Mysteries of Christmas

Did you ever wonder why angels always have to tell people not to be afraid of therm? Those people who have written about angels describe them as fearsome, with eyes that blaze like fire, or even that they are too fearsome to behold. So on that night when the birth we celebrate today happened, however it happened, the announcement was made to a bunch of hapless shepherds in the field by a bunch of fearsome creatures, whose first words are "fear not!"

Now help me out here: there are so many things we get wrong about the birth of Jesus, the date notwithstanding, and here is another one medieval painters (or whoever) got wrong. No "angels we have heard on high" and no "hark, the herald angels singing," what might have occurred was more like fright night in the back forty acres! These shepherds seem to have been scared out of their gourds! And for shepherds - who were the tough guys of the day (note that they had to stay awake all night to guard against rustlers) - that must have been pretty scary.

And if we can get past the riveting sight of the messenger to actually believe the alleged message that unto them a savior was being born, we have to deal with the shock of the rest of the scenario. In those days, when Caesar Augustus was supreme lord of most of the Mediterranean world and the Romans could play games with human lives for sport, the hoped for savior would have had to come in with some power and authority or it would never stand a chance. But all they got was a baby born to a homeless unmarried couple is some barn.

No. The story does not make sense that way! So the editors and writers had to make it better. After all, this is supposed to be god incarnate and that has to be special, different, and earth-shaking. And this, this unlikely story just isn't going to make it.  We humans need power, we need bombs and guns, and might - yea, real might! So we add layer and layer on to the most unlikely story ever told.

But the truth is that's what it was, and what it is - the most unlikely story ever told. Why would the power that created the universe reveal itself in the form of a frail baby? Why would the Almighty chose to come on behalf of an unmarried (read that as scandalous) displaced couple who don't even have a house or a room or a bed on which to lay their heads? Why? Because for thousands and thousands of years that is how the almighty reveals itself to us - not in power and might but in small frail, instances. We always wanted a god of war (read your Hebrew bible, a.k.a. the Old Testament) who could vanquish other gods and peoples. But we always got someone who was the unlikely hero.  We wanted thunder and lightning that would split boulders, but all we get is a small whispering voice.

So in the midst of all of the bling and pizzazz of modern Christmas celebrated on an arbitrary day in December may we all have the peace of mind required to put it all down and step away from the table long enough to notice the unlikely places, the unlikely people and the littlest things that show us how present our Creator really is. And may the overwhelming and mysterious power of that tiniest spec of godliness fill your hearts with warmth and joy tonight and in the days to come.

A Light in the Darkness

I have a wonderful friend who is a magnificent stand for light and laughter in this world, but recently was compelled to write to her in the wake of the murders in Newtown, CT.

My Dear Sweet Friend

How I love you – and how I adore and embrace your message of light and laughter as a service to this world.  But I have been watching your posts over the last two days since the most recent horrific event in our world has unfolded. And there is something that just doesn’t sit right with me. In many of your posts you say that we ought to turn off the media and delete those stories in an effort to send our message to that same set of sources that they should stop the hype and backward glorification of these killers and perpetrators. And for me that is too passive.

To any act of violence there are three courses of action: retaliatory violence (attacking back in some form of revenge), passivity and non-violent resistance (taking away the power of their status seeking), and a third way that is active, positive action.  I am of the third way. I cannot simply turn it off least they (the media or some future on-looking perpetrator-to-be) think I don’t care or can’t be bothered. Well I am bothered – I am bothered beyond my ability to contain myself in non-action.

But let me say a bit about how I perceive your message of hope.  It is not wrong – not in the least.  In fact it is the only message we should preach.  It is the context of that hope with which I have issue.  Just as you cannot see in total darkness, you cannot see in total light.  If we look only for the positive in our world, accent only the good that exists, and turn our backs on the darkness, the hatred and the violence of our chaotic world, we run the risk of being blinded by the light.

