed last Sunday, to examine what defines us and our place in the universe.  We can do this perhaps by following the five practical steps I outlined last Sunday and you can find them on our website.  A journey into our souls will inevitably cause us to ponder our death and to hopefully affirm what we know intellectually.  Without death, we cannot have life.  And that’s the irony I spoke of earlier.  Finding peace about dying paradoxically enables us to really live – now and long after we die.

If we ponder what we want our legacy to be, we can find the meaning for our existence and thus help insure how we will be remembered.  As I say many times, it’s our selfless concern for family, friend and stranger, and not ourselves, that will ultimately write our epitaph.  How did we love?  How did we serve?  How did we forgive?  How humbly did we live?  How did we change the world for the better?  The answers to those questions give us our purpose for living, the solace we seek when we die, and the life after death that we crave.  How we treat others right now, how we make a tangible and good difference in the world  – such actions will be remembered, but they will also be paid forward by influencing the lives and actions of countless others far into the future.  That, I believe, is our resurrection and our life beyond the grave.

I also encourage you to ponder just what is the “self”?  Is it your body, mind, soul, personality, or what you do and have done?  How you define the self will determine what you think about life after death.  If the self is one’s body and mind, then an afterlife is not possible.  But if it is what one has done and how one treats others in this life, then you will have an afterlife – and one I pray will be good.       

I offered five practical ways to journey into our souls last Sunday.  Today, I offer four ways I believe we can take the road less traveled to live fully right now, help us reduce a fear of dying, shape our legacies, and live onward after dying.

First, spend as much time as you can with others – especially loved ones – to share, talk, laugh, and create meaning filled memories that will last.

Second, serve others.  Be someone known for serving – and thereby build a lasting legacy of kindness and helpfulness.

Third, summon the courage to spend time visualizing, discussing, planning, and preparing for dying.  Doing so will be a gift you give yourself, and will bless your families and friends as well.

Finally, I encourage the kind of soul deep meditation that I talked about last week.  Refusing to think about dying does not and will not help us when the inevitable time comes.  Reflection on dying can help us employ reasoning abilities to confront and take control of fear.  As I said earlier, many of our fears about death are inaccurate.  We have the cognitive power, challenging as that may be, to change the way we think about dying and thereby find some peace.

I now end my four part message series on taking the road less traveled.  These messages may not have been the best you’ve ever heard, but I trust you got, or can get by reading them online, the overall point I’ve tried to make.  Our lives will always be challenging and present us with choices.  When we choose the way that seems more difficult, the road generally less taken, then THAT road is precisely the one we should take.  As Robert Frost ended his famous poem, it is that road that will make all the difference.

I wish you peace and joy…

      

(c) Doug Slagle, Minister to the Gathering at Northern Hills, All Rights Reserved

 

Last month when I contemplated what my April message theme would be, I intended to focus on spiritual practices that can elevate us – but which most people avoid undertaking.

Two weeks ago on Easter, I discussed how persevering through hardship is a way to renew and even resurrect our spirits.  It’s a common cliche, but nevertheless true, that joy comes in the symbolic morning after a hard night’s struggle.  For many of us, we learn and grow the most in the difficult times and it is that ironic truth we must remember when inevitable suffering happens.

Last week I examined how embracing inconvenience is another way to grow ourselves spiritually.  By using technology too often – to make life more convenient – we can diminish the skills and abilities that make us human – like hard work or pushing ourselves to conquer a task.  Technology can whisk us to the top of a symbolic mountain, but what is the satisfaction in that?  It’s the challenging hike to the top of any figurative mountain, the road less taken, that provides our meaning in life.

Today, I plan to look at another road infrequently traveled – the one that ventures into our souls to understand and define the essence of who we are.  While many of us say we are spiritual, the fact is that few people take the challenging journey of spiritual discovery.  To deeply examine one’s innermost feelings and motivations, is to take a less traveled road – one that can be lonely and discouraging. 

I’m not describing a mental journey where we determine what we spiritually believe.  That road is important, but it remains an intellectual pursuit instead of one that ventures into the core of who we are.  This road into our souls is how we transform ourselves into a more enlightened, kinder, peaceful and more aware person. 

Almost always, such a path – if it is taken – arrives at a moment of transcendence – an ahah!, ecstatic awakening when scales symbolically fall from one’s eyes and we suddenly see and understand life, death, the universe and our role in them.  Christians call this a born-again experience.  Buddhists and Hindus say it is arriving at Nirvana – a state of total enlightenment.  For Jews and Muslims, it is best described as being completely at one with God and her will.

For Humanists, Atheists and Unitarian Universalists, this journey to find a spiritual epiphany is one we often avoid.  I confess to avoiding it simply because I can convince myself that personal transformation doesn’t come through mysterious moments.  Spirituality for me is too often, and wrongly, confined to my head – and not my heart or even my proverbial “gut.”

I’ve come to realize, however, that a spiritual awakening is nearly identical for the religious and the non-religious, for theists – and for Atheists.  I, along with many others, believe genuine transformation is to move outside one’s mind and body to find the part that is selfless and unconditionally loving to all people – including ourselves.  In other words, I believe finding ones soul comes by sublimating one’s ego, needs, and desires.

All religions, and all Humanists and Atheists, share this same goal: being selfless to others is the one transformative, joyful, enduring and true endeavor we can make in life.  It’s a road less taken – the difficult journey to let go, accept, be present, and find lasting peace.

I say it’s a hard journey because it involves giving up so much of what we normally think and practice.  No matter how ‘others-focused’ we try to be, the truth is that almost all of us are obsessed with ourselves – how we feel, are we happy or sad, who has hurt us, who is our friend, what we think, what we want, what we do.  My thoughts always come back to my sense of self and what is helpful or unhelpful, pleasurable or painful.

I know many people believe that unless we take care of ourselves, we cannot help others.  Self-love, many say, is the path to love for others.  And I don’t disagree with that.  But the road to love of self and lasting peace comes not through self-ish-ness, but through self-less-ness.  This is a truth I discussed on Easter: real joy comes by denying what one wants to instead persevere through what one doesn’t want.  It also comes, as I said last week, by foregoing many conveniences and instead embracing the inconvenience of struggle and work.  As a few of you noted in your talkback last Sunday, it is in the overcoming of a difficult obstacle that we find joy and satisfaction.

This is a strange irony to wrap our minds around.  In order to truly love oneself and find lasting joy, one must deny oneself.   We paradoxically get what we intentionally try NOT to get.

