{"id":952,"date":"2011-02-06T08:12:00","date_gmt":"2011-02-06T15:12:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thegatheringcincinnati.org\/?p=952"},"modified":"2011-02-06T08:12:00","modified_gmt":"2011-02-06T15:12:00","slug":"february-6-2011-tough-love-american-idols","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.gnhuu.org\/index.php\/2011\/02\/06\/february-6-2011-tough-love-american-idols\/","title":{"rendered":"February 6, 2011, "Tough Love: American Idols""},"content":{"rendered":"

Message 47, \u201cTough Love: American Idols?\u201d, 2-6-11\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\u00a9 Doug Slagle, Pastor at the Gathering, UCC, All Rights Reserved<\/p>\n

Service-Program, 02-06-11<\/a><\/p>\n

Watch below video link first…<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=RgtRdp9Xs7o<\/a><\/p>\n

As Americans, we struggle with the choice framed in these dueling mock political ads.\u00a0 Indeed, I believe this struggle is what humans have faced for thousands of years.\u00a0 As President Calvin Coolidge once said, \u201cLiberty is not collective, it is personal. \u00a0All liberty is individual liberty.\u201d\u00a0 In other words, the greatest of all freedoms is the right to pursue our own idols of money, fame and material goods.\u00a0 That freedom has been the engine of growth in our nation.<\/p>\n

The other side of this debate might best be described by Susan Powter, a contemporary motivational speaker, who said, \u201cWhat’s natural and right is interconnectedness, not individualism. What is natural and right is respect for the social good. What’s natural and right is love for all.\u201d\u00a0 Ultimately, in this debate we confront the essence of our contemporary political and economic discussions: how much do we accept the ideal of American idolatry expressed best by freedom of the individual versus a concept of social altruism and the idea that meaning and purpose in life is not to live for oneself but to live for the good of all people.<\/p>\n

In the message series for this month of love, I want to look at some of our tougher choices in how to best love and honor the people and material things we have in our lives.\u00a0 Today, we will take a non-political look at trying to resolve ideals of individualism and altruism.\u00a0 Must we choose sides or is there, as I sometimes say, a middle path of living for ourselves and our own individual idols while also serving the greater good of all people and all creation?<\/p>\n

Next week, we\u2019ll look at another tough love choice \u2013 how to do we establish appropriate boundaries in our relationships so that our love is genuine and real?\u00a0 How do we practice love in such a way so that we do not enable a weakness, addiction or sense of selfishness in another?\u00a0 How can our love encourage growth and learning?\u00a0 Finally, in the third week, we will consider false or co-dependant love. \u00a0Is it possible to think we love another when, in fact, we really serve some inner need within ourselves?\u00a0 I will leave all of the romantic, sensual and heart-warming expressions of love during this month to Valentine\u2019s Day! \u00a0For me, I hope to be brave enough to confront and learn from the more difficult ways to love.<\/p>\n

We are all familiar, I think, with the Bible stories about the Garden of Eden and the Ten Commandments.\u00a0 In each story, written, I believe, not as actual history but as lessons to instruct, humanity must choose between an altruistic view of life involving cooperation and obedience to a higher good, or choosing to go one\u2019s own way \u2013 to eat of the tree of knowledge or to worship a golden calf.\u00a0 Both of these latter choices symbolize humanity\u2019s decision to glorify the individual over altruism and a higher good.\u00a0 Most world religions encourage us to suppress our desires to satisfy the self and to, instead, work for others.\u00a0 Indeed, I have often spoken of that higher ideal.\u00a0 In many respects, religious altruism asks that the individual give up his or her idols and a pursuit of personal needs and replace them with communal and cooperative goals of equality, social welfare and concern for society as a whole.\u00a0 Rampant individualism is seen as a sin within almost all religions.<\/p>\n

Beginning in the 17th<\/sup> and 18th<\/sup> centuries, however, philosophers, artists and writers began to encourage a new ethic of liberty and freedom.\u00a0 Martin Luther revolutionized Christianity by asserting that popes and priests and the Roman Catholic church are not the arbiters of truth but that each individual has direct access to Divine truth.\u00a0 We do not need to be told what the Bible says \u2013 we can read it and interpret it for ourselves.\u00a0 Other thinkers took ideals of human rights to new heights by asserting we are individually given universal rights to pursue happiness, education and wealth.\u00a0 The right to self-fulfillment according to our own thinking is a natural right.\u00a0 And, this right extends to economics where liberty and human development are given full voice when each person freely pursues advancement, property and wealth.\u00a0 The rise of today\u2019s most flourishing economies has come because of such individual freedoms.\u00a0 The drive to get ahead, succeed and enjoy the financial and material benefits of one\u2019s work has allowed our American economy to grow to a size not seen before in history. \u00a0As a whole, we are the wealthiest nation ever to exist.\u00a0 On a personal level, each of us has risen to our station in life due to our own efforts and our own desires to enjoy the fruits of our labor.<\/p>\n

