Category: Uncategorized

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

 

I know members of the Gathering at Northern Hills appreciate that all of you from St. John’s are with us this morning.  I welcome each of you including Rev. Mitra!  We’re especially pleased with your visit because it’s a bit of a drive out here.  A few weeks ago a visitor told me about his drive to us from downtown.  Apparently he did not have GPS and somehow he passed us by and drove into some nearby farmland.  He spotted a farmer, stopped and asked him, “Sir, am I too far out for the local Unitarian Universalist church?”  The farmer dryly replied, “Nobody is too far out for them!”

So I’m glad the Gathering at Northern Hills is not too far out for those of you from St. John’s – just as I trust St. John’s is not too far IN for us next Sunday!

I normally offer a monthly message series focused on a single theme.  My theme this month is “the Summer of Love Revisited.”  Last week and today I speak about the Summer of Love event that took place in San Francisco during the summer of 1967 – and lessons we can learn from it.  Over 100,000 so-called hippies descended on that city to live out author Timothy Leary’s encouragement for them to “turn on, tune in and drop out.”

While many of those youth simply wanted to spend a summer enjoying sex, drugs and rock n’ roll, most were also inspired by the meaning behind Leary’s motto.  Youth were to turn on by looking inside themselves to discover the god or goddess of love within – what Leary and other hippies believed is the ultimate power in the universe.  Hippies should then tune in by expressing their inner god of love in how they act and speak.  They were encouraged to drop out from the prevailing culture in order to protest against it.

I related last week how that ethos of turn on, tune in, drop out is equally relevant during the present troubled times.  Love must be how we resist against the President and those who discriminate, imprison children, demean the poor, and stifle a free press.  Radical love must also be how we interact with one another in our homes, workplaces and churches.

Today, I want to focus on another ethic from the 1967 Summer of Love that is also still relevant.  As 100,000 youth travelled to San Francisco that summer with little money and no plans, they had to somehow survive for several months.  Most youth joined together in small groups to find community and collectively share living space and food.  They formed hippie communes.  By doing so, they rejected what they believed was a corrupt and often violent culture.

These hippie communes shared resources and responsibilities.  Nobody was richer or poorer than another.  All ate and were sheltered equally.  Daily tasks like cleaning and cooking were shared.  And for youth drawn to the emerging sexual revolution, they also shared their beds with youth of all races, genders and sexual orientations.

Interestingly, most hippies modeled their communes after what is described in the Bible about the first Christian communities.  Only a few years after Jesus died, his followers decided to band together in order to better practice his teachings – ones that promoted kindness, humility, charity and a focus on people over money.

The Book of Acts in the Bible describes those early Christian communes this way, “The whole congregation of Jesus followers was united as one—one heart, one mind!  They didn’t even claim ownership of their own possessions.  They shared everything.  Not a person among them was needy.  Those who owned fields or houses sold them and gave the money to the church to be used by all members.”

The commune movement was therefore rooted in spiritual values. By 1970, it was estimated that there were over five-thousand thriving communes in the United States.  Most were self-sustaining, like the early Christian communities.  They produced their own food and ran income producing enterprises benefitting all members.

  These communities also followed an early American tradition  – that to oppose an oppressive government, one should remove oneself from it, with other like minded people, and build a new society.  The Pilgrims established perhaps the first commune in the US as they rejected Europe’s culture and tried to build a better one.  Quaker, Amish and Mennonite communities developed in similar ways.  Communes are thus not only spiritually based, they helped inspire American values of compassion and togetherness.

Author Bill Metcalf, in a book entitled “Shared Vision, Shared Lives” writes that most communes function like large families.  Children are raised, taught and disciplined collectively, resources are equally shared, and members feel and show emotions for one another similar to that in biological families – love, commitment, loyalty and generosity.

For us, I believe the hippie commune movement that fully matured as a result of 1967’s Summer of Love has much to teach – especially in this age of Trump.  We may not band together in groups of twenty and pool all our money, but we can nevertheless practice important communal ideals – many of which are already exemplified in our congregations. 

Simply by us choosing to be a part of beloved spiritual communities, we express the belief that cooperation, learning and sharing are important.   Indeed, I believe that in many ways, we as UU’s have separated ourselves from a culture of arrogance and selfishness – one that seems to be especially promoted right now.

Our advocacy for the dignity and worth of all people directly contradicts current policies of exclusion and fear of the stranger.  Even more, what we believe in our respective congregations is that while individualism has some merit, group collaboration is better and more spiritual.  Many of us agree with the proposition that when each person focuses on taking care of others, instead of themselves, the quality of life for everyone improves.

While self-initiative and a strong work ethic are important, they can also promote greed, egotism and indifference to weaknesses in others.  Not everybody has opportunities to obtain excellent educations, live in safe neighborhoods, or grow up in stable and caring families.  Some are born with abilities that are not as economically rewarded as others.  There exists in our human diversity an inequality of opportunity and of ability that has nothing to do with a strong work ethic.   The poor are often not to blame for their poverty just as the rich are often not deserving of their wealth.