As I said, this is true for people of all religions, or of no religion.  For Christians, the example is that of Jesus.  By following his example and his teachings, one learns to forgive those who have hurt you, one turns the other cheek to an enemy, one is non-violent and gentle, one sacrifices and serves the marginalized, discriminated against, sick and poor.   Every action of a transformed Christian should heed the standard – “What Would Jesus Do?”  Let go of self in order to be at one with god – who has sacrificed everything in her love for humanity.

The Jewish faith approaches selflessness from a different perspective, but it too teaches that we are to sublimate ourselves to something much greater.  Yahweh, a figure so great and so holy that Jews do not even say her name, is the force of truth, purity and goodness that they honor by doing all they can to live according to her standards.  The wants and needs of the flesh are secondary to the dreams of the spirit.

In Islam, selflessness is called “Ithar” and it is the central teaching of that faith.  Muslims are taught to sacrifice their needs for those of others and for the sake of being one with Allah.  Ramadan fasting, five times daily prayer, modest dress, and charitable giving to others all represent a Muslim’s unselfish submission to Allah and her perfection.

And lastly, Buddhism perhaps perfectly teaches selfless ideals.  They follow from three noble truths Buddhists believe: first, all things and all life are impermanent and will change; second, we have within us a “no-self” – a part of us that is similar to the soul – something connected to the wider universe instead of a personal identity; and third; suffering is unavoidable – we will all feel and experience pain.

These three Buddhist truths teach that we should stop taking happiness for granted.  Once we each accept that we are a part of a universe that constantly changes – and with such changes pain will inevitably happen, then we will naturally let go of fear and resistance to suffering.   We’ll stop worrying about life’s insults, bruises, illnesses and losses.  We’ll simply BE.  We’ll see ourselves as part of the endless flow of existence.  No longer will my thoughts be about “me, me, me” – but about nature, other people and the cosmos – of which I’m just a minor part.  And when I understand that truth, I’ll have arrived at an epiphany – a no-self – a place of pure and lasting peace, a state of Nirvana.

Each of these spiritual paths – Christianity, Judaism, Islam and Buddhism – are of course unique.  But they are also each valid – as is humanism and Atheism.  They are all valid because, as I’ve said, each seeks the same destination.  Whether one calls that heaven, Nirvana, total Love, or awareness of the universe, they’re all identical goals.  We all want to find eternal peace.  And that, each form of spirituality believes, comes only when we let go of ourselves to find oneness with all.  The self transforms into “ALL-self.”

To undergo this transformation, to take this less traveled spiritual journey, is easy to talk about but so very difficult to practice.  LIfe, I’ve learned the hard way, is not about me.  It’s about ALL.  It’s about the well-being of everything and everyone.  It’s about being gracious in all things – in the joys I’m given, and the insults I receive.  No anger.  No self-pity.  No ego driven desires.

To take a journey into the soul, I believe there are five practical steps that are each more difficult to practice than the preceding step.

1. 1. First, spend as much time in nature as possible.  In doing so, we will come face to face with mountains, forests, oceans and things greater than ourselves.  And we will come to see ourselves as part of all things.  That is a major part of true spirituality.
   2. Second, we must be in community.  When we intentionally join with others, we learn give and take. Mostly, we understand our need for others, and their need for us.  In community, we discover other opinions and lifestyles.  Being in community helps us spiritually grow – not for our sake – but for the sake of all.
   3. A third practical step on the journey into our souls is to confess, forgive and be compassionate.  If we intentionally do these, we will be genuinely gracious and spiritual.  When I hurt you and you forgive me, you’ve let go of self-focused feelings.  When I confess my mistakes, I let go of my ego.  When I’m compassionate, I prioritize your needs over mine. These are difficult tasks to always practice  – but they’re essential for honest spirituality.
   4. Fourth, we should be grateful for the joys and pleasures we have.  When I’m thankful, I realize that the well-being I enjoy happened not because of me, but because of external forces of goodness and love.  I’m blessed not by what I’ve done, but by the kindness of others and that of the universe.
   5. Finally, and most importantly, we should meditate.  We must spend intentional time to deeply reflect and ponder the diminishment of self and the empowerment of all.  If I meditate on the truth of suffering, on the truth that my desires are all ego based, on the reality that my fears are all based on selfishness, I can let go.  I can find my ahah! moment and move into a much more peaceful and contented state.

Five practical steps for the road less taken into one’s soul: Spend time in nature, be in community, forgive and confess, be grateful, meditate.

Dearest friends, the journey into the soul sounds easy.  But as I’ve said, it is not.  It is hard and trying.  It is discouraging.  I do not naturally want to let go of feelings I have toward those who hurt me.  I don’t want to let go of my desires for pleasure and happiness.  I don’t want to forego my desires, my pride, my little wounds every time you disagree with me.

And for that reason alone, it seems that achieving true selflessness by individuals or even societies is not possible.  Some vestiges of self-interest must be an innate part of us.  But that discouraging fact does not mean selflessness is not a worthy spiritual ideal – one comparable to what a god or goddess would be like – if they exist.  It’s an ideal we should pursue even if we may never fully achieve it.  Complete self-denial is likely an almost impossible goal.

But our souls, oh our souls, I believe they yearn to be free of the worries and fears of the flesh.  Our souls yearn to rest in the silence and peacefulness of all things – of a universe whose rhythms beat with goodness and love not for any individual, but for everything.  We sense these yearnings of our souls, but our minds and bodies rebel.  I pray, I hope……that one day we will each summon the courage to plunge headlong into our souls and come out on the other side much more

self-less.

And I wish you each peace and joy…

In the spirit of this morning, Michael will now play some music for meditation and in just a moment a nature video will begin.  Use this time to reflect, meditate or pray.  As you do so, reflect on what is your soul, your essence, your inner most being that defines you – not how others see you but how you truly are.  Find, if you can in these moments, some peace….                  

(c) Doug Slagle, Minister to the Gathering at Northern Hills, All Rights Reserved

 

Please click here to listen to the message.  Please read it below.

For just a moment, imagine if I handed each of you right now a magic penny whose value multiplies by 100 every year.  After one year, you’d have a measly $1, after two a paltry $100, after three $10,000, after four $1 million, and after five years, $100 million.  That would be an astonishing thing but we would both then notice that 99% of the five year value of that coin comes during the fifth year.  We might wonder, what was the coin doing those first few years?  As any mathematician or financial advisor knows, it was compounding.

