Language of Reverence: Prayer (December 8, 2013)

Last year I gave a sermon here about finding a “Language of Reverence” for Unitarian Universalists. We talked about how some traditional religious language is difficult for us, and I’ve taken to call such words “Sticky words”- those theological words that make us uncomfortable. We surveyed my Athens congregation and found that our most sticky words are “Hell” and “Sin” and right after that comes “prayer.” Why is that word “prayer” so troublesome for us? The most obvious answer would seem to be our diverse theology. Does prayer exclude atheists? What about agnostics-- does it feel disingenuous to pray if you are not sure whether God exists? Moreover, prayer seems to imply a transcendent God, right? A God of some heavenly realm far removed from us. Or maybe, maybe it’s the idea of a God whose hand we see on cartoon shows reaching down from heaven to move us around like pawn pieces. Such an image of the divine goes against our own sense of free will and moral agency, it contradicts what we have observed of the natural laws of science lived out in our world.

But I think one of the main reasons that prayer is a sticky word for us is that it doesn’t seem to work. Even the most fervent prayers that a loved one will be spared the ravages of cancer do not keep them from being torn from our lives. A lottery winner says her prayers were answered, and it makes us wonder, what about the other million people who prayed to win that jackpot? Maybe prayer is a sticky word for us because we have prayed for something we needed desperately and felt betrayed when our prayers went unanswered.

The story of that little broken bird offers us a new way of looking at prayer—a new way of answering the question “does prayer work?” Even though Prayer is a “Sticky word” let’s approach this question in good Unitarian Universalist fasion-- with an open mind. Asking “it is possible that at as a growing changing person with a growing changing theology, there could be a new meaning here for me? Asking “as part of a living tradition is there something in the word ‘prayer’ that we Unitarian Universalists can reclaim?” As a community that affirms the “free and responsible search for truth and meaning” and “encouragement to spiritual growth” I would like for us to consider reclaiming this word “prayer” by stretching it bigger and opening it to be more inclusive.

First let’s widen the purposes of prayer. Those of you who grew up in the Catholic Tradition are probably already familiar with their division of prayer into 4 basic kinds, but for me, growing up UU, this was new and useful information. The kind of prayer we are most familiar with is the “Prayer of Petition (asking for what we need, including forgiveness)” What right, we might ask, do we have to ask the universe to heal us when so many others are sick, to ask that we get the new job we need so much when others go without work. So I want to bring a little bit of neo-pagan wisdom to help open this up for us. In the Neo-pagan tradition the process of clarifying intention is very important. It’s so easy to go along with “how things are” and never take the time to say: “What I would really like is to have a closer relationship with my partner, a job that is meaningful, healthy blood vessels.” Just taking time to clarify this intention could mean that next time you are alone with your spouse, you remember that intention, and reach out. So for Atheists, a petitioning prayer could have the utility of clarifying intention. For theists, and even agnostics, there is always the possibility that we could be aided and abetted by the universe in creating the reality our hearts yearn for. Perhaps opening our hearts in prayer could help us open our eyes to help when it does come, instead of being trapped in that desperate feeling that we have to do it all ourselves. As Wendell berry says “Let tomorrow come tomorrow. Not by your will is the house carried through the night.[i]” Whether we believe in God or not, we are all part of something larger than ourselves.

I imagine that most of us are also familiar with “Prayer of Intercession (asking for what others need)” We in this beloved community practice this through our time of Joys and Concerns, and through the silent reflection that follows. Spending time considering and empathizing with the needs of others is important because it helps us reach out beyond our own joys and concerns out to all those beings with whom we share this world. Whether or not our prayers or thoughts for our sisters and brothers have any impact on outcome, perhaps those prayers of intercession help enlarge our own hearts, help us cultivate compassion for others, maybe even help us be part of that help for which our brothers and sisters cry out.

The third form of prayer is Prayer of Thanksgiving (for what God has given and done) [ii] Here is one form of prayer that science has proven (in multiple studies) to be effective. Psychologists Dr. Robert A. Emmons and Dr. Michael E. McCullough have done research linking gratitude practices with both physical and psychological well-being[iii]. Another study links gratitude to reduced stress hormones in the blood, which is linked to heart health. [iv] A third study linked practicing gratitude to health of relationships[v]

Have you tried this for yourself? Sometimes I am having a particularly rough day, filled with grumbles about my lot in life, I start naming things I am grateful for. The grumpier I am, the more challenging this is, so I look for the most basic things, things as simple as breathing in and out, as simple as food to eat. And as soon as I can think of anything at all to be grateful for, something inside me turns and I remember a better self.

