Friday, April 29, 2011

Femms for ALL

SMilnor: Susan, for some months now, it¹s felt like a war has been waged on women's health care and reproductive rights. But one particular development sent me over the edge.

SMinasian: Edge? I feel like I am just off the edge already.

SMilnor: Apparently, the Republicans are set to pass a bill in the House of Representatives that would require Internal Revenue agents to investigate how American women have paid for abortions. They would, essentially, be able to demand proof of rape or incest. What the heck is going on? Am I losing my mind, or is the worst kind of invasion into our privacy? Aren't these the same people who want government to stay out of our lives?

SMinasian: OK. Šo let's talk about sin. This is sinful. You are not losing your mind. I cannot believe how far back we have gone. How could they possibly expect a person to provide proof of rape or incest in that context? I think they hate women, and I think they want to have power over women. This makes me wonder if we have gotten further ahead than I thought and it's scaring them. Listen, they don't want government to stay out of our lives; they want the government to stay out of their pocketbooks. That¹s all. It comes down to money, power and control.

SMilnor: Oh, I think you just said it exactly, my friend, about our lives and our pocketbooks. It is so true. But I want to go back to what you said about these acts being sinful. Granted, my concept of sin is always evolving, and frankly, sometimes skating around on the ice, but it seems to me that sin is what we choose to do that both hurts other people and makes us less whole, more alienated from the force of good. I can't understand why the people who launch these attacks can't see that when they deny women maternity care, they are hurting the children they claim to care so much about. And why would anyone want to deny women pap smears or testing for sexually transmitted diseases or breast exams?

SMinasian: Susan, you have heard the phrase "It's not about the trash." It's used to describe those moments when the thing people are arguing about it NOT what the real issue is. It's not about any of these services. It's about power and control. I think the fact that women have become more powerful and we are now in a season when some younger women don't even know what all the fuss is about is all a part of this. In some ways men in general don't know what the rules are any more. They don't know what it means to be a man. There are also women who are afraid. If they have more choices or more of a sense of agency, then that means there is more responsibility. Let's face it: a world of nothing but black and white is easy, oppressive but easy. So our sin is our fear, abuse of power, and our desire for control. In the meantime people who are in the margins and people who are poor will pay the heaviest price.

Smilnor: I'm not sure I agree that our fear and our desire for control are the sins. I've been thinking a lot lately about what constitutes sin and whether feelings (fear, desire) ever do. But I sure agree that the use of fear to manipulate people for selfish interests and the use of power to control people out of greed are sinful.

SMinasian: Exactly. That's it. It's what those things lead to. When it comes to how our government legislates policy about and around women's bodies, fear and control are what oppress people.

SMilnor: And you know what? I think these legislators and advocates for restriction never contemplate that they themselves (if they are female) or their wives or daughters or mothers or sisters could be affected by these draconian policies and laws. They are the "haves," and they are confident that they will always be the haves. But now what was it that Jesus said. . ."Do unto others. . ." "Treat your neighbor. . . "

SMinasian: Well, I agree again! They don't think they will ever be in the situation to need the very policies they destroy and the people they do not protect.

SMilnor: This is related to what I was thinking about with our title "Femmes for All." What happens to women -- their welfare, their health – affects everyone. Hillary Clinton often says that countries in which women have rights and are accorded justice are countries that do better, countries that progress. It applies equally here. If we do not insure equal protection under the law and basic health care to women and children, everyone, including men, will suffer.

SMinasian: Don't you think it's interesting that we always hear politicians talk about how we go into other countries because they are so behind, and they always pull that "women need access to education" card? Then when the women get an education and make choices for themselves, then say...well...maybe we have gone too far. Let's pull the reins back.

SMilnor: Yes...that is so true, Susan. Education is fine until women get it and try to do something with it, try to change the world. On an even more fundamental level, though, consider how important it is to give women health care because we are, to a considerable extent, the ones who care for the children. And it's also women who bear the brunt of caring for extended families. I'm not saying that we deserve reproductive rights and health care just because we take care of others. We deserve health care because we are people, and we deserve reproductive rights because as full human beings, we are the ones who should control the Choices with which we are most intimately and morally involved. But still, it's stupid policy not to take care of the caregivers.