Life is painful and chaotic, and that pain is exacerbated by hoping for or wishing that is would somehow be different than it is.  Suffering, says the Buddha, is caused by trying to deny the reality of the now and wishing for something better. We first have to accept that there are people in this world who are so alienated and lost that their only thought is to inflict that pain on others.  Whether we call that evil or the devil or mental illness does not matter. Whether that manifests in genocide or warring or the slaughter of innocent children (close to home or on the other side of the planet) is irrelevant.  It exists; and my first calling is to recognize that it does exist.

It is against that pain and suffering that you and I have been called to stand as a beacon. It is in those dark places that we have to shine even more brightly. But I must first acknowledge the pain and suffering and then with the greatest compassion light a candle of hope. And that hope that we bring is the hope for and in human connection. Our greatest darkness happens when we are alone and unconnected to others.  Our greatest lightness is when we are embraced in the loving arms of another. Murder, genocide and war are places where the human fabric has been torn apart, where lost and alone people can somehow ignore the brotherhood or sisterhood of the human on the other end of their weapon. Killing cannot happen any other way.

Love is the antidote, caring and compassion are its vehicles. Every sage who ever walked on this planet has instructed us to love our enemies, not just our friends. Anyone can love those who love. Anyone can shine brightly when surrounded by others of the light.  That is the easy part. But to stand up with tears of grief streaming down your cheeks and shine a ray of hope, is the really hard part of this work. To name the darkness and embrace another, to become a contagious infection of caring and compassion and spread love where there is none, that is the real work.

So I will not turn it off – not because I get some twisted horror-movie thrill out of human carnage – but because I am called to stand up to evil and darkness and not back down, and not dampen my light. The hope I peddle is that if and when we love each other, there can be no more of this pain. (And I just want to say that I am as crushed by the death reports coming from Afghanistan or the Gaza strip as I am from Newtown CT.  Every soldier was once a baby rocked by his or her mother; every one of us had a beautiful future in front of us and brought a sparkle to our parent’s eyes.) We need to spread the message that the best action to prevent violence is the bonds we forge between each of us when we love and embrace each other.  In a message to the parents of the children that attend our school, I said that now is the time to start talking to the other parents, get to know them, make them part of your family – love each other as your own.

Now is a time of action, and the battlefront is where the darkness is the deepest.  Your message is right on but my request is that we wage radical love in those darkest places of the human experience. I can love more powerfully than anyone can hate, and when you and I join together, that becomes exponentially greater. And that is how we will win, one at a time; one more at a time; every time we say “we” and we mean one more person that the last time we said it. And we will overcome the darkness.

Spiritual Practices

Today I had a great conversation with a spiritual companion for my class on spiritual practices.  Our basic question was what constitutes a spiritual practice? We each use a different one; she using labyrinth walking and I practice lectio divina. We were noticing that when not followed with regularity neither held nearly the power as when engaged in on a regular (daily) basis. It's like conditioning, I said, if I don't exercise on a daily basis, the fitness factor is reduced and the pain quotient is immensely higher.

So the question to ponder is, can any discipline be a spiritual practice? We considered the following: herbalism, wildcrafting herbs, sweat lodge (building and using), and then drifted into hunting - like deer hunting, tending animals, talking to wild animals, well a lot of different ideas.  And the bottom line was it was more the way in which one engages in the discipline more than the actual discipline.

So what actually makes for a spiritual practice we concluded was:
1. It must be done with consistency and regularity
2.  It must be entered into prayerfully, meaning taking the time to center your mind and being and becoming open to the lesson or awareness to be presented.
3.  It must be an activity that requires or calls up mindfulness (weight lifting or walking or doing the dishes can all be done with a high degree of mindfulness whereas sleeping can't).
4.  The activity and the associated mindfulness must be reflected on to look for the lesson of the day/moment.
5.  One must then capture, write about or reflect on that lesson.
6.  Finally, the lesson needs to be brought into the world whether by living that lesson or by engaging with another person on the lesson and its meaning.

I recently watched the new Jackie Chan version of The Karate Kid where Jackie tells a young Jadaen Smith that "Kung fu is in everything." Well in much the same way, spiritual practice is in everything. Try it out with anything you do and let me know if it works.

