Author: Doug Slagle

(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.

The word “martyr” comes from an ancient greek work meaning “to witness.”  In that sense, the word defines anyone who is voluntarily willing to testify to their strong belief in a cause.  When John Foxe published in 1550 a book describing the sacrificial executions of early Christians, and later Protestants burned at the stake by the English Catholic Queen Mary, the word “martyr” became associated with willingly dying for one’s religious beliefs.  Foxe’s book was entitled The Book of Martyrs and it soon attained a status equivalent to scripture.  In some Christian evangelical circles today, the book is read and used as an example of persecution for being a witness to Christ.

Since Foxe’s time, martyrdom has had a mostly theological connotation – even when it’s been applied to persons like Abraham Lincoln, Mahatma Gandhi, and Martin Luther King, Jr.  Those three were killed not just for their civil rights advocacy, but as many people say, for their spiritual promotion of human rights.

Martyrdom has also been applied to the Pilgrims and Puritans for the hardship they endured in early America.  Catholic missionaries were considered martyrs by some when they were killed by indigenous people they tried to convert.  And those same indigenous people are often said to be martyrs for the suffering they endured at the hands of past white missionaries and immigrants.  

Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism, is honored as a martyr by that faith.  Some have applied the word to the six million Jews killed during the Holocaust.  More concerning, extremist Muslims liberally use the term to exalt those who willingly die when committing terrorism.

Unfortunately, the word “martyr” has been hijacked for religious and political purposes when, in fact, its real meaning, as I said, is a witness – or someone who testifies – to a belief.

The point of my message this morning is not to restore the true meaning of the word martyr, but rather to promote testifying – or bearing witness – to one’s spiritual beliefs.  

Last Sunday, Ann McCracken offered a beautiful and almost lyrical testimony of her spiritual journey from growing up as a young Catholic girl, to her budding religious doubts, to explorations of native-American spirituality, to her present fulfillment with Unitarian Universalist openness. 

What Ann offered, and you can listen to her message on our website, is both a deeply personal story of her spiritual search, but also a description of the value inherent in multiple forms of spirituality.  She found solace in Catholic rituals, connection with nature in native-American beliefs, peacefulness from reverential moments with Tom gazing out on the ocean, and gratitude for reason – and an absence of doctrines – in UUism.  Ann summarized her present spirituality as Humanist.  Most importantly, Ann’s story did not try to tell us why her beliefs are better than ours – and we should adopt them.   Instead, she simply offered her perspective on a life quest for meaning and transcendence.

For my sake as a Minister, I highly endorse her testimony not just for its content, but also for the beauty, thought and courage it took to share it.  Everybody has their own spiritual story to tell – and every story is therefore unique and important.   The 8 billion spiritual stories comprising the world’s population are testimony to our human-ness.  Every person seeks, in some fashion, connection with the ineffable and indescribable capital ’T’ Truth that defines everything.  We all seek what might loosely be called the divine – be that God, Allah, Yahweh, Nirvana, nature, the power of love, or the principles of science and reason.  Ultimately, I believe we all seek the same thing.

Ann described that universal search as entering multiple doors each opening to the same altar.  That is a beautiful analogy.  I have offered a similar one.  We are all on a different path to the same mountain peak of Truth.  There are many paths to the summit and all are good, but the great wonder about humanity is that we are all mountain climbers, or door openers, searching and yearning for the same goal.

My plea this morning is that we spend the time to understand and articulate just what it is we each spiritually believe, and then understand how and why that is both meaningful to us and to the larger world.  Our journeys are of course personally important to us, but they are more important for what they mean to the world.  How does our spirituality help build a form of heaven on earth where everybody lives in peace and with mutual love?

One of the false but primary accusations against Unitarian Universalism is that without any doctrines, it essentially believes in nothing.  One well-worn joke speaks to that idea.  In an episode of the “The Simpsons,” young Lisa Simpson visits a fundraising ice cream stand run by local minister Reverend Lovejoy.  She scans the list of flavors offered – ones like Protestant peach, Catholic rocky road, or Heavenly hash.  She spies the Unitarian Universalist flavor and exclaims, “Ohhhhh!  I want that one!”  Reverend Lovejoy hands her a cone, Lisa skeptically examines it, and then cries out, “But it’s empty!”  “Exxaccctly!” says the Reverend.

That joke playfully mocks UUism, but it also holds a larger truth about many UU members as well as other people.   In a Pew Research poll, 16% of the world’s people say they believe in nothing.  23% of Americans make that claim.  The single most common reason these people offer is that they are opposed to the teachings of any and all religions.

What is startling is that the relative percentage of people around the world who say they are non-religious and believe in “nothing” is predicted to decrease!  That is due to several factors, but a major one is that belief in “nothing” is mostly a negative statement and one that implies a generally pessimistic or cynical outlook.  Those who believe in some form of spirituality generally hold a more optimistic and hopeful attitude which gives rise to much higher birthrates for them – in contrast to very low birthrates for those who say they are irreligious.

The irony is that people who say they believe in nothing actually believe in something – even if it means they do not believe in a theological goddess, or the stories in various scriptures.  Indeed, Atheists, Agnostics, Humanists, the skeptical, indifferent or just spiritually lazy DO believe in something that is likely very, very positive.  

In their own way, people who say they believe in “nothing” are actually on their own path to the mountain top of Truth.  Instead of stating a supposed belief in “nothing,” I believe they instead consider testifying to just what it is they DO believe in – whatever that may be.

Such testimonies would likely change the more pessimistic attitudes of non-religious people.  Indeed, it is troubling that birthrates among religious people are higher than for the non-religious. There are likely many reasons for that but one is that spiritual people, in general, possess greater hope and optimism for the future.  

        As someone who is non-religious and who calls himself a Humanist, I have an optimistic outlook for humanity based on past human history.  Time and again, when faced with serious challenges like feudalism, slavery, plagues, inequality, or genocide, humanity has met them head on – and found ways to reasonably address them. 

As a Humanist, I thus have hope in people, in the collective goodness of humanity, and not in stories about a supernatural god or goddess.  As I’ve done before, but won’t repeat today, I’ve shared my spiritual journey with you and, even though it describes my move away from beliefs I found wanting, my story is nevertheless one that describes positive reasons why I now believe as I do.

For me, the continual process of examining and re-examining my beliefs, and then figuring out what they mean, is a tremendous confidence building – and peace inducing – exercise.  I’m able to clarify just what it is that I’m doing in life – besides just muddling through with no larger understanding or sense of purpose.

The Christian New Testament includes a verse supposedly written by Peter that states, “Always be prepared to give an answerto everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that is in you.”  That verse is used as a teaching point by almost all Christians.  Every Christian, they say, should be able to testify to their beliefs and how and why they came to them.  Indeed, it’s an expected practice among evangelical Christians to publicly share one’s testimony – not only to be able to understand their beliefs for themselves, but as a way to promote Christianity in general.

I don’t share the idea that we should promote and proselytize personal spiritual beliefs.  That is an arrogant and presumptive attitude.  But as the verse I just quoted says, it is good and helpful for others when we share what helps us be more hopeful, loving, charitable, humble and peaceful.

As I said earlier, that’s exactly what Ann McCracken did in her message last Sunday.  It was a wonderfully descriptive sharing of her journey to find more peace and joy in her heart and mind – a story that is different from mine and yours but nevertheless inspiring.  I learned from it, as I hope you did too – or will if you listen to it online.

In that regard, every story is valid and every one is to be celebrated.  Understanding that, we as Unitarian Universalists can testify to the goodness we find in multiple spiritual beliefs.  We will also testify to the foundational idea that nobody, no religion, and no form of spirituality expresses absolute truth – one that everyone should accept or else be rejected.  As Ann said, you’re looking for your door to the universal altar.  So is the person next you.  I want to rejoice in that and never claim my  chosen doorway is superior to another.

For me, that’s a positive practice I must repeatedly learn.  I may disagree with what others religiously believe, but I must remember both their right to believe as they wish and the intrinsic goodness of their belief – as long as it is founded on love.  For beliefs that include hate of others, I must gently speak against such doctrines, or interpretations of them, that purvey rejection and violence.  

If I want to most effectively promote what it is I believe, then let me practice a Humanist version of what Francis of Assisi suggested, “Preach Jesus, and only when necessary use words.”  May my deeds of kindness, empathy and charity be the most powerful testimony of what I believe.