To resolve these inherent human family inequalities, people must learn spiritual values of altruism, sharing, kindness, empathy, humility and collaboration.  If I have extra because of my privileged education or family background, then it is incumbent on me – not by force, but by love for others – to share with those less privileged.   Taken further, when I share my abundance, others will share with me their abundance.  I give, you give, we all give in ways so that the community thrives.  This is, I believe, the outworking of human spirituality to support, love and assist one another in our strengths and in our weaknesses.

For us this morning, as we consider the Summer of Love and the hippie commune movement, I suggest we can learn three things.  These are attitudes to try and adopt in order to evolve and thereby strengthen the figurative communes to which we belong – our families, churches, cities, nation and world.

The first communal attitude to adopt is that of humility.  When we consider the seventh UU principle, respect for the interconnected web of all existence, we understand that as individuals we are insignificant.  We are each but a tiny grain of sand within an immense universe.  Our interconnection with the web of all things means we are vitally dependent not on ourselves, but on the synchronized working of a vast cosmos.  Our significance comes not from us as individuals, but from being a part of a fantastic whole.   With that understanding comes a profound humility.  My needs, desires, and opinions mean very little compared to the collective needs and opinions of the Gathering at Northern Hills, the one million people of greater Cincinnati, the 325 million people of the US, or the 8 Billion residents of this planet.  I must humble myself before the needs and opinions of so many more.

Second, to have a communal mindset, I believe we must become servants.  We must be givers more than we are takers.  Specifically, this means to understand what we do in life is not to seek personal benefit, but to serve others.  The irony of this attitude, as I just said, is that if everyone thinks and acts this way, everyone will have their needs and wants fulfilled.           

         Experts say this servant mindset is particularly difficult for westerners.  Going way back to when the early western European culture was agrarian, virtually everyone was a wheat or barley farmer.  Such farming can easily be done by one farmer and his family.  That encouraged self-reliance and individualism which is still a foundation of western thought. 

Going back to early Asian or eastern agrarian cultures, most people grew rice.  That farming is labor intensive requiring extensive irrigation canals and arduous work.  One farmer and his or her family cannot perform the needed tasks alone.  Instead, entire villages had to work cooperatively to do the difficult work.   This encouraged a communal way of thinking which continues today.

Just this past Thursday, an article appeared in the New York Times about a woman rice farmer in Thailand, Mae Bua Chaichun.  She lives near where the 12 boys are trapped in a cave and she was elated when she heard that they had been found alive.  The next day, when she went to inspect her rice fields, ones that had just been tilled, fertilized and planted, she found them flooded and ruined by water pumped out of the cave – done so the boys can be rescued.  But she did not care.  The government offered her and other farmers $430 per flooded acre but she refused the offer saying the Thai government did not need any more burdens.  She told a reporter, “I am more than willing to have my rice fields flooded as long as the children are safe.  The boys are like my children.”

That’s a beautiful example of a communal mindset.  The boys and her nation are more important to her than her personal well-being.  Indeed, she is happy to serve for the sake of all.  She is practicing the maxim that it takes a village to raise a child.

The third and final communal attitude to adopt is the idea that less is more.  If everybody truly became more of a giver, many individuals will have less.  Some in our nation see this is as social leveling similar to socialism – a system scorned by many Americans because they believe it’s ineffective and leads to widespread unhappiness. 

Instead, the opposite is true.  Multiple psychological studies show that when people move from an individualistic mindset of personal achievement, assertiveness, and competition – to instead adopt communal attitudes of getting along, cooperation, trust, and altruism, they are happier.   People, it seems, derive deep satisfaction from working and living in groups, sharing, and helping others.  Individualism, studies show, is more likely to foster depression, isolation, and even suicide.  Indeed, polls of people in nations around the world show that citizens of highly pro-social nations like Finland, Norway, Denmark, and Iceland are the happiest.  In that poll, Americans – perhaps the most individualistic of people – rank 18th on the list of happiest people.

What these studies and polls reveal is the truth that less is more.  Happiness comes not from having more money, but from possessing less tangible assets like community support, sharing, and giving.  These are benefits we can easily forget in our congregations.  It’s not the building, budget, congregation size, or even the minister that bring satisfaction, it’s the unity, support and strength we get from being in community.  If we don’t recognize those bonds, if we do not do all we can to protect and nourish them, what will remain are things we can find more easily from a book or lecture.  When we have a thriving sense of community, and vigorous programs to serve the oppressed outside our walls, I believe our churches are at their happiest and most successful.

Three commune attitudes we can learn:  Be humble.  Be a giver.  Less is more.  When those attitudes are motivated by love, as they were for Summer of Love hippies, we will be heirs of their legacy – people who practice cooperation and love for all …….. to be happy – and to resist the current mean spirited and greedy culture.

I wish you each much peace and joy.   

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

 

Please click here to listen to audio of the message.  Please see below to read the message.