Ending the Madness

"No one's religious anymore. Not anyone with any sense. Religion incites hatred, starts wars, and vilifies anyone who challenges its narrow-minded views." So starts an article in the Huffington Post UK version (by Felicity Morse). But where Ms Morse ended up with her article is not where I would go. So with thanks to her lead, let me turn a different way.

You're right, Felicity, and I hate it! I am sick of the divisiveness created by religions and religious sects. I am embarrassed when someone calls me a Christian and they mean that type of a person who thinks others are soiled, unclean or despicable because they don't say the right words.  Or when the mean some sort of narrow-minded bible-thumping "religious" fanatic that uses verses to their own defense and to the exclusion of others.

I can no longer find a religion that I can claim and yet I love God, and I do my best to follow the teachings of Jesus.  It's just that I do my best to also follow the teachings of the Buddha, Lao Tzu, Zoroaster, and just about every other wise sage that ever graced this planet. And I do not believe that I am special if I believe in the resurrection of Jeshua, the Nazarene, or that I am damned to eternity in hell if I don't.

That type of dualistic thinking is the root of the disease that we now call religions. But that was never the message - not the message of the Nazarene, not the message of the Buddha, not the message of Hillel, not the message anyone who has ever listened for God has ever heard. In fact the message of all sacred texts is one of acceptance and inclusion - not hatred and out-grouping; one of forgiveness and compassion - not revenge and hatred; one of care-taking and respect - not one of dominion and dominance. Where we went wrong and got off that path, I don't know. But I do know that our very survival depends on getting back to it.

It is time for ministers and preachers and spiritual people everywhere to speak out that we are one.  It is time that we link arms and stand squarely in the path of those who would divide and vilify others. It is time we all band together and shout "Enough! No more! No mas muerta!" It is time to work for healing and bridge-building and forgiving. My heart is breaking - we cannot continue the way we are going.

Please - if you read this, pass it on! That's how we can turn this around. It's like Marge Piercy wrote in her wonderful poem, The Low Road:

It goes on one at a time,

it starts when you care

to act, it starts when you do

it again and they said no,

it starts when you say We

and know you who you mean, and each

day you mean one more.

Says Who?

I confess to having avoided the nauseating rhetoric provided by the two exclusive political clubs that run our government and exclude all other points of view.  I am certain to be enlightened by their opinions on what "we" should believe, and of just who might be included or excluded in that "we."  My eldest offspring is an ordained minister and an articulate advocate of justice. Lately she has been receiving a lot of attention for her stand on full inclusion not simply as a right or an option but as a must and necessary element of being a church. Exclusion, she writes, begins when we even start naming those "other" groups we intend to include by their categorical names. You know the deal: "This organization does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, creed..." The very act of naming "them" sets "them" apart from "us." Inclusion has no labels.

But when we include all of us humans within the circle of human experience, something becomes apparent: none of us has the same experience. And what is particularly enlightening about that is that we can begin to learn from others who are not like us in anything other dimension than their humanity. When we focus on the differences and out-group others, this lesson is not available. But when we are all one, our sisters and brothers can teach us from their point of view. They can tell us what it has been like to be inspected and suspected for their entire lives. They can tell us how they had to deeply search their souls and come to their own truths about their sexuality, their spirituality and their burning need to be recognized for the persons that they really are.

In particular, I am taling about people who are labeled as gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transgender and a whole host of other terms. I am talking about my very normal and dear friends, some of my neighbors, several of my clients and perhaps even family members. All of them are human and normal and living and vital and they are us. But we mus not be so hasty to "include" them as "us" lest we step over their gift as part of the human condition. That is the same kind of racism that wants to make African Americans act like "white people." Inclusion does not mean being the same. Rather it means embracing the differences within the whole of humanity. And here is where we need to shut up and listen. People whose sexuality is gay or lesbian or whatever have had to do something that every minority strand of humanity has had to do. They have had to wake up every morning and ask "if I am not what the majority says is the way to be, then what am I and who am I?"