What I hope we will each do is plumb the depths of our hearts and find the part of us that hungers for peace and a connection to something beyond ourselves.  When we meditate on being at one with whatever we consider a higher power – nature, god, or the power of love – I believe we lose our self-focused thinking to instead be filled with awe and deep gratitude.  This is how we then see ourselves as spiritual beings and how we begin to understand our spiritual journey.  For many, this is both an ecstatic and humbling experience – to deeply know one is part of something immense and overwhelmingly good.  

Pondering our spirituality and our journey is not an intellectual exercise.  Instead, it’s a soul deep process – remembering and honoring moments and feelings that have deeply moved us – the smell of incense from a past church service, a musical piece that brings us to tears, a quiet walk in the woods, or the full acceptance given us by a family member or friend.   These are some of the evocative moments of life that remind us we are more than flesh and blood – we are a species that seeks a glimpse of ultimate Truth.  

As a part of this process, I would love for any of you to share your spiritual journey – either in a full message like Ann’s last Sunday, or in a shortened 5 minute version to be incorporated in a future service.  Please reflect on this request and feel free to speak to me if you are so inclined.  

If public speaking is not your thing, then I hope you will develop and share your spiritual journey and beliefs with a partner or a few trusted friends – people who will just listen and lovingly affirm you. 

I shared as recently as Easter Sunday my belief that it is all of us – humanity in general – who are the gods and goddesses that make the world a better place.  I humbly suggest you discover your inner goddess and then tell others how she came to be, who she is now, and what she plans to do.  By letting others see and hear your inner goddess, you will create a divine moment for yourself and for those who hear you – just as Ann McCracken did last Sunday.  Let us bless one another with our stories and thereby help inspire the world with our peace and joy – of which I now wish for all of you.

Talkback?

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

Click here to listen to the message. Please see below to read it.

Saint Genevieve, who is the patron saint of Paris, had her life story written by an anonymous monk in the year 520 CE – only ten years after her death.  The biography describes many of Genevieve’s supposed miracles.  To combat Attila the Hun’s army that was threatening Paris, she had a tree cut down, that she then cursed, causing demons to emerge from it and kill hundreds of enemy soldiers.  Later, when she joined troops in boats crossing the Seine River, many of the boats capsized during a storm.  Genevieve had the boats brought up from the depths, re-floated, and the soldiers saved.  She’s also said to have healed hundreds of sick, blind and lame people – just by her touch.

Such hagiography, defined as over-the-top exaggerations of a deceased person’s life, are so elaborate in Genevieve’s case, that truth about her is impossible to determine.  And that’s because nobody disputed her biography – even though countless people knew her.  Why were the fictions allowed to go uncontested?

The ability to widely distribute printed material in ancient times was not possible.  Scrolls of parchment, which were the books in the ancient world, were very expensive.  Parchment, made from animal skins, cost the equivalent of fifty dollars a page.  Many scribes were needed to painstakingly hand-write each of the scrolls.  And those scribes had to be taught to read and write – at a time when less than 10% of people were literate.  Because scrolls were so time consuming and expensive to produce, only the Catholic church and wealthy people could afford them.   The result was the average person had no access to factual news.  People got their news by word of mouth, gossip and from sermons – since the Church controlled all information.  Genevieve thus became a Saint because nobody was able to widely dispute the miracle stories.

This same situation happened five hundred years earlier with the  biographies of Jesus.  Few people could dispute what was written about him.  What was helpful, though, is that several people, not just one, wrote biographies about Jesus.  And they significantly differed from each other. 

The traditional understanding of Jesus’ resurrection is that he literally came back to life after having died and was buried.  That’s the story presented in three of the Bible’s gospels – Matthew, Luke and John.  But the first one written, the gospel of Mark, differs in its account of what happened on the first Easter morning.  Mark, along with accounts in gospels not included in the Bible, suggest that the original understanding of the resurrection is far different from what other gospels say.  

Almost all scholars believe a man named Jesus lived two thousand years ago and that he was executed by Roman and Jewish elites because he was a threat to their power and wealth.  The historical Jesus taught amazing truths about human ethics.  But that Jesus, I believe, did not literally cause miracles and was not god.

That’s a radical statement to make on Easter Sunday but it’s not because I think Jesus was a fictional person or that he should not be greatly admired.  My intent on every Easter is to offer a different – and hopefully more accurate – interpretation of his life and resurrection.  I believe Jesus died a horrible death, he was buried in an unmarked grave like all other executed persons of the time, and he remained dead.  He was symbolically resurrected, however, through the legacy of his work with the poor, diseased and marginalized.  He was resurrected by the impact he had during and after his life through his teachings on forgiveness, humility, compassion, non-violence and service to others.  His real resurrection is thus a symbolic one that assures us that we too can impact the future long after we are gone.  My intention is to resurrect the true resurrection in order to find meaning that is relevant to anyone  – no matter one’s religion or no religion.

The four gospels in the Bible, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, were all written decades after Jesus died.  Mark was the first written – around 63 CE, or thirty years after Jesus’ death.  As the earliest gospel, Mark is thus considered by many scholars to be the most authoritative.  It does not include any story about Jesus’ miraculous birth or, as I’ve said, about his  bodily resurrection. 

       Mark, chapter 16, which is the final chapter in the gospel, concludes with the female followers of Jesus arriving at his tomb on Easter morning.  They find the tomb wide open and without Jesus’ body inside.  There’s no description in the original Mark about Jesus’ resurrection or him appearing alive after his death.

This ‘no resurrection’ version of Mark is in the earliest known copies of that gospel.  Much later copies of Mark, ones printed in Bibles you may own, contain eleven added verses that DO describe Jesus appearing alive after his death.  However, virtually every scholar, Christian and otherwise, say those verses were added centuries later by Church leaders who wanted a miraculous Jesus – and not a great but very dead man.  That’s proven because the two earliest copies of Mark, discovered in 1859, do not contain the added verses describing a literal resurrection.  Because of that, many Bibles today – you can check this in yours – put a disclaimer before those added verses stating they are not original.

The implication of this is significant – one that most fundamentalist Christians avoid contemplating.  The miracle of Jesus coming back to life on Easter morning, after being tortured, crucified, killed and buried, the event that supposedly proves there is a life after death for everybody, was probably made up.

What the original version of Mark described is that in the empty tomb sat a young man who tells the female followers of Jesus that he is risen and to find him in Galilee.  It’s in Galilee where Jesus lived his entire life and where he taught his famous Sermon on the Mount declaring the poor in spirit, the meek, the merciful and the peacemakers of the world are the truly good.  It’s also in Galilee where he served and showed compassion to the hungry, sick, blind and other abled, and where he confronted religious hypocrites who worshipped money and power.  Galilee, more than any other place, represented Jesus’ humble life and teachings.  It’s there, not some tomb, that the young man said to find the essence of Jesus and his legacy of forgiveness and love.  The heart of the resurrection, in my interpretation of Mark, is not about a physical life after death, but is instead a spiritual and symbolic one.

My interpretation of Mark’s original description of the resurrection is also that of the first Christians.  Once again, a relatively recent discovery proves this.  The gospel of Peter, another biography of Jesus, was found sixty years ago buried in what was an ancient library in Egypt.  This gospel was not included in the Bible by early Church leaders.  It’s exclusion was likely because it says that instead of Jesus being bodily resurrected, he was simply “taken up”.  That’s a crucial distinction and one that fits with the original ending of Mark.    

The gospel of Peter, experts believe, was written very close to Jesus’ death which makes it more authoritative than ones in the Bible that were written decades later.  Jesus’ essence – his spirit – was taken up into a symbolic realm comprising his teachings and all the good he did.  Jesus’ afterlife, and ours too, is not to rest forever on some heavenly cloud, or if we do evil things, burn in some ghastly hell.  Many of the first Christians believed we will be taken up into a spiritual – not literal – heaven, one which I believe is purely symbolic.

This is something I describe whenever I officiate at funerals.  It’s my belief that humans, not some mythical god in heaven, are the true gods and goddesses that make the world better.  Because of that, it is what a person does to influence other lives, that lives onward.  That is why kindness, compassion, and serving others are so essential.  They are the purpose for our existence.  We help make the world better off than if we had not been born.  We don’t do good to selfishly earn a spot in heaven.   We do good just for the sake of doing good – and to improve life for everyone.   

Doing good in life, according to Jesus, means to forgive others – even our enemies.  It means living humbly and sacrificially by practicing the Golden Rule to love and serve others at least as much or more than we love and serve ourselves.   And our contentment and happiness come not from money and material possessions, but from living at peace with everyone.  We can’t know the impact we’ll have in the distant future, but hundreds of years from now, our lifetime deeds will have been paid forward generation by generation such that it will be as if we are there too.

For me, that’s the resurrection I celebrate today – a reminder to live as Jesus lived – simply, compassionately, and joyfully.