That miracle of compounding has happened much the same way with technology.  Within the last 250 years, the vast majority of technology we use today was invented.  Since modern humans first emerged over 200,000 thousand years ago, we might assume that early people were intellectually lazy or simply stupid.

That, of course, is false.  Human knowledge and technological advancement happened much like the compounding value of the magic penny.  It took a very long time to develop the intellectual and scientific foundations for more recent innovations and discoveries.

125,000 years ago, humans finally learned how to create and control fire.  50,000 years ago humans developed crude stone tools.  8000 years ago the first metal tool was developed.  4000 years ago, the wheel and abacus were invented.  The printing press came 600 years ago; the telescope and microscope 400 years ago; the first steam engine 300 years ago; airplanes and cars 115 years ago; electric computers 65 years ago; the internet 28 years ago, artificially intelligent machines 7 years ago.

In the perspective of 200,000 years of homo sapiens history, the breathtaking rapid technological advances of the last two hundred and fifty years is astonishing.  Artificial intelligence itself has led to even more amazing technological firsts – driverless cars, robots that can learn, and the kinds of technology that may truly upend – and perhaps make inconsequential – the very existence of humanity.

This evolution of technology has been spurred throughout history by one common desire – the desire to make life more convenient.  When early humans invented spears tipped with flint arrowheads, they caught more food, their families were healthier, and they had more time to create new innovations – like domesticating wild animals so they no longer had to hunt. 

That same impulse for convenience led to the invention of the steam and gasoline engines.  Humans could use them to grind their grains, weave their fabrics and quickly transport themselves across long distances.  Life became more convenient. 

Similar inventions of convenience today allow me to a deposit check instantly by taking a digital picture of it with my smartphone and sending it over the internet to my account.  No longer must I drive to my bank, stand in line for a teller, and then wait 3 days for me to be able to spend.

But, as we have come to realize, technological advancements are not always as good as originally thought.  Nuclear power offered the chance for limitless energy, but its dangers have the potential to destroy us.  Gasoline engines clearly made life easier but their carbon dioxide emissions will cause profound climate change.  Antibiotics have saved millions but they have also caused the rise of superbugs to which our bodies are defenseless.

Added to those concerns comes a recent article by Professor Tim Wu of Columbia University that asserts the continuing development of technological conveniences threatens human significance.  Symbolically, technology can get us to the top of mountains via a car or helicopter without having to hike or climb, but what is the satisfaction of that?  Technological convenience, Wu writes, diminishes our minds, our bodies and the values that define us.  The pursuit of convenience destroys values like hard work, diligence, and perseverance.  It also harms our ability to solve problems, and it can call into question the very reason why we exist.

Since our purpose is to do more than merely eat, procreate and seek pleasure, what happens if the work that defines us is increasingly done by machines?  Indeed, the recent invention of machine learning presents the very real possibility that years from now, not too far off considering how fast technology advances, the Gathering at Northern Hills will not hire a Minister, or Music Director but will simply purchase software to sing and play the piano, and prepare and deliver Sunday messages.  Very few members of the congregation will have jobs either – since most work will be done by artificially intelligent machines – from providing legal advice, to teaching, to serving as doctors and nurses, to engineering, to even designing and building other machines that can learn and think. 

And that takes me to the theme of my message series this month, “The Road Less Traveled” and to my topic today, “Embracing Inconvenience.”  While making life easier seems to be the road best taken, might the road less taken, the one that embraces inconvenience and challenge, be the one that makes all the difference?  For the sake of our survival as a meaningful and capable species, shouldn’t we try to balance our lives by NOT using so many technological conveniences?  Shouldn’t we, instead, embrace the inconvenience and the challenge of growing our knowledge, stretching our muscles, hiking to the summit of a symbolic mountain……and thereby live out our purpose – to work, think, serve and improve the world?

The pursuit of convenience by most modern cultures is premised on the idea that physical and mental labor is a burden – things we should avoid if we can.  In the early twentieth century, convenience in the home became a goal.  Washing machines, vacuum cleaners, electric ovens, and dishwashers were all supposed to make life easier – particularly for women.  Betty Friedan, in her book the Feminine Mystique, wrote that the modern woman, despite having multitudes of time saving machines to help with housework, now spends more time doing housework than her great-grandmother. As Friedan notes, that says something not just about technology but also about sexism.

Convenience comes with a cost.  It imposes more demands on people while also eliminating many of the skills and abilities that make us human.  Why learn the art of cooking if one can pour a mix into a bowl, add water, and then pop it into a microwave for heating?  Far from enhancing the art of food selection and preparation, or the health benefits of eating natural foods, we now consume highly processed food products manufactured in factories and cooked by machines – all for the sake of convenience.  We’ve lost a meaningful connection to what we eat – and how the preparation of food enhances our minds, bodies and souls.

The same is true for office related machines.  Copiers, printers, computers, and word processors were all supposed to make business more efficient and thus allow more time for other tasks. Why bother learning greater language skills if computers correct spelling and grammar?  Why learn advanced research methods, critical thinking, or the ability to analyze complex issues if Google and the internet provide immediate answers?  Why spend an evening with close friends engaging in enlightening conversation if one can sit alone, log into facebook or Twitter, and chat with total strangers?  Even worse, we’ve all seen groups of people who are physically together, but nevertheless isolated in a digital world displayed on their smartphones – and not being present with people sitting right next to them.

Even relatively new forms of technology now seem irrelevant.  Why anticipate and wait for a cherished TV show if one can instantly stream it via the internet?  Why hand write a letter if one can email, or why email if one can text, or now, why text if one can Tweet?  Indeed, Evan Williams, the co-founder of Twitter, recently said that convenience is the driver of everything we invent.

That fact, for me, is frightening.  As I discussed in last Sunday’s Easter message, challenges may not be enjoyable when we are in the midst of them, but by enduring and persevering through inconvenience, we find a new awareness about ourselves and about life.  It’s ironic but true that we cannot fully know what joy is unless we know its alternative – pain and struggle.

For me, my goal is to self-actualize and become more enlightened, more capable, more loving, and more at peace.  Technology can help me  achieve that goal but it must not supplant it.  In other words, if I can use a word processor to write better Sunday messages, that’s a good thing.  But if I use computers to replace my critical thinking abilities, what have I become?  Technology can be a useful extension of me, but it can also become a destructive replacement of me – erasing all the things that make me – me. 

