A Divided Christianity Limits Its Witness

Collage of Christian culture, from:
https://tinyurl.com/uzzy7nl

In my work, I try to build relationship between Roman Catholics and evangelical Christians. I often encounter resistance from all sides.

One complaint I hear is: Why bother? There are are so many other issues of division in the world today that seem much more serious. Lives are hanging in the balance. Few people today, especially in the first world, are losing their lives over Catholic and evangelical tensions.

That certainly is a fair point. Tensions between Christian denominations have definitely subsided from where they once were. After all, the aftermath of the Protestant Reformation and Catholic Counter-reformation helped lead to the 30 Year War, one of Europe's bloodiest. Prejudice still exists, but it doesn't manifest into that scale of bloodshed anymore. We've come a long way.

But in the western world, Christianity has been the dominant religion. In a sense, it has been the one constant of the western world. Christianity has provided the moral framework in no small way for the west--beginning with the Roman Empire, through the Dark Ages and Medieval world, to the Renaissance, Enlightenment, "discovery" of the New World and its impacts in terms of colonialism, world wars and a rapid increase in technology.

All of these are complex topics, of course, but the point I want to make here is:  The western world did all of these things operating out of--and challenged by--the moral and ethical framework of western Christianity.  

How successful Christianity has been at intercepting sin in the midst of this could have a lot to do with how united Christianity has been.

Christianity and the Western World

We all need a solid moral, ethical and spiritual grounding in order to resist the pervasive temptations and sins that are endemic to the human condition. Greed and its twin brother selfishness run rampant so easily. Pride easily divides and pits one group as "better" than another. In day to day life, it certainly can feel like times marches slowly, but stepping back it becomes apparent that we are in the middle of a sharp exponential growth curve in technology, population, pollution, wars, etc. Older cultures had thousands of years to adapt to changes. We have just a short time. The western world has presided over so much rapid change in so short of a time.

My grandfather still worked with horses and was the first to use mechanized tractors on the farm. In 100 years time, we went from horses to cars, airplanes and spaceships, from the telephone to smart phones and from typewriters to word processors.

But while the western world has been overwhelmingly Christian, the lived reality tells a different story: You have your church and I have mine. I have my beliefs and you have yours. I don't have to talk to you. I don't even have to acknowledge you.

We're not just divided--we're isolated from one another. We can't expect uniformity in our beliefs as an axis for unity. After all, if you were to talk to 10 people you will get 12 theological opinions. But the problem is that we haven't found a way to maintain some semblance of unity in light of all this.

We've not just divided in terms of doctrine and beliefs--we are also just as much divided in terms of race and national origin. As MLK so famously said, Sunday at 11 am "is the most segregated hour in the nation." Blacks, whites and little enclaves of tight-knit immigrant community churches dot the landscape.

It's a strange message of: Leave me alone, I'm going to practice my faith which draws all people and even the entire cosmos to Christ. It's somewhat understandable as in this finite world we often don't know how to transcend so many divisions. I sympathize with people who simply give up and keep to themselves. But we should at least recognize the need to try and admit that division is not what we are called to.

A Divided Christianity Limits its Witness

Look at how this plays out in terms of national allegiance: Do we really consider Christians in Mexico to be our brothers and sisters in the faith?  Or are they just "those people over there"? Are we suspicious of them trying to sneak in and steal from us? The vast majority of Mexicans would identify as Catholic, Pentecostal or evangelical. Since we are not united in the faith, forces that want to suppress immigration get us to hate each other. Those forces would have little sway over us if we knew each other and respected each other as members of the same Body of Christ. We would know and trust each other as members of the same Church.

This wouldn't immediately solve all immigration issues, but it would make us less likely to fall victim to dehumanizing propaganda. But because it's considered "okay" to be divided then it becomes so easy to further divide the church into ethnic and national and class-based groups--and most importantly, it becomes easier to divide the church up politically. Division itself is considered acceptable which sets the stage for further divisions of all kinds.

A study was done recently on the terrifying practice trying and killing accused witches over the past several hundred years.  Researches noted that it was perhaps Christian disunity and competition between Protestants and Catholics which fueled some of the harshest and most regrettable periods of witch persecution in Europe and America. It begs the question:  How is Christian disunity today being used to divide and conquer?  How is this disunity manipulated to pursue political goals? Conversely, how is politics manipulated to pursue religious goals?

The Power of the Church

I got into this work because I believe the faith community can be a necessary tonic to the evils of the world.  I still believe that. Churches have stood up to the evils of the world i many ways, from the way churches helped the Civil Rights movement to the movement for justice in Latin America in recent decades and so many more examples.

I don't what to join with you, fellow follower of Jesus, just because you share the same liberal or conservative views. but I do want to join with you because we are rooted in the vision of the Kingdom and we make decisions about what is right or wrong from that place. Our home is in the Kingdom that Jesus calls us to recognize. It's not because we are liberal or conservative and then go to church based on those allegiances, it is because we carry the church in our hearts and make decisions about the world from that place.

Even with all of our theological and denominational divisions, Christianity provides a unifying framework. Even if we disagree on the application of certain issues, Christianity still gives us common language to confront sin. It gives us readings and practices. It gives us a unifying vision for membership in Christ's body and of the Kingdom of God. It gives us something in common with which to engage the rest of the culture. Even with that, it still takes everything we've got to resist the temptations of sin. But our denominational divisions prevent us from speaking that voice clearly.

With Christianity divided, the secular world eats us alive. The world of power and money can pick Christianity apart, co-opt certain groups for this or that benefit. They use Christians for their gains. Nowadays, it's no secret that there are denominations and sects of Christianity aligned with the political right and with the political left. Christians think they have chosen their allegiances but the more sinister truth is that perhaps those interests have chosen Christians to bolster them. They have coaxed Christians to ignore certain thing or to soften some edges and dampen their message in the name of compromise and collaboration.

Could a more united Christianity do a better job of maintained its center and not be so easily swayed by political, financial or military interests in the larger culture?

Maybe there are far too many folks who like Christianity so fractured because it is just easier to manipulate?  And then to pit one side against the other?

A more united Christianity may not stave off all the world's problems. After all, the relatively united church of the Middle Ages did help in some of this but it was still all too often a pawn for political powers. It's complex. Nevertheless, I will argue here that a divided Christianity limits its witness to the world. People don't have to take it seriously because Christians can't even agree on what it's about.  Disunity limits its witness to justice and peace. It limits the ability of the Christian message to be a healing and prophetic tonic for a very fractured world. Indeed: the fractures of Christianity resemble more this world than the Kingdom we are called to.