A few years back, I visited a Gathering member who was terminally ill.  He had assured me during his hospice time that he was at peace with death.  But when dying got very near – and he knew it, he was terrified.  Even though he’d become an Atheist as an adult, he began to fearfully remember his Christian upbringing and its teachings about hell.  He asked that I come to him shortly before he passed, and with much anguish and emotion, he asked that I pray with him to help him find some peace.  

And so I clasped his hands in mine and I prayed with him in gratitude for his beautiful life – one that included love for his family, partner, and many friends.  I prayed with the assurance that he would be remembered and his life legacy would last far into the future because of the love he had given away, the generosity he had shown, and the kindness he’d extended to those less fortunate.  I prayed with thanks that he had followed the life example of Jesus.  I finished my prayer reminding him of the many people who had loved him – who still do – and who will for many years to come.  And then I looked up at him.  He was no longer trembling, he had something of smile on his face, and tears stained his cheeks.  He said a very quiet, “Thank you.” 

I still remember that encounter.  His fear of death shook me, but I’m hopeful he passed into eternity unafraid because he better understood what resurrection means.  No hell.  No heaven.  Just peace and an eternal legacy of goodness.  

         I hope a gentle death comes for me and for you.  To the depths of my heart, I believe in a resurrection, an afterlife, for each of us – one that will be a timeless extension of how we have loved, given, served and spoken.  It’s the things we do today and tomorrow that will influence others far into the future.  It is not hyperbole to say that each of us touch eternity by how we show love – even in very small acts or expressions of kindness.  Whether or not future generations know our names, we will nevertheless be there with them. 

My hope is that we can resurrect the resurrection – and restore its original understanding.  We will all die one day and our bodies will become part of the universe.  But the essence of who we are will not end.  We will live onward in the countless ways we have impacted the world.  Nobody lives and dies in vain if he or she has selflessly loved family, friend and stranger.   Doing those things, eternity for me and you will be a continuous Easter morning.

I wish you each much peace and joy.

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

When I consider my life so far, the most significant moment for me was when I had an “Aha!” moment and decided to come out 14 years ago – both to myself and to the world.  That decision to change, or more realistically to improve, is important to me not because I came out, but because I finally chose to be the real me.  I stopped being afraid of all the potential negative consequences that might happen.  That major decision of change was mostly about me deciding to love myself.

Even though many past friends and members of the church I served at the time told me I was going to hell, and that I could no longer be their friend or their Minister, it’s funny that they also told me I’d become a different person – and they meant that in a negative way.  At first, that upset me, but then I quickly realized I had changed but only in a way that I got better.  I became happier, more confident, and more authentic.

The real me, the person who I was and am at my inner core, had mostly evolved.  I revealed a relatively small part of me that I’d previously and wrongly thought was bad – and that has made all the difference in my life.

Since next week is Easter Sunday and, for many people, a day to celebrate the resurrection story about Jesus coming back to life from being dead, I chose resurrection as my theme for April.  My intent is to consider what change means for us – on a societal level as I discussed last Sunday, on a personal level as I’ll discuss today, and on a spiritual level as I’ll talk about next week.

For most of us, changing ourselves for the better is something we say is a good thing, but we often are afraid of doing it.  It’s far more comfortable – and easy – to go along as we are.  But as we know, the world is constantly evolving around us.  Change is a fundamental fact in the universe.  If we stay the same, while everything else changes, we risk being left behind and becoming stagnant and boring.  And so we come to a place like this church to consider ways to improve ourselves so we can then help improve the world.  We also realize that making a decision to improve ourselves, perhaps by learning new ways to think or act, is periodically essential – for our own well-being and for the world too.  If we become stale, what good are we?

For me, there were and are three essential steps I needed to take in order to change myself.

First, I had to face my fears – and overcome them.  Any new thing in life, any so-called improvement in thinking or in how we speak and act, is difficult primarily because we are often afraid.  What if I fail?  What if others don’t like the new and improved me?  What if the process of change is painful and difficult?  What if change for the better actually turns out to be something worse?

The reality is that fear is like a prison in which we put ourselves.  Our freedom is limited because we subconsciously tell ourselves, “don’t even think of being different!”  We exist in a jail of our own making that seems comfortable only because it is familiar.  Fear also causes us to think the worst about ourselves and the world.  “I’m ineffective and a loser – so don’t try something new because it won’t go well.”  Or, “The world is a nasty place – so don’t do anything different that will call attention to yourself.” 

I thought those things before my “Aha” decision to come out.  But the odd thing was, once I faced my fears and came out, I realized my  thoughts of what might happen were far worse than what actually  happened.  My daughters still loved and accepted me.  My dad didn’t reject me.  I lost my job as a Minister, but within three years found a new and much better Minister position at the Gathering.  And I attribute that job offer to the fact that I was a more happy and empowered person precisely because I’d faced my fears and changed my life.

I still encountered some difficult times.  I lost friends, I felt very alone for a while, I occasionally questioned why I decided to change.  But those negatives were temporary as they always are.  Just as the adage goes about exercising our bodies, the same is true when we significantly change: “No pain, no gain.”

The second step I took to change was to love and accept myself for who I am.  Part of what had held me back from changing was because I didn’t like who I was.  An inner voice told me I was bad, sinful, and that being gay was the worst thing I could be.

I had to realize that who I was and am is someone worthy.  I had to challenge all the things mean spirited people say about LGBTQ persons –  and understand those are lies.  Do I try my best to serve family, friends and strangers with compassion?  Yes.  Am I perfect?  Of course not.  Do I try to learn from mistakes and be better?  Yes.  If there is a god, or whatever else that made me, would she make something bad?  Absolutely not.

Too many of us fill our minds with negative thoughts about ourselves.  We have to first tell our inner negative voice to shut up!  As I’ve said before, the only way we can love anyone else is if we first learn to love ourselves.  We don’t become arrogant and stare lovingly in a mirror.  Instead, we understand who we are, admit are flaws, try to change them, and more importantly see the beauty in us.  Once I accepted that I’m a good person and that I am worthy of respect,  I was able to change and improve my life.  Ultimately, I found the ability to accept and love me – just as I am.

The third essential step to change myself was to be as authentic and genuine as possible.  I had to agree to just be me – no masks, no hiding in symbolic closets, no fear of what others think about me.  LGBTQ protesters often chant at protest rallies, “We’re here, we’re queer, get used to it!”  I had to learn to say that to myself.

The world is full of fearful people who don’t love themselves and  hide who they really are.  Fake people are, at their core, unhappy people because they’re not free and they’re not real.  Such people are either very sad, or else they hide their fears by being overly arrogant and seemingly invulnerable.  And so, in sum, three things we must do to change: 1) face our fears, 2) love and accept ourselves, 3) decide to be fully authentic and true to yourself.

For any of us here today, especially young people, we know life is about change and moving forward.  We tell ourselves change is no fun when, in fact, it is often exciting and good.  Moving from being a young person to being an adult is scary.  So is the change from being a strong and vital adult into being an older person.  Other changes – to go to college, to start a new job, to evolve in how we think about an issue – these are equally challenging.   But I need to assure myself – and you – we are capable – and the vast majority of people love us just for who we are.  Black, punk, goth, trans, lesbian, jock, intellectual, artistic, preppy, grungy, old, young, male, female, gay, straight – whatever –  we are each beautifully and wonderfully made.  We’re amazing, strong, smart, and likable.  Let’s keep on being who we are – while we keep on getting even better.  We are a gift to the world and none of us should ever forget that! 

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

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

Almost exactly two years ago, the late night comedian Jimmy Kimmel spent fifteen minutes at the opening of his show describing the birth of his son Billy.  Within minutes of the birth, an observant nurse noticed something was wrong.  Billy’s color was not right and he had a noticeable heart murmur.  A pediatric cardiologist was called who decided the infant needed immediate open heart surgery.

Fortunately, all went well and Billy survived thanks to the skill of a medical team trained, in part, by funding from the National Institute for Health, or NIH.

Kimmel then noted how six months before, the Trump administration had proposed a six billion dollar cut in funding for the NIH.  Congress fortunately rejected that and instead increased NIH funding by 2 billion.  Kimmel went on to note that before Obamacare had been passed, children like Billy were often denied health insurance for the rest of their lives because of their pre-existing condition.

Kimmel then broke down, with tears streaming down his face.  He said he was fortunate he had both the money and health insurance to make sure his son received life saving treatment.  While choking back, he said no parent should ever have to face the prospect of a child born with a defect who cannot be treated due to lack of insurance.  “We live in   supposedly the greatest country in the world,” he said.  “This is not a Republican or Democrat issue,” Kimmel said.  “It’s a human life issue.”