I imagine I’m like most of you.  I find meaning in what I do – my work, my service to others, my love, my thoughts, ideas and opinions.  If I use technology to do those things for me, I’ve ceased to really exist – I’ve stopped meeting the criteria of Blaise Pascal, the famous enlightenment philosopher who said, “I think, therefore I am.” 

If I don’t think, if I don’t work, if I don’t struggle, cry, hurt and deeply feel – all because technological conveniences now do those for me – then I am nothing.  My very soul – the essence of my being – will have died.

And that, I claim, is a stark danger for me, for you, and for all humanity.  In his book 2001 A Space Odyssey, Arthur Clarke explored the theme of how tools and technology affect humanity.  Hal, the all-knowing and all-seeing computer in his film, has progressed in artificial intelligence to the point that humans are irrelevant and even dangerous to its existence.  Hal then kills almost all of the humans on their spaceship.  But Clarke made sure that one astronaut in his story wakes up to the threat and puts Hal under his control.  Clarke’s moral is that humanity can and will harness the good from technology – while preventing its dangers.

That is wishful thinking in my opinion.  For me, it all comes down to a  human spiritual malaise – one that often leads people to think only of themselves and their comfort.  The easier, more pleasurable and more hardship-free our lives are, the better.  Unless we as humans understand that selfish character flaw in us, and work to overcome it, I believe we will continue the headlong pursuit of technological convenience at the expense of taking the inconvenient road less traveled.

As I said earlier, I don’t believe we should abandon all technology.  Clearly, advances in medicine, transportation and computation have improved human life.  But I do believe that technological advances have also compounded to the astonishing point – like the magic penny I earlier presented – such that each new innovation has the ability to fundamentally alter or even destroy our meaning and purpose. 

If Pascal was right, that thinking implies existence, then if machines become capable of truly thinking, then they will have a form of life previously not imagined.  And given the fact that the universe is governed by immutable laws of mathematics, machines that can calculate perfectly will easily outwit our imperfect brains.  Much like homo sapiens evolved beyond and ultimately replaced lesser hominids like Neanderthals, machines could evolve and replace us.

The solutions to this troubling possibility are simple.  First, we must stop believing that technology is benign – that it’s neither good for bad.  As tools created by humans, technology will reflect our qualities .  As such, we must intentionally design technologies so that they reflect our good values.  We’ve seen the importance of this with recent revelations about facebook.  Initially, it was hailed as a way to bring people together.  It can be a force for good that encourages values we hold dear – democracy, equality, human connection and coexistence.  But just as facebook is used as a force for good, it is also used as a force for evil – spreading falsehoods, hate, bigotry and maliciously encouraging disunity and anti-democratic forces.  That must not be allowed.  We must demand facebook programmers, engineers and executives design its technology so that it protects and enhances our universal values – or else abandon it..

The second solution is to willingly embrace inconvenience and do more things on our own – without advanced technology.  We must accept and embrace the challenge of learning, struggling, overcoming and thereby bettering our human condition.

By implementing these solutions, we will take the road less traveled – the one of less selfishness, high ideals, and difficulty.  Our purpose is not to merely survive as easily as we can, but to thrive – and that can only come as we balance the conveniences of technology with the challenges of our values – work, persistence, service to others, learning and, yes, enduring hardship.  Embracing inconvenience is one path, a road less taken, that will make all the difference……

        And I wish you much thoughtful peace and joy.

           

(c) Doug Slagle, Minister to the Gathering at Northern Hills, All Rights Reserved

 

Click here to listen to the Message.  See below to read it.

 

For many of us who are spiritually open-minded, or for those who are non-spiritual but honor humanist ideals, celebrating religious holidays like Passover or Easter can seem meaningless.  Since one may not believe in the supernatural miracles that supposedly saved ancient Jews from slavery, or the alleged resurrection of Jesus from the dead, then why do we bother with a Passover family meal or an Easter service?

That’s a legitimate question.  And a possible answer should include more than the reply that Passover and Easter are parts of our Judeo-Christian culture.  For us as thinking, rational people, celebrating things we don’t believe in should provide some value – or else be abandoned.

I believe the implied lessons from Easter, despite its religious origins, do offer value and wisdom to people of any faith, or no faith.  Easter, in particular, is a story with all kinds of truths that Christians and non-Christians can remember and follow.

As most know, Easter is the ultimate day of joy for Christians.  All of Christian history, all the books, sermons, prayers and practices of that faith rely on the Easter morning story.  As the Bible says, without Easter morning, Christianity makes no sense.

That assertion comes from accepting the Easter story told in the four Biblical books Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.  Jesus’ tomb, the story goes, was found empty two-thousand years ago by several of his women followers.  It’s a tribute to them, and to women in general, that they practiced a mostly feminine attribute – they alone were loyal to Jesus as the last to ones at his death, and the first to discover his empty grave.  He’s is alleged to have appeared fully alive to the women on Easter morning and to then appear to hundreds of people in the days to follow.

This came, as the story says, after he’d been terribly whipped, killed by one of the most agonizing methods possible, confirmed dead, and then entombed for two days.

The night before his trial, torture and execution, what Christians call Maundy Thursday, it’s said that Jesus assembled his twelve disciples to celebrate a Passover meal.   It’s from this meal that the tradition of bread and wine communion began.  It’s also at that meal that Jesus learned one of the disciples, Judas, had made a pact with the Romans to betray his whereabouts.

After the meal, Jesus retreated to an olive grove overlooking Jerusalem.  This secluded place was the spot where he wanted to reflect and pray in preparation for his anticipated arrest and death.

It’s said he was in such anguish as he prayed that night that he sweated profusely – even to the point that blood oozed from his skin.  In his prayers, the gospels quote Jesus as crying out and pleading with God to spare him the next day’s horrors.  At some point in the wee hours of Friday morning, Roman soldiers came for him.  His hard night of terror would lead to a daytime of intense suffering.

Much of the story about Jesus’ death cannot be conclusively proven, but many details are historically accurate.  It’s factual that Romans used crucifixion to execute thousands of criminals and enemies.  It’s factual that Pontius Pilate, who condemned Jesus to death, was the Roman governor of Palestine at that time.  It’s also factual that Christianity rapidly spread soon after the Bible says Jesus died.  It’s a bit ironic that the powerful Roman Empire that killed him was peacefully taken over by Christianity less than three hundred years later.