As a white male member of the domination and dominant class of my society, I never questioned those values. I never doubted what I was. The texts were written by and for others like me. But the howling error that lives in that is that those same texts carried the implicit belief that this should be true for ALL of humanity - men and women, white and black and brown and yellow and tan skinned people - everyone must be like this. And I never had to question that. But anyone who is not part of that dominant culture has and does. These sisters and brothers have a level of introspection I have never attempted. And they lead the way to a deeper more profound understanding of self. I aspire to that level of deep self understanding. It is thoroughly unfair that these brothers and sisters have been forced to "justify" their beingness. No one should have to justify their existence. You are human - that's the ticket to get on board this train. But because society has forced it upon them, they have done what perhaps we all should be forced to do.

So here is a quick list of questions to ponder each morning as you prepare for your day: Are you certain about your sexuality? How do you know? Have you ever tried anything else? If you told your (a) boss, (b) school, (c) church how you really feel as a sexual being would you feel safe there? Would you be accepted? Have you tried finding a church that really accepts you at your deepest level of who you are? When was the first time you felt sexual desires? Was it confusing? What if you were not permitted to marry the person of your choice by you family, your state or your religion, would you move? How would you cope? If you were told that your very being was a sin, how would you justify how and who you are? Lastly, you have no authorization to ask "them" how they answered. They have done the work and they are okay with their answers. Theirs is a level of maturity that you can only hope to achieve. They are the brave leaders we need to hold up as our heroes and heroines and examples. LGBT is not the new cool or in thing to root for! But what I get from my brothers and sisters who are is  a level of awareness of justice matters most of us can only read about.  But to be certain, I am sick to death of all of the positioning around the issue of humanity and human rights.

Emotional Processing

My personal trek into the unknown is beginning to reshape my understanding of human emotions and how we precess emotional matter.  In fact that last sentence is the problem most of us (myself included) seem to have about emotions.  We think we can process or understand our emotions - that they are messengers for what we are to do.   You know; see a bear charging us, run away; see an attractive person, move toward, etc. And while that may work to some extent, what I am learning is that we have gotten it backwards.  We do not process our emotions (or at least we should not try to process them), emotions process us.

I am not talking here about the pretense of indecision reflected in a person's saying, "I don't know how I feel about suchandso," or "Let me see how I feel about it." Those "emotions" are more often than not the result of cognitive processes; of the "I think therefore I feel" type of thinking.  What I am talking about, on the other hand, is the occurrence of a deeply felt emotion that comes upon us.  Take for example the experience of love or grief or the welling up of whatever moves us to tears in the presence of the indefinable.

We need to learn how to resist the urge to analyze what those mean and begin to let them do their work on us. To say that emotions move us may be more accurate that we first think.  What happens when we allow an emotion to work its magic on us is that it begins to transform our very being from the inside out. And our "normal" reaction to that transformation is to quickly avoid it, run away from it or do something about it.  Transformation is never pleasant - it is often more like pulling yourself inside out through your belly button!  But when we allow an emotion to work us, that is exactly what is possible.

Lovers may feel the love but may too often move to capture the object of their love instead of letting it grow them in new and unthought of ways. The former is an act of narcissism (not love) where the latter is transformative. Similarly suffering causes a knee-jerk reaction of doing whatever will stifle the suffering. And yet nothing will reinvent us like suffering. This is not to be confused with victimhood. There are times when suffering must be ended for the safety of the victim.  But when our ego takes charge (a bad habit it engages in for most of our waking hours), and it is our ego need that wants to end the suffering or claim the reward at having loved so well, then we are denying our emotions the power that is uniquely theirs. Ego is the enemy of transformation.

Most of the time allowing emotions the opportunity of doing the inner work feels like sitting in a pool of muck - all damp and smelly and dirty. What's worse is that emotions do not work on us in any linear fashion (step 1, 2, 3) as our logical egos would have it.  It is sporadic, coming and going in waves of differing times and intervals.  And it is not over until it is over.  As if that is not enough bad news for your ego, get this: once you start this work, there is no way out except through it. And a nasty corollary to that is that any part that you skip will come back to kick you in the butt when you least expect it.