The final kind of prayer is Blessing and Adoration (praising God). This one gave me pause. Do we Unitarian Universalists do that? Can an atheist make a prayer of adoration? The Archdiocese of Boston says such prayers are offered “for the wonder and beauty of our world, and for all the many blessings we enjoy. We open ourselves up to praise God for all the wonders of creation.” This started to make sense to me. Wonder and awe I understand. Excommunicated Priest Mathew Fox, who has been a theological pioneer in creation spirituality, says that wonder and awe are critically important. He writes that “awe is the appropriate response to the unfathomable wonder that is creation from the magnificence of galaxies, to the complex and brilliant process of cell-differentiation, and the miracle of the human hand (product of 14 billion years of evolution). Imagine how much richer learning will be for all ages when we intentionally cultivate a sense of appreciation and wonder.” I think this is what the great poet e e Cummings was getting at when he wrote “i thank You God for most this amazing day”. Wonder is a balm for our jaded hearts. Wonder helps us see our world with new eyes.

The Boston Archdiocese goes on to say that “This form of prayer encourages bodily expression, such as standing with arms raised or dancing.” Wow. That sure opens up what prayer can be, right? Dancing can be prayer. Think about that classic shaker tune:

“When true simplicity is gain'd,
To bow and to bend we shan't be asham'd,
To turn, turn will be our delight,
Till by turning, turning we come 'round right.[vi]

This song comes from a tradition in which dance and movement were a regular part of their worship.

James Forbes, the Pentecostal preacher who became a professor at Union Theological Seminary and who lead the Preaching seminar I attended this past February writes “Although there is a tendency in every tradition to make strong suggestions regarding prescribed patterns of spiritual formation, there is little to suggest that there is only one approach to spirit growth” he says we must “affirm the uniqueness… [of] the relationship of any one of us with the God whom we call Mother or Father”[vii] If you have had the experience of going to pray in a new religious community, where everyone joins in unison with words they all seem to know by heart, perhaps you wonder, as I do, if maybe I am going to do it “wrong.”

At the same conference where I heard James Forbes speak, I also attended an evening worship with Jai Utal. He is famous for leading a kind of devotional singing called “kirtan” which comes from the Hindu tradition. As he prepared this group of a few hundred ministers, many of whom had never experienced kirtan before, to enter with him into a time of chanting he said (and I have to paraphrase here, because I didn’t have a pen with me at the time) “you can dance, if you do that, or sing, or not sing. It can be kind of tiresome trying to draw spirit in, so just be where you are, see what is there, and I find spirit usually enters in.”

Our relationship with that mother or father God is as unique as each one of us. Each of you has the right to reach out with open mind and heart -- even when we don’t know how to pray. Even in anger. Forbes told us this story:

“I remember once when I couldn’t find the words to appropriately address the God of my life. I knelt at my bed, stretched forth my arms and moved my shoulders in writing jerks of anguish. All I could utter were sighs and groans. But afterwards, I felt so much better that I said “Perhaps I can pray now.” But it seemed the spirit said to me” You don’t need to pray any more now. Heaven is equipped to receive choreographed prayer. Also, your sighs and groans have already been decoded and help is on the way.” [viii]

Here, perhaps, is the sticky part. What is this help that Forbes understood to be on the way? The great 20th century Jewish ­­­­­­­­­­theologian and rabbi writes Abraham Joshua Heschel might have an answer for us. He says: "Prayer invites God to be present in our spirits and in our lives. Prayer cannot bring water to parched fields, or mend a broken bridge, or rebuild a ruined city; but prayer can water an arid soul, mend a broken heart and rebuild a weakened will.” I believe this was the point of this morning’s story; when that little bird sang out “from her broken wing and broken heart came notes of pleading, notes of sadness, notes of incredible beauty” Gradually her heart, if not her wing, was mended. Through her singing, her prayer, she found a new purpose in life and a new name.

This points, for me, to a 5th form of prayer --listening. After we have poured out our hearts, we just listen. In any conversation, in any attempt to build relationship, after we talk, we listen. Whether we are listening for the Holy Spirit as Forbes suggests, or for our own wisest self that sometimes lays hidden from us, we listen for that “still small voice.” Maybe words will spring to mind, or maybe just a feeling of being heard, a feeling of calm, a feeling of being emptied, or an experience of the mind as a still pond (which the Buddhists seek). Maybe in that listening we notice a feeling of being called to act, called to change.