It’s unlikely, therefore, that the religion was invented.  It had to have been based on the life and teachings of a real person.  Because of that, most scholars and historians believe a man named Jesus of Nazareth did actually live, he did teach many profound lessons, he did accumulate thousands of followers during his lifetime, and he was executed because he represented a threat to Rome and to religious elites.

So, it’s also likely the stories about the night before his execution and the details of his death are true.  It’s only when the miraculous story of Easter morning is examined that scholars and historians object.  It is surmised by many scholars that Jesus, like most victims of crucifixion, was unceremoniously taken off his cross, buried in a common grave, and his body was possibly dug up and consumed by wild dogs.

          The ensuing dejection of his thousands of followers cannot be underestimated.  Jesus was seen as a potential leader along the lines of King David – one who would lead a revolt against the Romans and wealthy elites.  Others were strongly drawn to his spiritual wisdom – to forgive, love one’s enemies, practice non-violence, and care for the poor and marginalized.  With his death, all of the hopes invested in him seemed to die too.  It’s entirely understandable that his followers then remembered him by recounting stories of his life and repeating his teachings.  In time, stories about him were written down and embellished to the point that fact and myth were mixed.  Still later, admirers of Jesus made him god-like, someone who performed miracles and who could defeat death.  The Easter morning story was the primary part of the effort to turn a great human being into a supernatural god.

        The apparent myth of Jesus’ resurrection does not, however, diminish its meaning or lesson.  It’s often said by Christians that the joy of Easter could not happen without the suffering of Good Friday.  And that statement is more than a religious belief.  Implicit in it is a fundamental truth for all people – and thus the point of my message today and my message series this month.

        Challenges in life are made worse and become pointless unless we find a way to transform our pain, and thereby transform ourselves.  Taking the easy way, avoiding or running away from hardship, is to symbolically take the road most taken.  As Robert Frost implies in his famous poem, the road less taken, the one still beaten down because it’s way is hard, is the better one.  It’s the road that will make all the difference.

        And that truth is evident in the story about Jesus’ suffering, death and resurrection.  On the night before he died, he was desperate.  His fear was apparent to all who saw him.  He clearly knew the excruciating pain and humiliation that awaited him.  He could have slipped out of the city before his arrest.  But he didn’t.  He endured his hard night perhaps as a final lesson for his followers  – that real courage is not displayed by fighting with physical or verbal violence. 

        Often, courage is in how one quietly perseveres with as much peace and humility as possible.  Courage is Mohatma Gandhi during his salt march protests against British colonialism.  Courage is Martin Luther King, Jr. and his followers walking across the Edmund Pettus bridge into bigoted mobs.  Courage is one standing with quiet dignity against hate directed their way, it’s someone bravely but peacefully facing a terminal disease, or anyone gracefully bearing any obstacle head-on.

        And the triumph of Easter morning, myth as it may be, is testimony to the reality that endurance with dignity pays a reward.  Jesus as a human, not as a god, is perhaps the single greatest person in history.  That’s not because he fled from his trials, it’s because he didn’t.  His resurrection, in that regard, may not have been a literal one, but it’s meaning is true nevertheless.  Jesus as a person of history lives onward – as does anyone who selflessly suffers but helps improve the world anyway.

        Multiple psychologists assert the truth of this.  When any of us are in the midst of hardship, the way to successfully endure and find peace is not to avoid or run away.  Instead, experts say we should examine our suffering and determine where it comes from.  Even though we will likely attribute our suffering to external causes – a negative person, an illness, a job loss……..that is not why we suffer.  Instead, our suffering comes from our fears – fear of thinking we’re inadequate, fear of feeling demeaned, fear of being forgotten after we die.

        Once we identify our root fears, then logic and reason can take over.  Are we really inadequate?  Haven’t we succeeded in numerous ways?  Are we really being demeaned by others?  Or, is someone else’s negativity their own problem – and not our’s?  And, what about our fear of death?  What is it about it that we are afraid of?  Have we not left our good marks on the world?  Have we not loved and served and sacrificed?  Have we not sent out ripples of goodness far into eternity – things we’ve done that have improved other lives and that will be paid forward forever?

          The truth is that our fears are often illogical.  Once identified and rationally considered, we can change how we think about them.  It’s a timeless truth that how we suffer has less to do with external influences and far more to do with internal issues of fear and insecurity.  Most of us have the power and ability to end our suffering by changing our perception of it.   

        Added to that fact is the reality that pain is real, but it will end.  Indeed, the cycle of life is always one that moves from happiness – to challenge – to suffering – to recovery – and back again to happiness.  As much as we know that from past experience, it will help us to remember that through our hard night. 

           And even when we are at at death’s door, our life will not truly end.  We need not fear insignificance.  Our lives will go onward due to all we have accomplished in love, kindness and service.

          Ultimately, be it in the throes of challenging circumstances, or during our final days, there will always, always, always be scores of things for which to be thankful and from which we can find Easter-like joy.

        This path, this challenging road to find lasting contentment, is the road less taken.  It’s a road, however, that we instinctively avoid.  Flinching from pain, fleeing from hardship, drugging ourselves to numb our pain, these are ways humans have always taken the more traveled road.  At that road’s end, however, there will only be an illusion of peace.  There will be no contentment, no lessons learned, no insight into one’s soul, no hard won conquest of fear, no Easter like celebration.

        I read now from Robert Frost’s poem:

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,

And sorry I could not travel both.

And be one traveler, long I stood,

And looked down one as far as I could,

To where it bent in the undergrowth;

Then took the other, as just as fair,

And having perhaps the better claim

Because it was grassy and wanted wear,

Though as for that the passing there

Had worn them really about the same.

And both that morning equally lay,

In leaves no step had trodden black.

Oh, I kept the first for another day!

Yet knowing how way leads on to way,

I doubted if I should ever come back.

I shall be telling this with a sigh

Somewhere ages and ages hence:

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,

I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made all the difference.

        

        For you and me, may we heed the Easter lesson and take the road less traveled.  May we consider all that challenges us, all that stings, all that tries our souls.  And I pray that from those considerations, a dawning truth will emerge.  Life is hard, but we are stronger.  Our bodies may hurt and even perish, but we will never die.  There is no end, no conclusion to the road less traveled.  Instead, it will be a path to find eternal peace and joy that surpasses all understanding.

I wish you a very blessed Easter.