Fasting From Division, Feasting on Inclusion

Is this not the fast that I have chosen:

To loose the bonds of wickedness,

To undo the heavy burdens,

To let the oppressed go free,

And that you break every yoke?

Is it not to share your bread with the hungry,

That you bring the poor and homeless into your house;

When you see the naked, that you cover them,

And not hide yourself from your own flesh?

 -- Isaiah 58:6-7

Super challenging passage from Isaiah. 

Can we fast from injustices?

Can we fast from the pleasures that come at someone else's expense? Some of those things may be enjoyable or simply things we think we need to do for our own protection.

Such as:

Our pride which maintains divisions, hatred...? "My church is better than your church."

Our hurt and anger left unaddressed which lead to walls between people and ultimately to wars? "I only take care of those inside my walls."

Our consumerism and greed which scorches the earth...? Our consumer engine which produces abundance but yet leaves far too many with nothing.

Our fears which compel us to justify anything and everything, no matter how sinister, in the name of revenge or self-preservation....? After all, so much evil (if not all of it) is done by people thinking they are defending themselves. Someone else is considered a threat that must be controlled or neutralized, so we tell ourselves that gives us license to jettison all our ethics and morals in order to neutralize this perceived threat. "Be not afraid."

So let's fast from pride, from hurt, from greed, from fear.... let's stop constantly gorging ourselves on the buffet of these negative conditions, emotions, thoughts and orientations... THIS is the fast that God calls for here in this beautiful passage! Let's fast from these things which are not of God so that we can feast on the goodness, mercy, and love that IS of God! It takes true bravery to do that after being cloaked in fear, anger and all the trappings of this world all our lives.

Let's fast from lust which distorts true beauty and desire. It obscures our ability to see the full dignity of each other by reducing people to objects to be consumed.

Let's fast from apathy, sloth and sadness... justifiable feelings, no doubt, but they can be a trap leading us into inaction.

Let's fast from the gluttony which compels our rabid consumption, always seeking a high and never being satisfied.

Ultimately let's seek out, heal and fast from whatever is behind all of these feelings... whatever pain, trauma, fear, self-doubt is driving all of these unhealthy coping mechanisms.

Saying we ought to fast from these things is one of the most profound passages in Scripture. It is clearly articulating that we are tied in to systems of power, privilege and injustice. We are tied into these systems every day and bear responsibility even when we are not directly or consciously perpetuating injustice. It is part of the fallen condition of the world that we are stewing in this sin.

It also means by consequence we are inherently connected to everyone and everything--we are all part of the same human family, the same biological family of plants and animals, and the same cosmos. It is our "same flesh" after all, as the passage states. There is a oneness to all. That's why the things which promote division are sinful--division is not of God. It is imaginary but consequential. It causes us to miss seeing the Kingdom of justice, mercy and wholeness which is right here, right now... to miss seeing God, Jesus, Holy Spirit, who are always right with us, permeating everyone and everything.

I've heard of churches talk about the "sacrifice of praise" or the "sacrifice of worship." I'm not suggesting those are in any way bad. Others fast from food or various vices from time to time. But at least in this passage, God is clearly saying that's not the sacrifice wanted by God. The message is pretty clear and doesn't give us much wiggle room to try to make it say something else.

This passage urges us to increase our inner circle to include more. Destroy that which separate and limits and increase that which welcomes and invites. Let's challenge ourselves to consider whatever limits or separates us from others and reflect on that in light of this passage.

***

This is the first part in a series on the seven deadly sins.

Multi-Generational Trauma and Christian Disunity

One of the deadliest days Catholic-Protestant tension: Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre by Francois Dubois. Wikipedia Commons.

I often encounter so much resistance from Christians to the cause of Christian unity.

I am often left baffled.

In my humble opinion, there doesn't seem to be enough theological justification for this resistance. There aren't enough cultural reasons, either.

That's certainly debatable, of course. Many would challenge me on this.

But I still get a sense that there is something else going on—some people have an almost visceral reaction toward other Christian groups that is hard to explain through merely doctrinal differences alone.

So what is driving this?

It's like there's an invisible force. Or a ghost, perhaps.

Well, in a sense, I think this is true.

In this blog we often explore the symptoms of a fractured people—in particular, divisions in Christianity. Those fall along doctrinal lines, national origin lines, racial lines and class lines. But they also fall along historical lines.

I'm amazed by how many Christians want to be isolated from other Christians. For example, there are many evangelical Christians in the rural U.S. South who just want to be left alone. They don't want any relationship with any other church, even within their own denomination. Is this just personal preference or is there a back story? Is this what Jesus asks for those who follow in his way?

Perhaps we today don't have a living memory of persecution. Perhaps we don't remember being abandoned or being rejected or having to uproot our family and travel westward to a new country just to get away from all the strife back in Europe. We didn't personally experience the nasty and cruel ways various Christian groups treated each other—up to and including wars and death.

But somewhere deep down in our bones we feel the result of this wound. The memory may be gone but the trauma—and the coping mechanisms—remain. We are only at the beginning stages of understanding how experiences of trauma can be passed down to subsequent generations. But we know it experientially:  Once you start attempting to heal any of these divisions it becomes abundantly clear right away that past is prologue.

Coco

The Disney Pixar movie Coco does a fantastic job of showing how this multi-generational trauma works. This family in Mexico that just seemed to hate music. They did everything they could to avoid music and punish harshly any family member who attempted to play music. Nobody remembered  why and nobody really bothered to ask. It's just the way it was. They just hated music and wanted to be left alone.

[spoiler alert follows!]

As the movie progresses, we discover that the reason this family hates music is that a great-great-grandfather was presumed to abandon his family to pursue a life on the road as a musician. He left a wife and young daughter to fend for themselves, never to see them again. Through great difficulty and innovation, his wife built a new life—but utter contempt for music and anything related to it was painfully stitched into every moment of their lives going forward. I imagine every sound of music brought with it painful memories and grumblings which her daughter and grandchildren picked up on. I imagine they didn't want to see her in pain so they also did everything to shield her from music. Music brought her pain, and it was painful for her daughter and grandchildren to witness this, so music ended up bringing them pain, too—they appropriated her pain. Hating music just became part of the family ethos.