Lately I am finding that one of the ways prayer, or quiet reflection, “works” most reliably for me, is that it helps me remember what is truly important. Says yoga teacher Kate Holcomb “Taking time to differentiate between what’s just stuff out there and what’s me, and listening to the voice of my true Self, makes it a lot easier to make conscious, meaningful choices about how I spend my time and energy.”[ix] Holcombe uses the word self with a capitol “S” which references the theological idea found in Hinduism and other religious traditions that I am not separate from anything that is; there is a fundamental unity undergirding all things. Prayer can help us connect to that deeper unity, to a higher, deeper, wider Self. Listening to the voice of my true Self reminds me who I really am.

What I would hope we could each take away from today’s service is two-fold. First, I would like for us, when we are at a public event or with friends and they say “let’s pray together” I want for Unitarian Universalists to experience that as an inclusive rather than an exclusive act. We UUs do have a relationship to prayer. It doesn’t matter whether your theology of prayer is different than that of your neighbors, we can reclaim that word so that it is authentic for us.

Second, I would like for each of us to have a path to that deep knowing, a practice building relationship to the web of life, to that higher Self of which we are a part. Whether or not the word “prayer” ever stops being sticky, I wish for each person their own way of building a relationship to the love that will never let us go… some practice to bring us comfort when we need it most-- to “water an arid soul, mend a broken heart and rebuild a weakened will”
Endnotes:
[i] –from Wendell Berry’s "What Are People For?"
[ii] http://www.bostoncatholic.org/Being-Catholic/Content.aspx?id=11444
[iii] http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletters/Harvard_Mental_Health_Letter/2011/November/in-praise-of-gratitude
[iv] http://www.thepositivitycompany.com/research/gratitude-research/ The original study can be found by looking up: R. McCraty, B. Barrios-Choplin, D. Rozman, M Atkinson & A. D. Watkins (1998) The impact of a new emotional self-management program on stress, emotions, heart rate variability, DHEA and cortisol. Integrative Physiological & Behavioral Science. 32 (2) 151-70.
[v] http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletters/Harvard_Mental_Health_Letter/2011/November/in-praise-of-gratitude
Grant AM, et al. "A Little Thanks Goes a Long Way: Explaining Why Gratitude Expressions Motivate Prosocial Behavior," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (June 2010): Vol. 98, No. 6, pp. 946–55.
Lambert NM, et al. "Expressing Gratitude to a Partner Leads to More Relationship Maintenance Behavior," Emotion (Feb. 2011): Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 52–60.
[vi] [Shaker song written and composed in 1848 by Elder Joseph Brackett. Also appears in our UU Hymnal Sing the Living Tradition]
[vii] James Forbes “The Holy Spirit and Preaching” p. 72
[viii] Later I found this same story in his book- James Forbes “The Holy Spirit and Preaching” p. 73
[ix] Yoga Journal March 2013 “In the Clearing” by Valerie Reiss p. 88

Thanksgiving and the Doctrine of Discovery (November 24, 2013)

Readings

From the bull "Romanus Pontifex" issued by Pope Nicholas V in 1452 Pope Nicholas V to King Alfonso V of  Portugal

... [W]e bestow suitable favors and special graces on those Catholic kings and princes, ... athletes and intrepid champions of the Christian faith ... to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens [an archaic term for Muslims] and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and ... to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate ... possessions, and goods, and to convert them to ... their use and profit …”^[i]

From the papal bull "Inter caetera" issued by Pope Alexander VI

 “ We have indeed learned that you, who for a long time had intended to seek out and discover certain islands and mainlands remote and unknown and not hitherto discovered by others, to the end that you might bring to the worship of our Redeemer and the profession of the Catholic faith their residents and inhabitants, …you, with the wish to fulfill your desire, chose our beloved son, Christopher Columbus, a man assuredly worthy …with divine aid and with the utmost diligence sailing in the ocean sea, discovered certain very remote islands and even mainlands that hitherto had not been discovered by others; wherein dwell very many peoples living in peace, and, as reported, going unclothed, and not eating flesh. …. In the islands and countries already discovered are found gold, spices, and very many other precious things of divers kinds and qualities. … you have purposed with the favor of divine clemency to bring under your sway the said mainlands and islands with their residents and inhabitants and to bring them to the Catholic faith."

