I was waiting at the West Trenton train station Tuesday afternoon, and picked up a copy of the Trenton paper, where there was a story about a nun (actually, sister, if you check this out further) who blogs in Chicago–opening a whole world of nuns and sisters blogging. I think its fair to say that our little corner of the blogosphere here is relatively quiet. Perhaps we should open a conversation about how to make it more active–and by doing it right here–we may ‘be the change’ we want to happen, eh?

And now it’s Lent.  A quick reading of the newspaper tells us that there are actually people who hunt small animals with assault weapons, and that when a prominent hunter protests he is assaulted and ostracized by gun lobbies;  prosecutors appointed by the Bush administration are instructed to prosecute people, or not, as political punishment or support – and then fired if they don’t do what they’re told.  Recently we have read about prisoners being placed in solitary cells with the windows blocked for more than three years and then considered sane and able to help with their own defense!  The deadly emissions to the environment will remain the same for the next 10 years we are told, even as sugar Maples in the North are threatened and honey bees have gone a little crazy and are somewhere unknown,  lost.  The first prosecution of someone at Guantanamo is announced after four years.  And yes, we are still at war in Iraq.  Yes, we are still there.

It is Lent and we wander in the desert. Of course, there is hope - the anti-war voice is being heard, the outrage over violations to our own sense of human decency and to our Constitution  is being more widely expressed. There are good people everywhere doing good things and winning some “battles” – (we will have a monument in Philly that acknowledges Washington’s salves!)  Jesus wanders in the desert with the wild beasts, and the angels look after him.  Will they look after us?

I had lunch with an old friend whom I respect.  He told me that he had come to the conclusion that religion was a very destructive thing.  That was months ago, and I have often pondered that disturbing thought from someone who is intelligent and socially committed.

Last Sunday, the second Sunday in epiphany, I read Isaiah 62:1-12 and Corinthians, 12^th chapter and finally in John, the wedding at Cana.  Startled by God “vindication” of Jerusalem I think that Muslims, Jews, Christians – all could approach this scripture claiming Jerusalem as theirs, looking one day to be “vindicated.”  Then I read in Corinthians that we are all baptized into one body, but of course Paul speaks of our being “baptized” into Christ’s body.

Religion does divide us.  Can we just step sideways a little bit and look at the scriptures as uniting rather than dividing?   Is that possible?  Universal vindication?  The vindication of peace? All of us struggling and seeking and suffering and dying, and hoping and living, and rejoicing – all justified, made right, ontologically okay?  Is it possible that we are one body – all – Jesus Way, Koran Way, Buddhist Way, Taoist Way.  One.

Paul follows chapter 12, of course, with 13, the triumph of love.  Jesus, at the urging of his wise mother, changes the water into wine.  There is enough for everyone.  A grand universal wedding; a body of humanity, a healing of the earth, one great festival.  It is, after all, still the season of epiphany, and God continues to reveal Godself in all manner of ways. But it has to be for everyone.  Then reconstruction will begin, in Philadelphia, in Chester, in Baghdad.  Guns will be beaten into plow shares.  It is possible.

“When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.” –Jimi Hendrix

Groove with that!

Peace and love–Jeff

On every mock tombstone is the phrase “in loving memory” followed by the name of a child, his/her age at death and the reason for their death, tank attack or battle. There are 500 in all each one representing 1,000 deaths in the war on Iraq. What is stunning however is that the faculty member from Penn Faculty and Staff Against the War on Iraq, Felicity Paxton, went to great pains to explain to the Daily Pennsylvanian that no Penn funds, tuition or otherwise, went into this project. This is because one student was ready to create a ruckus if any of his tuition dollars supported the Penn Teach-in Against the War. So since when did it become a liability for a University to be political? Isn’t academe supposed to challenge our cherished ideas of the status quo? As educated people aren’t we supposed to learn to think critically on campus and  embrace those who do (whichever side of the political fence they are on.) And since when did war become a partisan issue? Why can’t all of us agree that killing is wrong or at least the option of last resort and not to be justified but to be grieved? (Perhaps defensible for some people but then we should have the debate about it, not quell dissent with our dollars or threats of lawsuits because we disagree!)