The 1960’s are called watershed years in American history.  The nation was assaulted with multiple crisis’ that called into question American values and strengths.  From the cuban missile crisis, to the Kennedy and King assassinations, to lunch counter and back of the bus segregation, to Civil Rights marches and, of the course, the Viet Nam war, the 1960’s were a period of upheaval.  America, many believed, was coming apart at the seams even while institutions of wealth, politics and police seemed as powerful as ever. 

For baby boomers who came of age during the 1960’s, the decade was not only frightening, it exposed the lies their parents’ generation had told them about America.  Middle age parents in the 1960’s were the so-called greatest generation – those who had fought and sacrificed to save the planet during World War Two.  Afterwards, that generation rebuilt the world with the Marshall Plan as they then fostered a time of unprecedented peace and prosperity.  But those successes were only one part of the American story told by that generation.  Ugly American realities were fully exposed in the 1960’s – and the young generaty noticed.

       Some youth became activists and protesters.  Others joined Kennedy’s newly formed Peace Corps to do hands on service for the dispossessed.  But many others were so disillusioned by their parents’ America that they created a counter-culture which rejected prevailing traditions.  Those young people became hippies.

Each of the three groups determined their way to react to an illegal war and to widespread policies of discrimination and hypocrisy.  Young people looked at themselves as the solution – whether by protesting, doing charitable work, or adopting a nihilist, “I don’t care” attitude.

       It was in this mix of upheaval and youthful dissatisfaction that author, professor, and advocate of the drug LSD, Timothy Leary, organized a “Be-In” weekend in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park in January 1967.  It was a wildly chaotic event with many young people admitting they attended simply to enjoy sex, drugs and rock n’ roll.  But it was at that event that Leary gave a rambling speech in which he tried to give greater meaning to the “Be-In” and to start a movement to inspire youth to “turn on, tune in and drop out.”

The answer to America’s ills, he suggested, were not through civic engagement and protest – what he believed were playing by the establishment’s rules.  Nor was the answer to join the Peace Corp and volunteer to do good.  It was, instead, to reject the prevailing morality and culture.  That culture, as Leary and many youth believed, was corrupt, uptight, hypocritical and judgmental.  Older generations were stuck in a philosophy of the past – that wealth and power solved problems. 

Instead, Leary and author Ken Kesey sought to define the hippie ethos of sex, drugs and rock n’ roll with one word – “love.”  Open and free sex, for them, was all about expressing love.  Drugs, and especially psychedelic varieties like LSD, expanded one’s mind to see the world and life as they should be – defined not by money or power, but by simple love.         

That Spring, many hippies began to promote what they called a “Summer of Love” to be held in San Francisco and to do exactly what Leary suggested – turn on, tune in, and drop out.  Beginning in May and lasting into September, over 100,000 young people converged in San Francisco with little money and few plans other than to live a utopian dream. Similar but smaller “Summer of Love” gatherings were formed in New York city and London.

One unknown youth that summer defined who they were.  Someone was a “Summer of Love” hippie if, “You are free as the wind, and you don’t like following rules.  You’re open minded and nonjudgemental.  You’re neither a leader or a follower. You believe that people should love more.  You’re on your own blissful path.”

Singer Janis Joplin, a noteworthy hippie herself, helped define the Summer of Love at which she performed by saying, “My business is to enjoy and have fun.  And why not, if in the end everything will end?  Right?”  Other hippies that summer offered more colorful thoughts that captured their approach to life: “I’d rather be nude – than rude”, and “If we all had a bong, we’d all get along.”  Others proclaimed their opposition to the culture of their parents by calling any authority figure “The Man.”  “Don’t let The Man keep you down…man” they said. 

By October 1967, however, the ‘Summer of Love’ had proved mostly a bust.  Idealistic hippies found that life is not as simple as rejecting work and civic engagement.  They also found that in their midst were hippies just as focused on money and possessions as the establishment they had rejected.  And with such a large group of hippies all trying to live the good life in a small area, chaos resulted.  A mock funeral for the ‘Summer of Love’ was held in San Francisco that October as thousands of dejected hippies retreated back to school, jobs or, even worse, their parents’ homes.

A year later, however, Leary further explained “Summer of Love” beliefs. “We seek,” he said, “to find the god within, the divinity which lies within each person’s body.  Our search is to find higher truths about life.”

For Leary, “turning on” was how one finds the god within – by using drugs, sex and meditation to enlighten one’s heart and soul.  When one turns on, he said, one will discover that the ultimate truth in the universe, what some call god, is love.   “Tuning in,” he said, is how one shares that discovery by showing love in everything one does and says. “Dropping out” rejects a culture of rules and money that prevents turning on and tuning in – and thus destroys love.  For Leary and hippies, everything in the universe centers around love – and we can discover and express that by dropping out of a destructive culture. 

What I find interesting is that despite the fact that many “turn on, tune in, drop out” youth were primarily interested in its hedonistic philosophy, the saying nevertheless offers spiritual wisdom.  We are now in a time of national crisis similar to that of the 1960’s.  All of the norms that have defined America – for good and bad – are currently in question.  Even as activism and protest against sexism and discrimination are increasing, that’s because large parts of America have regressed fifty years. 

