In the Garden of Spirituality – Karen Armstrong

“We are not on earth to guard a museum,
but to cultivate a flowering garden of life.”

– Pope John XXIII

The Wild Reed’s series of reflections on religion and spirituality continues with an excerpt from the preface of Karen Armstrong’s book, Islam: A Short History.

In this particular excerpt, Armstrong explores the “central paradox of the religious life” and how it is expressed in the religion of Islam.

_______________________________________

The central paradox of the religious life is that it seeks transcendence, a dimension of existence that goes beyond our mundane lives, but that human beings can only experience this transcendent reality in earthly, physical phenomena. People have sensed the divine in rocks, mountains, temple buildings, law codes, written texts, or in other men and women. We never experience transcendence directly: our ecstasy is always “earthed,” enshrined in something or someone here below. Religious people are trained to look beneath the unpromising surface to find the sacred within it. They have to use their creative imaginations. Jean-Paul Sartre defined the imagination as the ability to think of what is not present. Human beings are religious creatures because they are imaginative; they are so constituted that they are compelled to search for hidden meaning and to achieve an ecstasy that makes them feel fully alive. Each tradition encourages the faithful to focus their attention on an earthly symbol that is peculiarly its own, and to teach themselves to see the divine in it.

In Islam, Muslims have looked for God in history. Their sacred scripture the Quran, gave them a historical mission. Their chief duty was to create a just community in which all members, even the most weak and vulnerable, were treated with absolute respect. The experience of building such a society and living in it would give them intimations of the divine, because they would be living in accordance with God's will.


For further thoughts on transcendence, see the previous Wild Reed post:
Intimate Soliloquies

For more of Karen Armstrong at The Wild Reed, see:
Boorganna (Part 2)
A Return to the Spirit
A Dangerous Medieval Conviction

See also:
What Muslims Want
Informed and Helpful Perspectives on the "Ground Zero Mosque" Controversy
Irene Khan: Shaking Things Up Down Under
The Sufi Way

Image: Michael J. Bayly.

You Don't Say!

I found this old advertisement on the recently discovered Planet Homo!
I hope it gives you a laugh – or at least brings a smile to your face!


Related Off-site Links:
The Most Homoerotic Vintage Ads of All Time
Have a Gay Old Time
History of the Gay Pride/Rainbow Flag

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
One Out of Ten
A Beer Ad With a Difference
A Car Ad With a Difference
Oops!

Quote of the Day

I think it is fair to say that a great wave of indignation, much of it well-placed, is now unfolding against the [Roman] Catholic Church. No matter what language you speak, the perception that the Catholic Church is above the law or that it is not bound to the same ethic of truthfulness as everyone else is a haunting indictment that knows no boundaries. Many feel betrayed. Many just walk away.

But as more and more Catholics walk away from active participation in the life of the church or take a pass because of what they see as a lack of adherence to the truth, absolutists gain more and more ground, especially among the leadership that is only too happy to cater to the will of those who delight in flattering obedience.

When discipleship is solely focused on blind obedience, leadership has an easy way out. When this happens, I believe, the real mission of the church suffers.

To where, then, does discipleship lead? To faith and hope, of course. And ultimately it leads to love and justice, the practical exponent of love. It is the road that carries us home to God. “Charity begins at home,” Charles Dickens used to say, “and justice begins next door.”

– Anne M. Burke, Illinois Supreme Court Justice
“The Truth Shall Set Us Free”
U. S. Catholic
June 2010

Informed and Helpful Perspectives on the “Ground Zero Mosque” Controversy

I find the perspectives reflected in the following quotes to be informed, well-reasoned and thus very helpful in understanding the controversy around the proposed Islamic community center near Ground Zero. Accordingly, I share them this evening via The Wild Reed.

____________________________________

The proposed building is not a mosque; it will be a community center, akin to a YMCA, and will include a mosque – and it is not even at Ground Zero. It is two blocks away, out of view of the World Trade Center site.

Opposition to the center stems largely from anti-Muslim prejudice and fear, which like all prejudice is based on ignorance. It is hard to imagine that a proposed synagogue or cathedral in the vicinity of Ground Zero would arouse such hostility. Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin and others implicitly (and sometimes explicitly) draw a direct link between the Islamic faith and the 9/11 attacks, which claimed several dozen Muslims among their 3,000 victims, victims who hailed from more than 50 countries. This was a crime and a tragedy for the entire world.

All the major religions and their scriptures can be interpreted for peace and tolerance, or for aggression and intolerance. Under the banner of Christianity, some of history’s worst evils have been perpetrated: the trans-Atlantic slave trade, racism, colonialism, imperialism and even genocide were promoted or justified with biblical scripture.

As we all know, Islam has been usurped in recent years by cynical figures like Osama bin Laden to justify their deeds and win recruits. But fortunately, only a very small minority of the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims support or condone terrorism. In fact, violent perversions of Islam are a problem above all for Muslims. “Islamist” fanatics have always targeted fellow Muslims whom the extremists deem to be wayward.