Sermon

Sometimes I forget how radical Universalism really is; this idea that,  “God’s love embraces the whole human race,” seems like common sense to me. But lately when I’m watching the news I hear people hinting at the idea, or even saying outright, that some people are more valuable than others. Universalism was radical hundreds of years ago when it proposed that we humans were not divided into those who are elect, and the rest of us who are doomed to an eternity of hellfire; Instead Universalists believed that we are all were beloved by God. Though the language has changed, this duality of the elect and the doomed, the worthy and the unworthy is not just some historic notion from the days of Calvin, it is woven into our society, and into our laws even today. And we who stand in the Universalist tradition must respond.

The Doctrine of Discovery is a principle of international law dating from the late 15th century. It has its roots in the decree issued by Pope Nicholas V [read by Kelly earlier] that specifically sanctioned and promoted the conquest, colonization, and exploitation of non-Christian territories and peoples: “ to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue and ... to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery” and then to “appropriate” (that is to say steal) all their lands and goods for the profit of the King of Portugal.^[ii]

After Columbus returned from America, the King and Queen of Spain went to the Pope Alexander and asked for clarification about which lands could be claimed by Spain and which by Portugal. The pope, responded with 3 papal bulls, [a portion of which Kelly read earlier]. He reasons that since the inhabitants were not Christian, did not dress like Europeans, and appeared to be pesco-vegetarians, and since there were plenty of “gold, spices, and very many other precious things” for the taking,  the Pope would gave the Spanish rulers “divine clemency to bring under your sway the said mainlands and islands with their residents and inhabitants.” And so with these words the Pope gives the Catholic kings of Spain claim to the entire “New World” and he gives Africa and India to Portugal. In just a few pages the Popes of European Christianity wiped out tens of thousands years of prior claim by native nations.

The principles found in those papal bulls became enshrined in US law in the 1823 United States Supreme Court decision of Johnson v. McIntosh. It seems that in 1773 and 1775 Thomas Johnson bought land from Piankeshaw Indian tribes. Then in 1818, William M'Intosh bought the same land from the United States Congress. When they realized this, Johnson's heirs sued M'Intosh in the United States District Court to recover the land. The District Court ruled for M'Intosh, reasoning that M'Intosh's title was valid since it was granted by Congress; the Piankeshaw could not legally sell the land because they never “owned” it.

The Supreme Court upheld the finding for M'Intosh, ruling that individuals could not buy land directly from American Indians because the United States government had acquired ultimate title to Indian lands through the "doctrine of discovery." Chief Justice John Marshall wrote in his opinion that European nations had assumed "ultimate dominion" over the lands of America under the Doctrine of Discovery, and that upon "discovery" the Indians lost "their rights to complete sovereignty, as independent nations," and retained only a right of "occupancy" in their lands. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote, "As infidels, heathens, and savages, they (the Indians) were not allowed to possess the prerogatives belonging to absolute, sovereign and independent nations."  The Court concluded that European and U.S. practice treated American Indians "as an inferior race of people, without the privileges of citizens, and under the perpetual protection and pupilage of the government."^[iii] Chief Oren Lyons says of the Johnson v M’Intosh decision “this is where they installed it in US Law”

There is no question this is one of the most disturbing parts of our history as a nation. It is so disturbing, in fact, that the mind rejects it. Or rationalizes it. Because everyone was doing it, right? During the period of history when Columbus “discovered” America, colonization was a powerful phenomenon guiding international movement around the globe. And right at the beginning of this international land grab the Pope himself gave it the religious stamp of approval. This idea that the highest authority in Christianity would call on “intrepid champions of the Christian faith ... to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue” is, frankly, what gives Christianity a bad name. This is what Rebecca Parker was talking about when she wrote:

 “The way the name of God has been so easily on the lips of those who bless acts of war is only the most recent example of people leaning on God to rationalize human actions that are far from holy”[iv]

In Australia and other areas it was the legal concept of Terra Nullius or “empty land” which allowed European Nations to “Discover” those lands. The logic of Terra Nullius runs that the land was here to discover because there were no Christian people here, no REAL people, therefore the land was empty. In the words of  Oran Lyons, Faithkeeper of the Turtle clan of the Onondaga Nation, the Doctrine of Discovery rests on the notion that native people are “something less than people, they are not eligible for human rights” ^[v]

There is hardly an atrocity that can be imagined that was not committed during this period of aggressive colonization and these acts cannot be undone. It will always be a part of the history of our country and of the human race that must be remembered so that it can never happen again. And yet we long to forget. We long to imagine that this is a historical anecdote that has nothing to do with us today, but most of the land we now inhabit in this country was land we took by force from other peoples.