But there is good news. On the other end, there is a rainbow of new opportunities and insights that were never visible through your ego-controlled lenses. New worlds and new ways of being wait for those willing to let themselves be sucked through the vortex of emotion-driven transformation. Be patient with yourself and gentle with your emotions. It is hard work, but the rewards are worth it.

Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For

As I sit here and contemplate what course or courses I wish to take in seminary as I return (yet again) in the fall, I am faced with a huge dilemma: to what end? I have often contended I study religion for sport! I love it and literally nothing fascinates me more than the question of what people (myself included) believe in. They are among the strongest held and most polarizing beliefs we have. And yet it feels like I need to have a reason. Actually - truth be told - I want to have a reason.

I am now 63 and officially retired from full-time consulting - my livelihood of the past three decades - and yet I am still hungry. I continually ask myself if I have done what I was sent here to do. And I do not know the answer.  I know (because I have been told) that I am among the best psychometrists in the business. I love cracking the code of a diagnostic test and seeing it come to life for my client. It is my gift and I have used it well over the years.

But men of my age are not supposed to be asking "is that all?"  We are told to be content with life and what we have accomplished by now. And I am - - sort of.  But there is this nagging voice in my head and churning in the pit of my stomach that continually point me toward spirituality and some form of ministry - not church-based ministry, but the kind of ministry that assists, guides and helps others struggling with their spirituality as I continually do.

Struggling with spirituality is not the best term but I have no other.  I do not mean by that phrase the kind of struggles that search for a belief or an understanding of god or experiences of the sacred and divine. Struggling with deep spirituality comes from a deep and profound connection with the divine that walks and talks with that power (sometimes figuratively but often literally) yet has no clue of what to do with and because of that connection.

Carolyn Myss says that I might have to be content living at the end of my little cul-de-sac in life bringing my light to that street.  She says that maybe that is all that is required of ones spiritual connection - just to be a light in the world. Period. Nothing else. No other reason. End of story. And it is my ego that wants to make something significant out of what I feel. Maybe.

But as I head back to the hill this fall, I will be looking for a way to shine in other corners, on other streets, in other ways. And I still have not a single clue. God wants us on god's terms, in god's service, not ours, not mine. So again I have to surrender will. Again I have to seek understanding. Again I have to see if there are others who feel like this - because I know there is no denomination I have yet explored that describes the truth I feel and experience.

How can I feel so connected and yet so lost?

Vive La Difference

Who are we as humans? What is it that makes us hate others who are not just like us? I remember in my undergraduate years taking a course from the famous social psychologist, Carolyn Sharif. She and her husband Musafer Sharif (forgive me if I have spelled it incorrectly) conducted this great study of teenage boys called the Robber's Cave Study that I think was the foundation for some of the scenes in The Lord of The Flies. The net of the study was that is was regular behavior to define one's own group by the "out-grouping" of another. In other words, we are who we are because we are not "them." And so social scientists since the 50's and the Robber's Cave study had a way of describing what we do to each other. Read that as in "it is normal and regular to do that." Hey that is no news. Humans have killed off the "other" for as long as we have had tribes. But does it make it right or normal? I think not and in fact I am getting sick and tired of reading justifications of outgroupings whether they are based in biblical mistranslations or out of context quotations or hocus pocus bullshit made up by some egocentric narcissist too terrified of his own shadow to step into the light on his own. Well I am tired of it. What is straight or gay or whatever anyway? Who decided that mattered in determining your humanness? When I was a junior in college (that is a loooong time ago) I had a room mate who was gay (still is). And how he explained it to me was asking me if I decided to be 6'3". I said of course not, I just grew that way. Well, he said, I never decided to be gay, I just grew that way. (Thanks Peter, I still love you for all you taught me.) States and churches are falling into sides around same-sex marriages as if it is their right to legislate how tall a person should be to be considered a person. Cut me a break. It is not our decision! It is up to each individual to act on and become all he or she is meant to be irrespective of the local norms and mores of the dominant group. Despite what the Sharifs observed, it is neither right or normal to place a moral judgment on another because he or she is not like you and your group. That kind of clique behavior is as distasteful in adulthood as it was in junior high school, only the adults in question should have outgrown it! It is time we grow up as a society and face the fact that the human experience is not a unified or singular experience. Being human has about six billion different ways of manifesting and each one is as great and beautiful as the next. Thank god you are unique, and that the person next to you is unique and that I am not you. We need to stop bonding about how we are the same and rejoice in and bond around our array of differences. The human experience is a wide rainbow of colors and the boundaries are indistinguishable yet ubiquitous. I don't want to be you and you should not want to be me. So why do people think that someone else should have the same preferences as you and I do. I really don't know when it was that I knew I liked girls, but I do remember that it was after I had my boy experiences. We boys loved each other. We were inseparable and we learned about sex from each other, told tales to each other, gaped at our dad's Playboys together, and we were tighter than anything. Then one day, I noticed that girls smelled different, sounded different and I was uncontrollably attracted. I did not choose that. I just was. My room mate did not choose to stay with his boys, he just did. There is nothing more to it than that. Two of us manifesting two of the six billion ways to be a human. Praise god for that! And for god's sake, cut the crap about making differences wrong. It is what is right about being human - we are all uniquely different. Amen, amen, let it be so.