– John Cox
“The First Amendment Applies to Muslims As Well”
CommonDreams.org
August 22, 2010

This page has supported construction of the center, whose name, Cordoba House, is taken from the Spanish city that stood for interfaith tolerance in the Middle Ages and whose stated mission is “promoting positive interaction between the Muslim world and the West.” Anti-Defamation League leader Abraham H. Foxman and Rabbi Marvin Hier of the Wiesenthal Center, however, argue that building an Islamic center so close to ground zero would be insensitive to the victims of violence committed in the name of Islam. “If after World War II, the German government had created a German cultural center across the street from Auschwitz, it would have been vehemently opposed by families of victims because it would be too much to bear,” Wiesenthal told The Times. But the examples are not parallel. The Nazi government of Germany carried out the Holocaust. The 9/11 attacks were committed by religious fanatics with a political agenda; not all Muslims were complicit, nor should they be held responsible as a group for the atrocities.

Certainly the victims’ families — Christians, Jews and Muslims alike — should be heard and their feelings considered, but theirs are not the only voices to be taken into account. America has an interest in religious freedom, in fighting bigotry of all kinds and in seeking relationships with adherents of Islam who are committed to peace and interfaith dialogue, as the group behind the center appears to be. The center, which has been denigrated as the “ground zero mosque,” would include an auditorium, art exhibition space and bookstore, all of which present opportunities for interfaith discussions and activities.

– Editorial
“‘Ground Zero Mosque’ Should Go Forward”
Los Angeles Times
August 11, 2010

Over sixty percent of Americans still think an Islamic cultural center should not be built on “hallowed ground,” and vulnerable Democrats like Harry Reid are caving faster than a Massey-owned mine on the issue, which apparently erases from voters’ minds the mass joblessness that building more mosques would, in small part, ameliorate. There are even talks underway to relocate the center to a less sacred location – somewhere far far away from the strip club, McDonald’s and off track betting parlor that currently dignify Ground Zero. . . . My fellow Americans – what the hell is going on here?

– Richard Kim
“The Center Cannot Hold:
Why the Mainstream Media Can’t Stop the Ground Zero Mosque Hysteria”
The Nation
August 19, 2010

Within roughly the same walking distance from this “sacred ground,” one passes strip joints, porn shops, betting parlors and dance clubs, none of which appear to have wounded the sensibilities of these patriotic defenders of the sanctity of Ground Zero. The center itself is to take the place of a dilapidated warehouse, previously the site of a Burlington Coat Factory outlet.

The real aims of those attacking the Cordoba House are not the protection of the nonexistent sanctity of Ground Zero or the shielding of the sensibilities of 9/11 victims’ families. It is a vicious attempt to foment and exploit religious bigotry, xenophobia and outright racism to drive politics ever further to the right.

The far-reaching implications of this campaign entail an assault on the First Amendment of the US Constitution, guaranteeing freedom of speech and religion and barring the government from establishing a state religion or lending preference to one religion over another. This includes the right of Muslims, or any other religious minority, to worship how and where they choose, without the interference of the government or other religious institutions. The “Ground Zero mosque” campaign is consciously directed at mobilizing elements of the religious right that reject this principle.

It is entirely in sync with a parallel attempt to foment mass hysteria over immigration, portraying immigrants as a criminal class responsible for the loss of jobs and social services. Increasingly, this campaign has embraced the demand for the repeal of the US Constitution’s 14th Amendment—which guarantees citizenship to every person born in the US—in order to clear the way for the deportation of millions of children born in the US to undocumented immigrants. This amendment is the constitutional foundation of equal protection under the law.

In both cases, the assault on core constitutional principles and democratic rights has been coupled with venomous rhetoric that serves as an incitement to violence against immigrants, racial minorities and Muslims.

– Editorial
“The ‘Ground Zero Mosque’: Obama Cowers Before Right-Wing Hysteria”
World Socialist Web Site
August 18, 2010

It is true that more Muslims around the world than one might wish sympathize with some of Osama bin Laden’s thinking, view America as an aggressor nation, and accept as justified some of what Americans view as terrorism. But it’s also true that many more Muslims reject such thinking, see Islam as a fundamentally peaceful religion and view al-Qaeda as foreign and repugnant. As Muslims struggle with how to adapt their religion to the challenges of modernity, Americans should be showing respect for those in the second camp, not lumping them together with the terrorists and their supporters.

And if the Muslims who want to build a community center are no more responsible for, or supportive of, the attacks of Sept. 11 than any other Americans, how can their plans be “insensitive”? The hurt feelings must reflect misunderstanding or prejudice on the part of the objectors, and the right response to misunderstanding and prejudice is education, not appeasement.