SMinasian: Equal care for all. That's what "femmes for all" means to me Susan: a world in which we care for all people equally. What would our country look like if classism, racism, sexism and heteronormativity did not have the unhealthy and destructive hold it has on us? I want women AND men to feel valued and cared for. I want women AND men to have access to what they need for health care that protects, heals, and supports them. I want children to grow up knowing that we all care about the value of their bodies, minds and souls. Femmes for ALL. Yes...for all...men, women, children.

Smilnor: Well, Amen to that. And on this one, Susan, there can be no backward motion. The ONLY way is the way forward.

Femmes of ALL

SMilnor: Susan, for some months now, it¹s felt like a war has been waged on women's health care and reproductive rights. But one particular development sent me over the edge.

SMinasian: Edge? I feel like I am just off the edge already.

SMilnor: Apparently, the Republicans are set to pass a bill in the House of Representatives that would require Internal Revenue agents to investigate how American women have paid for abortions. They would, essentially, be able to demand proof of rape or incest. What the heck is going on? Am I losing my mind, or is the worst kind of invasion into our privacy? Aren't these the same people who want government to stay out of our lives?

SMinasian: OK. Šo let's talk about sin. This is sinful. You are not losing your mind. I cannot believe how far back we have gone. How could they possibly expect a person to provide proof of rape or incest in that context? I think they hate women, and I think they want to have power over women. This makes me wonder if we have gotten further ahead than I thought and it's scaring them. Listen, they don't want government to stay out of our lives; they want the government to stay out of their pocketbooks. That¹s all. It comes down to money, power and control.

SMilnor: Oh, I think you just said it exactly, my friend, about our lives and our pocketbooks. It is so true. But I want to go back to what you said about these acts being sinful. Granted, my concept of sin is always evolving, and frankly, sometimes skating around on the ice, but it seems to me that sin is what we choose to do that both hurts other people and makes us less whole, more alienated from the force of good. I can't understand why the people who launch these attacks can't see that when they deny women maternity care, they are hurting the children they claim to care so much about. And why would anyone want to deny women pap smears or testing for sexually transmitted diseases or breast exams?

SMinasian: Susan, you have heard the phrase "It's not about the trash." It's used to describe those moments when the thing people are arguing about it NOT what the real issue is. It's not about any of these services. It's about power and control. I think the fact that women have become more powerful and we are now in a season when some younger women don't even know what all the fuss is about is all a part of this. In some ways men in general don't know what the rules are any more. They don't know what it means to be a man. There are also women who are afraid. If they have more choices or more of a sense of agency, then that means there is more responsibility. Let's face it: a world of nothing but black and white is easy, oppressive but easy. So our sin is our fear, abuse of power, and our desire for control. In the meantime people who are in the margins and people who are poor will pay the heaviest price.

Smilnor: I'm not sure I agree that our fear and our desire for control are the sins. I've been thinking a lot lately about what constitutes sin and whether feelings (fear, desire) ever do. But I sure agree that the use of fear to manipulate people for selfish interests and the use of power to control people out of greed are sinful.

SMinasian: Exactly. That's it. It's what those things lead to. When it comes to how our government legislates policy about and around women's bodies, fear and control are what oppress people.

SMilnor: And you know what? I think these legislators and advocates for restriction never contemplate that they themselves (if they are female) or their wives or daughters or mothers or sisters could be affected by these draconian policies and laws. They are the "haves," and they are confident that they will always be the haves. But now what was it that Jesus said. . ."Do unto others. . ." "Treat your neighbor. . . "

SMinasian: Well, I agree again! They don't think they will ever be in the situation to need the very policies they destroy and the people they do not protect.