Discernment

Through both my formal learning in psychology and my continued education, growth and development I have come to ascribe to a school of thought called "constructivism." Essentially what that translates to is that I believe that we are only capable of seeing or hearing and conceptualizing that which fits within and can be described by our current level of education, training, experience and social context. Specifically that means that all thought we have come from the same pool of thoughts we have always had and can be described using only the vocabulary we have available to us at the time. Though this may sound like harmless psychobabble its impact on issues of justice and discernment of "God's will" are monumental. It is for that reason that the power elite cannot effectively enact matters of justice because of the very fact that all matters are seen through their lens of the host culture that causes the oppression in the first place. But in accurately discerning God's will we may be even more suspect. There is a story of Francis of Assisi who it is said heard God telling him, "Francis, rebuild my church." So, gathering his monks around, they set out to find the most broken down church and rebuilt its roof. A second time Francis asked God what He wanted him to do and again heard "Francis, rebuild my church." So Francis and the monks repeated the process - and a third time as well. It was not until Francis heard the same instruction a fourth time that he understood his mission to reform the Catholic church of the time. My continual concern is that well-intentioned and prayerful people (and even church leaders) mistake what they think they are hearing as a message from God when all they ever get is a confirmation of their existing mental paradigm. Naturally that message would be supportive of the existing structure and understanding. What they hear may (or may not) be a message from God but it gets filtered, interpreted and expressed through the only limited perspective that person has. History is filled with examples of how one group after another has inflicted injustice on others in the name of what they thought they heard or understood. That notwithstanding, this is amplified when we realize that not every word of the bible is "God's word." Much of what we read in the bible is "man's word" and at that it may not even be God-inspired. Research indicated that great portions of the gospels and whole books of the Torah have been written by religious leaders of the time to suit their particular agenda. That does not mean it isn't sacred literature that has endured the test of time, (take Deuteronomy for example) it just means that it is not outside the realm of possibility that what you are reading might just be someone's personal point of view. Perhaps the Desert Monks had the best approach by living in retreat for long enough to eradicate the noise of their own mind's experience to be able to let in the still small voice of God. But preachers who hammer on a vendetta of hate and exclusion and claim discernment as their source will never convince me that they listened to or heard anything divine.

Regression to the Mean

I have been watching and following the posts of my daughter, an ordained minister, while she attends her church's national convention. Mostly I had hopes for what she might be able to do as (and this is not just a father talking) she is both brilliant and magnificently articulate. I prefer to listen to her podcast sermons than actually attending my own church. And her ability to shape and present a cogent position on nearly any subject is inspiring. Her youtube post called "It's not a Sin to be Gay" is a great example But what I forgot is that when you put ten thousand people in the room together there is that old statistical problem of regression to the mean. Essentially the greater the number the more likely the overwhelming majority will center around the middle - in this case that which would not rock the boat; that which would not be upsetting; the status quo. Many equally brilliant orators spoke on the topics for which she was passionate - reproductive rights and total inclusion - and the masses of the regression rolled over them all like some gigantic tsunami. It was washed clean and wiped out as if there were no discussion at all. I experienced the same a few years ago at a regional conference of my denomination. Also speaking to radical inclusion as part of our policy on Human Sexuality, the masses quoted Martin Luther and the need to stand strong on his polity of the 1500's. There was no recognition of the practice Jesus modeled of inclusion, there was no discussion of the meaning of love. The masses quoted Martin to me. And I left. My prayer this day is that my passionate daughter might not be so easily dissuaded. I am so proud of her and of her stand, I would hate for it to be swept away by the next tsunami. You go, Becca!