– Editorial
“Where are the Republicans Who Will Reject Pandering and Prejudice?”
Washington Post
August 19, 2010

[Those who object to the Islamic Center say that its construction near Ground Zero] is insensitivity. But it’s not about sensitivity or insensitivity. . . . It’s about the legality of the situation. It is about our rights as Americans. We are protected under the Constitution. There is freedom of religion. You know, if it’s one faith today [that’s being targeted], it’s going to be another faith tomorrow. That is scary. And to scapegoat the Muslims for the acts of a foreign terrorist, that is — that is hatred. That is wrong. Because if we go by that argument . . . then, by that token, Timothy McVeigh’s actions also makes all Christians terrorists.

. . . Muslims are as equal members, citizens, as any other faith in this country. They died on 9/11. They were the first responders. They also died after helping. Their children are on the frontlines . . . in Afghanistan and Iraq. Muslims are fighting, too [against Islamic extremists] . [Yet] we are being told, “You are a terrorist,” which is very wrong. . . . And this stoking the fear that all these politicians are jumping in on the bandwagon and trying to make it exploit, the tragedy of all those 3,000 people killed for their own political expediency, it’s disgraceful.

– Talat Hamdani, whose son died
at the World Trade Center in the 9/11 attacks.
Democacy Now!
August 18, 2010

By supporting this project, we directly undermine and counteract the narrative of the transnational terrorists who claim that America is at war with Islam. America is not at war with Islam. And all we have to do to demonstrate that is to stand on our Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of worship for all Americans. So . . . while [some] are trying to argue that the United States is against Islam, America has a Constitution, and hopefully a majority of its population which still believes in religious freedom and tolerance.

It is the constitutional right of all Americans to worship as they see fit. And if this project is turned back, it will embolden elements not only in New York, but all over the country, that are trying to stop mosques literally all over the country. . . . The very root elements of this country are in freedom of faith. And I’m worried that, as we see in Europe, you know, minarets being banned, we see hijabs being banned, that this is a pernicious development, and we should hold fast to our heritage of religious tolerance in the United States.

. . . No president, no congressman, should be urging or trying to advocate for the erection of a religious institution or the defeat of the building of that same institution. It’s our job to protect people’s rights. It’s not our job to tell people where to put a synagogue or where to put a Buddhist temple or where to put a church or a mosque. The President is correct. He should not be in the business of advocating the construction of a religious institution. What he should be doing is saying that everybody has a right to pursue their rights and that he is going to uphold and defend the Constitution, which means he’s going to guarantee their right to do it. And that includes not creating a hostile atmosphere so that people are afraid or inhibited or chilled from exercising their rights, as politicians like Peter King and many others have done. So I don’t think the President’s wrong.

– Congressman Keith Ellison, Democrat from Minnesota,
the first Muslim elected to Congress.
Democacy Now!
August 18, 2010

I had two friends who died in the World Trade Center. I was very involved in this for a long time. And to be able to use the sensitivities of people to really — to really stoke fear, there’s something very cynical about that. And there isn’t such a thing as the sensitivities of 9/11 families. There are a lot of different 9/11 families, and there are not only 9/11 families who lost directly people, but there are 9/11 families who were forced out of their homes for years in the neighborhood. So, what do we mean by the "the feelings of 9/11 families"? These are abstractions used to actually stoke fear in the country.

– Rabbi Irwin Kula, president of the
National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership
Democacy Now!
August 18, 2010

Islamophobia runs very deep. . . . And the reality of it is, it’s like any form of racism. We need to call a spade a spade and address it head-on. If we don’t, this will simply continue to spread.

– John Esposito, Professor of
Religion & International Affairs and of
Islamic Studies at Georgetown University.
Democacy Now!
August 18, 2010

Recommended Off-site Links:
Archbishop Offers Mediation for Islamic Center – Javier C. Hernandez (New York Times, August 18, 2010).
Lone Man Stands in Middle of Park51 Debate – Literally – Erik Badia and Corky Siemaszko (New York Daily News, August 23, 2010).
Rallies Over Mosque at Ground Zero Get Heated – Verena Dobnik (Associated Press, August 23, 2010).
For Strippers Near Ground Zero, It's Business as Usual Amidst Mosque Uproar – David Freedlander (New York Observer, August 20, 2010).
Violent "Muslims" Distort the Tradition – John Esposito (Washington Post, July 14, 2010).
Liberal Defenders of "Mosque" Get It Wrong – Aisha Ghani (Religion Dispatches, August 24, 2010).
Islamophobia Watch


UPDATES:
NY Mayor: Stopping Mosque Compromises Terror Fight – Cristian Salazar (Associated Press, August 25, 2010).
Poll: Public Doubts Islam More Prone to Violence – Associated Press (August 24, 2010).
Why Are So Many Americans Hostile to Islam? – Margaret Talev (McClatchy Newspapers, August 27, 2010).