SMilnor: This is related to what I was thinking about with our title "Femmes for All." What happens to women -- their welfare, their health – affects everyone. Hillary Clinton often says that countries in which women have rights and are accorded justice are countries that do better, countries that progress. It applies equally here. If we do not insure equal protection under the law and basic health care to women and children, everyone, including men, will suffer.

SMinasian: Don't you think it's interesting that we always hear politicians talk about how we go into other countries because they are so behind, and they always pull that "women need access to education" card? Then when the women get an education and make choices for themselves, then say...well...maybe we have gone too far. Let's pull the reins back.

SMilnor: Yes...that is so true, Susan. Education is fine until women get it and try to do something with it, try to change the world. On an even more fundamental level, though, consider how important it is to give women health care because we are, to a considerable extent, the ones who care for the children. And it's also women who bear the brunt of caring for extended families. I'm not saying that we deserve reproductive rights and health care just because we take care of others. We deserve health care because we are people, and we deserve reproductive rights because as full human beings, we are the ones who should control the choices with which we are most intimately and morally involved. But still, it's stupid policy not to take care of the caregivers.

SMinasian: Equal care for all. That's what "femmes for all" means to me Susan: a world in which we care for all people equally. What would our country look like if classism, racism, sexism and heteronormativity did not have the unhealthy and destructive hold it has on us? I want women AND men to feel valued and cared for. I want women AND men to have access to what they need for health care that protects, heals, and supports them. I want children to grow up knowing that we all care about the value of their bodies, minds and souls. Femmes for ALL. Yes...for all...men, women, children.

Smilnor: Well, Amen to that. And on this one, Susan, there can be no backward motion. The ONLY way is the way forward.

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Did I Ask For It?

SMilnor: There has been so much to feel heartbroken about in the devastation of Japan. I experienced a particular kind of sadness, though, when I heard a Japanese woman say that surely her people must have done something wrong to bring down so much wrath from the heavens. I surely understand why people struggle with the “Why us?” question following horrors like this, but disturbs me to realize how easily the victims of tragedy feel guilty and responsible. Isn’t it enough to bear the burden of loss and suffering without also having to bear the weight of believing you caused it?

SMinasian: When you first shared this with me, I was a little taken back. I don’t usually think this way when huge “natural” disasters happen. And then quickly I realized that yes…I do think there are messages that we give people along these lines. I think many cultures have this mindset, and it is indeed very sad. Susan, we are so used to the North American rhetoric of “those people who did this to us” mentality. I also wonder what the faith tradition is of the woman who expressed these words. I hate to say it, but I think Christians more often than not have this idea that if they do things right, nothing bad will happen. The reality is that life is messy, and you can do everything “right” and bad things will still happen.

SMilnor: I think that’s true. Often people believe it won’t happen to them because they are right and God is on their side. After I heard this comment, Susan, I then heard that Glenn Beck said that while he didn’t know what was in God’s mind when God caused this disaster, he thought the Japanese people ought to understand that they haven’t been doing something right. He went on to suggest they should realize they need to adopt the Ten Commandments instead of practicing Buddhism. It’s even worse to use a tragedy like this to blame and judge other people and their religion. Plus, I think he insulted not only a major world faith tradition, but God as well.

SMinasian: UGH. I was afraid of this. I wonder if Glenn Beck has ever read the Gospel of Mark. I’m gonna go Biblical on ya…but just bear with me. In the 12th chapter we read: “And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, “Which commandment is the first of all?” Jesus answered, “The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.’

SMilnor: That’s fascinating, Susan. I’ve never thought about these two commandments together and what each might mean taken with the other. The first mandates the second. Wow! Thinking about it that way, it seems like a pretty clear message that we should treat people from other religious traditions with equal respect. I like that. Of course, it was Beck who was making this into a conflict between traditions. I think the poor Japanese woman was just devastated and asking, in a way, “How? Why?”

SMinasian: You know…Beck has a real opportunity to make connections that comfort others during a time like that. “How? Why?” are laments from the deepest part of a person when such tragedy strikes. Did I ask for it? Another question that I can even remember asking on occasion. It’s a powerful question. Some people do not ask that question. Some say…why not me?