How do we reconcile these two seeming inconsistent high ideals of communal altruism which calls for the well-being of all people versus individualism which champions liberty and the personal pursuit of happiness?\u00a0\u00a0 Recently, the Economist magazine posed the question this way: how do corporations reconcile shareholder interests versus those of the employee and customer?\u00a0 Profits and wealth can increase for the shareholder if employees are exploited and the customer is cheated by an inferior product.\u00a0 On the other hand, employee and customer interests can be advanced with higher wages, benefits and products which contain superior, but more expensive, components.\u00a0 Taken to extremes, shareholders will ultimately lose out and see their profits decline if they exploit their employees and make inferior products.\u00a0 Should employees and customers demand excessive rights and benefits, shareholder profits will decline, innovation and investment in the company will fall and ultimately the company as a whole will cease to exist.\u00a0 Either extreme creates a no-win situation.\u00a0 Corporations, like individuals, cannot be extremely greedy but they also cannot be extremely altruistic either.<\/p>\n

On that personal level, how can we as individuals help others if we ourselves are not happy, fulfilled and able to enjoy the fruits of our labor?\u00a0 Ultimately, our motivation to help others will cease if we are not also motivated to work harder for a better life.\u00a0\u00a0 To put it bluntly but honestly, personal greed, at some level, is a strong motivator for hard work, innovation and economic advancement.\u00a0 If we do away with such a motivation in the name of charity and altruism for all people, then ultimately everybody will, I believe, lose.<\/p>\n

And so we face this tough love choice.\u00a0 Love of things and of money or love of others and the society at large.\u00a0 Some contemporary conservative theorists have even said that spiritual ideals of altruism and social justice are wrong because ultimately they are opposed to the ethic of individual liberty.\u00a0\u00a0 And, vice versa, some extreme liberal thinkers have encouraged doing away with individual rights because they work against the interests and needs of society as a whole.\u00a0 What is the answer to each of these seemingly good but inconsistent ideals?<\/p>\n

I believe unrestrained individualism and personal liberty leads to rampant greed, evidenced by our recent economic collapse and put in stark perspective when one looks at a nation like Haiti where a few oligarchs control all of the wealth while the vast majority literally scrounge with pigs for scraps to eat.<\/p>\n

To the other extreme, I believe unchecked communal altruism leads to a tyranny of the whole against the rights and freedoms of the individual \u2013 something many of us here at the Gathering would particularly abhor since I, for one, am a part of a maligned GLBT minority.\u00a0 Can we still love others and work for their well-being while still enjoying a comfortable home, a nice car and personal fulfillment?\u00a0 How we reconcile these two ideals is crucial.\u00a0 Spiritually, politically and economically, I believe there is a middle way \u2013 a cut the baby in half way, if you will.\u00a0 The Economist magazine calls it \u201cethical or rational egotism.\u201d\u00a0 We must find the right balance between individual rights and self-interest versus the high ideal of social welfare.<\/p>\n

I often find myself warring against two sides within me.\u00a0 Like many of you, I have worked to find self-fulfillment in life and, as such, have been fortunate to acquire a comfortable \u2013 certainly not wealthy \u2013 lifestyle.\u00a0 I chose the ministry as a career many years ago not to enrich myself but because I wanted to be more of a servant than to work within a corporate world where money and profit predominate.\u00a0 I do not reject business and corporations but, for me, such an atmosphere was not healthy.\u00a0 My demeanor is more suited to my current role.<\/p>\n

As one who will continually repeat the ethic that our purpose in life is greater than to merely serve ourselves, I find guilt and tension within in my own soul.\u00a0 Can I enjoy my home, my car and the pleasures in life I have earned?\u00a0 Should I not be more of a servant to others?\u00a0 What about those who are less well off and shouldn\u2019t I sacrifice more or even all of my own comforts for the sake of others?\u00a0 To what extent I give and serve is a personal decision for me as it is for all of you.\u00a0 Nevertheless, my spiritual sense of meaning and purpose calls me to give more than I receive.\u00a0 What I hope to practice and find in life is some sense of balance \u2013 a way to live out the individual liberties I enjoy to work and save and enjoy life while still keeping a laser focus on not letting that get out of hand.\u00a0 I must constantly encourage myself to love others, to serve, to give and to volunteer my time and talents for the well-being of our church, our society and our world.<\/p>\n