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
What Muslims Want
Irene Khan: Shaking Things Up Down Under
Richard Flanagan Wants a “Gentler, More Generous” Australia
The Real Fascist Threat in Europe
A Dangerous Medieval Conviction
The Blood-Soaked Thread

Opening Image: Mosque supporters Abdul Malik, 26, from Philadelphia, and Matt Sky, 26, from the East Village, converse with mosque opponent Lori Taverna, 68, from Midtown. Protesters and supporters of the controversial Park51 Islamic center, the so called “Ground Zero Mosque” gathered at 51 Park Place for separate rallies on August 22, 2010. (Jeanne Noonan, New York Daily News)

How We Can Help the People of Pakistan

Above: Pakistan flood survivors receive relief foodstuff
distributed by naval officials in Sangi Village near Sukkur,
in southern Pakistan on Thursday, August 19, 2010.
(AP Photo/Shakil Adil)

Earlier this evening I made a donation to Doctors Without Borders’ special appeal on behalf of those impacted by the devastating floods in Pakistan.

It’s being reported that over 15 million people have been affected by these floods - the worst in Pakistan in 80 years. The Pakistani government has estimated at least 1,600 fatalities. The overall number of people in Pakistan affected by the flooding is greater than those who were affected by the 2005 South Asia tsunami (5 million), the 2005 South Asia earthquake (3 million), or the 2010 Haiti earthquake (3 million). The estimate of 290,000 homes destroyed or seriously damaged is almost the same as those destroyed in Haiti.

Above: Flood survivors negotiate a flooded road at Muzaffargarh,
in central Pakistan on Thursday, August 19, 2010.
(AP Photo/Khalid Tanveer)

Following is how Doctors Without Borders’ executive director Sophie Delaunay describes the situation.

Millions of people in Pakistan have been cut off from medical care, their homes devastated, their lives put at risk of disease because of severe flooding. Doctors Without Borders is working hard to prevent outbreaks and to provide essential health care to men, women, and children impacted by this massive natural disaster.

Currently, the most common diseases our medical teams are treating – skin infections, respiratory diseases and acute diarrhea – are linked to difficult living conditions and lack of access to clean water. In addition to providing medical care, Doctors Without Borders is distributing tents and relief kits that may include clothes, soap, toothbrushes, towels, buckets, a jerry can, plastic sheeting, cotton mattresses, and water purification tablets. We are also providing more than 480,000 liters of clean water every day to affected communities in different parts of the country.

If you would like to contribute financially to the efforts of Doctors Without Borders, click here.

The following agencies are also accepting donations for the people of Pakistan.

American Red Cross

Oxfam

UNICEF

Save the Children

Islamic Relief

Catholic Relief Services

World Vision International

United Nations World Food Programme

Above: People with pots stand in queue to get relief food
at a camp for flood-affected people on the outskirts of Sukkur,
southern Pakistan, Wednesday, August 18, 2010.
(AP Photo/Shakil Adil)

Above: People stand on the remnants of a bridge
washed away by heavy flooding in Bannu in northwest Pakistan.
The World Meteorological Organization says the weather-related
cataclysms of July and August fit patterns predicted by climate scientists,
although those scientists always shy from tying individual disasters
directly to global warming. (AP Photo/Ijaz Mohammad)

Above: A Pakistani boy drinks from the bowl of his father
as they rest at a camp for flood victims at Muzaffargarh district,
Punjab province, Pakistan on Thursday August 19, 2010.
(AP Photo/Aaron Favila)

Above: Pakistani flood survivors shift their belongings to safer areas
on Monday, August 16, 2010 in Khangarh near Multan, Pakistan.
(AP Photo/K.M. Chaudary)

Above: A Pakistani woman sits outside her tent
as she waits for relief goods at a camp for flood victims at Muzaffargarh district,
Punjab province, Pakistan on Thursday August 19, 2010.
(AP Photo/Aaron Favila)

Recommended Off-site Links:
Pakistani Floods Affect Millions, But Level of International Aid Pitiful - Vilani Peiris (World Socialist Web Site, August 11, 2010).
Why the Unfolding Disaster in Pakistan Should Concern You - Robert Reich (The Huffington Post, August 19, 2010).
Bridge Over Troubled Water: The Importance of Relief for Pakistan - Daniyal Norani (The Huffington Post, August 18, 2010).
Pakistan: A Question of Water - Gwynne Dyer (CommonDreams.org, August 21, 2010).
Millions of Pakistani Flood Victims Face Continuing Crisis - Vilani Peiris (World Socialist Web Site, August 21, 2010).
Images from Pakistani Flooding - The Huffington Post (August 2010).

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
How We Can Help the People of Haiti
Crisis in Sri Lanka
Letting Them Sit By Me

Maria Callas – “Ave Maria”

Writes Marion Lignana Rosenberg on Maria Callas’ early-1960s recording of Giuseppe Verdi’s “Ave Maria”:

Verdi’s Otello had little importance in Maria Callas’s career. She recorded the “Willow Song” and “Ave Maria” for EMI in Paris in 1963 ... Her rendition of Verdi’s “Ave Maria” is simple and inward, as befits this beautiful aria. The orchestra is led by Nicola Rescigno.

Ave Maria, overflowing with grace,
Blessed be the fruit of thy womb.