In the 1960’s, the one thing that united youth and others in their protest was the Viet Nam war.  Today, the one thing that unites resisters, activists and those that simply cannot stomach what is happening in our nation is….the President.  His malignant influence on America, like the Viet Nam war, has infected our culture.  It saddens to me to note that in our homes, churches and other institutions of influence,……….anger, bitterness, incivility and arrogance often predominate.  Name calling, humiliating others, lack of cooperation and a “my way or the highway” approach seems to rule the day.  Even more frightening, angry words thrown at opponents has inspired some to that verbal violence to the next level – to physically attack and kill those they disagree with.  America seems as divided as almost never before – and that division has infected almost place in the nation..

“Turning on, tuning in and dropping out” seems therefore as relevant today as it was 51 years ago.  I believe America must intentionally drop out of and reject the current culture of division.  Once America does that, then we as a people must turn on and tune in – to discover and express the one eternal truth that 1960’s hippies said they found – that the universe is animated by one overarching power – love. 

What America needs, what I need, what I believe this congregation also needs, is more humility, kindness, respect, civility, and cooperation.  Put simply, we all need more love.  And that love is not the sloppy kind – something tossed around with little meaning.  I believe soul deep love must become the lodestar by which we guide ourselves – the single most important ethic by which we think, act and speak.

Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “Hate begets hate; violence begets violence; toughness begets a greater toughness.  We must meet the forces of hate with the POWER OF LOVE….Our aim must never be to defeat or humiliate the white man, but to win his friendship and understanding.”  

While King’s reference to whites is still valid, we can also interpret his reference to the white man as also including any person with whom we disagree. The antidote to nastiness, incivility, judgement, arrogance, bitterness, lack of cooperation, angry words, abuse of power, hate, and “my way or the highway thinking,” I suggest, is to “turn on” like Timothy Leary encouraged and make an intentional inward journey to discover the goddess of love within.  She is an eternal truth deep in our souls that we won’t find with our minds but only with our hearts.  We must not just love those who agree with us, who are close friends and family, but we must purposefully love those who disagree with us, who oppose everything we stand for – who is, even in mild ways, our opponent. 

I define my spirituality and theology this way, “God is not an outside force controlling our lives.  She or he is within us and a part of who we are.  It is WE who are the ‘gods and goddesses’ that will build a better world.”

Instead of hopefully, or fearfully, looking to the heavens for god, she is right here, right now, inside you and me.  If you believe, as I do, that Timothy Leary and the hippies had it right – that the one true goddess in the universe is love – then my theology that I just spoke compels me to literally become a god of love.

To find the god of love in us, Leary said we must drop out.  I do not believe that should be taken literally.  To drop out, for me, means to stop practicing the cultural standards of our time – reacting with judgement and angry speech against other people.  It means we have to stop talking at one another – insisting on telling them how we are right and they are wrong.  Instead, I suggest we must come together in love.  We must be still and feel the love in us and in others.  With respect, gentleness, listening and honest humility that we could be wrong, I truly believe cooperative solutions to problems can be found between opposing people.

I suggest four practical ways to discover the god of love in us – and thereby enact a “turn on, tune in, drop out” ethos. 

First, we must change how we think about ourselves and others.   We may not always act or speak as we should, but we each have the light of god – love – in us.  Everybody has the potential to be that god.

Second, we must begin to recognize all compassionate, kind and loving words and actions come from the god of love inside us.

Third, we must trust that we ARE a god of love.  This is not a head thing – but a heart felt thing.  If you feel you are a god of love, then you will always BE a god of love in action and speech.

When we acknowledge the god of love exists in all humanity, it will change how we act toward those we disagree with.  Our expressions of love to them have the power to change their behavior and their thinking – so that they may become more loving, humble and open minded – just as we must also be.  While Dr. King said hate begets hate, I suggest love does the same – only love is more powerful.

Dear friends, National events of the past several weeks have shaken me.  I won’t recount all of them except for three.  When our nation decides it can take an innocent child out of its mother’s or father’s arms and place that child in a detention facility, there is something deeply wrong with our national soul.

         When our nation does nothing about an epidemic of mass shootings in schools, churches, news rooms, nightclubs and concert venues, then there is something sick in our souls.

Furthermore, when many in our nation say it is OK to humiliate, shout down, banish and even hate people with whom we disagree, a member or f another political party, religion or someone who has differing ideas on how to improve the world, then I also submit there is something deeply wrong with our national soul.  Division and separation within the one human family, no matter the ideal or cause, is unhealthy.  Love, however, must be the glue that binds together every person.

In just a moment, I’ll ask us to meditate on what love means.  I ask as a part of your meditations to try and not convince yourself that love is what you think it is.  Be open to ways other people love.  Each of us are genuine lovers – but we love in different ways.  Let us see and reflect upon the many variations of love.  And with that awareness, I beg us all to expand our hearts to honestly express love to everyone.  May we listen, respect, cooperate, seek togetherness and find common, loving ground.  May this congregation……..may this nation……..be a beloved place….and may that summer of love feeling begin with you and with me.  Let us now meditate while Michael plays some music.