I heard another person say that part of the problem of our competing ideologies is that we have such a sense of being special. None of us is special. All of us are special. I move through my life not expecting real life to happen. Sometimes. There are so many things to distract our minds from the possibilities of what could happen and what is going on elsewhere. That’s probably a good thing. But…we are all vulnerable. So “ask for it”? No, I say. YOU just happened to be there.

SMilnor: That’s it exactly. Things happen, and we just happen to be there. Then we deal with those things as best we can with the grace of God available to us all, as well as our own strengths and understanding. If I believed in that other reality, where God punishes that group of people and saves this group. . . all on the basis of what they believe. . . not what they do, not whether they are compassionate and caring, but on what they believe or which scripture they hold sacred . . . I would despair, Susan. Of course, I’ve just worked myself up into a classic Universalist confession, I guess. And I mean it. We are all children of God.

SMinasian: Yes. May it be so. Blessed be!

Friday, April 15, 2011

Raging Revs

SMilnor: In our last – also our first – entry, we talked a little about being women from the South. We might not actually have been Southern Belles (please tell me we weren’t), but we did grow up learning from our culture that we should be “nice.” Nice Southern girls don’t make trouble, do they? They don’t speak out; they don’t have strong opinions. In short, they play dumb. But neither of us could manage that in the long run. How did we end up as women with strong voices who can give a loud, impassioned sermon from the pulpit? How, in other words, did we end up as “ragin’ revs”?

SMinasian: Susan…I may have been born in the South, but I am a second generation Armenian. That made everything very different. The “being nice” in my family was interpreted as “fit in – assimilate”. Now, nobody used those words explicitly. However, I got the message very early. I was called the “N word” in kindergarten because my skin was dark. I wasn’t a part of an ethnic or racial group people could quickly identify. Our Armenian identity was shared in the house, but we were cautious about doing that outside. In those days being “different” was not a compliment and I am not sure it is now. My rage began when I realized I was being judged and categorized without people “knowing me”.

SMilnor: That’s a sobering picture, Susan. And it was very different from my experience. I was so conditioned to defer and accommodate that once I was walking in a downtown area of a city, turned the corner, saw myself in a window I was walking toward, and apologized. I was a long way from raging then.

SMinasian: I can be very pastoral. I really can. However, my rage can get going these days when I watch the news, read the paper, look at some Facebook posts or read some books. I find that my blood pressure starts to rise. There is a rage inside of me that rises when I hear about injustice in all its various forms.

Right now I find that the radical right wing supported by many of the so-called “religious” folks in this country is driving me crazy. I don’t know how a person can be a Christian and support a national budget that oppresses the poor.

How can people complain about celebrities who have babies out of a marriage out of one side of their mouths then throw out slurs to women who seek safe abortions out the other? You can’t win.

SMilnor: I know what you mean. I can be pastoral too, but that same rage rises in me. These days I am deeply disturbed by the assault on women’s rights and health care that you mention. How can mostly male politicians dare to wage this war? My deepest anger rises these days, though, at the concerted machinations designed to strip all political power from the working and middle class. Our elected officials are taking money and opportunity from those who can least afford it, then turning around and giving it to the wealthiest in tax breaks and corporate welfare. And they say that the left is waging class warfare???? This is worse class warfare and redistribution of wealth than I ever imagined could happen in America. How can these people call themselves Christian – or religious at all – when they do exactly the opposite of what Jesus advocated?

SMinasian: See, Susan…I think the Christian call to follow Jesus is harder than most Christians want to admit. Jesus said sell it all and take care of the poor, and yet the mega churches or what I call big box churches preach a prosperity Gospel that goes against that. UGH!

What is it about people voting against their best interests and the care of our neighbors? What’s the deal, Susan? Can you hear my rage?