Blessed are you above all women
for delivering to us Christ Jesus.

Pray for the one
who kneels in prayer before you.

Pray for the wrongdoer
and for the innocent,

Pray for the weak and oppressed,
and for those in power.
For the wretched, likewise,
show your mercy.

Pray for the one suffering
cruel misfortune.

Pray for the one who bows his head
under injustice and cruel fate.

And for us,
pray for us, pray always.

And in the hour of our death,
pray for us.

Ave Maria,
in the hour of our death.

Ave.

Amen.

Recommended Off-site Links:
• Re-Visioning Callas
• Callas as Medea

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• Callas Remembered
• Callas Went Away
• Re-Visioning Callas

Rob Tisinai on the Facts We Need to Know About Hate Crime Laws

Over at the indispensable Box Turtle Bulletin, Rob Tisinai has posted an informative piece highlighting three facts that we all should know about hate crime laws. Tisinai notes that he was compelled to highlight these facts after hearing the lies being spread about such laws by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Maggie Gallagher. One such lie is that Christians can be charged with a hate crime for saying that homosexuality is a sin.

Following are the three facts that Tisinai says Americans need to know about their nation’s hate crime laws.

________________________

1. Hate crime laws don’t make anything illegal.

Hate crime laws merely provide enhanced penalties for actions traditionally recognized as crimes, but motivated by bias. That’s all. Don’t believe me? Ask the FBI:

[H]ate crimes are not separate, distinct crimes; instead, they are traditional offenses motivated by the offender’s bias (for example, an offender assaults a victim because of a bias against the victim’s race).

In other words, if it wasn’t a crime before the hate crime law was passed, then it’s still not a crime afterward.

Do you know what people are doing when they claim American hate crime laws will criminalize the Bible or send pastors to jail for preaching homosexuality is a sin? They’re lying. Or, at the very least, speaking from ignorance. They may give you examples from Canada or Sweden or other countries that don’t have a First Amendment, but they don’t apply to the US.


2. Homosexuals don’t get special protection from hate crime legislation.

The Matthew Shepard Act added sexual orientation to the federal hate crimes statute. It doesn’t specify homo or hetero. If a gay man assaults a straight man out of hatred for straights, he can be charged with a hate crime.

Now at some point an anti-gay will protest, “But that STILL gives gays special treatment, because no one assaults straights for being straight!” I hope I’m there, because it’ll be fun to watch him realize what he just said and try to suck those words back into his lungs.


3. Christians are protected by hate crime legislation.

Actually, that’s true for people of all religions. Been true for decades. The religion protection is exactly the same as the sexual orientation protection (at the federal level at least; many states have protection for religion but not sexual orientation). [If it was true that] pastors [could be] prosecuted under hate crime laws for saying homosexuality is a sin, [then] I could be prosecuted for saying that the bigotry of Pat Robertson or Jimmy Swaggart is a sin. But neither of those things will happen because hate crime laws don’t make anything illegal.

_____________________________

Tisinai goes on to observe that “it’s amazing how much crap you can refute with just these three facts.” He then proceeds to give examples that are well worth reading, and which you can do so here.


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Rebuking a Common Lie
The Facts About the Overturning of Prop 8
The Matthew Shepard Act: “The Beginning of a Process That’s Ongoing”
The Scourge of Homophobia in Economically Impoverished Countries
First They Take Manhattan
Recognizing the Similarities Between Racism and Heterosexism

Image: “The Passion of Matthew Shepard” by Fr. William Hart McNichols.

Celebrating the Dormition of Mary

Last Sunday, August 15, I hosted a house Mass for members and friends of Cornerstone Old Catholic Community.

As you may recall, it was the Feast of the Dormition of the Mother of God - a feast day that predates Roman Catholicism's Feast of the Assumption, is celebrated by the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Catholic, and Old Catholic Churches, and commemorates the "falling asleep" or death of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and her bodily resurrection before being taken up into heaven.



Following is what Wikipedia says about the differences and similarities between the feasts of Dormition and Assumption.

The Orthodox Church teaches that Mary died a natural death, like any human being; that her soul was received by Christ upon death; and that her body was resurrected on the third day after her repose, at which time she was taken up, bodily only, into heaven. Her tomb was found empty on the third day.

Roman Catholic teaching holds that Mary was "assumed" into heaven in bodily form. Some Catholics agree with the Orthodox that this happened after Mary's death, while some hold that she did not experience death. Pope Pius XII, in his Apostolic constitution, Munificentissimus Deus (1950), which dogmatically defined the Assumption, appears to have left open the question of whether or not Mary actually underwent death in connection with her departure, but alludes to the fact of her death at least five times.

Both traditions agree that she was taken up into heaven bodily. The Orthodox belief regarding Mary's falling asleep are expressed in the liturgical texts used for the Feast of the Dormition (August 15) which is one of the Twelve Great Feasts of the Orthodox Church, and is held by all pious Orthodox Christians; however, this belief has never been formally defined as dogma by the Orthodox Church nor made a precondition of baptism.