Even though Kimmel’s emotional statement was met with scorn by some, video of it went viral.  It was watched and liked on various internet sites over 50 million times.  It became national news and polls later showed an increase in support for the Affordable Care Act, which was under threat of repeal then and is now once again.

Despite people hearing statistics and intellectual arguments about why universal health insurance is good for society, one tearful father telling the story of almost losing his son was powerfully compelling.  Who could not feel for Jimmy Kimmel – not because he’s a celebrity – but because he’s a parent just like millions of others.  People listened with their hearts, they identified with Kimmel, they understood his emotions, and for just the fifteen minutes it took to watch and hear him, they felt his pain.  Millions of people empathized with him and perhaps came to support Obamacare.

Two years before, the world was hearing news reports about the Syrian Civil War refugee crisis.  Over five million Syrians have fled carnage, chemical gas attacks, and widespread hunger in their home country.  That number of people has caused a humanitarian crisis.  Over 86% of Syrian refugees still live in barely tolerable camps with conditions below the world poverty line.   Appeals for international assistance to the refugees has largely gone unmet.

As you listen to what I’ve just said, think for a moment what it means to you that 5 million people suffer in conditions worse than the world’s poorest.  For me, when I read or hear such data, I’m of course upset and I feel an intellectual sorrow.  But my feelings are mostly in my head.

Now, please take a look at this picture taken in 2015 of the drowned 2 year old boy Alan Kurdi, a Syrian refugee whose family had fled Syria by boat, which later capsized off the coast of Turkey.  Now, reflect on your feelings about Syrian refugees.  Are they different than what you felt before?

This picture, like Jimmy Kimmel’s story, went viral.  Over a billion people around the world saw and felt the impact of the Syrian civil war and refugee crisis.  This one tragic image caused a fifteen-fold increase in donations to help the refugees.  Governments around the world, including the US, increased their support oft them.

What made the difference?  The world became, for just a short time, widely empathetic to the suffering and deaths of refugees.   Alan Kurdi became the entire world’s child.

As most of you know, I’ve appealed many times for greater empathy in us and in the world.  My message today will not be as much about empathy itself, but how it can be a powerful means to create societal change.  Since it is April when many celebrate Easter, my theme this month will focus on “resurrection.”  We often think of that word as relating to the story of Jesus’ bodily resurrection from death to life.  It is said to both prove Jesus’ divinity and the existence of God.

Whether or not that understanding of resurrection is true, it’s meaning is far too narrow.  Next week, I plan to look at why resurrection – or change – in ourselves is important.   In two weeks, on Easter Sunday, I plan to resurrect the Jesus resurrection itself to find new meaning for it that can speak to everybody. 

This past January, I talked in a message about a book by Stephen Pinker entitled Enlightenment Now.  In it, Pinker describes how people are far too pessimistic about the present.  Many people, both conservative and progressive, believe things are worse off today than in the past.  While statistics prove that belief to be false for almost everything – poverty rates are way down, average life expectancies are way up, and social justice rights are better than ever, Pinker notes that happiness levels have not increased with ever improving well-being.

Some experts say human happiness has not substantially increased throughout history because people have moved away from close-knit, caring communities.  They point out that humans were likely happier when they were hunter-gatherers who lived in small clans of less than twenty people.  When humans depended on one another for their survival, when they intimately knew and identified with others in their clan, they had the human connection and mutual concern for one another needed to help everyone feel happy.  Many sociologists say communalism makes people happier.  

That happens, experts say, because communalism fosters empathy.  When we share what we have, when our well-being depends on the well-being of others close to us, studies show we are happier.  And, experts say that is because we understand and feel each other’s emotions.

Individualism, which is a hallmark of western society, emphasizes instead the attainment of happiness by focusing on the self – what it wants, needs, deserves and feels.  Less attention is placed on the well-being of other people – especially people we don’t know.  We can hear about their plight and be sad – like we do about Syrian refugees – but because we are focused on personal happiness, many people simply don’t have the emotional tools to genuinely understand other feelings.

The sad irony is that because of individualism, people are less happy precisely because we, and everyone else, are too focused on their own interests.  We don’t think how someone else will feel when we don’t listen, when we judge, verbally attack, or aggressively compete so that we win and they lose.

Even more, we have lost the intuition ancient people had that sensed how each other felt.  We often ask others, “How are you?” but that is often a greeting we don’t really intend as a serious question.  We also don’t listen to, or feel, the answer given, or sense someone’s underlying mood.  Empathy involves sensitivity and intuition just as much as it does listening.

The world can be such a nasty place but even if we don’t participate in such cruelty, I think it is the very rare person who consistently lives, speaks and acts in empathetic ways.  Our failure, I believe, prevents us from being as genuinely compassionate as we could be which sadly can make us part of the problem.  We want a more equal and just world but we   don’t dedicate ourselves to full time empathy.

That reality leads me to believe that the only way humanity will change itself and thereby resurrect a caring, equal, and non-violent society, is if we all begin to build listening and understanding in ourselves, in our children, and in our small groups – churches, schools, workplaces and government councils.  It may sound simplistic, but the only cure for racism, greed, discrimination, crime, war, partisan political nastiness, and a general lack of grace or forgiveness, is if everyone fosters within themselves honest empathy.  To change society, people must also change.

We can still intellectually agree or disagree with each other, but we must always find HEART agreement with one another.  When you hurt, I both understand it and I hurt too.  No judgement.  No ranking of your hurt as less than mine.  No rush to try to solve it, or tell you about my suffering.  Instead, to use President Bill Clinton’s famous empathy phrase, I feel your pain.

Last year, this congregation considered the Black Lives Matter issue on a mostly intellectual level.  Our opinions, I believe, came mostly from our minds.  Me included.  But I knew enough to encourage us, on several occasions, to listen to one another’s personal stories and heart reasons why we each believed as we did.  Mostly, we stated our opinions but did not reveal our emotions.  As a Minister, I often get to hear the heartfelt stories of you.  I heard some members, who had a relative or loved one who was or is a police officer, tell me about the fear they have for that loved one’s safety – that they’ll be harmed by someone with a gun or knife.  Whether or not Black Lives Matter is anti-police, many people heart feel that it is.  That is has little to do with their thoughts and everything to do with their emotions which, to honor their dignity, we should understand. 

Some opponents of a banner also shared why they attend GNH.  It’s not for social justice activism, but to instead be a part of loving, caring and friendly community.  This community makes them feel safe and a part of something that helps them feel connected and worthy.   GNH has a strong  emotional pull for them.  But many of us, me included, didn’t try to hear or understand those feelings.

Others, who were in favor of the banner, told me stories about parents of color they know who fear for their children when they go out into the world.  A few members have children or grandchildren of color.  These parents worry that some tired, indifferent or angry officer or vigilante citizen will stop, hassle and perhaps harm their child – simply for being black or brown.

Other advocates of the banner talked about their volunteer work with people of color and their poverty, lack of good schools, and scarce opportunities to advance.  On a heart level, these members feel the anguish people of color experience.  They are emotionally invested in the well being of a marginalized group of fellow humans.

What we had, in this one small community, was a discussion that never seemed to explore the feelings of one another such that we could all empathize with how each other FELT – not THOUGHT.  

It’s ony when people feel, not just think, that true change can happen.  Oprah Winfrey once said that its not so much what we say that matters, it’s how we make other people feel that is remembered.

Our empathy does not mean we must intellectually agree with others, but it will mean we must understand them.  And that (!) can lead us us to think with our minds AND our hearts.  That’s the foundation of our spirituality: to view the world with the Unitrian head and the Universalist heart.  When we do that, I believe we can so love one another that we seek win-win solutions – compromises –  that joyfully address the feelings and thoughts of all sides.  With compromise, everybody ends up being heard, understood and valued.

Sadly, we were unable to compromise last year – at least in our voting.  What we did achieve, in a backwards way, is a solution that we now accept and perhaps celebrate.  We have used our street sign to promote social justice for women, native Americans, Jews, Muslims and Black Lives.  We’ll continue to do that for them and others.

Our seeming failure to empathize is something I ironically have empathy for.  Indeed, Black Lives Matter is being discussed in UU churches everywhere and its a discussion our nation continues to have.  We, like most people, are conditioned to form intellectual opinions and be afraid of both our emotions and those of others.  I very much am like that.  I’m more comfortable in my head than I am with my emotions.  It’s understandable that we’re not always understanding.  We can, however,  learn to be quiet and actively listen to each other.  We can conditon our minds to stop analyzing, judging and solving when another speaks.  And we can train our hearts to be open to feel the feelings we hear or sense.  Finally, we can honor the sincere feelings of others such that we want them to win too.