SMilnor: Sister, I not only hear it; I feel it! Very few wealthy people vote against their economic interests, but a lot of working and middle class folks do. Since the 70’s and 80’s people’s fears and prejudices have been used to get them to do just that – support candidates who not only aren’t going to help them, but who will actually hurt them.

For most people of my faith tradition, there’s not much tension with a text or a tradition when it comes to justice issues. But Unitarian Universalists constantly struggle with speaking out on current issues from the pulpit. Oh, don’t get me wrong: we have a lot of very powerful voices for justice. But many UUs feel that you shouldn’t bring politics into the pulpit and that preachers can too easily use the pulpit to advocate their personal political agendas. I know that it’s possible to do that – and I try to be careful about that when I’m a Susan-in-the-pulpit -- but we UUs proudly declare passionate voices from our past, say, for abolition or woman suffrage, as religious and prophetic. It’s only political soapbox rhetoric if it exists in the present! I always like to imagine that you Christians have an easier time of this because Jesus was so clearly “political;” he spoke truth to power and he did it in service to God. But, then, maybe I’m being naïve. The grass is always greener . . .

SMinasian: Are you kidding? See this is where both of us get into the grass is greener on the other side conversations. It isn’t easier for Christians. The only thing we have in common with each other is Jesus. NOW, how we understand him, interpret him and appropriate what we believe he was about is all over the place. I don’t have an anthropomorphic image of God but if I did this is when I would say Christians make God cry!

SMilnor – Just tell me this, Susan. What is it in your tradition’s theology that pushes you to be a Ragin’ Rev sometimes? I think for me, in my tradition, it is this. If we advocate the worth and dignity of every human being as one of our principles; if we believe in a loving God who “saves” all souls; then we cannot ignore the plight of suffering people, and we cannot deny the importance of having a voice in the public arena. We cannot ignore justice. That great Unitarian Ralph Waldo Emerson said that real preaching has to be passed “through the fire of thought.” Were I to dare to add to the Emerson’s formulation, I would say it also has to be passed through the fire of compassion.

SMinasian: While many people say Jesus was not political, I cannot help but see him that way. I think all of us are political. Jesus turned tables over in the temple. He spoke out against the radical right of his time. He intentionally lived in the margins and surrounded himself with people who were…let’s say questionable. I think on some level he had to have some sense of rage in him. Now, it is possible that on most days he was calm like Obama (no, I am not equating Obama with Jesus), and on other days he was probably more outspoken. We don’t really know. I just think rage is something that is not always the boisterous in- your-face-behavior. Rage for me is the wrong we see, hear and know that stirs up the call to do something, to respond to the call for change. It’s that prophet gene. I wonder when they will have a test for that? So I preach from the passion of study, reason, experience and I always begin with scripture. Now, if scripture doesn’t spark some rage…at least some of it…well…I don’t know what does. I’m saying that lovingly of course. Oh, and let me say this. Jesus did get nailed on a tree. You don’t get there without being a trouble-maker.

SMilnor: You pretty much said it there, Susan, and in your uniquely effective way. I guess we’re a long way from how we ended up as Ragin’ Revs instead of Southern Belles. But maybe not. Our convictions about the world, and life, have been in our hearts and souls from a young age. It might even, as you suggest, be genetic. And that, my friend, may be the reason we couldn’t be nice.

SMinasian: I think Southern Belles are stereotyped as sweet little ladies who were always taken care of. I know from experience that this is true. I also know that some of the strongest women for justice and liberation have come from the South. There is no way that advances in the South have happened without women. We were both born on land that soaked up a lot of pain, Susan. We come from ancestors in our own blood lines that have struggled trails of tears. So, yes, we are from the South, and we might even be Southern Belles. Why the hell not?! Let’s claim it and rage on!!! Without rifles of course.

Friday, April 8, 2011

Duologue

Duologue


SMilnor: So here we are, my friend: two Susans out of the pulpit. That’s not a job update, by the way. But we are both clergy women not serving congregations at the moment who still seem to have a lot to say. Wouldn’t you agree? I’ve always thought it would be fun to tease out topics with someone whose mind is electric. And that’s you!