Above: Robert Caruso, pastor of Cornerstone Old Catholic Community, and his partner John.

For my September 2007 interview with Robert about Old Catholicism and, among other things, its progressive stance on homosexuality and same-sex relationships, click here.



Above (from left): Phil, Brittany, Mary, Emily, John, John, Paula, Robert, and Doug - August 15, 2010.


Following is an excerpt from Eugene Kennedy's August 15 National Catholic Reporter reflection on the Dormition/Assumption (with thanks to to Phillip for bringing this reflection to my attention).

This feast has warm associations in many Catholic traditions in which it has accented the wonder and mystery, the sacramentality we might say, of midsummer. With an eye on their ripening fields the Irish knew it as Lady’s Day in August and Americans, with an eye on their seaside holidays, found spiritual renewal in getting into the water on that day. It is as if such customs recognized that the Mystery of the Feast spoke mysteriously and deeply to believers who were moved by its symbolism rather than its historical character.

. . . The Assumption invites us to tap into the vein of rich spiritual ore that runs just beneath the surface of a teaching that is radically diminished when it is presented literally as if by a reporter breathlessly describing the launch of a space vehicle from Cape Canaveral, “We have lift-off.”

Was it an accident of history or a powerfully symbolic underscoring of the relevance of this teaching that Pope Pius XII proclaimed it in 1950 at the very heart of the tumultuous twentieth century? Graham Greene drew on his novelist’s sensitivity to symbol in an essay in then newsstand dominant LIFE magazine. After two World Wars and the Holocaust, among other horrors of the first half of the century, the pope was responding to the world wide need for a reaffirmation of the dignity of the human body and the sacredness of human personality. Greene understood that the real meaning of the Assumption was found not in tightly bound literalism but in the overflow of a Mystery that, as a mother would have it, concerned us as much as her.

While some Protestants pulled back from the declaration as hardly conducive to ecumenical relations, the Swiss psychologist Carl Jung considered it the most important religious declaration of the twentieth century. As a master of the mythological river that nourished what he termed our “collective unconscious,” Jung grasped the profound and fitting symbolism of such a declaration at mid-century.

The world had already turned its attention toward the endless vistas and wonder of space and astronauts would leave boot marks on the moon’s surface a generation later. The Swiss scholar sensed that the Assumption symbolized the mystery of human destiny and the end of the pre-Copernican era at the same time. The Assumption was a mythological and therefore a spiritual symbol of a Mystery in which we are still caught up. There was another numinous layer beyond the celebration of Mary and the confirmation of human dignity.

The Assumption proclaimed the Mystery of the century, the return of Mother Earth to the Heavens and the end, therefore, of the split between Earth and Heaven and all the divisions, such as between flesh and spirit, that flowed from that. It heralded the unity of the universe and the unity of human personality. That is the richest and perhaps least plumbed aspect of this feast. The wonder is that the Assumption is rich and deep enough a Mystery to accommodate these various levels of understanding all at the same time. Midsummer allows us to savor its Mystery in many ways and to understand how much we lose when we limit our religious understanding only to the concrete literal level.


Recommended Off-site Link:
The Divine Feminine Assumes Her Place – Louis A. Ruprecht (Religion Dispatches, August 20, 2010).

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• The Old Catholic Church: Catholicism Beyond Rome
• Understanding the Old Catholic Church (Part 1)
• Understanding the Old Catholic Church (Part 2)
• Understanding the Old Catholic Church (Part 3)
• Robert Caruso's Scholarly Introduction to Old Catholicism
• Celebrating the Risen Christ - Old Catholic Style

Quote of the Day

There are more and more Catholic families with openly gay and lesbian children, many of whom are grown and have partners and families of their own. The blood of family being thicker than the waters of baptism, the participants in the Catholic debate about gay marriage must recognize that many Catholic parents long ago accepted the sexuality of their gay children, have come to love their partners, and treasure the grandchildren they have through them. Already in California, a recent poll has shown that Latino Catholics are now the religious group most in support of gay marriage at 57 percent. That's the family dynamic at work.

– Bryan Cones
"The Wrong Way to Respond to Gay Marriage"
U.S. Catholic
August 19, 2010

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Voices of Parental Authority and Wisdom
Catholic Rainbow (Australian) Parents
Thanks, Mum!
A Parent's Prayer
The Bishops' "Guidelines": A Parent's Response
Grandma Knows Best
One Catholic Gay Parent Who Isn't Leaving the Church
Gay Adoption: A Catholic Lawyer's Perspective
Competent Parenting Doesn't Require "Traditional Marriage"

Recommended Off-site Links:
Fortunate Families
Catholic Rainbow Parents

Benedict and Georg

Following are excerpts from Colm Tóibín's review of Angelo Quattrocchi's book The Pope Is Not Gay. It's an interesting title and statement, don't you think? It's also one that I actually agree with. After all, "gay" implies a healthy self-acceptance and/or expression of one's homosexual orientation. So, no, Benedict is not gay. I dare say, however, that he's "same-sex attracted," as the Courage crowd likes to say, which is something altogether different in terms of psycho-sexual development and one's understanding of God's presence and action in one's life as a sexual being.