Each year when we gather to celebrate Thanksgiving we, as people of conscience, have to choose what story we tell. We were taught as children the story of happy pilgrims and Native Americans sharing their harvest bounty. But now we know this story to be more of a cultural myth which is not only rife with historical inaccuracies, but obscures a larger story in which those pilgrims were part of a systemic call  “to invade, search out, capture, vanquish.” And we know this story ends in a trail of tears. When we remember what comes after that mythical harvest celebration, we don’t really feel like celebrating any more.

As I was reading about the doctrine of discovery to prepare for this morning‘s service. I felt overwhelmed by grief, overwhelmed by the magnitude of what has happened, and overwhelmed by how we cannot change this story that is already written.  But our Unitarian heritage calls us to faithfulness to the truth. And if there is more than one version of a story to be told, our faith calls us to listen even to the hard stories, the difficult stories, because we believe in the free and responsible search for truth and meaning, and we know we don’t get to pick and choose which truth we should include.

I found some circumspection in these words by the UU minister Alice Blair Wesley who wrote “It is terribly arrogant to suppose that because we can see, with hindsight, mistakes of the generations before us, it's okay to demonize them. Without demonizing them, we need to be as clear as we can be about their gifts to us and their mistakes, because the consequences of both still shape us.”

Our purpose here today is not to demonize 15^th century popes and monarchs, but to understand the consequences of their actions. The problem is that in subtle and not so subtle ways we are still living out the legacy of the doctrine of discovery today.  In City of Sherrill, New York v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York  the U.S. Supreme Court said in footnote 1: “Under the ‘doctrine of discovery…’fee title [ownership] to the lands occupied by Indians when the colonists arrived became vested in the sovereign—first the discovering European nation and later the original states and the United States.’”[vi] The 1832 decision has never been overturned, and has been referred to in legal decisions in Federal courts as recently as 2010.^[vii]

As we trace the  impact of the Doctrine of Discovery, it leads to another troubling set of questions: Are policies toward “undeveloped nations” based on the premise that these undeveloped peoples are not sovereign? That they need to be “under the perpetual protection and pupilage of the government”? Is “undeveloped” just the modern way of saying “savages”? The Doctrine of Discovery is still used today to take mineral rights from native lands or take away their water rights. I am guessing that many of you, like property owners throughout New York State have wrestled with the decision about whether or not to lease the mineral rights to your land. The people who live on Native lands have no such right, because of this doctrine.

How can we justify selling someone else’s land, and stripping mineral rights against the will of the people who live there unless we believe that indigenous people occupying their ancestral lands have no rights. That is to say, they are “something less than people, they are not eligible for human rights”

As people of conscience, it is time to interrupt this story. We do not believe in a God who commands us to “invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue” those who are not like us.  Universalism is the radical notion that there are no inferior peoples, no superior people, just people, all of whom have inherent worth and dignity.

I have heard UU historians and theologians say that in a day when there is very little talk about hellfire and damnation in the mainstream media the importance of Universalism has faded. But I encourage you to keep your ears out for political decisions that affect the lives of millions of people which are based on the assumption that the lives of some folks are just worth more than the lives of other folks. In the public policy debates of today, listen for the assumption that some folks should have sovereignty and others should be under their patronage.

At the Justice GA in Phoenix 2 years back, delegates from churches like this one all over the country passed a business resolution repudiating the Doctrine of Discovery:

"BE IT RESOLVED that we, the delegates of the 2012 General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association, repudiate the Doctrine of Discovery as a relic of colonialism, feudalism, and religious, cultural, and racial biases having no place in the modern day treatment of indigenous peoples." [viii]

It called on all our fellow Unitarian Universalists to study the Doctrine and eliminate all vestiges from the current-day policies, programs, theologies, and structures of Unitarian Universalism.

It calls on us to  “[Affirm] that indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, while recognizing the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different, and to be respected as such,”

It also calls for more concrete action:

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that we call upon the United States to fully implement the standards of the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the U.S. law and policy without qualifications.

