Come, Holy Spirit!

This may not be the best time for me to write. My heart is heavy—grieving. I’m not angry; although, anger surrounds us and increasingly becomes the norm among some parts of our American population. I’m sure I’ll be angry at some point. Anger is a normal part of grief.

I find myself on the verge—and sometimes into the abyss—of tears more and more frequently. I recall that dreadful news clip of the fiery crash of the Hindenburg, and the sobbing voice of the reporter, “Oh! The humanity! The humanity!”

How calloused have we become when we so rarely are moved to tears at the sight of human suffering? What hideous kind of demon possesses one human to kneel on the neck of another human—a human who is face-down on the ground, handcuffed, with two other humans kneeling on his back—a human who is crying, “I can’t breathe! Please!”? And what kind of inhuman creature looks on, apparently more concerned about the camera that is recording it all than about the human who is gasping for his dying breath?

“Kneeling on a man’s neck is an extreme and dangerous step, well out of bounds for ordinary police procedures. The kneeling officer appears to have a long track record of complaints.”[1] I’ve seen three videos, each from a different perspective. In none of them did it appear that Floyd was resisting or uncooperative.

I know: there is a report that George Floyd had preconditions “including coronary artery disease and hypertensive heart disease”; and the preliminary autopsy showed, “no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation.” The report said death likely was caused by the "combined effect of Floyd being restrained by the police, his underlying health conditions, and any potential intoxicants in his system.”[2]

Does such an analysis diminish the inhumanity of three humans sworn “to serve and protect?” As a medical layman I have to ask, “Would such unnecessary use of force exacerbate the preexisting factors, thereby possibly—even probably—contributing to Floyd’s death?”

But, I linger too long on one specific instance, when my grief is over the increasing commonness of justifying inhuman behavior on the basis of ideological absolutism. The controversy over where to stand in relation to George Floyd’s death appears to line up consistently with every other controversy in America: conservatives line up against liberals.

There seems little possibility that there ever will be an issue in which both liberals and conservatives agree. And there seems little possibility ever again that those disagreements will be pursued with respect and integrity. I see very little indication that anyone on either side wants to resolve any of the issues that divide them. Most just want to win the fight.

And so, I grieve. And the tears come more frequently.

We are watching something cancerous grow faster and faster each cay. It is, in my estimation, the satanic spawn of absolutized individualism run amok. Don’t misunderstand. I serve a master whose sacrificial love for individuals is unsurpassed in human history. But, Ayn Rand notwithstanding, the master I serve also called his followers to love one another sacrificially, to serve one another in humility, even to the point of washing one another’s feet, and to love one’s neighbor as oneself. And he defined one’s neighbor in his Parable of the Good Samaritan—a parable, incidentally, about reaching across lines of ethnicity to serve anyone who is in need.

The individual is important, and the individual’s importance is embellished in service to other individuals. Our individual importance reaches its highest potential when we “lose ourselves”. All four gospels report Jesus saying, “Those who find their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it. (Matthew 10:39 NRSV). I like the way the Message Paraphrase puts it: “If your first concern is to look after yourself, you’ll never find yourself. But if you forget about yourself and look to me, you’ll find both yourself and me.”

I write as a Christian Pastor to Christians; however, Christians are as divided and as hostile as the rest of the culture (which is a primary reason the church has been in decline for a half-century), and I struggle to find hope that peace and reconciliation can come from Christianity so divided. Therefore, my appeal is to all who are of a similar mindset, regardless of your spiritual base. I believe respect, integrity and compassion have no ideological or credal boundaries, and that people of all spiritualities can unite in the effort to be agents of healing and reconciliation.

Today is Pentecost. Christians celebrate it as the birthday of the church and recite the biblical story of the Holy Spirit of God descending upon a broken, frightened little band of Jesus’ disciples. The Spirit filled them, and they turned the world upside down. I suspect that our nation will not be healed by human effort apart from that same Spirit.

So, come Holy Spirit. Come as wind and breathe into us a passion for the humility of Jesus, who washed his disciples’ feet.

Come Holy Spirit. Come as fire and burn away all the divisive arrogance that solidifies our human understandings of your purpose.

Come Holy Spirit. Come as a dove and bring us peace.