_______________________________

Quattrocchi also considers the relationship between the pope and his private secretary Georg Gänswein [pictured at left]. Gänswein is remarkably handsome, a cross between George Clooney and Hugh Grant, but, in a way, more beautiful than either. In his book, Quattrocchi prints many photographs of the pope in his papal clothes, and many of Gänswein looking sultry, like a film star, and a few of the two together, taking a walk or the younger man helping the older one to put on a robe or a hat. He writes:

About ten years before he became pope, when age was beginning to take its toll and was maybe sharpening the secret internal rage, Ratzy [Ratzinger] met Don Giorgio [Gänswein]. And it was a spark of life amid the doctrinal darkness … So we can at least imagine how a pure soul becomes inflamed when it meets its soulmate, when a nearly 70-year-old prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith meets a brilliant 40-year-old priest from his native Bavaria who shares the same outlook on the world … When we see the photos, which we publish in this book, of Georg putting Ratzy’s little hat on for him, handing him his stole, watching his back, looking after him, accompanying him and helping him as he walks, we cannot help being moved.

It seems to me that Quattrocchi is pushing his luck here. In his attacks on homosexuals, Ratzinger was using his full skills as a hardline Catholic theologian; he was indeed displaying himself as doctrinaire, but he was operating during the papacy of Wojtyla. He could not have issued his declarations without the agreement of the pope. While there is something oddly emphatic and absolute and oddly hateful in his diktats, it should be understood that he has taken this tone on other matters besides homosexuality. He may well have taken it out of pure conviction and seriousness; to suggest that this most ideological of figures may or may not be homosexual himself simply because he has made so many statements on the matter seems unfair to him. And in his way of wearing clothes, he is not different from any other member of the Church hierarchy. It is unlikely they all get pleasure from wandering around looking like elderly fashion victims, even if some of them, including Ratzinger, seem to do so. It may depend on who is taking the photographs. And it seems natural that Ratzinger would have a private secretary who is also from Bavaria and with whom he seems to share an ideology. It might be pure coincidence that he is one of the most handsome men alive.

The problem is that, after all that has been revealed, many of us who were brought up in the Church now know that we once listened to sermons about how to conduct our lives from men who were child molesters. And that senior members of the Church hierarchy protected these men, believing that the reputation of the Church was more important than the safety of children, and that Church law was superior to civil law. When they were found out, their sorrow was not fully credible. Thus, when we think of the Catholic Church, we think of secrecy, half-hearted apology, studied concealment.

This makes it difficult for Ratzinger, who is probably the most intelligent and articulate pope for many generations, to be heard properly when he speaks about matters of faith and morals. He wishes to make it clear, from a position that is starkly coherent, that moral values are not relative values, but absolute ones, that we must follow God’s will, and that the Catholic Church is in a unique position to tell us in some detail what this entails. However, rather than listening to this message or bowing our heads as he offers us his blessing, because of what has happened, because of a new suspicion which even the most reverent feel about the clergy, we will find ourselves examining Ratzinger’s clothes and his accessories, his gestures, and checking behind him for a glimpse of the gorgeous Georg with whom he spends so much of his day.


To read Tóibín's review in its entirety, click here.



See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
The Pope's "Scandalous" Stance on Homosexuality
Oh, Give It a Rest, Papa!
And a Merry Christmas to You Too, Papa
Officially Homophobic, Intensely Homoerotic
Keeping All the Queens Under One Roof
Homosexuality and the Priesthood
The "Ratzinger Letter" of 1986 as "Theological Pornography"
Bless Me, Father
The Inherent Sensuality of Roman Catholicism
The Allure of St. Sebastian
What Is It That Ails You?
A Humorous Look at Internalized Homophobia
A Catholic's Prayer for His Fellow Pilgrim, Benedict XVI

Just Wondering . . .

Given the Roman Catholic Church's foundational yet often minimalized tradition and teaching on social justice, I wonder when we can expect the clerical leadership of the St. Paul–Minneapolis Archdiocese to speak out against the Target corporation's recent donation of $150,000 to the anti-workers' rights group Minnesota Forward?

The Church fully supports the rights of workers to form unions or other associations to secure their rights to fair wages and working conditions.

– Economic Justice for All #104
Pastoral Letter on Catholic Social Teaching and the U.S. Economy
U.S. Catholic Bishops, 1986

Workers' rights cannot be doomed to be the mere result of economic systems aimed at maximum profits. The thing that must shape the whole economy is respect for the workers' rights within each country and all through the world's economy.

– Laborem Exercens (On Human Work) #17
John Paul II, 1981

We must . . . continue to study the situation of the worker. There is a need for solidarity movements among and with the workers. The church is firmly committed to this cause, in fidelity to Christ, and to be truly the "church of the poor."