In the spirit of this morning, please quiet your minds and hearts and join me in a guided Easter reflection….

Let us reflect on challenges before our world…

The wars and killing that devastate people and cultures,

The hatred that divides instead of unites,

The injuries to our oceans, land and air,

The struggles of poor and marginalized persons,

The anger of persons discriminated against – who see members of their communities beaten and even killed,

The challenges of the other abled, sick and dying….

Our hearts break for so many, many, many wounds……………….

But through these hard nights of challenge behind us and still ahead of us

Our souls rejoice for all that is good and blessed…

For advocates of peace, justice and equity…

For helping hands who feed, soothe, comfort and care for the hurting,

For diversity of life and humanity – the flowering of many creatures and many peoples each adding their beauty to one another,

For lovers, spouses, partners, children, parents, friends who sustain and support us,

And finally for the hope that remains inside us – a hope we refuse to let die – that good will prevail, that light will conquer darkness, that joy will come in the morning!!!!

Officer Arnold is a Cincinnati Police Officer who has been a member of the Sentinel Police Association since 2013 and has served on its Executive Board.  Officer Arnold believes in active Police community involvement.  He also supports oversight of the Police Department by the Sentinel Association.  Its motto is: “One Voice, One Action, One Spirit.”

Officer Arnold’s regular community outreach through his large email following and posting of local job opportunities was responsible for us finding our new and much valued Administrator Adrienne Campbell.

 

Listen to Officer Arnold’s Message Here:

(c) Doug Slagle, Minister to the Gathering at Northern Hills, All Rights Reserved

I presented the two videos we just watched as our Moment for All Ages because I wanted them to be a funny and endearing moment of reflection for kids and adults alike.  I’ve asked that the children’s RE teachers briefly discuss the videos with the kids.

For all of you, please just shout out – so I can hear – a one or two word idea you got from the first video we watched – the one with the birds.

Now, please shout out a one or two word idea you got from the second video – the one with the polar bears.

I chose these videos to watch because I believe they capture the essence of what it means to collaborate.  And that topic of collaboration, as you know from the title of my message, is one many people, including many experts, believe is a value expressed by a lot of women.  In the Harvard Business Review poll I’ve cited the last two weeks about values people all over the world want in their leaders – and whether or not the value is mostly feminine or masculine – collaboration was judged mostly feminine and it was ranked number four, out of ten, of most desired leadership qualities.    

A majority of the world’s people not only seek leaders who act in mostly feminine ways – with emotional intelligence, progressive thinking, empathy and collaboration – they are also implicitly rejecting traditional patriarchy.  In a book entitled The Athena Doctrine, How Women (and Men Who Think Life Them) Will Rule the Future by John Gerzema, people all over the world are frustrated by leaders who who behave in typically male ways, with control, aggression and black and white thinking.  Most people believe these mostly male behaviors are responsible for wars, income inequality, racism, scandal and reckless risk taking.

Evidence based research supports that belief.  Most women, experts have found, think less of themselves when compared with their peers.  Many men, on the other hand, overestimate their abilities compared with their peers.  In short, studies show that men tend to have inflated egos and a greater sense of self-worth.  Women, on the other hand, tend to shortchange their skills.  That key attribute, to think less of oneself, is what ironically leads people to be more collaborative.

An analysis of voting patterns by US Senators shows this collaboration gender difference.  In the last seven years, female Senators have co-sponsored an average of 171 bills with members of the opposite party.  Male Senators have co-sponsored bills across party lines an average of only 129 times.

Another recent study by two college professors took 500 male students and 500 female students and divided them into same gender pairs.  They were then asked to select, as a pair, 100 shares of any stock that the pair believed showed the most profit potential.  The female student pairs were far more likely to compromise on their stock choice.  For the male pairs, it was usually an all or nothing proposition.  Either the two men agreed on a stock, or else no selection at all was made.  For them, it was a my way or the highway approach.

The study showed, one of the professors said, that men tend to believe they have something to prove to another man.  They often refuse to back down from a position in order to show they are strong.  Women, this professor said, have no inner need to prove anything with other women.   Their sense of self is not as precarious as that of men.  Indeed, this professor remarked that many men will go out of their way not to compromise with another man – for fear that to do so is emasculating.

Regarding the two videos we watched, the predominant message I got from the one with the birds is patriarchy.  Only those birds who appear the same are welcome in the flock.  The one who is different was not only unwelcome, but was mocked.  Even within the flock of similar feathered birds, there is tension, competition, and conflict.  Each bird jostles to be the lead bird, the one at the center.  Ego and selfishness describe the flock’s general attitudes.

The Coca-Cola commercial, on the other hand, is a beautiful depiction of collaboration.  It echoes the famous Coke ad of the 1970’s that shows a group of people from all over the world singing “I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing.”  For me, these Coke commercials exude all of the human values we esteem – but too often fail to practice.  Harmony, sharing, gentleness, humility, and most of all love.  The polar bears work and reach together for the moon – all so they can share a Coke – which the commercial implies is an inspirational symbol of unity.

For many reasons, that brief commercial strikes an emotional cord in me – one that reminds me of love I have for those I’m close to.  It’s warm, endearing and yes, even feminine, in how it champions affectionate care and selflessness above all else.

Collaboration as a practice or value is one I advocate for GNH perhaps the most.  It’s a primary one I hope to myself become better at – and one I encourage this congregation to practice in all it does and says.

Collaboration gets at the heart of who and what we want to be.  Without a collaborative spirit, I don’t believe we can be truly loving, generous, open minded, humble, or concerned about issues of justice.  Collaboration is what the eight billion residents of this planet implicitly want to do.  We want human connection.  We want the kind of intimacy with others that is comforting and affirming.  We want connection with others from the moment we are born, until the moment we pass.

I recall last May when my father died.  My siblings and I gathered around him in the intensive care unit, held his hands, and together, as his life faded away, jointly shared with him all he meant to us and how we loved him.   Much like in the Coke commercial, we too were reaching for the moon in one of life’s most poignant moments.  Together, we wanted to send him into eternity knowing his life had meant something and that, most of all, he could die knowing he was deeply loved.  That exemplifies for me the kind of connected collaboration we seek with others – something that only happens when people intentionally come together to achieve something greater than themselves.

When we think of collaboration as an idea, however, we too often think of it in everyday, practical terms.  Teamwork, cooperation, sharing.  Those are essential components of the idea, but collaboration expresses all of the human values we believe in.