That’s the way it looks through the Flawed Glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim

---

[1] https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/george-floyd-death-minneapolis-riots-justice-requires-order/. I point out that the “National Review” is a conservative source. The inherent danger of such restraint was reported in several additional sources.

[2] https://www.insider.com/george-floyd-non-responsive-before-officer-took-knee-off-neck-2020-5

Some Thoughts RE: Public Education

Our education system is under attack from a segment of our conservative population. Public education and higher education, iconic foundations of our strength as a nation, are being undermined; indeed, to some degree, it appears they are being dismantled intentionally.

It has been said, and I concur, that democracy needs an informed electorate in order to thrive. I know: there are some who split hairs over whether we are a democracy or a republic. That’s a smoke screen. The reality is that we are both. Democracy identifies the source of our authority (we the people), while republic identifies the way we organize our governing process.

So, let’s not try to sidetrack the conversation or misdirect it. The education system upon which our wellbeing depends is in jeopardy, and in some quarters its demise is welcomed—even orchestrated! As a result, our freedom is threatened.

I am educated. I have a bachelor’s degree from a state school, and two post graduate degrees, although neither is a product of public or state systems. I often have been called “over-educated,” and have been accused of being brainwashed by a leftist/liberal system. My intelligence has been questioned by an implication that my thoughts are not my own, but, rather, simply “regurgitated leftist talking points.”

It’s true: with all my degrees I didn’t learn to weld or to repair a washing machine or to run a lathe or milling machine. But I have rebuilt two automobile motors, a clutch assembly and more carburetors than I can count—in my garage. I also have rebuilt a washing machine and two dryers. And I was able to do those things because the greatest benefit from higher education, to me, has been the ability to do research and to educate myself. And I was doing that prior to Google; indeed, before I ever had touched a computer or a cell phone. Yes, Google has extended that benefit and made it more easily accessible; nevertheless, sometimes the Card Catalogue and the Dewey Decimal System remain the most productive resource.

The greatest benefit of education, in my experience, was not the content of what I learned (although that is of great value), but, rather, the process of learning, itself. Using the process, I have educated myself in management and administration procedures (an area that was inadequately covered in my seminary experience) and have kept up with emerging trends in my profession.

So, why is there such strong opposition to public education and higher education? Can we be honest? I suspect the most basic reasons are because public schools consider evolution as a valid theory, they expose students to a variety of social and political ideologies, and they don’t embrace and enforce a very specific theological doctrine. To some extent the opposition to public education is a renaissance of the age-old legalism/diversity dichotomy that characterized the confrontations between Jesus and the Pharisees of his day.

I have a hunch that if opposition could be quantified and measured, the opposition to public education would be seen to grow directly out of the so-called “Scopes Monkey Trial,” and it would be seen to pick up steam with each succeeding expression of public tolerance toward social, cultural, ideological and theological diversity. The opposition is not to public education, per se, but to diversity, which is a direct result of, and therefore a prerequisite to, personal freedom.

Perhaps the half-century decline in effectiveness of mainline and evangelical churches has played a role in the increasing opposition to public education. Since churches have lost their effectiveness and (maybe more importantly) their influence and power, there may be some who wish to shift their pedagogical responsibility to the education system; that is, to have the public schools do what the church and the family have not been able to do effectively. I have no data to support that idea; but, it’s hypothesis that might be researched.

Or, maybe those who oppose public education are seeking a scapegoat, and thus are blaming the education system for the decline in the influence of church. Again, it’s a question; not a statement.

So, what can be done to resolve the ongoing disruption of our children’s and youth’s development? I don’t know if I have the slightest idea. Historically, in circumstances of ideological gridlock, when either or both sides have been unwilling to consider any variation from their own specific doctrines, our freedom has been compromised; and virtually nothing has been resolved.

Sadly, I think the gridlock resulting from such a refusal to negotiate puts us in a win/lose situation. “My-way-or-the-highway” always does that; but, it doesn’t have to be that way. It is possible to resolve any issue—ANY ISSUE! The first step is to define the issue in terms of need. Most people define most problems in terms of some preferred solution. And the saddest part of all is that too many people don’t really want to resolve the issues between them and others. They just want to win the fight.

Until there is a willingness to enter with integrity into a valid conflict resolution process, I suspect it will remain a win/lose situation that will continue to be resolved—one way or the other—at the polls.

That’s how it looks through the flawed glass that is my world view.

Together in the Walk,

Jim