We eventually find out the truth is still more complex—the father intended to leave the road and come home but was murdered by a jealous music partner who wanted his songs to himself. Tragic misunderstandings often play a huge role.

Christian Prologue 

How much do the historical treatments of Christians to one another matter today?

They matter a lot—it is the pain on which so many of our patterns and attitudes have been built. The pain and coping patterns remain long after the original incidents are forgotten.

I can prove it. What happens when you read the word "Viking"? Do you imagine an adventurous seafaring people from Northern Europe? You probably imagine brutal terrorists. Their descendants today are the quite peaceful Scandanvian people. But yet to this day the word "viking" conjures up foreboding. That's because for a period of time the Vikings terrorized much of mainland Europe. Their time attacking coastal Europe was a long, long time ago. Yet this period was sufficiently brutal and psychologically traumatizing enough to carry their reputation forward to the present day.

The church of the western Roman Empire (now called the Catholic Church) actually attacked and sacked Constantinople, the seat of the eastern church (now called the Orthodox Church). Certainly wars between Christians have been common throughout the years, but this was more explicitly tied to religious divisions itself, at least on the surface. It was a thousand years ago but if you unpack the layers of frosty relationship between Catholics and Orthodox, you will quickly notice the impact of this and other similar events.

Catholics murdered Protestants. Catholic and Protestants murdered Anabaptists. And many Christians persecuted pagans, Jewish people and Gypsies.

A colleague explained to me how the Civil War, for example, split denominations in many ways. The different experiences in the North and the South—the suffering, the years of hunger, the humiliation of loss, the feeling of abandonment by their brothers and sister in the faith on the other side of the Mason Dixon line—have left lasting scars that remain to this day. Many today on one side don't even know why they have such feelings toward those on the other side, but they know they do.

Think of how much fear and misunderstanding Christians have for Muslims. Some of this is just stirred up by political forces today. But this negative view of Islam has its root in history. Europe experienced serious defeats during the Crusades. Empires of Muslim people made inroads into Europe in Span, Turkey and Southeast Europe. This menacing, looming shadow was just beyond the sea, ready to strike at any moment. Perhaps they see Christians the same way—it's all perspective.

Actually, Muslim people are as normal and peaceful as people in any nation. But we've been kept apart for so long where fears turn people into caricatures. Just like walking through a dark forest on Halloween, where every noise makes you worry there's a giant or monster right around the corner. This is what fear does. This is why it's so important to get to know people in the present day to dispel those fears and to make sure political forces aren't using those fears to manipulate us.

Going Forward

Even when memory of an event is long gong, the reaction to that pain is often still with us. It may still be in the drivers seat, whether we know it or not. It's actually harder when we are unaware of it—because we are triggered and reacting and there doesn't seem to be a logical reason for it, but logic is not enough to build the bridge. We have to find out what's driving out reactions to one another.

When you start reconciling with people from another group, you may start crying over pain from centuries ago—pain you never even dreamed was relevant to you at all. That's how multi-generational trauma works.

That is why we can't enter a dialogue as isolated individuals. We all come with a history and out of a context, and we all need to respect that. Unity requires lots of reconciliation with the past. It requires lots of apologies and amends and at the very least an awareness of its impact on us today. Even a thousand years later, the pain doesn't simply just go away on its own until it is lovingly healed.

***

This is part 3 in a series around remembering the voices from the past: All Saints Day, All Souls Day and Day of the Dead in Hispanic cultures. Reformation Sunday in Protestant churches. How do narratives we have inherited from the past—accurate or not—affect who we are today?

Part 1: A Tale of Two Americas
Part 2: Family Separation: My Personal Story

Family Separation: My Personal Story

My grandmother immigrated to the U.S. on the SS George Washington.

I hesitate to write the above headline, because the story I'm about to tell is not anywhere near as traumatic as the family separation currently happening to asylum seekers at the U.S./Mexico border. Nor does it compare to the brutal family separation that occurred during slavery, the disappearances during Jim Crow, in Native American "boarding schools" or currently in a culture of mass incarceration and immigrant detention. I hate to compare one person's trauma to another's, but some hesitation is warranted here.

Nevertheless, I think my story does a good job of showing how separation of any kind leaves long lasting trauma that affects our behavior and attitudes for generations to come—and how this trauma needs to be healed before full unity and wholeness in society or our institutions can be achieved.

***

My grandmother immigrated from what is now modern day Slovakia to the United States (Ohio) in the early 1920s. She was 17 years old. She remembered saying goodbye to her mother. At that moment, she instinctively knew that she would never see her again. That turned out to be true.

She did return once to see her family back in Europe in the 1960s. She saw her brothers, sisters and extended family. I'm sure it was wonderful to have that reunion. It must also have been bittersweet to realize all the life together they were not going to experience.

Her first born son Emery joined the Navy and went off to the Pacific theater of World War II. He was 17 or 18—the same age as my grandmother when she left home for good. While overseas, he married a Philipino woman. They had three children, many grandchildren and great-grandchildren. They moved around a lot but always stayed in the Pacific rim. They settled on Hawaii, which was a halfway point for their respective families—and close to neither!

Growing up, we would see them as often as once every year. Their visits were full and fun. We actually saw them more frequently, and had more in-depth interactions with them, than some of my other aunts and uncles who lived a lot closer. We made sure to make our limited time together count. But there was always a pain. Uncle Emery and Aunt Betsy just couldn't be a regular fixture. We didn't see them at random weddings, funerals or 4th of July cookouts. We didn't just run into each other in the grocery store. No matter how close we were, the miles between us were always there. I have only seen some of my cousins once in my life.

These experiences of immigration brought out the best in people. It helped them to be daring, entrepreneurial and full of vigor. There is an energy that immigrants have that is hard to find anywhere else. But in these cases, it also brought lasting wounds for both themselves and their families. Some of those wounds have remained for decades, and it's the 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants who have to do the work to restore and heal.

Fast forwards several decades: I come of age. Without considering any of this history, I am surprised by how much hostility my family has to any of my plans to move around. Go to a faraway college? Move to another city? Move out of state? Travel abroad?? All those ideas were met with anger, resistance and disapproval. I actually hid those plans from my folks up until the last minute because I just couldn't bear all the guilt and negativity, which I saw as an affront to my own ideas and initiative. And it was. But today I see some of this in a new light.

I'm sure a lot more factored into my family's reactions than our immigration history, but I bet they factored in a whole lot more than any of us ever realized.