And so for me, resurrection of human society is not just about politcs, activism or charity.  It’s not just about systemic change.  It’s about the resurrection of each person at the most elemental level.  Humanity needs to listen, undertand and not judge each other’s feeliings.  I need, we all need, empathy. 

Please click here to listen to the message:

(c) Michael Tacy, Music Director to the Gathering at Northern Hills, All Rights Reserve

Good morning everyone. Thanks for having me speak to you this morning. This is a topic that I feel very strongly about. Its something that I’ve wanted to discuss with all if you for a long time, but have been a little scared. One, because you may think my ideas are a bit radical but also because i have so much to say I feel I may just ramble endlessly as you all glaze over In fact,
there is a running joke among my close friends that I am able to somehow blame every problem, no matter what it’s regarding, on capitalism. And yeah that’s pretty much true. Maybe I’m not always justified but I enjoy trying to relate a problem back to its source and I believe the root of many problems in society, health, personal life and internal struggle is greed. I think it’s easy to forget amongst our comforts and daily goings-ons that we were indoctrinated into a society that glorifies and normalizes the hoarding of personal wealth to a point that it is nothing short of outrageous.

I learned a few days ago that Bill Gates just joined Jeff Bezos in a very exclusive club with only 2 members. The $100 billion dollar club. The article I was reading absolutely disgusted me. It was celebrating Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos commending them for a job well done. Let’s all applaud the men who are hoarding enough money to pay for the college education of more that 2 million people. As a member of a generation that is poorer than any previous American generation this infuriates me. The median net worth of adults under 35 in the US is around $11,000. That means that collectively, Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates (only 2 people) have hoarded
more wealth between them than is owned by over 18 million young adults in America. For the sake of perspective I decided to compile a list of things that $100 billion could pay for:

100 billion could:

• Send 2.77 million people to college for 4 years
• Pay for health insurance for 8 million people for a year
• Easily and healthily feed all of America’s 54.5 million hungry people for a year
• House all of Americas 554,000 homeless for over 300 years
• Fund NASA 5 times over
• Fund the EPA 12 times over
• Pay for 7.7 million homes to go solar
• Nearly double the amount of nuclear power on the grid
  What it couldn’t do:
• Pay the USA military budget of nearly 600 billion
• Pay the national debt of 22 trillion
• Pay the 1.9 trillion dollar tax cut to the rich passed last year

No…no… we paid for those. But I digress. Am I the only person who is disgusted by this level of selfishness? When will we stop celebrating the unnecessary and grossly disproportionate spread of wealth in this country?

I had a discussion with a friend about this recently and he pointed out a fairly valid counter argument to me. He said Bill Gates is a person who has contributed a lot to society with the formation of charity foundations , work for the environment, activism etc. And he wouldn’t have been able to do a lot of those things without the vast wealth he accrued. He was able to reach
more people and do better things because of his wealth. To that I say yes he was able to do good things. He still has far too much personal wealth and I see no justification for the sheer amount of wealth , but wouldn’t it be better if everyone had the facilities and comfort to contribute something to society. Not just one guy, Bill Gates. Imposing what he feels is important on the rest of us. Sure if we spread the wealth we wouldn’t be able to do the huge things that Bill Gates did, but wouldn’t it be great if those people who right now are focused on working 60 hours while raising a kid and still barely scraping by could instead take a couple days off a week and spend it cleaning their local park? Helping their elderly neighbor trim their
weeds? What if we all had just a bit more freedom and a little more time to do the things that matter to us? What if the people that currently inhabit our (suspiciously crowded) prisons weren’t forced to resort to crime as their only recourse because they had the resources they needed already?

This brings me to another important point and one that I feel is crucial especially for people like us to understand. You are not self-made. I am not self-made. No one in the whole damn world is
self-made. It’s an illusion. It’s a lie that you tell yourself to make you feel better. As a human, from the moment you are born you are kept alive because of the work that other people do for you. You would never have made it past infancy unless someone cared to feed you, shelter you, and tend to you for literally years. And beyond that, the specific conditions into which you were born have a tremendous impact on your quality of life. That wasn’t because if your personal accomplishments. You didn’t earn that. It just happened to you. It was a random draw out of a hat and you just happened to be lucky. Take me for example. I was born into a family that had all the resources I needed to be successful. My parents were around to help me with school. I always had a healthy amount of food so I never was malnourished. They had enough money to help me pay for a higher education because I didn’t have to work while doing school I could focus on my work and be successful relatively easily. Thus, I was able to land a good job, buy a house, and have the knowledge that I need to be healthy. There are some that would look at me and think I made my own success, and perhaps I did contribute partly to it after all, but the bulk of my success was contingent on having a strong foundation to stand on. People that are born into poverty, born with disabilities, with different color skin, or without
parents to raise them face inherit challenges that many of us can’t imagine, but it wasn’t their fault. So why are they held responsible for it? Worse, in light of the information we recently received about mega wealthy parents bribing universities to admit their students regardless of their poor performance. Not only are they held responsible, but they are punished for things that are entirely beyond their control. Not to mention those that are wrongfully imprisoned or forced to commit crimes for reasons beyond their control as well. And then the rich have the audacity to continue to profit off their slave labor in For-Profit Prisons.

Once again, I digress. America is built on this wonderful idea of equality. Equal opportunity. We like to pat ourselves on the back and tell ourselves that we believe in this idea of equality as Americans, but clearly there’s some crucial piece missing. Inequality is everywhere and despite being “The Land of Opportunity” America is plagued with a huge amount of poverty and imbalance of wealth. That is because of a fundamental fallacy in the idea of equality what we should instead be focused on is equity not equality. Equity is the idea of lifting up those people who can’t reach as high so we can all have the opportunity to reach high enough to find success, happiness and fulfillment. We have a commitment as Unitarians to helping everyone achieve equity. It’s even in our seven principles. The Second of our seven core principles states: “Justice, Equity, and Compassion in
Human Relations.” Equality only further amplifies existing dividing lines and class distinctions. Making no distinction between how poor and rich people are treated seems like a good idea, but in a capitalist society where the hoarding of wealth is glorified, the wealthy can accrue more wealth. Utilizing and preying on the poor with their vast resources, they amass riches beyond comprehension while simultaneously using their resources to cultivate a culture in which this barbaric behavior is accepted.

We must reject this idea. It our obligation to create a society where equity is valued over equality. But how? Well, that’s a really difficult question to answer. The society we’ve created is so normal to us as US citizens that it seems insane to imagine anything different. But, let’s all together try to identify some of our own internalizations of capitalism. See if any of these things apply to you. Try and be honest with yourself. Some signs you’ve internalized capitalism:
-You determine your worth based on your productivity
-You feel guilty when resting or “wasting time”
-You are always seeking ways to make yourself profitable
-You neglect your health
-You think that “hard work” will bring you happiness
I read those posted by a socialist friend on social media and I went “oh no…” How many people, be honest, felt that one or more of those things could apply to you? If you did it’s nothing to be ashamed of but it is something you need to be aware of. There can be no real progress in our country until we accept that the very principle that our economic system was founded on is unjust. We are being distracted by the ultra wealthy they want you to believe that there is a fight going on between right and left. North and South. USA and Russia. Good and Evil. But it’s a lie. The same fight has been happening for years and years since the dawn of civilization. It has always been the fight between the weak and the strong AKA the rich and the poor.

The great thing is, that we as the everyday consumer have all the power. These uber-rich people rely on us to maintain their wealth and their power. The problem is it requires a huge sacrifice by us. Watch where you spend your money. I’m going to say it again. Watch where you spend your money. One more time in case you didn’t get it those first two times. Watch. Where. You. Spend. Your. Money. The best way we can fight the injustice is by ceasing support of unjust companies, corporations and entities that are designed only to keep the poor in their place. What that means for you though is a lot of inconvenience. The places you shop at on a regular
basis are more than likely part of the problem. Kroger? Yeah. Part of the problem. It also means sacrificing a lot of your money. If you bought anything that was made in China. You’re contributing to the problem. I know, you’re thinking it’s impossible to not buy something that was made in China. No, it’s not impossible but it is expensive. If you buy your produce at the farmer’s market you may have noticed that it’s more expensive than going to kroger. That’s not because those terrible farmers are greedy and stealing your money it’s because they aren’t profiting off factory farming, unethical business practices and utilizing underpaid workers. Your
money is going towards something worthwhile, the lives and well-being of a local farmer and his/her employees, rather than mostly into the pocket of an executive. I know I’m mostly preaching to the choir here. Most of you know that it is good to shop local and I’m by no means implying that I am perfect or that you should expect to be a 100% ethical consumer at all times, but I want to impart to you how important this issue is.