Easter Quiz

The fun part of being a non-literalistic fan of the bible is that one can tolerate the many discrepancies held within these "sacred" texts. And among the best of the best in confusing events (with second place going to the feeding of a large number of people) is the Easter story. Here are but a few of the wonderful parts of this story in the form of a little quiz (answers included):

1. How many women went to the tomb early that morning (before sunrise as in John, after sunrise as in Matt and Mark)? Was it just Mary Magdalene by herself (John)? A whole bunch (Mary M, Mary Mom, Joanna, and their friends in Luke)? Or was it three (Mary M, Mary mom, and Salome in Mark)?

2. Then there was that confounded stone - was it rolled away (as in Mark, Luke and John's account) or by the angel after they/she arrived (Matt's version)? And while we are at it, how many angels or young men were there: two (John and Luke) or one (Matt and Mark)? And where were they? Inside the tomb (Mark and John) sitting on the stone after rolling it away (Matt) or suddenly appearing standing beside them (Luke)?

3. Ah, but what did the one or two angels or men say? "Woman (to Mary M) why are you crying (John)?" "Don't be afraid - you are looking for Jesus (Matt and Mark)" "Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here (Luke)"

4. Now here is the stumper: What did the women do or say? Did they flee from the tomb saying nothing to anyone, despite being instructed to tell Peter and the Disciples (Mark); hurry away to tell the Disciples (Matt); bow in reverence, remembering what Jesus had told them, whereupon they "returned" to tell the Disciples (Luke); or stand there crying and say, "They have taken my Lord away." (John)?

5. And then, we have to deal with the guys themselves. What was the reaction of the 12? Mark doesn't mention any, Matt says they went to Galilee as instructed, Luke says they did not believe the women, but Peter ran to the tomb to see for himself, and John says that both Peter and the beloved disciple (presumably John) both ran to the tomb.

Bonus Question: When and where did Jesus appear and to whom? If you side with John, he appeared to Mary Magdalene right then and there at the tomb, engaged in conversation with her but warned her not to touch the merchandise as he had not yet returned to his father. Matt says he appeared to the women on the way back shortly after they left. Then Luke says that the first appearance wasn't till later that day as two of the disciples were walking to Emmaus. Poor Mark missed class the day they discussed the appearance and doesn't mention it at all! And least we forget, in 1 Corinthians, Peter claims to have seen him first, but that wasn't part of the contest.

So what do we make of this remarkable comedy of errors? Well if any of you had ever been at an astounding event, or traumatic event, you quickly know what happened here. Recall for example what you and your friends and colleagues did and said on 9/11. Then compare stories with them and you will find that no one tells the same story. Oh yea the towers fell, and some planes hit them, but the story of what you and they discussed will vary quite a bit, and that is what happened here. So overwhelming was the execution and days following that event that the telling and retelling of those accounts many times before writing them down, resulted in these wildly varying accounts, no one of which can be trusted literally as the god's honest truth.

What is true is that something happened and and it was pretty shaking. What is true is that we are still astounded by that event. And what is true is how that event lands on you. What you choose to believe is your Easter experience and that is all that matters.

The Gospel According to...

I had the opportunity of talking to my son's midrasha class on the occasion of the coincidence of Maundy Thursday and erev Pesach. It was only the remnants of his class as a town dance thinned the numbers quite a bit but it was interesting to hear what might have been taught as Christianity by their teacher and to be able to contrast that with some thoughts from a modern day theology student.