Buddhists, as some of you know, seek a continual reduction of desire and need in their lives.\u00a0 Simply put, human wants are the source of unhappiness, according to Buddhists, and so we achieve greater personal happiness the more we relinquish those desires \u2013 those impulses to worship personal golden calves if you will. \u00a0\u00a0But Buddhists also acknowledge that we cannot escape living in a world where desire and temptation are all around us.\u00a0 As humans move toward a nirvana state of perfect peace, we are encouraged to live in balance.\u00a0 Kama<\/span><\/strong>, or worldly desire, will diminish as much as we allow dharma<\/span><\/strong>, or personal peace, to predominate.\u00a0 In this regard, concern for other humans and other creatures creates in us more and more a sense of wholeness and purpose.\u00a0 In many respects, Buddhism understands the spiritual implications of individualism versus communal altruism.<\/p>\n

Interestingly, Islam also seeks to resolve the conflict we see played out both inside ourselves and in the world around us.\u00a0 For Muslims, there exists a natural state within humans called Fitrah.\u00a0 It is natural and human to seek pleasures associated with good food, love, sex, comfort and success.\u00a0\u00a0 Such desires are encompassed within that condition of Fitrah.\u00a0 As Islam wisely notes, humans are not instinctive creatures.\u00a0 No matter how hard we try, we will never attain perfection in our attitudes.\u00a0 Temptations, despite all our better angels calling us to help others, will nevertheless drive us to serve the self often to excess.\u00a0 Humans must be regulated in their individual liberties by some outside force.\u00a0 For Muslims, that regulating force is Allah.\u00a0 We balance the pleasures of life and keep them in check by submitting to the will of Allah or God.\u00a0 In doing so, we are balanced by not following our human nature to pursue wealth, for instance, against the needs of others.\u00a0 Money is fine, according to Islam, as long as it is subservient to the command to love Allah and love others. \u00a0\u00a0Not surprisingly, this Islamic view echoes the apostle Paul\u2019s statement in his Biblical Timothy letter that it is the LOVE<\/em><\/strong> of money that is the root of all evil \u2013 NOT<\/span><\/strong> money itself.<\/p>\n

As I mentioned earlier, the Economist magazine calls for a renewed sense of what it calls \u201cethical or rational egotism.\u201d<\/strong> This essentially states what many faiths also express.\u00a0 Unregulated capitalism, best represented by complete individual freedom, will ultimately lead to unrestrained greed, which logically will lead to a communal collapse.\u00a0 Unregulated communal altruism can lead to despotism, a denial of individual rights and, logically, societal collapse.\u00a0 In the continuum between extreme individualism and extreme communal altruism, each of us, and I believe, each economy, must seek a balance point.<\/p>\n

Thus, I reach the point of my message.\u00a0 In practicing tough love on our personal idols, we must not elevate things, work or even individual people above a concern for the greater good.\u00a0 Many people are, for example, addicted to work or addicted to romantic love.\u00a0 They do so at the risk of forgetting a higher purpose to also serve and love others.\u00a0 They are out of balance.\u00a0 For those of us who call for greater communal altruism from ourselves, our church and from our government, I believe there must be tough love on the extremes of that impulse as well.\u00a0 The balanced way, as I propose and as many of us already practice, is a spiritual form of ethical egotism.\u00a0 We serve the needs of the self but we serve the needs of others even more.\u00a0 Such is a model for us and for our nation.<\/p>\n

As I often say, truth for ourselves and in our political economy is not found in the extremes.\u00a0 Life is never black or white.\u00a0 It is grey and muddy and confusing.\u00a0 Ethical egotism is not easy to practice or even fully define.\u00a0 As I said, we each find the balance point in our own lives.\u00a0 But ethical egotism is a middle path to finding truth in the best and highest aspects of both individualism and communal altruism.\u00a0 Neither is right and neither is wrong.\u00a0 They are both good.<\/p>\n

In the freedom to express ourselves, our beliefs and our personal choices in life, we must never, ever forget the high call to love our neighbor more than we love ourselves.\u00a0 In this month of love, I must exercise my own form of inner tough love.\u00a0 Yes, I will buy a box of chocolates for myself and I will eat them without guilt, but I\u2019ll also buy some for Ed, for my family and for those in need.\u00a0 I wish you all peace and joy\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Message 47, \u201cTough Love: American Idols?\u201d, 2-6-11 \u00a9 Doug Slagle, Pastor at the Gathering, UCC, All Rights Reserved Service-Program, 02-06-11 Watch below video link first… http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=RgtRdp9Xs7o As Americans, we struggle with the choice framed in these dueling mock political ads.\u00a0 Indeed, I believe this struggle is what humans have faced for thousands of years.\u00a0 As […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-952","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.gnhuu.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/952","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.gnhuu.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.gnhuu.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.gnhuu.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.gnhuu.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=952"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.gnhuu.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/952\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.gnhuu.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=952"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.gnhuu.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=952"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.gnhuu.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=952"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}