You see, nowadays communication and travel are different. It is relatively easy to get a plane ticket. Highways are well-developed. Phone calls are cheaper, if not downright free with you plan. Social media and video chatting are everyday realities rather than something only imagined on Star Trek. And the Soviet "iron curtain" no longer divides the world. 

But somewhere embedded in my family's consciousness is the idea that people who leave never come back. It's a permanent separation. You might as well be dead to them if you are going to leave your hometown. When I was about to make an out-of-state move, I watched them steel themselves emotionally as if they were preparing for a funeral. Their reactions seemed so over the top, so out of proportion—but today I see it differently. Their reactions were based on the 1920s rather than the realities of 2020.

My experiences are not unlike those of the character Miguel in the Disney Pixar movie Coco. The movie does a phenomenal job showing how trauma can continue to impact people in a family generations after the initial incident occurred, even when the initial incident is unknown to present day people. My family's fear of dividing the family was putting us at risk of causing a rift in the family again.

Multi-generational trauma is a significant factor at the foundation of just about every division in society.

Many people today don't understand why we should do anything to atone for slavery, for example. Or the brutalities of colonization. Many don't understand why we would bother do expend energy trying to mend Christian disunity, especially when some of the wounds are 500-1000 years old! But the more we come to understand how multi-generational trauma works, the more clearly we understand the imperative to do the good, ole fashioned Christian work of seeking forgiveness, atoning for wrongdoings and working toward restitution. Very few things are simply "in the past." People say that history does not impact them, but it clearly does, whether we realize it or not.

Multi-generational trauma impacts the Christian family tree as much as it does any other family. We'll explore that in the next post, stay tuned!

***

This is the second part in our series commemorating All Saints and All Souls Days, as well as Day of the Dead in Hispanic cultures. Reformation Sunday in Protestant churches. The voices, experiences and wounds of people in the past have a greater impact on us today than many of us even realize. On the path toward unity, we have to consider the role of multi-generational trauma plays in our divisions.

Part 1:  A Tale of Two Americas

A Tale of Two Americas

This blog focuses on issues of unity, especially among Christians. We look at how disunity manifests itself along theological, racial, cultural, economic and nationalistic lines in our society.

We want to follow the gospel mandate to repent, repair the damage and offer restitution on the hopeful path toward reconciliation. That is a page from good, old fashioned Christianity! But one giant obstacle in the way is a poor self understanding. We can't do any of this well if we aren't honest about ourselves or the situation. This may require shattering some long-held golden calves. But I believe we can do it.

As the churches following the liturgical calendar move toward commemorating All Saints Day and All Souls Day—and Day of the Dead in Hispanic cultures—and Reformation Sunday in Protestant denominations—it is a good time to ask: Who are we? Where did we come from? What narratives do we tell of our past that define who we are today? Who do we want to be going forward and where do we ultimately want to go?

There are two Americas.

We have a very difficult time admitting it. But in order to be healthy and whole and to become the people we want to be (and think we are), it is necessary to come to terms with this. The truth will set us free.

We have indeed been an experiment in freedom and equality. When the U.S. was founded, we attempted something no other nation in the modern era has ever attempted, at least not on the scale we were attempting. Smaller communities were the model but there was never anything so grandiose. And yes, through the years, very often our stated ideals of freedom and equality have pushed us (often kicking and screaming) to live them out more fully.

However, perhaps more importantly, you could say instead of "freedom and equality for all" what we have instead created a pocket of power and privilege for a few in the guise of freedom and equality for all. As noted evangelical writer Jim Wallis often says, racism is "America's original sin."

There are other words that can accurately describe American society:

Apartheid.

Caste system.

Rigid social hierarchy.

Forced labor camps.

Forced patriotism.

Genocide.

Privilege.

Concentration camps.

Internment camps.

Forced family separation and re-indoctrination of various groups (slaves, natives, migrants, immigrants).
Militaristic empire.
Colonizers (both neocolonialism and good ole fashioned regular colonialism).

All of those are accurate and factual descriptions. 

"We don't like those words! That's what other countries do, not us!" We tell ourselves: "Sure, we've made a few mistakes along the way, but we're not like them!"

But when your idea of freedom and equality for all is to do the following, perhaps we are not being honest with ourselves:

1. "Clear the land" of the first nations people and cultures already here as if they were simply annoying weeds.

2. Kidnap, capture, and import slaves, dehumanize them and write the laws to regard them as property—and then even after slavery to keep them in forced segregation and oppression—perhaps in unconscious fear that if granted true equality and freedom they might do to us what we did to them.

3. Beat down on successive waves of immigrants who might steal the power and privilege we have amassed for ourselves—also perhaps in unconscious fear they might do to us what we did to them.

Different Words for Different Folks

One of the ways we perpetuate these divisions is that we use different words for ourselves than we use for others. The U.S. was populated by migrant workers, immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers. But we don't like those words, so we call ourselves "settlers" instead. How come Mexicans crossing the border today without documents aren't called "settlers"? They meet that definition as well as any European from three centuries ago did.

The U.S. started as genocide toward native people and continued with a string of forced labor camps (what we usually call "plantations" (you know, where slaves were imprisoned)) where the inmates were subject to brutal life sentences and continual torture—and so were their families for generation after generation.

In all this, the U.S. has then maintained a rigid social caste system. On top of the social caste system are white (preferably northern European), Christian (preferably Protestant) heterosexual, cisgender males. There are some anomalies and complexities in this that must be named but that is the overall system.

At Home and Abroad

Whatever freedoms we may legitimately enjoy here, we brutally deny to most everyone else on earth. Seriously, for every place on earth that we hold up as an example that we have genuinely helped become a democratic, freedom-loving society (er... usually by force), there are probably a dozen more where we have installed and supported autocratic regimes—keeping the third world poor and vulnerable so our corporations can exploit the people and land without resistance or interference. It was actually a Catholic Maryknoll missionary priest who played a large role in uncovering these maneuvers.

The refugees and asylum seekers currently at the U.S./Mexico border begging for mercy were driven in no small way by U.S. policies that wrecked their homelands, either directly or indirectly. This includes the drug wars (Colombia), embargoes (Cuba/Venezuela), destructive trade policies (Mexico) and overthrowing democratically elected governments (Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, etc).