This Declaration was an “aspirational declaration” (which means that it is not legally binding.)  It was passed by the United Nations in 2007 and President Obama signed it in 2010 but it was endorsed without any implementation. If it were submitted as a treaty to the US Senate, it would take on the power of  law. This is what we UUs are calling for- to turn aspiration into law.

Chief Oren Lyons says questioning Doctrine of Discovery in international law “Really shakes the root… of colonization”^[ix] Which must be why we have avoided public discussion of this Doctrine because so much is built on it. We have in fact built our very presence here on this legal precedent, these papal bulls in terms of who can claim land. This is huge.  It’s like when you realize that not only is your shower leaking, but that it’s been leaking for 400 years, and probably the wood underneath is not so stable any more. We have built hundreds of years of law on this Doctrine, It would open many things for question if this doctrine were re-examined.

When I was in Canada a few years back a colleague encouraged me to go visit the “women are persons” monument. The monument is a tableau of larger-than-life statues of the five Alberta women who fought a legal and political battle in the 1920s to have women recognized as persons.  Because of their efforts, in 1929 the Privy Council ruled that the word “person” includes both men and women. It made quite an impression on me, standing among the statues of these activists, remembering there was a time when women were not considered persons. It hardly seems possible now, does it? Women like me who lived in New York State could not own property until the “Married Women‘s Property Act” of 1838. Imagine the upheaval such a great legal turning must have caused in the minds and hearts and realities of our women, of men, of nations was huge. And yet today this seems very ordinary and reasonable.

As people of conscience we cannot refuse to reconsider the structures of our society when the moral foundation they are built on is rotten. We cannot overlook the doctrine of discovery and the “entire framework of laws that rest on the Doctrine of Discovery”^[x] just because the implications of repudiating it would ripple so far and wide. 

Our religious heritage does not allow us to walk away from this issue, not only in spite of but perhaps because of the magnitude of what this could mean. Because we believe in the inherent worth and dignity of every person. Because we believe that “God’s love embraces the Whole Human Race”  and because we believe those things, we know that any legal question about the personhood of any human being on this planet has only one possible answer.

This month, as we gather to celebrate Thanksgiving, I challenge us to do so with two stories in our mind. Not only the story of Indigenous peoples and recent immigrants to their land sitting down together in a feast of harvest gratitude, but also the story of peoples coming together right now in 2013 in dialogue and understanding. It finally is time to not only proclaim, but to bind into law the worth and dignity of every person.

---

^[i] [Pope Nicholas V issued to King Alfonso V of  Portugal, the bull Romanus Pontifex.]

^[ii] [Pope Nicholas V issued to King Alfonso V of  Portugal, the bull Romanus Pontifex.]

^[iii] [from http://americanindiantah.com/history/nar_19thcenturyrelations.html]

[iv] http://www.sksm.edu/info/journal_images/dialogue.pdf “An Open Letter to the Rev. Bill Sinkford,

UUA President” Rev. Dr. Rebecca Ann Parker

^[v] http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yVZDbqh7WgM

[vi] http://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/united-states/christian-discovery-and-indian-sovereignty#sthash.dmlVwH2Q.dpuf

^[vii]  http://www.uua.org/multiculturalism/dod/230890.shtml Report from the UUA Board of Trustees on the Doctrine of Discovery January 2012

[viii] http://www.uua.org/statements/statements/209123.shtml

^[ix]  http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yVZDbqh7WgM

^[x] (study guide lesson 2) http://www.uua.org/documents/lfd/dod_discuss_guide.pdf

A Hobbit's Adventure (October 27, 2013)

Bilbo Baggins is a most unlikely hero.  He is short, and a little plump, and loves nothing more than a quiet day at home, smoking his pipe, having a cup of tea.  This is a protagonist I can identify with.  “He liked visitors, but he liked to know them before they arrived, and he preferred to ask them.” How I empathize with Bilbo when 13 uninvited guests tumble in at tea time. In most stories of epic adventure the hero is not bewildered and bewuthered by something as ordinary as unexpected guests, or the prospect of running out of seed cakes. Most unlikely indeed.

For those of you who haven’t read the book, or who read it many years ago, Gandolf and all those dwarves are just about to embark on an adventure to reclaim the mountain that was the dwarves’ ancestral home (and all the treasure therein, from the dragon that stole it generations ago and who has hoarded it ever since.) They have come to Bilbo’s hobbit hole to hire him as a burglar.