    

        

Click here to listen to all five speakers…

(c) 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.

 

Soon after I purchased my home in Florida nine years ago, I held a party for new friends I’d met.  Most of them were gay men.  As the group toured my yard, I explained that I’d bought the house from a lesbian couple.  One guy in the group laughed and asked if I had drained and re-filled the pool, and disinfected the house, after I moved in.  The group laughed at the joke.  I, however, was horrified.  I told them the lesbian couple were lovely people, that they were leaders in the local gay rights movement, and the joke was not funny.  There was an awkward silence and then the guy apologized.  But I’ve remembered his open prejudice ever since.

That highlights for me how even within a group that has been the target of hatred and persecution, there is prejudice toward others.  For those who are victims of discrimination, it seems they ought to be the least likely to discriminate.  Sadly, that’s not true.  I’ve heard lesbians make similar jokes about gay men.  I also know there are many within the LGBTQ community who demean effeminate or flamboyant men, masculine acting women, and transsexuals.  They hate in the same way they have been hated.

This dynamic also plays out with some people of color.  Colorism is a term applied to discrimination by blacks, hispanics and Asians against persons of their own ethnicity.  The term was originated by black author Alice Walker who defined it as “prejudicial or preferential treatment of same-race people based solely on their color.”   Lighter skinned blacks are often more favored by some blacks and studies show that for many African-Americans, white culture has conditioned them to see lighter skin tones as more attractive.

The feminist movement is equally guilty of in-group discrimination.  For many years, feminism was largely a white, middle class female effort to address sexism.  It ignored, however, the fact that white middle-class women experience marginalization very differently from that felt by black or a hispanic women.  Some white feminists assume paternalism is the primary form of oppression against which they fight – without understanding or addressing the intersection of multiple forms of prejudice some women experience – and which must also be addressed.

What these facts highlight for me is the related nature of any manifestation of hate and prejudice.  I’ve spoken about a dark vestige of the human character before – that all people have innate egotism.   At our core, we can be selfish and self-focused.  Our egos often determine our thoughts and actions.  Ego and fear of losing out to someone else dominates our minds.  Too often we act and feel as if we are entitled and superior.  It’s a “me, me, me” mindset.

This explains why marginalized groups and persons often discriminate against others.  When someone is made to feel diminished, he or she then diminishes another – all in order to feel they are better than someone else.  White wealthy men can marginalize poor white men who can marginalize black men who can marginalize gay men.   That’s a simplistic generalization but it’s rooted in fact.

Our current President is perhaps the culmination of selfishness and egotism.  A billionaire white man expresses open hostility and prejudice toward women, the poor, blacks, hispanics, gays, the transgendered, the disabled, Muslims and many others.  His hostility is the loudest voice of white, Christian, straight, wealthy men.  They fear they’ll no longer be the dominant force in the world.  They try to hold on to their status and power by pitting oppressed groups against one another  – poor whites against poor blacks, both of those groups against immigrants, white feminists against black feminists, Christians and Jews against Muslims, gay men against lesbians, both of them against the transgendered, etc, etc.  Encouraging people to hate one another based on religion, skin color, gender or sexuality is a time-worn way to sustain those at the top. 

What results is widespread intersection of bias.  Those at the lower ends of our culture feel the sting from several forms of discrimination.  That intersectionality, as it’s been called, does not create a hierarchy of discrimination but rather recognizes some people face many forms of hate.  A black, lesbian woman, for instance, faces marginalization from three different fronts.  Her experience is not the same as that of white women or that of white homosexuals.

And that speaks to the title and intent of my message – “Rainbow Resistance.”  Since hatred and discrimination take many forms, even within marginalized groups, and since it is all motivated by a dynamic of ego and selfishness, then I believe resistance to the root causes of prejudice is the answer.  Instead of separately resisting sexism, homophobia, racism, and anti-immigrant prejudice, I believe we must confront bias at its most basic level – as a form of selfish egotism that places the individual above the well-being of all people.  Rainbow resistance, for me, means we must confront what causes any and all forms of bias.   

To do that, I believe humanity must undertake a cultural leap forward – much like many people did during the Enlightenment period of the 17th and 18th centuries.  Nations and people during that time threw off the shackles of Kings and aristocrats and undertook a momentous shift toward democratization and natural human rights.  Nations and people today can undertake a similar leap forward – perhaps motivated by the outrageous bigotry exemplified in the President.  We need a rainbow form of resistance that addresses the selfishness and hate that lurks in all people.  We must make a dramatic shift into an era of one true, global, human family.

That cultural leap forward should be much like the Enlightenment shift – an historic change founded not on negativity, but founded instead on positive and uplifting ethics of universal love and inclusion.  My vision of rainbow resistance is one not motivated by what we are against but instead by what we are for – that we are capable of evolving away from a me-centered mindset toward one of a we centered love.  We must teach this from the moment a child is born and make it a defining ethic for how people should live.

Reverend William Barber, who has spoken to several UUA General Assemblies and who is a leader of the Poor People’s Campaign, encourages something very similar.  He recently said this:  “We can choose to be the moral defibrillators of our time and shock the heart of this nation and build a movement of resistance and hope and justice and love.”