The money… that goes to funding those For-Profit-Prisons which benefit from nothing short of slave-labor. The Money… that bought out countless University admission officers and stole the spots of deserving students. The Money…that is being used to oppress and stunt the growth of an entire civilization. It didn’t come from nowhere. It didn’t come from some sinister, mysterious, calculating beneficiary. That Money, remember, on some level it came from us.

(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.

The “Goldilocks” principle, as I assume many know, applies to anything that is just right – not too hot, not too cold, not too soft, not too hard.  For our planet and for all life on it, the principle is essential.  The earth is situated in a “goldilocks” zone within our solar system.  It’s not too close to the sun and thus too hot, like the planet Mercury, and it’s not too far away, like Neptune, such that it’s too cold.

Interestingly, the same “goldilocks” idea applies to the universe.  There are a few principles in physics that are perfectly attuned to allow for the universe, as we know it, to exist.  And that equally applies to our existence.  Physicists indicate that if the Big Bang explosion that created the universe had been one, one-millionth more powerful, the expansion from that explosion would have been too fast to allow for the formation of planets, stars, galaxies – and us.  The Big Bang was a goldilocks explosion  – not too powerful and not too weak. 

The physics law of electromagnetic force is also a goldilocks principle.  It allows for atoms, and their parts such as protons, electrons  and neutrons, to function as they do.  Without the precise mathematical constant for electromagnetic force, which is 1/137 of any mass, atoms could not exist and thus neither would any compound, substance or, again, us.  Electromagnetic force is not too strong such that all atoms stick together to form one huge blob, and its not too weak so that atoms cannot bind together.  The great physicist Richard Feynman called electromagnetic force, “one of the greatest mysteries of physics: it’s a magic number that comes to us with no understanding.”

The obvious question physicists and many others ask is, “How were these so-called goldilocks laws of physics set?”  Many theists, religious people, and Intelligent Design advocates say they are proof that there is a god, and that the universe was specifically designed for human life.  Principles with mathematical values that come from no other physical or scientific reality cannot just randomly happen, they say.   How else could these physics laws have been mathematically set to allow for human life…without a god?

That’s a difficult question to answer – one that physicists, philosophers and even psychologists have deeply considered.  Many of them now say that the universe only exists because humans perceive that it exists.  We are the one’s who essentially create the universe by our awareness and definition of it.  This is heavy philosophical and psychological stuff, but the idea gets at what the Enlightenment philosopher Rene Descartes famously asserted about human existence, “Cogito, ergo sum”, “I think, therefore I am.”  Our sense of being, the reality of our very existence, comes solely because of our awareness that we exist.  If we and others don’t perceive our personhood, we’re simply not here.  

And multiple experts and great thinkers apply the same idea to the existence of the universe.  The goldilocks principles allow for everything to exist because we see, understand and define them.  We not only bring the universe into existence through our perception of it, but we are the very center of it.  It’s existence depends on, and revolves around, us. 

As I said, this is heady stuff and I don’t blame you if you are scratching your heads right now.  Many very intelligent scientists, theologians and philosophers support this notion, however.  It is similar to the question about whether a tree that falls in a forest, with no life in it, makes a sound.  We know sound waves happen because we can detect and measure them, but do they really happen with nothing to hear them?  The spiritual and philosophical answer is “no.”

This introduction to my message is not just to consider why we exist.  The question of where we and the universe came from is one I encourage us to reflect on.  How we think we were created will determine many of our values and beliefs.  

More importantly, my introduction is intended for us to consider the implications of the idea that humanity is the center of the universe.  Indeed, that idea supports my personal theology that it is people who are the goddesses and gods of the universe.  We are the verifiable beings, not any supernatural gods, that can improve or destroy life.

If we are the center of the universe, as I’ve just suggested, then it follows that our attention and concern should flow from us outward – to family, neighborhood, churches, cities, towns, nations, and then persons around the globe.  In terms of my message today, we must have a local viewpoint before we can have a global viewpoint.

I make that claim because the wider world is only as healthy as each of its individual parts – all of us.  This makes sense from any number of moral or spiritual ideals.  As Mahatma Gandhi said, “We must be the change we want to see.”  If I want our nation and world to take action against climate change, for instance, then I should first begin by decreasing my carbon emissions footprint – by choosing the most gas efficient car to drive, buying and using less resources, heating and cooling my home efficiently, etc, etc. 

More importantly, this idea of focusing first on the individual and local first also speaks to whether or not we’re hypocrites.  How can I condemn the President for pulling the US out of the Paris Climate Change Treaty, for instance, if I am not personally doing my part to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases I cause?

As we know, hypocrisy was the human attitude that Jesus condemned most.  Don’t talk about love and goodness unless you speak and act with love and kindness.  Don’t cast a stone at a woman caught in adultery, unless you yourself have committed no ethical or sexual misdeeds.  In other words, walk your talk – or else……shut up!

For my message series this month that asks “Who is We?”, walking our talk is not easy.  As Unitarian Universalists, we are naturally concerned about the well-being of people around the world.  But an important question to ask, since changing the world must begin with us, is whether we are first and foremost locally concerned servants, educators, and activists?

Former Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill once said that all politics is local.  His belief underlines the idea for us to first be local activists.  With our activism and emphasis on serving others, I believe we must primarily focus on local concerns – beginning in our homes, local schools, churches, and nearby communities.  If we think about it, the decisions made at the local level – in school Boards, city councils, church Boards, and local charities – they affect us far more than those made at the national level.  How we fund our schools affects a substantial portion of the property taxes we pay, as well as the value of our homes.  Infrastructure decisions about roads, parks, trash collection, police and fire departments, sewers, libraries, and business zoning all directly impact our individual and family qualities of life far more than many decisions made in Congress or by the President.

All of that is not to say that their policies are not important to our well-being.  They are.  But they often only affect us indirectly.  The greatest impact on each of our lives comes from local governments.  And that fact  emphasizes the priority we should give to local issues of poverty, homelessness, child education, and hunger.  

In that regard, if we want to promote equality, we should begin here in our church, in our city councils, and in our neighborhood schools.  We’ll have far greater influence and impact if we do.  Studies show that local governments are far more effective in getting things done than is the Federal government because local councils and boards are less partisan.  Over 75% of US cities and townships hold non-partisan elections with their candidates not identified by a political party.   That reduces political posturing and helps foster, instead, a stronger ethic for officials to collaborate and actually accomplish things.

That is why I don’t support contested Board of Trustees elections in this congregation, or the division of our members into competing factions.  I don’t want internal politics within our community.  We can debate various issues without dividing into bitterly opposed groups.  Our goodness, and our effectiveness, lies in our loving and caring unity. 

Former US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once said local governments are like experimental laboratories that help our nation determine the policies and programs that are most effective.  Obamacare, or the Affordable Care Act, was first tried in Massachusetts – begun ironically enough by then Governor Mitt Romney – where its success proved it could be adopted nationwide.  

Same-sex marriage was first legalized at the local level when San Francisco Mayor, now California Governor Gavin Newsom, pushed through a city ordinance legally recognizing GLBT weddings in 2004.  This was done almost ten years before gay marriage was nationally legalized.  Studies done in San Francisco showed gay marriage encouraged more marriages in general – and that showed the nation it was a beneficial thing for everyone. 

In 1960, civil rights activist and now Congressman John Lewis led a sit-in campaign in Nashville, Tennessee to integrate diners and lunch counters.  The white Mayor of Nashville at the time, Ben West, agreed with John Lewis and pushed through a city ordinance banning restaurant segregation – the first city in the nation to do so.  Nashville set the example for the nation that integration was not just the right thing to do, but that it could be widely accepted even in the South.  The 1960’s civil rights movement thus began at the local level and culminated in the national Civil Rights Act.

Last year, after hearing how many progressives around the country supported a $15 an hour living wage for all, I asked our Board to bring both Michael’s and Adrienne’s wages up to at least that standard.  Despite our budget shortfalls, the Board and all of you, at our annual meeting, approved those raises.  They will of course benefit our staff, but they will also insure the success of this congregation by having loyal, dedicated and hard working employees.   On this one issue, GNH will both walk its talk and help show that, here at a very small local level, living wages help everyone – including those who pay them.  

These examples are why I believe we should define ourselves as grassroots, local activists first and foremost.  If we do, I believe we can then strategically set 3 or 4 priority local goals that this small congregation can realistically achieve with excellence.