– Laborem Exercens (On Human Work) #8
John Paul II, 1981

Above all we must remember the priority of labor over capital: labor is the cause of production; capital, or the means of production, is its mere instrument or tool.

– Laborem Exercens (On Human Work) #12
John Paul II, 1981

Recommended Off-site Links:
Notable Quotes from Catholic Social Teaching on the Theme of Work and Workers' Rights – Office of Social Justice, Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis.
Workers' Interfaith Network

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Boycotting Target
A Call to Action, Equality
A Call to Emphasize Catholicism's "Sweet Spot"
The Pope's Progressive Agenda
Agreeing with the Vatican
Fasting, Praying, & Walking for Immigration Reform
May Day 2007
A Lose/Lose Situation
R.I.P. Neoclassical Economics
Capitalism on Trial
John Pilger on Resisting Empire
In Search of a "Global Ethic"

Image: Logo of the Catholic Worker Movement.

Targeting Target!

I find this non–violent direct action against the Target corporation incredibly hopeful – not to mention fun!

It is right to struggle against an unjust economic system that does not uphold the priority of the human being over capital and land.

– Centesimus Annus (The Hundredth Year) #35
John Paul II, 1991

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Boycotting Target
A Call to Action, Equality
A Lose/Lose Situation

Boycotting Target

Ryan Murphy, son of my friends Mary Lynn and Mike Murphy, has an excellent letter-to-the-editor in the August 13 issue of Lavender magazine. If you’re in any way confused or unsure about the recent call by many to boycott the Target corporation, Ryan’s letter will, I’m sure, provide clarity and resolve.

I also have to say that his connection-making among issues of sexual orientation, gender, race, and immigration status reminds me of my activist days with Queers United for Radical Action (QURA), a group I founded and was part of in the early 2000s.

Ryan’s letter is reprinted in its entirety below.

__________________________________

Time for a New Gay Agenda

When Target recently donated $150,000 to Minnesota Forward, a front for openly homophobic gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer, it seemed that the GLBT community had been hoodwinked. Target, after all, is a model for corporate gay friendliness, a patron of Twin Cities Pride so enthusiastic that tens of thousands of visitors go home stamped with the company’s bulls-eye logo cut from a rainbow flag.

How, community members and activists are asking, could a company that has done so much to build a brand-loyal GLBT consumer and employee base fund a vitriolic opponent of gay rights?

The answer to this question should force us to think more critically about the connections between GLBT activism and issues of gender, immigration, and race.

Target, after all, made its donation not because of its position on gay rights, but because of its take on immigrant women’s labor. Minnesota Forward is a “pro-business” lobbying group dedicated not only to preventing employees from joining unions, but to blocking legislation that would mandate shorter hours, health insurance, vacation time, and retirement benefits for all employees.

The vast majority of people who work the registers and stock the shelves at Target are people of color, many of whom are women, and many of whom were born not in the Twin Cities, but in Somalia, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Mexico, El Salvador, Laos, or many other countries poorer than the United States.

The challenges that these people’s gender, race, immigration status, and income level provide on the job market make it harder for them to demand higher wages and better benefits. To keep its cost low, Target is invested in keeping these barriers in immigrant women’s lives. Hence, the $150,000 for Emmer.

But what, people might ask, does this have to do with the GLBT community?

The answer lies in whom companies have traditionally honored with full citizenship at work. Companies have long offered good wages to male breadwinners, paying handsome salaries to the Ward Clevers of the world who had to take care of June, the kids, and the home behind that white picket fence.

Historic patterns of discrimination have made it much less likely that families of color, immigrant families, and GLBT families live behind those white picket fences. Thus, these groups have been afforded less at work.

Remember, a lot of companies still give family benefits to married straight people, but deny them to gays with partners or kids.

It is time to take this inequitable history – and Target’s latest chapter in it – to rethink the goals of GLBT activism. We must make a fundamental commitment to the belief that everyone deserves dignity on the job.

Regardless of whether we live behind a white picket fence or not; whether we have kids or not; whether we have partners or not; whether we identify as GLBT or not; and whether our ancestors were born in England, Mexico, or Pakistan, we deserve a living wage, health insurance, and a secure retirement.

Without making this connection, and by continuing to tolerate companies that are “pro-gay” and “anti-labor,” we set ourselves up to be hoodwinked, and to be presented with a Governor like Emmer who will provide fairness and dignity to none of us.

– Ryan Murphy

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
A Call to Action, Equality
A Lose/Lose Situation

Recommended Off-site Links:
Target Boycott Movement Grows Following Donation to Support "Anti-Gay" Candidate - Brian Montopoli (CBS News, July 28, 2010).
Target May Lose Points in HRC's Ranking of Gay-Friendly Companies - James Sanna (TheColu.mn, August 18, 2010).
Target Stands By Statement, Does Not Offer Apology - James Sanna (TheColu.mn, July 23, 2010).