This time period in which we currently find ourselves is frightening.  Many politicians and the President often express bigotry and anger toward fellow Americans and fellow humans that is difficult to stomach.  For most of us, it’s sickening.  But as I said earlier, that is just a manifestation of our culture – one that often celebrates the lowest common denominator of hatred.  And this happens on both the left and right.  Roseanne Barr’s disgusting and racist remarks were rightly punished.  But why wasn’t the liberal comedian Samantha Bee punished for her hateful vulgarity toward Ivanka Trump?  Why is Kathy Griffin, another comedian, praised for saying, “When conservatives and the President go low, I go lower.”  That’s a horrible shift from the ethic Michelle Obama encouraged – “when others go low, we must go high.”  For me, there is no morality, no respect, no human-to-human extension of dignity when we demean and humiliate another person – even to those with whom we fundamentally disagree.  As the famous song goes, “Where is the love?” 

As humans, we demean and feel entitled to vent anger at anyone who crosses, disagrees with, or mistakenly offends us.  The Golden Rule is no more practiced in our world than is universal peace.  And if it seems like I’m pointing a finger – I am.  At myself.  I can fall into the same sinkhole of anger and self-righteousness as anyone else.  “I’m right.  You are wrong.  I hate you for your opinions.”

Miguel de la Torre edited a compendium of articles in a recently released book entitled Faith and Resistance in the Age of Trump.  Articles in the book cover a range of social justice issues, how our President is acting against them, and what must be done in response.  The tone in the articles is not negative but rather inclusive and positive – echoing what I believe should be how we resist.  Discrimination is evil no matter to whom it is directed and people can either divide themselves based on false hierarchies of discrimination, or else they can recognize the common poison that it is toward all marginalized groups.  And we must address it with a common cure – what I call a Rainbow resistance of humility, respect and most of all love.

In the Bible, the rainbow is a positive symbol of god’s promise to take care of us.  The Reverend Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition used that same symbol to proclaim we are all one, and that we rise or fall based on how we treat one another.  Gilbert Baker’s rainbow flag, the one he originated as a symbol of LGBTQ Pride, was intended to say the same.  If I love another man, I’m still a human worthy of your respect.  If you worship Allah, you are a human deserving of dignity.  If you’re a woman, you are a fully equal human next to any man.  If you are an evangelical Christian or a conservative Republican – someone who disagrees with most of my spiritual and political views – you are still my beloved brother and sister.  If you’re black, hispanic, Asian, or a blend of some or all, you’re a beautiful human creation.

Rainbow Resistance is thus about addressing egotism and selfishness – the root causes of prejudice – with messages of cooperation and love.  It’s about sublimating the self and leaping forward into a new era of mutuality – to respect each other and work as one.  Indeed, Rainbow Resistance is not so much against bigotry as it is for kindness and coming together.  If the world truly became a kinder place – one where people no longer yelled at, demeaned or felt superior to another, then I believe ALL forms of prejudice would vanish.

Several months ago the Victoria, Texas Mosque was set afire by arsonists and burned to the ground.  A few churches in the area immediately offered their buildings as a worship place for members of the Mosque.  One of those churches was the Unitarian Universalist church of Victoria.

Recently, someone driving their car near that UU church lost control and crashed into its Sanctuary.  It was terribly damaged and will take months to rebuild.  That congregation had nowhere to worship until last Sunday when the Victoria Mosque opened its newly rebuilt building for use by the UU congregation.   “Our building is your building,” the Mosque’s Imam said.  “Just turn out the lights when you leave.”

Such small gestures of love from these two congregations, but what wonderful acts of rainbow resistance love!

Perhaps Robert Kennedy’s most famous quote is, “Some people see things as they are – and ask why.  I dream of things that never were and ask why not.”

Michael Tacy will soon perform a song that I requested of him.  It’s a Hawaiian man’s version of “Somewhere Over the Rainbow” – a mashup of Judy Garland’s version of the song and Louis Armstrong’s “What a Wonderful World.”  The song’s simplicity and beauty struck me, as I hope it will for you. 

While Michael sings it, reach over to someone near you, greet them, hold their hand, or just offer a warm smile….and then close your eyes.  As you hear the song’s lyrics, dare to dream of things that never were – things like universal love and respect – and ask…“Why not?” 

If you’re like me, I hope you’ll also ask, “Why not let universal love and respect begin with me – right here, right now?”  Resolve to yourself,    “I will always do my best to act humbly, banish anger, and love generously.”

Let’s now take ourselves, with Michael’s help, over the rainbow, way up high, to a place where blue birds fly, where clouds are far behind, and where dreams that we dream really do come true.

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

 

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

Most who have attended a Unitarian Universalist church are familiar with the story behind Flower Communion.  Its history is inspiring.  But a more in depth look at how it began as a ritual provides insight into the unity and diversity of Unitarian Universalism. 