We maintain that industrial military complex through forced, obligatory patriotism here in the U.S ("Support the troops" who are "making the world save for democracy.") However, people around the world simply do not universally cheer us as their "liberators." Some do, but many do not. So often, we have betrayed the people who have helped us. We get upset when we hear about how communist and socialist governments have attempted to force their systems onto their people, but when we have "brought democracy" abroad is has generally been through force and military rule.

Despite all this negativity, there are bright lights to report.  For example, we have historically settled permanently more refugees than everywhere else on earth combined (not since Trump's restrictions but previously). Granted, that's only a small fraction of the world's refugees. It must be said that we certainly do not take in the most refugees—not by a long shot. But the ones we have taken in we have granted permanent status. That's the difference. It's still a very good mark for the U.S. Granted, we should also ask how many of those refugees we have created in the first place through our policies and practices.

It must also be said that even though historically the U.S. has been a leader in pushing for freedom and equality for all, we are nowhere near the leaders in world freedom anymore. Lots of studies have been done from lots of groups to measure the relative "freedom" of people all over the earth, and the U.S. does not rank anywhere close to the top of freedoms today. This is especially true in post-9/11 America where all the infrastructure for a police and surveillance state has been quickly and firmly put in place. In addition, there is too much disparity in power and privilege along economic, racial and social lines.

Conclusion

I'm sure folks could point to other areas where we have done an exemplary job and other areas where we have been dismal. But that's the point—both have been true. And this is why democracy in the U.S. is always fragile and that fascism and white nationalism are ongoing threats just around the corner. We have always been dangerously closer to that than we usually care to admit—lynchings, McCarthy "red scare" hearings, Japanese internment, family separation of native peoples and "re-schooling," not to mention slavery and native genocide. The list goes on and on. I believe it was Noam Chomsky who made that point—we have always had the infrastructure for fascism, especially in post 9/11 America. We just haven't had a leader or a populace willing to exploit it to its fullest... yet.

A nation of freedom and equality does not have a military many times the size of the next closet competitor with bases in 150+ nations worldwide. A nation of freedom and equality does not mandate saying the Pledge of Allegiance or standing for the national anthem—those quasi-religious gestures would have been abhorrent to our founders. It's not what you do in a genuinely free society. It's just not. By Definition.

So there you have it. A tale of two Americas. We are not all bad. We have done some great things for freedom and equality in the world, even if most of those gains are historical. But it's time we let go of any paternalistic, comic book fantasies about what our country is. We can do this. We need to first be honest about who we are, what we have done and what we are planning to do. Only then can be actually be the people and nation we aspire to be. We have to quit saying "We're #1 We're the best!" We just not. Let's face it—that's kind of juvenile. Life is more complex than that. Besides, Christians in particular should set their gaze on the Kingdom that Jesus announced rather than wordly things, statuses and titles. But admitting it is the first step on the road toward repentance, restitution and reparations and ultimately reconciliation.

A lot of folks say:  "This can't be true because of such-and-such positive thing about America." But that's it—we have two sides and need to acknowledge—fully—both.

Let's go back to church and learn the 4 R's:

Repentance, Restitution, Reparations and Reconciliation.

Christians at the Southern Border!

Our fellow Catholic, Pentecostal and evangelical Christian
brothers and sisters in need--shut out at the border.
Photo by ABC News.

Christian dis-unity paves the way for the secular world to divide people for power and profit.

I have never once read an article warning about the masses of "Christians at the southern border."

I've been both an advocate and concerned citizen on all issues related to immigration for over 20 years. This includes looking the whole system of immigration as well as concern for migrants of all types: Refugees, asylum seekers and both documented and undocumented immigrants.

By contrast, whenever the United States seems to be stoking the fires for yet another war in the Middle East, I commonly hear about those so-called "Muslim nations."

In this blog serious through "Respect Life" October, we've been looking at how we talk about and encounter each other lays the foundation for how much we respect we have for each other—including respect for each other's lives.

In the gospels, Jesus seems to warn us about getting caught up in the labels society gives to people. Jesus ate with sinners and tax collectors and encountered all manner of people in genuine, respectful dialogue—especially people that his society warned him not to, such as Samaritans and lepers.

It is easy to infer that the reason we never hear about the "Christians at the southern border" is because that would likely increase sympathies for them, and there are forces at work that don't want that to happen. Likewise, those who are itching to go to war throw out the "Muslim" word since that is likely to decrease sympathies based on some egregious misunderstandings about the Islamic faith. Let's not fall for it.

The vast majority—if not the entirety—of immigrants coming to the U.S. from south of the border would virtually all identify as Christian in one form of another—Catholic, Pentecostal or evangelical.

By contrast, the populations of Middle Eastern nations are far more mixed. Each of them has a sizable Christian population, including some of the oldest Christian communities in existence. And few of those nations are "Muslim" in the strict sense of the word referring to a theocratic government.

Doesn't our mutual membership in the same Body of Christ mean anything here?

Do our loyalties to our national identity mean more than our identity through Christ?

Some of Jesus' most astonishing statements recorded in the gospels speak to this.

"Hate Your Father and Mother"

Jesus seems to want us  to deny our tribal bands of loyalties and to embrace the universal family revealed to us through Christ. This is how I understand the challenging verse in Luke 14:25-27 when Jesus says that whoever follows him must "hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters." I don't believe that Jesus is actually telling us to hate anyone —that seems hard to square with the guy who urges us to love one another up to and including our enemies! But I believe he is urging us to see beyond the loyalties based on family, race, religion, national origin, denomination or whatever false divided us and prevents us from seeing the oneness of all.

So when Jesus says "hate your mother" he's not asking us to hate the person but rather the title and the special privileges that come with it. That may be hard to do when it comes to such an important relationship like father and mother, but I get his point. I think of this this way:  Jesus is saying don't love someone less just because they are not a fellow American, a fellow white person, a fellow authorized, documented citizen or a fellow Christian. See past those labels to know—and ultimately love—the people behind them.

Conclusion

I'm not suggesting, of course, that we should reserve sympathies only for Christian immigrants or Christian majority nations. I believe the vision Jesus calls us into reaches far beyond those terms. But our mutual identification as believers who profess Christ, or at the very least searches who follow Jesus, who are baptized into the same Body of Christ, including people who are members of our own particular church or denomination, should count for something. It should count for a whole lot.