One of our current priorities expressed in our Unison Affirmation is our commitment to the future of all children.  Time and again I’ve been emotionally touched by the many lives of children we help make better.  Our RE and OWL programs, our volunteering for UpSpring, Lighthouse, the Freestore, and InterFaith Hospitality Network all show the high level of concern this congregation has for children.  

The suffering and pain we see children in our families and communities experience compels us to do something.  Yes, we want Congress to approve funding for universal pre-kindergarten childcare, and yes, we want the President to stop separating undocumented infants and children from their parents.  Those are moral and spiritual concerns for us.  But equal to those concerns are the homeless gay and lesbian youth in this city, the young kids in area communities who don’t know if their family will have enough food for them this weekend – this congregation loves all children and youth and are truly committed to loving and serving them.  When we touch their lives with love, counseling and instruction, when we help insure they have enough to eat and a safe place to sleep, we enable their ability to learn, work and grow.  We literally change the universe’s future by our work right here for the youngest ones among us.

And when we help save one young life, we save the world entire – that’s an old Jewish proverb that is very true.  We are each, as I said at the start of this message, the center of the universe.  That does not mean it exists to serve us, but rather that it exists because we see, touch, hear, feel and define it.  Our perspective thus begins with us and moves outward so that those nearest to us are the first we help.  

With that in mind, I submit to you that a compassionate and loving universe is only created if it begins FIRST in our hearts, homes and neighborhoods.  

I wish you 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.

I chose the video you just watched ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrZPJ9gO5o0 ) because it is thought provoking on many levels.  Monet X Change, in the video, is a black, male, drag performer.  In the video, he interprets the song ‘Strange Fruit’ to speak to his identity as both a black man, and as a gay drag performer.  The symbolism of strange fruit therefore has double the negative meaning for him.

The video speaks to the issue of identity in our culture.  Why is it that people like Monet are known – and oppressed – by their outward appearance – as black or as a drag queen – instead of as a person who stands for worthy ideals?

It’s the youth of today, all of you young people here, who I believe offer answers to many of our questions about identity.  For me, young people in general tell us a lot about how to have a genuine identity – and so the title of my message for this Coffeehouse service for families and young people, is: “What’s so Important about Identity?”

Back when I was minister at the former Gathering, I arranged with my youngest daughter to have lunch after church.  She was in college at UC and lived in Clifton with a roommate.  I arrived at her place at noon and rang the buzzer several times until she finally appeared obviously having just woken up.  She welcomed me into the living area while she went upstairs to get dressed.  

Soon after my daughter went upstairs, her roommate quickly scurried out of my daughter’s room and over into her room across the hallway. 

A minute or two later, also out of my daughter’s room, emerged her gay best friend and his boyfriend, who is African-American.  They came downstairs to make coffee and appeared as if they too had just woken up.

Soon thereafter my daughter emerged from her room, with her boyfriend, who is now her husband.  All six of us chatted for a while before my daughter and I left for lunch.  And I quickly asked her about her four friends being in her bedroom for what appeared to be a sleep over.  She laughed and assured me nothing weird had happened.  They had all watched a video movie in her room the night before – and then fallen asleep.

For me, this was an eye opening thing!  But I was not upset about it primarily because it revealed to me the wonderful openness and acceptance young people have for one another.  Gay, black, male, female – none of those identity labels mattered much to my daughter and her friends.   External labels, many young people believe, are often simplistic and too easy.  They don’t define the inner reality of someone.  A friend is a friend is a friend – no matter how she or he outwardly appears.

Most psychologists say that identity and self-esteem are closely related.  We need to build a self-identity about which we are proud – one that truly defines the real us – who we are on the inside.  

Many millennials, or those born between 1984 and 2004, believe that identity labels like black, white, male, female, gay, straight are too sueperfiicial.  Instead, young people today want to be known by the values they stand for.

My daughter and her friends stand for the value of total acceptance –  no matter a person’s differences.  That’s an important identity for them.  Other millennials strongly believe in equal rights for everybody, and many others stand for protecting the earth and the environment.  Those are some of the values by which young people identify.  And it is such values, not outward differences, that matter most to today’s youth.

Millennials, therefore, avoid being identified by groups that baby boomers, people born between 1946 and 1964, usually identify with – ones like a political party, religion, or ethnicity.  Over 60% of youth do not primarily identify with any of those group labels.  

Millennials also do not identify themselves geographically – like most baby boomers.  They are not are not southerners, New Yorkers, midwesterners, or people of anywhere else.  Over 60% of millennials live someplace other than where they grew up – and they are very willing to regularly move around.  Geography is for many young people a meaningless way to self-identify.

Young people equally do not like being identified by their job or career since most millennials continually change jobs until they find one that makes them happy.  Earning lots of money is not as important to them as is being content.  They therefore often avoid being labeled:  “I’m a lawyer”, “I’m a minister”, or “I’m a nurse.”  Many young people instead prefer to identify themselves by the values associated with their job – ones like, “I advocate for the poor”, “I care for the sick”, or, most importantly, “I do something that is meaningful.”

Overall, millennials determine their personal values from one’s that their peers have,  from social media and music,  from their schools and universities,  and from using technology.  

And, just what are the values that are important to many millennials and young people?  The Pew Research council says that having meaningful work is one.  Collaboration with others is also an important value.  Today’s youth have been taught teamwork since they were infants and so it’s natural for them collaborate – and not act as an individual.  

Staying connected to others is also important to youth because their identity is closely tied to what their friends and peers like.  Social justice is another value for millennials.  They are committed to making a difference in the world.  Finally, diversity is very important to youth.

Millennials want diverse friends and peers because it reflects their lived experience.  Millennials are the most diverse American generation ever.  Over 40% of today’s youth are people of color.  Less than 25% of baby boomers are people of color.  Over 8% of millennials say they are gay, lesbian, or transgender while only 2.4% of baby boomers do.  It’s predicted that the diversity of future generations will increase even more.

What all of this means to me is that individual or group identities are rapidly changing as youth are more and more defining the standards for our culture.  And that, I believe, is a good and positive thing.  No longer will labels of race, wealth, religion, sexuality, or gender mostly identify a person.  Ultimately, as we all know, those external labels don’t matter much.  We’re moving into an era when people will be known almost entirely by their character and what they stand for – and that is all due to the influence of the millennial generation.

To help us understand a few of the differences between millennials and baby boomers, watch with me now a video as Ellen Degeneres  hilariously explains a few of the things that define each generation… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JADG4hXaqy4&t=4s

I so appreciate Ellen and all that she stands for as her identity.  She’s a baby boomer who is young at heart and someone I, at least, think is very cool.

For any of the young people here today, and for all the rest of us,  I hope we will reflect on our identity and the important things we stand for.  Let’s learn from young people to use values and character as the primary way to identify ourselves and others.   Our gender, skin color, jobs and spiritual beliefs define only a part of our identity.  It’s our beliefs and our values that make a difference in the world and thus define who we really, really are. 

         That goes for us as a congregation.  Our identity is far more than being a church in Cincinnati.   We are a community that loves and cares for each other – despite our many differences.   We’re also a commonity that loves and serves those on the sidelines of society:  the poor, hungry, homeless, other abled, discriminated against, and oppressed.  Those are the loving values that identify who we are and what we do.

Having any identity to be proud of is essential – for youth, adults and communities like this place.  Let’s affirm the beauty of our different identities – both outward and inward – but let’s make sure it’s our values to make the world a kinder and more inclusive place that really defines who we are.

Peace and joy to all of you…

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

Click here to listen to the message or see below to read it.

Beginning in Russia during the mid 1800’s, nihilism was and is a depressing philosophy about life and the universe.  Nihilism says that there is no inherent meaning to existence.  All things were created and function according to mathematical laws where everything has no underlying purpose.  Even worse, since people are also created and regulated by mathematical, physical and chemical formula, they have no responsibility for their actions.  They can be, for instance, selfish brutes since that would be caused by science and math and not by free will. 

Without any purpose or responsibility, humanity is therefore NOT governed by universal principles of morality.  We’re created, we exist, we vanish.  Dust to dust and ashes to ashes – with no all encompassing or ethical reason to live….for us or anything else.   

Nihilism says doesn’t matter if some suffer, some prosper, some are nasty, or some are compassionate.  Without meaning or eternal values of goodness, our actions for good or bad don’t matter.  Added to that, it does’t even matter whether or not we are born.   The universe is a remorseless and mostly random math equation. 