The Reverend Norbert Capek began Flower Communion at the Unitarian church of Prague, Czechoslovakia on June 4, 1923 – 95 years ago tomorrow.  He and his wife had moved back to their homeland after spending several years in the United States where Capek became closely affiliated with the Cambridge, Massachusetts Unitarian congregation.  They encouraged his return to Czechoslovakia to found a Unitarian church – which he did and which quickly grew in size to over 2800 members.

These members were mostly disaffected Catholics who rebelled against the controlling power and superstitious beliefs of that faith.  The new church also attracted liberal Protestants and Jews.  All members thrilled at Capek’s eloquent sermons which people likened more to lectures than to religious preaching.  As a result, however, some members began to complain the services were not spiritual enough.   They began to support introducing rituals from their former religion – particularly bread and wine communion which they said provided a sense of community and common love for one another.

On the other side, however, were members strongly opposed to anything that smacked of theological oppression – an oppression that said  the only way to understand God, or capital ’T’ Truth, is through Christ and bread and wine communion.

As Minister to both sides of this discussion, Capek was torn.  He understood all congregation members were spiritual liberals.  He also knew that those who wanted communion did not connect the practice to a belief in Christ.  As some of those people likely said, what is the problem with bread and wine if consuming them is a ritual only of togetherness?

But Capek also understood the feelings of those who were adamantly opposed to the ritual.  They deeply felt the bread and wine ritual was based on superstition that the elements literally become the body and blood of Christ, and that such ancient beliefs are unacceptable in a free-thinking, progressive church.

In his wisdom, Capek came up with the idea of Flower Communion.  He would both preserve a ritual that celebrates community while abandoning old symbols and inventing a new one.  He established the common ground on which both sides of that congregation’s debate could stand.

Most importantly, he originated the use of flowers as meaningful symbols both of unity and diversity.  Many different flowers of various size and color come together to form one bouquet of great beauty.  As he said in a blessing at that first Flower Communion, in each flower is a seed of love that unites people as brothers and sisters – regardless of any barrier that divides them.  From the rancor of division, Capek created and offered a new symbolic ritual, a compromise for all.  Flower Communion thus celebrates the paradoxical truth that despite differences, people can, in selfless love for one another, discover ways to preserve their unity – and thereby prove the enduring benefits of diversity.

As the title of today’s message suggests, my series theme for June intends to celebrate Pride month.  Over the last several years, June has become identified with LGBTQ Pride celebrations because it’s the anniversary month of the New York City Stonewall Inn protests of 1971.  Homosexual men and their allies marched in defiance of police actions to arrest men who simply visited a gay bar.  Those protests are marked as the beginning of the gay rights movement.

As a gay man, this month and the anniversary of the Stonewall protests have great personal meaning.  Pride celebrations, including the one to be held here in Cincinnati on June 23rd, help me remember and honor my own coming out.  That was the most frightening decision I’ve made in life but it was also, forgive me my pride, a courageous declaration of who I was made to be – something that every human being has an innate right to declare.  We must each be proud of who we are as crafted by god or the forces of nature.  That declaration of pride is, I believe, an eternal human right. 

My pride is rooted in being able to simply love whom I wish – a freedom that is both good and natural.  It is our natural right as humans to romantically love whom we wish – as long as they are consenting adults.

A man named Clive Baker is credited with designing the LGBTQ Pride rainbow flag.  It first appeared at the San Francisco Pride parade in 1978.  Harvey Milk, a San Francisco councilman and supervisor who was assassinated only months later, rode in the parade under the first rainbow Pride flag.

Baker said he was inspired to create the rainbow flag by Judy Garland’s famed song “Under the Rainbow.”  The song reminded him of scientific fact.  When the sun shines through a prism of raindrops or a crystal, multiple colors emerge on the other side – proving that light is not one color but many.  For Baker, that was and is a perfect symbol for humanity – one human family comprised of many beautiful variations.  No matter how we were formed, how we appear, how we love, what we believe or think, every individual is a part of the wide range of diversity – a shining human rainbow.

Implicit in Baker’s Pride flag is the truth that one color, by itself, is nothing.  Light is not true light unless all colors combine in a complimentary way with other colors.  And the same is true for humanity.  The human species is nothing, it simply does not exist, unless it comprises ALL variations of people.  This speaks to the seemingly ironic title of my message.  There is a oneness, a unity, in diversity.

Clive Baker knew that when he designed the rainbow flag.  June Pride celebrations are an emphatic assertion of that truth.  And Norbert Capek’s Flower Communion and our celebration of that today are further claims that there is strength, vitality and eternal spiritual meaning in this ideal of unity in diversity. 

The history of the last hundred years has a been a long and painful fight for acceptance and celebration of human diversity and human rights for all.  And we must continue that work to purposefully reject the fear, tribalism, and prejudice toward anyone who appears, acts, loves, believes or thinks different.  As long as we adhere to the Golden Rule – to treat another as we want to be treated ourselves – there is no restriction, no barrier, no law of nature that should divide us.