Our faith and trust in Jesus' words in the Gospels can help strengthen us to stand firm against the forces that would try to divide us. I'm not sure who people wants to sow division. Underneath it all, it is probably about power and money, as most evil is. Let's approach the world as Christians first and foremost, who care for members of our community and who reach out in genuine respect to those outside our community. Let Christ set the terms of our encounter with others do that we don't let selfish or political interests define, label and demean people for their own selfish gains.

How different of a world it would be if we were regularly reminded of our bonds to one another rather than reminded of our perceived differences. But since the rest of the world can't be counted on to do this, we must commit to doing this ourselves.

***

This is part 5 in a series during October on Respect Life.

Part 1: Ecumenical and Interreligious Dialogue is a Respect Life Issue

Part 2: Yes, Even "Those People"

Part 3: Dialogue: A Contemplative Practice

Part 4: White People Talking About Racism:  Do It Anyway

White People Talking About Racism: Do It Anyway

Through the month of October, we've been talking about dialogue as the example Jesus modeled for lifting up the dignity of disenfranchised people and for bringing back into community people who have previously been excluded outright or who have been relegated to the margins. In this post, we will talk about a certain type of dialogue in regards to race in America. After all, race is one of the primary ways that society is divided, in particular the Christian community.

***

A lot of white people avoid talking about race in America on general principle.

In some ways, that is understandable. It is seen as a high-risk, low-reward scenario. The risk is high that someone could be offended or that one's personal work or reputation could be jeopardized, and the prospects of making the situation of race any better for anyone seem pretty low.

So it's easy to see why people of goodwill opt out.

I don't think that's the right approach.

I take great solace from the poem Do It Anyway (copied below) (attributed to Mother Thersea but originally written by Dr. Kent Keith): I think it's something we need to do anyway.

If the majority of us who have any sensitivities or empathies around race stay silent, who will do the talking? Surely, white supremacists will show no hesitation. And young people who are vulnerable to this message may not hear a counter narrative.

There is a chance we will be seen as dominating the discussion. That is not something to take lightly. But if we don't talk, the burden will fall on our African-American sisters and brothers who run the risk of re-traumatizing themselves trying to explain race *yet again* to an unsympathetic audience.

There is a chance we will be seen as trying to make the conversation about ourselves, trying to pat ourselves on the back for thinking we are "woke" or for trying to appease our white guilt.

There is a chance we will stay something stupid or at the very least insensitive.

All of these are serious considerations. That is why we must enter the conversation as sensitively as possible and to listen, listen, listen, and then listen again, as one my colleagues frequently says. But enter it we must--knowing we will fail, knowing we will say stupid things and knowing there may be doubts as to our integrity, selfishness or value to the conversation.

If we can allow a bit of grace for each other, when we do air out those unconscious biases and say things that genuinely *are* insensitive, we can lovingly correct each other. If those thoughts are never spoken out loud, they may linger for years and continue to infect our perspectives and decisions. If we speak them out loud, there is a chance they can be challenged.

After all, I remember a time when I was less woke that I am today. And I am hopeful for a future when I am more woke than I am right now. As easy as it is to condemn my fellow white Americans for their insensitivities, I have to remember how easy it is to have them.

I seriously doubt how successfully we can scold people into a change of heart. It can make me feel good in the short term but what good is it if, well, no good comes from it?

After all, God loved the world into existence, Christ loved the world to its redemption and the Holy Spirit continually loves us in the process of sanctification. If that weren't enough, Jesus told us the first and foremost commandment is to love one another, up to an including our very enemies. How could we see anything other than love as the vehicle for change?

All things equal, I do believe it is better to talk about race than not talk about it. Please understand, there absolutely *are* risks in talking about race. We have to continuously take personal inventory and be always consciously on the alert for dominating the conversation. We have to lift up African American voices, as they are the ones directly living with the effects of racism and whose voices have been silenced all too often. But we white folks are the ones who can use our privilege and our relationships to have the tough conversations and make the tough decisions in the personal, private and public spaces that we inhabit.

After all, many African Americans report feeling exhaustion over talking about race, and we've been asked to do use our privilege to make the situation better, and that includes talking about race, especially with other white people. Just be sensitive to how you are doing it, such as making a  priority of listening to the experiences of the black community and avoiding the traps of making it too much about ourselves, but do it we must.

People are often unreasonable, illogical and self-centered;

Forgive them anyway.

If you are kind, people may accuse you of selfish, ulterior motives;

Be kind anyway.

If you are successful, you will win some false friends and some true enemies;

Succeed anyway.

If you are honest and frank, people may cheat you;

Be honest and frank anyway.

What you spend years building, someone could destroy overnight;

Build anyway

If you find serenity and happiness, they may be jealous;

Be happy anyway.

The good you do today, people will often forget tomorrow;

Do good anyway.

Give the world the best you have, and it may never be enough;

Give the world the best you've got anyway.

You see in the final analysis, it is between you and God;

It was never between you and them anyway.

by Mother Theresa and/or Dr Kent Keith

***

This is part 4 in a series during October on Respect Life.

Part 1: Ecumenical and Interreligious Dialogue is a Respect Life Issue

Part 2: Yes, Even "Those People"

Part 3:  Dialogue: A Contemplative Practice

Dialogue: A Contemplative Practice

Jesus just kept talking to--and healing--all the people
the rest of his society wanted to stay away from.

Unfortunately, for much of Christianity faith largely became believing things to be true or false (intellectual assent) instead of giving people concrete practices so they could themselves know how to open up (faith), hold on (hope), and allow an infilling from another source (love). Contemplation opens our heads, hearts, and bodies to God’s living presence.

-- Franciscan Catholic priest Fr. Richard Rohr

The above writing by Richard Rohr offers an important challenge to Christians or anyone else concerned about ethics, respecting life and social justice.

Too often, when we hear the phrase "respect life" we immediately think of certain hot-button issues  and we've come to expect the accompanying arguments as to who is "right" and who is "wrong." Christian church traditions have a long history of unpacking the ethical and moral dimensions along these lines.

That's all fair and noble, and I certainly approach these issues this way, too--but it is not the only way to learn how to respect life. Intellectual analysis and agreement are important, but so too are practices that help open our hearts. Behaviors and activities that open our hearts are known as contemplative practices.

The gospels do not record Jesus articulating precise, analytical arguments for or against certain causes. Rather, he modeled a practice of encounter and dialogue. Through that experience, your heart expands, your sensitivities deepen and your empathy blossoms. This method is also very freeing as Jesus rarely tells us how or what to think but rather he gives us to tools to get them ourselves.