If we want democracy in this congregation, in our cities and in our nation, we must collaborate.  That means we will each have opinions about various matters, but we intentionally agree to live together as one people and to collaborate in a way that allows church members, city dwellers and US citizens to co-exist peacefully.  Democracy, in order to work, requires respect for all.  It demands listening to others.  It expects all will be treated equally.  None of these things can happen unless we cooperate, collaborate and, yes, learn to compromise and even lose a debate, or an election, with grace.

If we want healthy and thriving romantic relationships, families and friendships, we also must collaborate.  That means we recognize in these intimate relationships that each person has value and each has something worthwhile to contribute.  We don’t impose a hierarchy in our relationships – that one person is better than another.  And we communicate as lovers, parents, children, siblings or friends with open generosity and humility.  We may challenge one another from time to time – but that is done with the aim to encourage and inspire.  Indeed, to lovingly and gently challenge spouses, family members or friends is a hallmark of close relationships.  We implicitly trust that the other wants what is best for us.  People in close relationships lift up and never tear down.  Once again, we cannot do any of these things unless we collaborate.

If we want success in the work we do – here at church, at our workplaces, or in our justice advocacy, we too must collaborate.  That means we listen, we empathize, we don’t judge, and yes, once again, we compromise and find common ground.  We engage in the sharing of ideas and encourage a diversity of thought.  Only with a collective blending of best ideas can we find solutions that work.

Finally, if we want genuine peace in our homes, churches and world, we must above all things collaborate.  Rigid, confrontational and self-focused thinking is what leads to conflict.  And that, sadly, is too often caused by patriarchy.  As was shown in the study of student collaboration, men too often refuse to compromise and cooperate.  Those are signs of weakness many men believe.  I admit to sometimes being prone to this thinking too.  Our culture demands that men not appear weak.

But history’s battlefields are littered with the bodies of young men – sent off to war to prove that a particular leader or nation is stronger and more manly.  Homes, churches, schools, businesses and governments are similarly littered with lives destroyed by fake masculinity – that of arrogance and self-important attitudes.

Time and again, however, humility, collaboration and compromise are shown to be ironically more powerful.  Gandhi and Martin Luther King showed their true strength in acting and speaking non-violently.   Jesus taught that the meek and gentle shall inherit the earth and that only peacemakers are worthy of God’s blessing.  Ramadan, month long fasting and five times daily prayer for Muslims are ways to sublimate themselves before forces of love greater than themselves.  The same is so for Hindus and Buddhists who, perhaps more than any others, intentionally work to diminish their egos in order to find lasting peace and enlightenment.

Moving from selfishness – to selflessness – is one of the hardest things we do.  Being too self focused is my number one life obstacle.  Such thinking has a number of negative manifestations, but for us today, collaboration stands as a primary response.  When we cooperate with others, when we humble ourselves and our opinions, when we genuinely listen, share and love, we tap into all that is good and effective.  We need to get in touch with parts of ourselves that are vulnerable, that yearn for connection, and as I’ve said in my three messages this month – that many people consider feminine.  We need to abandon vestiges of patriarchal egotism that can exist in both men and women.  We need to collaborate, compromise and ultimately love enemy and friend alike. 

      May that be so with me, as I pray it is with you.

     

(c) Doug Slagle, Minister to the Gathering at Northern Hills, All Rights Reserved

Please click here to listen to the message.  Please read it below.

 

Two years ago during a Democratic Party primary debate, Hillary Clinton was asked if she was a moderate or a progressive.  The question was posed because of accusations that Ms. Clinton was not a true progressive.

Ms. Clinton replied to the question by saying this, “I’m a progressive, but I’m a progressive who likes to get things done.”

Her response was a defense not only of her thinking, but also that of women in general.  Many women are progressives, but their approach is different from that of men.  There is, I believe, a gender difference between how women and men are forward thinking or progressive.

Ms. Clinton’s response, therefore, highlights my topic this morning.  As you may know, my series theme this month is “Feminine Values that Should Rule the World.”  Last Sunday I discussed emotional intelligence as a leadership quality that many experts consider is a mostly feminine attribute.  Today, I want to look at looking forward as another leadership quality that is mostly feminine.

I cited last week the Harvard Business Review study and poll of 64,000 people in 53 countries around the world asking them to state the qualities they most want in their political, business, spiritual and non-profit leaders.  These same people were later asked whether they thought the qualities they listed are mostly feminine or mostly masculine attributes.  Of the top ten leadership qualities listed by all those polled, all but one were considered by respondents as mostly feminine.  Emotional intelligence ranked number one.  Looking forward was number two.  To put it simply, a majority of women and men around the world believe that having a forward thinking approach is an attribute they highly desire in their leaders and it is a mostly feminine one.

Forward thinking is generally defined as being progressive, dynamic, bold, pioneering, modern and innovative.  Interestingly, several of these qualities are often viewed as mostly masculine traits.  To be traditionally masculine is to be bold, dynamic and innovative.  They are not qualities most people would associate as mostly feminine.

And yet, as Hillary Clinton pointed out about herself, she is a forward thinker – a progressive.  How can she, or any woman for that matter, be progressive if it means one must be bold and dynamic?   Is there a possible disconnect between the genders about just what constitutes forward thinking?  I believe progressivism in women is different and it is exactly what the worlds needs today.

To be clear, women in the United States are overall more progressive than men.  Voting patterns as well as beliefs about many social issues prove it.  In last year’s election, 53% of women voters supported Ms. Clinton compared with 41% of male voters who supported her.  That gender gap was true for whites and blacks – more women from each racial group supported her than did men.  More women support gay rights and marriage equality than do men.  More women support gun control and military disarmament than do men.  And more women oppose the death penalty and support the Affordable Health Care Act than do men.

Interestingly, however, most female forward thinking is far more nuanced than such data indicates.  Women are forward thinking in the way that Hillary Clinton described herself. 

According to this view, many women are what I call practical forward thinkers.  Men tend to be focused on the philosophy and politics of an issue, while women in general focus on finding solutions and making sure that whatever belief they hold, a workable answer is a priority.

According to the Harvard Business Review, many men excel at being forward thinking visionaries and they lead accordingly.  They offer a compelling vision in such a way that prompts others to follow.  But men being men, most of those who are considered visionary leaders are lone wolves.  They create a vision and they alone express it to others and then act as the sole leader.