I started off by separating the stories of Jesus from the history of Christianity (ugh!). I spoke of Jeshua the Rabbi and his message from the Torah - his message straight out of Deuteronomy and Leviticus. Love your enemies, free the slaves, care for the sick, feed and clothe the poor and lift up the widowed, and orphaned and children. All these things the the kids had learned as mitzvoth - and they were this Rabbi's messages. But what happened in chronicling and documenting that message was completely another story. They had no idea that at one point there were perhaps hundreds of "gospel" stories (Read Luke 1:1) but that only these four accounts were selected because they best represented what the prevailing theology of the time (ca. 100-300 CE) believed and wished to portray. They saw Christians (with plenty of good reason) as literalists but did not realize that our biblical stories, like theirs, were subject to revision and adaptation.

For example, I asked them what the Romans were like. Few really knew the unabridged version of Roman culture, of their lust for blood and sport of killing. Why then, I asked would there be little of no reference to the Roman tyranny in the books of the Christian bible? Because would you risk writing anything negative about a people who would think nothing of finding a reason to kill you? So perhaps as Rabbi Shmuel Boteach writes (Kosher Jesus), they might be inclined to whitewash the text and finger the Jews or the ruling class of the priesthood as the bad guys. After a few centuries of telling the story the the bad guys became the killers, and in the name of telling a story of crucifixion and resurrection, antisemitism became institutionalized in the catholic church.

But that was not the message of this man (who never once referred to himself as the Messiah or meshiach). I also pointed out the many similarities between a Christian service, our ritual prayers and sacraments as rooted in or directly lifted from the Shabbat service. And that today we (mostly) believe that the day before his trial and execution at the hands of the Romans, these followers and their rabbi gathered to remember the Passover, to share unleavened bread and drink wine in whatever the seder rituals of the day prescribed.

I only had a half hour to get this out and there are so many things that need to be untangled - what's this trinity thing and how can you explain the crusades. We just did not get there. But perhaps for three kids and my son, today a few of us bridged a little bit of the gap. And I would like to think that I might be invited back to talk again for a little bit more time in an open forum with the Rabbi and the whole class. That would be nice.

Love and Evil

My daughter - the real deal - posted a very moving message on the problem of evil in reaction to a tragic event in the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont. This is what I said in response.

Long ago and far away I was a Child Protection Caseworker for the VT Department of Social Services. Though my stint was short lived, because of the nature of the work, I witnessed horrors that humans can inflict on each other. Not nameless, faceless strangers lurking in the bushes - fathers, and uncles and mothers, brutalizing and molesting their own. I left because of the violent nightmares of what I would do if anyone should harm one of my daughters. The dreams would make Saw and Chuckie and Freddy cringe.

The evil that lives inside each of us is horrible. As a peace seeking and nonviolent man, I embarrassingly admit that chromosome is part of my DNA as well. We (I) endanger ourselves and others when we egotistically deny its presence. Its roots run deep in our heritage.

Think of it like this: in the history of humanity there has never been an era that was devoid of war - sometimes global, often regional, but always there killing and thinning the ranks of the human species. And who do you think survived through all those wars, the nice and the gentle ones? Hardly! The survivors, and the progenitors of us all were the conquering tribes - the killers, the rapists and the raped. Violence in in our bloodstream.

But as you so wisely pointed out, that is not what beats our hearts; that is not what causes us to breathe and live on. Within us also is love - call it what you will - I name that "god." So our human genetic predisposition toward evil - not our fallenness - our natural selection in action, is confronted by our life itself. But the scary part is that we appear to have been gifted with free choice. That is the rub, as the Bard would say. Each day we either surrender to the love that lives us into being or the hate and evil that is our birthright. And when we go unconscious love often takes second place.

My prayer today is that we hold tightly onto that holy and sacred force in us, in full awareness that we must root out the other force, the evil that courses through our veins. Every great sage has said it: love conquers all; love is stronger than hate; love is all we need. May we choose love today, and tomorrow and each tomorrow after that.

I am so sad for my former colleagues and neighbors and family who, living in the "Kingdom" must face that specter today. May love rule the day.