The analytical mind can be prone to unhealthy control tendencies. We fear what someone may do with that freedom, so we want to make sure they think a certain way. We want to overwhelm them with astute argumentation. We want to prove them wrong. But we have to be careful, as this can be an affront to the very human dignity we are trying to articulate.

Further, human beings are not objects to be analyzed but rather people to be known. I am not in any way discounting the importance of intellectual inquiry, because there's not enough of that in the world today, either. But when our society is so polarized--and when arguments flare up for or against certain issues--and when our world is so bitterly divided in the culture wars--perhaps we need something more than just one more convincing article or thesis.

Jesus shows another way. What if we were to just sit with someone? What if we were to come face to face with the mystery of who this person is, in all their complexities, absurdities and vulnerabilities? What if we were to look in this person's eyes and see the divine image looking back at us?

After all, it is very rarely good theology that converts people to Christianity but rather a personal experience of Jesus or at the very least, Jesus known through his church. The theology comes later as people try to understand what they have come to know through faith. The same holds true for how we regard our fellow humans. Let's face it: Most of us already know what we believe about certain issues and we look for reasons to bolster that later. So how did that initial opinion form?

Perhaps if we did what Jesus showed, we wouldn't need to read bioethics studies to calculate when indeed life begins. We wouldn't need to consult ethicists to determine the precise moment when they deem violence is justified in a particular situation. Nor would we need social justice advocates reminding us that the lives of a particular group matter.  We would simply move differently in the world. We would respond to attacks on human life as if our very sister or brother were threatened. The ethical arguments have a place but they would come later.

This is what, I believe, Jesus is calling us toward: To respond to attacks on human dignity and life as viscerally and immediately as if it were our very mother or father.

And while this post is not about academic studies, the data does back this up: Those who have the most hostility toward disenfranchised groups are almost always those who have no personal relationships with members of that group. For example, this link shows that many who distrust Muslims often do not know any Muslims. Likewise, I have found that people who have the most hostility toward unauthorized immigrants are those who have never taken the time to hear any of them talk about their lives and why they made the choices they have made. The same is true for racial tensions, LGBTQ+ prejudice, suspicion between Catholics and evangelicals of each other, to name just a few examples.

***

This is part 3 in a series during October on Respect Life.

Part 1: Ecumenical and Interreligious Dialogue is a Respect Life Issue

Part 2: Yes, Even "Those People"

Yes, Even "Those People"

This is Part 2 in a series during the the month of October focusing on how dialogue and encounter—particularly between Christians of different denominations—is a way that Jesus himself showed us how to respect life.

Part 1:  Ecumenical and Interreligious Dialogue is a Respect Life Issue

“Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?”

Mark 2:16

One of the most astounding things about Jesus' earthly ministry 2,000 years ago was how he encountered people.

Jesus loved and talked to anybody and everyone. However, he seemed especially concerned about going directly to those most marginalized by the rest of society. He was always living the Beatitudes (Matthew 5:1-12) by including the excluded and making the last one first.

So for example, if he were approached by two people, and one had a comfortable and established place in society and the other was an outcast, Jesus  probably would go to the outcast first. He loves them both equally, and he goes to the outcast, first.

Today, we have a fancy way of describing that. We call this the preferable option for the poor in the Catholic Church. We are to love everybody, but when we have the option, we prefer the poor (and we always have the option).

It's like saying all people are equal—especially the poor and forgotten. This is a logical conundrum perhaps but it makes sense through the eyes of faith!

If that's confusing, you are not alone. The elder brother in the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32) story had difficulty understanding this, as well. There was such a lavish reception for the return of the younger son that it didn't feel like the love was equal, especially for someone who didn't seem to deserve it, in the eyes of the older son.

There's a modern way of looking at that:  Yes, of course all lives matter, and because all lives matter, that's why we say "black lives matter." It's an example of "the last shall be first." We are lifting up the ones most put down. Like Jesus, we love everyone and we go to the poor first. We anxiously await the healing and wholeness of our society by witnessing to it this way.

Sometimes we make this out to be more difficult than it is. If you are a parent with a son and daughter, I'm sure you love them both equally. But if the son had just fallen and broken his leg, you would drop what you were doing with your daughter to get your son to the hospital.

Our categories have changed somewhat since Biblical times. Our world is not divided between Samaritans, lepers, tax collectors and the "possessed," these days. We just don't understand the world in those terms, anymore. However, those same dividing lines are there, just termed differently. Our world today is one of Muslims, immigrants, black people referred to as "thugs" and LGBTQ+ persons. Just like in Jesus' time, not only are people unfairly excluded by they are blamed on top of it—they are called "sinners" even though they are not necessarily any more sinful than anyone else. But mainstream society wants a way to rationalize their treatment, after all, no one wants to think of themselves as unfair or cruel.

Further, our world is divided is between conservatives and liberals, Christians and atheists, Catholics and evangelicals, the university educated and the street smart, pro-choice and pro-life, you name it. Each side has demonized the other. The less we know of each other, the easier it is to demonize each other.

Who are those that society wants to relegate to a lesser status—a lesser class—a lesser caste? Those seemed to be the groups that Jesus went right toward. After all, the Samaritans, lepers, tax collectors and the possessed were considered the lowest of the low when Jesus walked this earth.

Jesus was constantly witnessing to the God-given dignity of every person and the equality of all. He moved through society as if he didn't recognize at all its labels, statuses, privileges and restrictions on recognizing human dignity. But in a sense he did recognize them, because witnessed against them. He just kept putting the last first, turning tables and shocking everyone. After all, he had developed quite a reputation for hanging around with "sinners and tax collectors" (Matthew 9:10-17,Mark 2:15-22,Luke 5:29-39). He did this to such an extent he became known for associating himself with society's discards.

I can almost hear Jesus saying through his actions:
Jesus: "Yes, even "these people"!"
Bewildered disciples: "Even them??"
Jesus: "Yes, especially them!"

Can you get to know some unpopular, hated group of people to such an extent that you get known as one of them? That you suffer along with them? Eschewing society's labels and getting to know people directly is still as radical and life-affirming today as it was when Jesus walked this earth two millennia ago.

Ecumenical and Interreligious Dialogue is a Respect Life Issue

Jesus talks to a Samaritan woman.

Have you ever paused to consider that dialogue between people of different Christian and non-Christian religious traditions is actually a way to respect life itself?