And that is strikingly different from how many women approach problems.  In general, women collaborate and seek other ideas of how to fix something.  Women, in other words, tend to focus on finding practical, common sense answers.  They care less about themselves appearing as bold leaders, as they care about working with multiple people to find a solution that is bold and innovative.  Looking forward for women, therefore, is not about debate and being a leader, it’s about making sure the desired outcome actually happens.

An example of this approach is how the Premier of Canada’s Northwest Territories addressed that province’s issue of fighting poverty.  Typically, the problem became a political argument between conservative and liberal men.  Conservatives advocated for less government involvement and liberals essentially wanted more government involvement.  Eva Aariak, the Premier of the Northwest Territories, refused to engage in that debate.  Instead, she enlisted the advice of stakeholders in the poverty problem.  She convened listening sessions with community, neighborhood and family groups to hear their thoughts.   She found that most people wanted government assistance to fight poverty, but that anti-poverty programs should be run and determined by each village and neighborhood – not by the central government. 

Ms. Aariak adopted polices to channel funds to various localities but then let them decide how best to use the dollars.  This allowed communities to be flexible and to determine assistance on an individual by individual basis.  Some people need funds for education.  Others who are unable to work need direct financial help.  Still others need tough love to work or learn.

This relatively novel approach was called by Premier Aariak a bottom up approach.  It was not conservative or liberal, and it was not run by those in power.  But it was a new, forward thinking idea, crafted by multiple people at the grass roots level, that actually worked.  It fit Hillary Clinton’s definition of being progressive in a way that accomplishes something.

In the Harvard Business Review article, one female corporate CEO described her leadership this way: “I don’t see myself as particularly visionary in the creative sense.  I see myself as pulling and putting together pieces of information or observations that lead to possible strategies and future opportunities.”

This executive’s progressivism is built on collaboration – a mostly feminine quality I’ll look at next week.  Unlike many men, her approach is not to debate and engage in a competition of ideas.  Instead, she pulls together many ideas, from many people, and assembles them into a solution.  No individual is the owner of the solution.  Everybody owns it.  No person comes out the winner.  Everybody wins.  That is a mostly feminine quality that should rule the world – one where argument and competition are reduced and compromise and consensus prevail.

Stephen Prothero, author of the book “Why Liberals Win the Culture Wars (Even When They Lose Elections), asserts that men are often the driving force behind conservative culture wars – ones against gay rights, abortion, feminism, sexual liberation, and secularization.  Men are often those who are “anxious about the loss of old orders and the emergence of new ones.”  Politicians use culture wars to gain their votes and get themselves elected.  For instance, non-college educated white men were the predominant demographic group who supported Donald Trump in last year’s election.  Their anxiety over loss of jobs and economic opportunity was and is real.  Their concerns were exploited by Trump in his attacks against immigrants, Muslims, people of color and women – all of whom he implied are taking away white male jobs.  But while Trump won the election, Professor Prothero says he is likely to not win the overall culture war.

Indeed, he points out that none of the culture wars have been successful since women won the right to vote in 1920 – primarily because women have added their forward thinking values to the national debate.

Their values may have seemed to lose – as they have in several elections over the past hundred years.   But mostly feminine forward thinking has nevertheless prevailed.  That was due, I believe, to the up from the bottom, ground level ideas and changes offered by many people.  We saw that in the Civil Rights victories of the 1960’s, in the LGBTQ equal rights and marriage equality movement, and now in the feminist MeToo effort and Black Lives Matter protests.  We are beginning to see such success in the gun control effort – spurred not by any particular leader, but by thousands of grass roots youth – many of whom are female.

The implications of this are significant.  On a spiritual level, forward thinking is foundational.  Every world religion is based on the need for change – inwardly in people, and outwardly in society.  One’s heart must first perceive his or her self-focused way of thinking.  By changing that, one perceives new ways to interact with others and be more at peace.  I assert that any form of honest spirituality moves one forward from selfishness – to selflessness.

Once people have so changed, societies can then change too.  Rightly applied, spirituality leads large groups of people to embrace a concern for others – for the marginalized, the poor, for those who have little hope.

This spiritual value of change is also mostly feminine.  Men have it too, but the poll I mentioned earlier indicates most people around the world believe more women have it than do men.  That confirms why women often comprise a majority in churches and spiritual organizations.  They, along with men who think the same, accept and want change in both themselves and in the world.  Spiritually minded communities, like the Gathering at Northern Hills, are perhaps best aligned to not only be forward thinking, but to actually get things done.

As its name implies, conservatism on the other hand wants to look backwards, mostly due to fear of change.  Don’t take a new job, don’t merge with another congregation, don’t try out new music, don’t adopt new technologies, don’t examine and change inner flaws.  Maintaining the status quo, as we know, is not a healthy strategy.  Change and forward thinking define the universe, and must define our lives.

And looking forward should incorporate many of the mostly feminine qualities needed to be effective – ones like emotional intelligence, listening, collaboration, and reasonableness.  To look forward in ways that will succeed, multiple people need to participate and be heard.  Progress is not measured by the accomplishments of lone wolf leaders, but by the collective work of many.

This speaks to values at work in this congregation and ones we seek to follow.  We don’t as much talk about problems, as we try to do something about them – even in small ways.  We are like Hillary Clinton – we’re progressives who get things done.   And we do so not because I or the Board says something is good to do – but because all of you, the congregation, collectively believe its good to do.  It’s one thing to lament homelessness in our city.  It’s quite another to jointly serve, love and assist the homeless.  It’s one thing to decry racism.  It’s quite another to admit vestiges of implicit bias in our congregation and ourselves, and then make conscious efforts to eliminate it.  That’s the essence of honest spirituality – to believe in something so strongly that words are not enough.  Deeds must be undertaken to prove a belief is sincere.

Most of all for us, who lament the direction our nation seems to be heading, we must try to see things in perspective.  Culture wars against social progress will always happen.  People will continue to be afraid of change.  Culture wars will occasionally win elections that seemingly cause us to go backwards.  The reassuring lessons of history and spirituality show us, however, that our nation and world have advanced in being more selfless in ways earlier generations would have never thought possible. 

This current period of anger, hate and fear toward people who appear different – this too shall pass.  It will not prevail over the long term and the seeds of its fall are already apparent.  That will be due to the application of mostly feminine values – ones like having a forward thinking attitude.  These values not only should rule the world, I believe they do in the hearts and minds of millions of women – and men who think alike.