Gandolf, the wizard, tells Bilbo: “I am looking for someone to share in an adventure that I am arranging, and it’s very difficult to find anyone.”

To which Bilbo replies: “I should think so—in these parts! We are plain quiet folk and have no use for adventures. Nasty disturbing uncomfortable things! Make you late for dinner! I can’t think what anybody sees in them”...Top of Form

Bottom of Form

 “We don’t want any adventures here, thank you! You might try over The Hill or across The Water.” By this he meant that the conversation was at an end.

I recognize myself in Bilbo. I love my snug home, I love to have things planned just so, and if I had to choose between a long adventure into the mountains to steal gold from a dragon, or a morning curled up with a book infront of the fire, I feel confident I would respond just as Bilbo did “We don’t want any adventures here, thank you.”

I also admit that children’s fantasy fiction is kind of an unlikely text for a worship service. So I ask you to enter into this text with me as a metaphor for our own life’s journey, not only physical but also spiritual. Generally speaking folks tend to build themselves a theological hobbit hole, one that is comfortable and safe, and settle in for the duration. Religious educator Gerome Berryman calls this a “theological circle” and there is no reason to venture outside of this theological circle unless it is broken. There are, he tells us, two ways such a circle can be opened. One is by tragedy- something happens to us that just cannot be explained and supported by the theology we have been dwelling inside of; our circle of beliefs is ruptured. The other is by choice- sometimes we decide to go on a theological adventure, to consciously open our circle and enter the wider world.

But Bilbo is right- adventures are “disturbing uncomfortable things! Make you late for dinner!” It is counter-intuitive to leave your comfort zone, whether a cozy hobbit hole or a system of beliefs. It is inherently disturbing and uncomfortable. Right at the beginning of his journey, when Bilbo first rushes out to join the dwarves on their adventure, he has a shocking realization:

“I’m awfully sorry,” said Bilbo, “but I have come without my hat, and I have left my pocket-handkerchief behind, and I haven’t got any money. I didn’t get your note until after 10.45 to be precise.”

“Don’t be precise,” said Dwalin, “and don’t worry! You will have to manage without pocket-handkerchiefs, and a good many other things, before you get to the journey’s end. “

To go on an adventure we have to give up not only our metaphoric pocket- handkerchief, but also our precision, our mastery of the little world we usually inhabit. Adults hate this. We have worked so hard and long to grow in mastery of our lives, and we are just not used to being unprepared, being imprecise, being without our tools.  By the end of the first day of journeying, Tolkein writes that: “just at that moment [Bilbo] felt more tired than he ever remembered feeling before. He was thinking once again of his comfortable chair before the fire in his favourite sitting-room in his hobbit-hole, and of the kettle singing. Not for the last time!” Bilbo, the  reluctant hero, gives us a new model for approaching adventures that tumble in our front door. He illustrates how even one who loves the quiet life, who would naturally choose bacon and scones over dragon’s gold any day can still have an adventure.  So my thought here this morning is not to convince you that  adventures are “all pony-rides in May-sunshine” but to inquire whether an adventure might be worth it, even for respectable hobbits.

Bilbo feels something of a fraud as he first sets out with this band of mostly strangers. He has been hired as a burglar, a job for which he has no experience. He must, very quickly prove to his party and to himself that he can do the job he has been hired to do.  But as they encounter trolls, or goblins, or wolves, dark forests, huge spiders or tall mountains, and eventually a dragon guarding a pile of gold, Bilbo begins to learn what his talents are- he can be very quiet and stealthy, is clever in a pinch, and eventually emerges as a leader of the group. By the time they reach the mountain where the dragon hordes the stolen gold his comrades “had come to respect little Bilbo. Now he had become the real leader in their adventure. He had begun to have ideas and plans of his own.”  Through their trials, Bilbo finds a role in this adventure that is truly his own- one that none of his companions could play.