As I listen and enter into conversations concerning Islam, I continue to be worried about our separation and our ignorance.  We need to face our own reactions to outward expressions of Islam if we are to avoid that sneaky, creeping, evil - prejudice.  For example, I have very different reactions to the hijab (the headscarf) and the hiqad (the face veil).  I’ve had quite a bit of positive experience with women wearing hijab. When I visited Palestine I met the wives of neighborhood friends from Boston.  The men were in the U. S. earning a living, the wives and children living in Ramallah.  We met in East Jerusalem, the friends wearing hijabs.  They volunteered later that they had no external pressure or compulsion to wear them, but that they were signs of their solidarity and pride as Muslim Palestinian women.  When a guard at the Muslim museum wanted me to cover my head, the women vigorously protested.

In urban ministry in Boston and in Chester I have had many occasions to work and to socialize with American Muslim women, some wearing head scarves, some not.  I respect their decisions around this and I can empathize with either position.  See, for example, an article on www.Islam101.com by Naheed Mustafa, a young Canadian woman who writes in “My Body is my Own Business” that “Why would I … want to cover myself…?  Because it gives me freedom.”  (I remember what it was like to be a young mother in a mini-skirt in the 60s, having to steel myself every day as I walked by a construction site on my street.)

But then there is the hiqad – the face covering.  Again, I respect another person’s decision about how she will dress.  But, I have an emotional reaction to sitting across a table at dinner with a woman in a veil, she negotiating her fork underneath the veil in order to eat;  later meeting the woman in the ladies room without her veil and not recognizing her – someone with whom I had just shared a meal!  I think of the communication and empathy exercise we did with youth – we gave them a sheet of paper with pictures of faces with many expressions and asked them to identify the emotion behind the expression.  How can we communicate without seeing faces?  In England a teacher was dismissed because she would not remove her veil.  I understand that.

Of course I know that this is a debate within Islam, and I have profound respect for the women of Islam to address the issues that face them.  It is up to me to face my own reactions, to respond with respect, to seek dialogue and relationship, and to seek to be well informed.  I wonder what would happen if Christian women wore hijabs for a week or so in solidarity and respect!  We would probably learn something.

Keith Olbermann has been providing powerful commentary during many of his nightly broadcasts (8PM edt) on MSNBC. His focus has been on the anti-democratic tendencies of the Bush Administration and its general incompetence.

These commentaries are striking. First, it is a complete sea change that these pointed attacks are allowed at all. You may remember that Donohue was cancelled in late 2002 because he dared to air anti-Iraq war opinions on his show.

It is also interesting that Olbermann on MSNBC (and Cafferty on CNN) are now able to find the anti-Bush voice. Today roughly 65% of Americans disapprove of Bush and 51% want him impeached according to Newsweek. So is this just piling on?

If we are to be a free society in which the empire (see Walter Bruggemann) can be challenged it is important to be able to allow anti-empire voices to be heard even when it is unpopular.

It is good that Olbermann is speaking up. It is remarkable in fact and I fear for his job should the R’s claim victory on November 7.

Perhaps those of us in the peace/justice camp need be more assertive when our views are in the minority. When we are attacked again there will no doubt be another effort to intimidate/mute our voices. Hopefully we will remember Olbermann?

What a drama in DC! The events unfolding in the upper echelons of power in DC are about the ways men with power have used it to shore up the status quo and protect one another rather than use it to protect the young people working with them. And, that is pretty despicable. But when we know of a dangerous situation and keep silent??. (”To those who know to do good and don’t do it….”seems like a Bible verse there.)

But how do we use power in ways that bring about good? I mean history is full of stories of people thinking they are doing good and then discovering that rather than helping as they intended they have even made things worse. Usually it is because the paternalistic urge takes precedence over the listening that should occur first. And of course those of us with the power that comes with privilege who are oftentimes (or usually) totally oblivious to the ways we throw our power around! Sometimes we insist we really don’t have any! (And no doubt people just shake their heads at our self-delusions.) Surely with power comes pitfalls but surely we can find ethical ways to use our power to bring about justice. Surely. BD