SMinasian: You make me laugh! I think we are right where we need to be. We have always preached with conviction, and so why would we stop now? I think it’s great that we don’t have one congregation. This technology gives us an opportunity to speak beyond the church building. So yes…let’s tease out topics, my friend.


SMilnor: We have a lot of common ground. We are both Southern women, and clergy, both mothers of a daughter, both progressive in our views, yet we come at questions from two different faith traditions. There you are, ordained in the United Church of Christ and committed Christian, and, here I am, ordained by a Unitarian Universalist Congregation and a broad theist, influenced by feminist, ecological, and nature-based spiritualities.


SMinasian: Yes, Susan! We are Southern women with a twist: we are from the South, but we are not totally of the South. We are clergy women who know what it’s like to be discounted by some men and disappointed by some women. AND our daughters. Well…they are great…so far. You know, whenever I preach, I talk about how the United Church of Christ has been known as Unitarians Considering Christianity or Utterly Confused Christians. It always gets a laugh. While the UCC talks about having a broad continuum…I’m not sure we are so great at living that out or even getting that message out. I think the UCC and the UUA folks have so much to offer the world, but we do such a lousy job of getting the message out. That’s some of what excites me about us doing this blog.


SMilnor: You said it, Sister! And I think you just referenced a slew of topics we could take on. By the way, I totally agree about those of us in liberal religion not presenting our message well enough. One of the problems is that we are always differentiating ourselves from everyone else. One thing I want to do in this blog is find common ground and mutual appreciation. On that note, let me just confess something. I love my Unitarian Universalist faith tradition; it’s one of the few places I could fit with honesty. But there are some things I envy in your tradition. I am fascinated by the thought of having one common text from which to understand the world AND preach. Sometimes I feel like the UU freedom to preach from ANYTHING and EVERYTHING is overwhelming. Where do you start? I’m always pushing myself to do something serious enough and worthy of people’s time and attention. But, then, maybe that’s true for every preacher. Anyway, I look forward to exchanging ideas with someone firmly rooted in one theology and scripture.


SMinasian: One theology? Sometimes. It’s the scripture piece that I think means a lot to me as a preacher/pastor in my tradition. While it isn’t perfect, I follow a three year cycle of scripture called the Lectionary. Many people will tell you that following this Lectionary keeps them honest and their agenda out of their preaching. I don’t think that is really true. I think any preacher can impose their agenda into any text…scripture or not.

The Gospels are where I live. I find the life and earthly ministry of Jesus to be the centerpiece of how I understand my own faith and at the same time the laments of the Old Testament give my heart some comfort as an Armenian American who is always seeking justice for a Genocide that is in continual denial by the Turkish Government.

What I love about your tradition, Susan, is the willingness to broaden the wisdom for other sources. The revelations that are inspired by God can be revealed through stories, poetry, film, paintings, dance and music. I think the way Unitarian Universalists are able to see Holy inspiration in other places is so liberating. While the United Church of Christ talks about the “Still Speaking God,” I think there are times when the Unitarian Universalists embrace this still speaking voice more seriously.


SMilnor: I hope we do that. I really do. We can all learn so much from each other. And on that note, Susan, let’s set out the agenda. Here we are going to engage not just in dialogue, but in“duologue”: – the conversation of two good friends who are perfectly willing to agree when we do (probably a lot of the time) but who can tease out nuances and even disagreements as they come up, and, most of all, do it with appreciation for the other’s different perspective. One of my favorite quotes is from Barry Holstun Lopez in his book Of Wolves and Men: “Someone else does not have to be wrong in order for me to be right. “

What do you think?


SMinasian: Amen, Sister!!! So let’s give it a try. What’s our first “topic to tease”? I hope you have a lot of hairspray!


SMilnor: I always have hairspray. What say we do a piece on “Raging Revs” – the tension between being sweet Southern belles and passionate preachers willing to take on the times?


SMinasian: Let’s go!