Respect Life Month

Every October, the U.S. Catholic Church celebrates Respect Life month.

People of other faith tradition are certainly welcome to join in the prayer, events and simply the focus of attention that such a commemoration brings.

Setting aside a time to reflect deeply on the dignity of life calls us to consider all the ways that human life is disrespected, disregarded and simply ended in our culture. Certainly, we can point to certain key issues where human life is threatened in direct ways, such as abortion, war, the death penalty, assisted suicide and others.

Diagnosis: Throwaway Culture

But the more we reflect, we come to understand what Pope John Paul II so often said: We live in a "culture of death" where life is simply treated like unwanted junk mail that we throwaway without a second thought.

Even those certain issues have their roots in many seemingly benign activities that over time bear really terrible fruit. What I mean is: When someone chooses to cross the line and do an extreme action such as killing another human being, that action did not simply happen in isolation. There were undoubtedly many years of slow and steady dehumanizing words, inferences and actions that paved the way, unfortunately, for this terrible action. 

A person who ends another person's life crosses a line, but all of society should reflect on ways we all may have some responsibility for what we did to take that person right up to the line, so to speak. Yes, every individual is responsible for her or his own actions--but none of us lives in a vacuum. We are constantly being influenced by those around us, and this is especially true for the youth. Advertisers and political propagandists bombard us constantly with images and ideas, and it does affect what we do. Otherwise, there would be no advertising industry and political campaigns would focus on issues rather than images, but we see that's not the case.

Virtually every Christian tradition affirms that all human life is created by God with God-given dignity--that means all life, all the time, everywhere. That message is bursting forth on nearly every page of the Bible (this link has some choice passages to consider). Yet, in our fallen world we humans put dividers where God has not put any.

Both consciously and unconsciously, we humans start deciding that some people are more important than others and that only certain people deserve special consideration. We convince ourselves there are reasons for this (using inaccurate generalizations) even when our faith informs us that this is not the case.

Treatment:  Dialogue, A Necessary Tonic

One of the best ways to resist the throwaway culture that disregards life is to dialogue with other people. And by "dialogue" I do not mean just a random conversation, however nice that may be. I mean to truly encounter the person in a relationship of equality, respect and peace.  It means taking a genuine interest in another person and being truly open to what another person has to offer.

Real dialogue with another person is a profound act of defiance of our culture of death. To truly dialogue with someone that means you respect this person in her or his full God-given dignity. It is an attempt to understand the person on his or her own terms--to get to know them as they truly are, not based on what others have said about them. It is a way to get past the labels and to encounter the true person. It is a way to ultimately establish peace.

Labels

Labels enforce the throwaway culture. We have all heard comments such as these:

"Oh, that person is just a criminal, so I don't have to respect him."

"They are just a bunch of Muslims, so we should be afraid of them."

"That (African-American) kid is just a thug, keep him at a distance."

"They are just a bunch of liberals (or conservatives)--not worth our time hearing what they have to say."

"People are mistreated in detention? They are just illegals, so they must deserve it."

Any time the word "just" is used to describe a group of people, you know the throwaway culture is in full operation, i.e. "they are just Muslims."

On top of that, we often attach other descriptors that are unfair, such as "terrorist Muslims" or "criminal immigrants" or "thug" when we are referring to African-American males, but almost always those broad-based descriptors are neither fair nor accurate.

Encounter: The Way of Jesus

To truly encounter another person in her or his full humanity is to do what Jesus did time and time again throughout his earthly ministry as reported in the Gospels. He continued to treat every single person with full respect, including--and perhaps especially--those that the rest of society wanted to disregard: The hated Samaritans... the unwed mother... the adulterer... the diseased or mentally ill... even the slimy tax collector. People often asked Jesus "Why are you bothering with such-and-such a person?" Jesus always went past their imaginary walls and encountered the person.

In doing this, Jesus gave us a model to follow.

In Their Own Words

Jesus did not always agree with every single thing that every person did--and neither should we. We can and should maintain our principles. But that should never stop us from truly encountering another person as respectfully as Jesus did. We should hear their perspective in their own words before we decide that we disagree with them. Let people tell their own story. Honor that. Let them describe themselves and assign their own labels for themselves. Let us truly value each and every person and what they have to say.

I would go as far as to say we should never judge the actions of a group of people until we have worked hard to get to know its members and hear them describe their circumstances in their own words. That includes immigrants, Muslims, Middle Easterners, criminals, unwed mothers, everyone.

And then in a relationship of true equality, let us share our story with them.

The Use, Misuse and Non-Use of Religious Labels

Religious labels are very often used to cause this division and misunderstandings. What comes to mind when you hear the following words: Muslims, Jews, Catholics, evangelicals, pagans.... with each of those terms, I bet we immediately have images, definitions and even fears that immediately pop into our minds. These imagines impact the decisions we make when our nation chooses to go to war with certain nations. It impacts the decisions voters make in regards to our criminal justice system, in particular the death penalty.

In the case of the Islamic and Jewish faiths, religious labels are often used to justify violence. You see actions of terrorism when Jewish synagogues have been attacked here in the U.S. by hate groups or individuals and when our nation goes to war with a "Muslim nation."

Violence is also justified by refusing to acknowledge the religious faith of people. For example, I do not recall a single news article that tells us about the "Christians at the southern border." NEVER. I have been following the news on immigration for many years and I never have I seen this stated boldly or directly.

Yet, virtually every immigrant, refugee and asylum seeker at the southern border--who is being cruelly detained and their families separated by current border enforcement methods--can all be described as evangelical, Pentecostal or Catholic Christians. Calling them "Christians" would increase sympathy for them which is no doubt why we ever hear them described this way.

But when it comes time to wage war with a Middle Eastern country, suddenly all we hear is that this is a "Muslim nation." That is because the public has been programmed to attach negative connotations to Muslims which decrease empathy for them.

Conclusion

Whenever I have set labels aside and have truly tried to imitate Jesus and encounter people on their own terms, I have immediately discovered that these labels were unfair, incomplete and often downright wrong. By talking to a Muslim man and hearing his story, I am re-affirming my faith in the God of all who created everyone with dignity. I am taking back control of my life and my thoughts from the forces of marketing, propaganda and prejudice. I am making my own decisions rather than being swayed by clever spin campaigns. I am re-affirming that my faith comes first and my politics come second--always. And perhaps most importantly: I am respecting life.