Not surprisingly, science, sociology, and history all prove that there is strength in diversity.  Whenever different groups of people come together to cooperate, share, serve one another – and yes, compromise, they thrive all the more.  Clans, tribes and nation-states that cling to a particular identity or ethnicity may prosper for a time, but long-term they inevitably end up on the ash heap of history.  The same is true of movements, spiritualities, ideologies and philosophies.  Diversity in opinion and thinking are crucial to longterm well-being.  Recent research has shown this is true.  Businesses comprised of diverse workforces – by gender, race, sexuality, political belief and lifestyle – do better than those that are mostly homogenous.  Professor Katherine Phillips of the Kellogg School of Business and Management, who initiated the study, says that homogenous groups feel overly confident in how they think and act.  Diversity, on the other hand, creates tension and awkwardness.  But it is in that tension, that difference of background, opinion and approach that creates more successful decision making.

As she says, “People would prefer to spend time with others who agree with them, rather than disagree with them.  But this unbridled affirmation does not produce the best results.  When you think about diversity, it often comes with more cognitive processing and more exchange of information.  New ideas emerge, individuals learn from one another and they may discover the solution to a problem.”

Another interesting analysis by the investment firm Credit Suisse has shown that out of 2,400 major global businesses, those that have at least one female board member yield higher profits, income growth and net return on equity.  One seemingly minor form of diversity and a business does better.  When businesses increase their diversity, they thrive even more.

As Professor Phillips implied in her study, differences put a stop to group-think.  Much like the proverbial lemmings who collectively run off a cliff to their deaths, mostly homogenous businesses, nations and organizations do the same.  What prevents that way of thinking is diversity of thought and the resulting necessity to cooperate and compromise.  Decisions that work best, that produce tangible long term good results, are those that emerge from a crucible of give and take, of listening, and of sublimating individual ego for the good of the whole.

Rev. Capek clearly knew this.  The debate over communion in his young church was potentially lethal to its survival.  It’s doubtless that both groups thought their way was right and most principled.  But Capek provided common ground for those who opposed communion and those who felt enriched by it.  Most importantly, he saved the Unitarian congregation of Prague which still exists today.  The dilemma that church faced in its earliest years was solved not only by a wise Minister, but also by its members who did not give up their core principles, but gave up their demands for how they would be expressed.  Each side accepted a good enough solution.  That good enough option, Flower Communion, has stood the test of time proving its original value.

I believe most of us struggle with the notion of compromise.  As a I said in my message several weeks ago, compromise has a bad reputation.  It’s often seen as a sell-out.  We need only look to some members of today’s Congress to find persons who firmly believe in their ultra conservative or ultra liberal principles and will not forsake them to compromise on various pieces of legislation this nation needs.  As a result, little is achieved by Congress and legislation that does pass, does so very narrowly – signaling to the world that Americans are not united and cannot effectively come together to rule themselves.

Because of my support for compromise and congregation unity, some people have accused me of selling out and of not being true to what I believe.  “Be a leader for what you know in your heart is right,” they tell me.  I humbly disagree with their opinions.  While I hold several core beliefs – the foremost of which is in full equality and respect for all people – I also believe in getting things done – even if they are incremental steps.  Partial justice is better than none at all.  Indeed, I recently learned that the former Northern Hills rejected flying a rainbow flag several years ago.  Personally, that would have hurt me a lot had I known about it.  But that former congregation then hired an openly gay Minister and it proudly displays a rainbow quilt and flag in its sanctuary.  Those are important compromises which nevertheless created real progress.

        As a Minister, I believe my most important role is to be a protector and defender of congregations I serve.  Their ongoing well-being is of paramount importance – not for the sake of mere survival as an organization – but for the essential sake of continuing their good and important work for justice and compassion.

As a Minister, my role is to also foster unity.  Being united as loving people is a spiritual ethos all world religions proclaim.  Humans must continue their work to exist in peace with each other.  How can that be done when people hold different opinions, thoughts and beliefs?  My wish for Americans and, indeed all humanity, is that they remember their common bonds – the eternal values most people and most forms of spirituality share.  We might disagree on how to achieve those values, but we ought to then come together in goodwill to resolve our differences.  No group gets exactly what it wants when differences are resolved, but each gets something.  And both groups achieve the title of my message – unity in diversity.  When people cooperate, they achieve not only practical results, they engage in what is spiritually good and right – that of selfless love and cooperation with others.  Personally, I know I am not perfect in how I believe things should be done.  And frankly, nobody is.  That demands even more that I listen to and compromise with others. 

Dear friends, as Minister here I know that every member is a good person – someone who holds all of the values and principles of this congregation and the UUA.  We each want to do our part to spread equality and compassion in this world.  What I ask of you now may seem contrived, but I trust us all to make it heartfelt.  I ask that right now, while Michael plays some background music, each of us walk or reach over to someone we might disagree or be angry with, offer them a hug or handshake of peace, and say to them, “I love and respect you.  Let us work together.”

Let’s do that in the spirit of Flower Communion and of June Pride.  Let’s not just say we are a beloved community, let’s live it and let’s work together in cooperation and, yes, compromise.

I wish you each much peace and joy.      

(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….