When I first read the book, I assumed that, like in most adventure stories, Bilbo would be the one to slay the dragon (because really, you can’t steal a pile of gold out from under a dragon who has already destroyed a dwarf stronghold to get that hoard in the first place). I was quite surprised when it turned out that (spoiler alert) an archer from the port town across from the mountain aims the fatal arrow.  No, Bilbo’s role is not that of the usual hero. But when the dwarves and men and elves begin to fight over the treasure, as is so often the way, it is Bilbo who decides to give up the valuable “arkenstone” he had stolen from the dragon:

“This is the Arkenstone of Thrain,” said Bilbo, “the Heart of the Mountain; and it is also the heart of Thorin. He values it above a river of gold. I give it to you. It will aid you in your bargaining.” Then Bilbo, not without a shudder, not without a glance of longing, handed the marvellous stone to Bard, and he held it in his hand, as though dazed.

Bilbo is willing to give up this dazzling priceless gem in order to stop the impending battle.

Though Thorin, king of the dwarves, is initially furious at this duplicity, as faces he faces his own death, he says to Bilbo: “There is more in you of good than you know, child of the kindly West. Some courage and some wisdom, blended in measure. If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.”

This the crux of the whole thing I think. First, that there is “more in you of good than you know;” Unitarian Universalists tend to think this is true of each one of us. We have this great potential for good that often goes untapped. If we didn’t have to face goblins, spiders, dragons  or the very real trials we face in our real, human lives, we might never have a chance to see that good, that courage, that wisdom in ourselves.

Moreover, there are some things in this world that can only be done by the particular person that we are. In this case those very traits that made Bilbo an unlikely hero, are the ones that allowed Bilbo his special role in this story; valuing “food and cheer and song above hoarded gold.”

But wait, some of you are undoubtedly saying, what about the ring? While the ring our burglar Bilbo steals from the strange creature Gollum plays only the role of a useful tool in this book, it is the crux of the whole battle for middle earth in the “Lord of the Rings” series. In the same way that Bilbo has no idea of the role this ring will play in the fate of middle earth, when Tolkein wrote “The Hobbit” in 1932, he had no idea it would become so popular, nor that he would be asked to write a sequel- the epic story “the Lord of the Rings.”  Sometimes our paths are circuitous and strange. The sparkle we stoop to examine on one adventure (or win in a riddle contest- depending on which edition you read) can lead to unimaginable future adventures. Whether you believe in fate or chance, way leads on to way, one journey leads to another. One adventure can change us, can change the world.

Because the other thing about adventures, is that when you finally come home again, you are changed:

 “It is true that forever after [Bilbo]  remained an elf-friend, and had the honour of dwarves, wizards, and all such folk as ever passed that way; but he was no longer quite respectable. He was in fact held by all the hobbits of the neighbourhood to be ‘queer’... I am sorry to say he did not mind. He was quite content; and the sound of the kettle on his hearth was ever after more musical than it had been even in the quiet days before the Unexpected Party.”

 This reminds me of a recent article by my seminary professor Jeremy Taylor who writes that with

“the dreamer's increasing awareness of the deeper, non-material sources of meaning and value in waking life, (which is one way of defining "individuation") … it is not at all unusual to find that these increasingly conscious understandings lead to less interest in "small talk" and "cocktail conversation" - that which lubricates the wheels of social acceptance… This can look like loneliness and separation from those we are close to in waking life.” Taylor describes an “archetypal separation which is very often one of the inevitable… consequences of increasingly successful individuation. At the same time that …[we] celebrate the achievements and joys of deeper spiritual awareness, they can also remind the dreamer of a price that such developments so often require - a loss, or at least a lessening of the "barn warmth" of the "puppy pile."

Perhaps this is why we gather together these Sunday mornings in religious community. Because sometimes our adventures, be they physical or spiritual, change us, and we want to be with others who are willing to engage with us “the achievements and joys of deeper spiritual awareness.” At its best, this community is one where even when we return from our adventures changed, we are still welcomed home.

It occurred to me as I was watching the new “Hobbit” movie, that the twin tiers maybe a little like the Shire. It is not often a destination for world travelers, like Paris or San Francisco. It is not a center of Fashion and finance like New York City. But I see a little of this congregation in those words “If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoard gold, it would be a merrier world.”  Though not all of us can slay the dragon, each of us has a special role to play in  the epic stories unfolding in the world right now: the struggle to preserve wild places and species, the adventure of defending true democracy, the venture to end hunger, the journey towards ending oppression. And there are private adventures in our own lives- finding meaning in tragedy, forgiving betrayal, triumphing over addiction, the journey of living with authenticity and integrity.

So when the unexpected visitors show up at your door inviting you to join them in their adventure, consider doing as Rumi suggests and “meet them at the door laughing and invite them in.”