Fyodor Dostoevsky used his novel Crime and Punishment, published in 1866, to point out the dark absurdity of nihilism.  His main character Raskolnikov is a nihilist who believed himself greater than any laws of morality.  He plots to kill a pawn broker who had swindled him along with many other people.  He plans his murder meticulously and with the belief that he can decide anyone’s fate.  The pawn broker hurts many people, he reasons, and so should be eliminated as an inconvenience.  He squashes out a human life much like he steps on an annoying ant.

For some reason, however, Raskolnikov is loved by a woman named Sonia.  She sees in him goodness beneath his uncaring exterior.  She eventually learns of his crime and confronts him – not to act as a judge, but rather to share her love for the decency she perceives in him – and to challenge him to do the right thing.  Realizing for the first time that he is profoundly and unconditionally loved, Raskolnikov confronts his own beliefs about the meaning of life.  He sees that existence is governed by a force more powerful than laws of math and physics.  His epiphany is that love offers humans the meaning of life.  It is, Raskolnikov realizes, the ultimate power in the universe.  With a new understanding of life, he confesses his crime, pledges to redeem himself, and accepts imprisonment.

Dostoevsky brilliantly forces readers to themselves ponder the meaning of life.  Ultimately, he points out, we exist for a reason.  We live to love and be loved.   Love ennobles us because, through it, we perceive that life is not just about ourselves, it’s about life for all.  Love comforts, empowers and cares for people now and far into the future.  Love is both the answer to an unfeeling universe, as it is amazingly powerful.  It is the god force that defines everything.

My intent for this introduction is to set the stage for our own reflections on why we exist as a spiritual community.  What are the ideals and goals that define why we meet?  Why do we give our hard earned time, talent and money to this little community?  What greater meaning does this congregation have beyond the simple fact that we regularly come together?  I believe, based on my brief discussion of nihilism, that meaning and purpose are essential for individuals and organizations.  Absent any purpose to exist and consume resources, we as individuals and as a community are expendable.

The title of my message this morning is therefore, “Who is ‘We’?  Social activists, theologians, or neighbors?”  That is a way to ask what is the purpose for us being a part of the Gathering at Northern Hills?  Are we here to actively serve and advocate for a better life for all?  Is our purpose at GNH to study, learn and practice spiritual ideals?  Or are we here to support and enrich each other as a community of friends, neighbors and like minded people?

I’ll be asking questions about “who is ‘we’” in the two weeks ahead and my purpose is not only to share with you my own thoughts, but to stimulate your thinking about: 1) what purpose do we as individuals and as the Gathering at Northern Hills serve? and, 2) what are the goals that justify our purpose?

I believe we are each here, whether we are consciously aware of it, for all three reasons I have suggested.  We may think we are here for only one, but the reality is that all three purposes are so intertwined that “who is we” means we are all social activists, theologians, AND friendly neighbors.

  All of that boils down to what Fyodor Dostoevsky proposed in his novel Crime and Punishment.  The Gathering at Northern Hills, as a part of the universe, exists to love.  We are to be a beloved community not only for ourselves, but for the outside world too.  Most importantly, we’re here to spiritually grow and learn how to speak and act such that we impact the world and the universe in loving ways.  As Dostoevsky implies in his novel, everything boils down to service, compassion, kindness, generosity, and sacrifice…or in one word, love.

Some people define love as God.  Others understand love as a powerful emotion.  Still others see it as a choice for how to live.  However any of us define it, I believe it is the spiritual truth we all seek and the force that governs all life.  The protection a lioness shows for her cubs is not a chemically induced instinct in a pitiless world.  It’s love for what she created.  The forces that animate planets and stars are not just physical laws.  They act as they do according to what I believe is a greater principle – to regulate the universe so that all things within it are lovingly nurtured.

Love is the great reason behind why the big bang happened and why immutable laws of mathematics exist – to insure that beauty, kindness and nurturing creation take place.  Without such an underlying reason for being, everything is nihilist – things with no reason, no responsibility and no feeling.

         Quite frankly, if the universe is nihilist, I want get off it right now.  What is the point for living if there is no point for living?  Life would be a ridiculous and meaningless thing.

I thus refuse to accept the idea of nihilism.  I exist for a purpose, so do you, and so does the Gathering at Northern Hills.  Our ultimate purpose, our meaning, is to love and be loved.  And that statement is, for me, profoundly spiritual.

Applying this to my earlier questions about “who is we,” the bedrock answer for who we are, as the Gathering at Northern Hills, is that we are spiritual seekers or, as I suggest in my message title, theologians.  All other answers for “who is we,” in my opinion, flow from our spiritual foundation to love.

An answer that follows from that foundation is that we are social activists.  Many of us are here because we seek to love and serve the world beyond this place.  And within this group of social activists, there are some who see service to the wider world as organizing for social change.  Such people are energized by advocating in behalf of those who suffer discrimination, poverty, or oppression.  

Others within the social activist group seek to primarily perform hands on service to children and youth in need, the homeless, hungry and marginalized.  I am a member of that sub-group of social activists.  I feel most fulfilled when I’m offering tangible assistance to those who have far less then me.  That was a focus of my ministry at the former Gathering, just as it is here.  As someone who by nature is an introvert, I’m not an organizer or protester for systemic change.  I love others by hands on serving and comforting.

That does not make me any greater or any less than advocates for change.  They love others by working to abolish systems of discrimination and poverty.  The Gathering at Northern Hills is large enough to have both sub-groups of social activists – one to advocate for social change, another to offer social service.  Each sub-group is a part of “who is we,” and they comprise, I strongly believe, an important answer to the overall question of what GNH stands for and what some of its goals should be.  We express our foundational spiritual love for others with social activism.  We are defined, in part, by our loving impact on the world. 

Another answer to the question of “who is we” emerged last year during our discussion of a black lives matter banner.  Several members shared from their heart that, for them, GNH is first and foremost a community of neighbors.  They are here for many reasons but an important one is the sense of community, friendship, and connection they find here.  This too is an expression of the spiritual ethic to love and be loved.  This group of people, I believe, enjoy serving people outside our doors, but they are most energized by serving and loving this particular community of friends.  That, too, is an important definition of who is we and must be a primary goal for GNH.  As I quoted Ru Paul Charles, the famous drag queen, in one of my February messages on love, if we can’t love ourselves, how the hell are we going to love anyone else?  That applies to individuals, AND to groups like GNH.

The love we share with the outside world could not be authentic if we do not speak and act with love toward those within GNH.  The outside world would see us as hypocrites.  As multiple world religions point out, love must begin at home.  

But, as I also said in my February message that quoted Ru Paul, love for oneself – or for us as a community – is only a means to an end.  We love and serve ourselves precisely so we are able to love and serve others.  Indeed, showing love and respect within our community is a way we learn and grow in our ability to speak and act with kindness to the outside world.

In this way, social activism is a primary way to define GNH and so is building and maintaining community with one another.  They each work together in complimentary ways.  In here, I can learn how to better speak and act toward each of you.  That will empower me to better love outside strangers.  And our love for them is in turn a way to feel empowered to come back here to love ourselves.  We are, in many ways, a unique kind of social club, one that is trained to love the outside world by loving itself.   I believe we must see ourselves in that light such that our social activists do not demean those who are most inspired by love for this community, and vice versa.  We must never apply a hierarchy for expressions of love.  All are valid and all should work together.

Somewhat related to my message today has been a blue period I’ve experienced this past week.   I’ve pondered what is my purpose for the rest of my life – and my inability to come to any firm conclusions has depressed me.  How much should I practice the human purpose to serve others, and how much should I serve myself?  Those are questions I’ve asked myself many times.  It’s never easy to balance selfishness with selflessness and I don’t want to imply today that it is.  What I do believe is that in determining what is our purpose and what are our goals, we must be gentle with ourselves and with each other – never condemning someone for believing in different priorities.   I can hopefully enjoy parts of my life in a way that is me focused, while at the same time serving others selflessly.  GNH can do the same.  The challenging part is how we do that. 

Four answers I offer today for “who is we.”  First, we are NOT nihilists.  We are not hardened and cynical people who see no higher meaning for existence.  We believe the universe, and all of life, has a purpose.

We are therefore first and foremost a spiritual community that sees a purpose greater than ourselves – which is love.  We’re all, in that sense, theologians or spiritual seekers.

Second, we are all social activists committed to advocating for – or hands on serving – the outside world.  Third, we are all neighbors and friends that learn and practice ways to serve one another.   Both of these together are how we practice our spiritual purpose to love.

In sum, “who is we?”  Are we social activists, theologians, or neighbors?  I believe we are all three – but most importantly, we are spiritually defined by our love.

I wish you all peace and joy!