“Is There Room at the Table for Me?”
by Reverend Charles Blustein Ortman
November 11, 2007
READINGS:
Our First reading is from the Tao te Ching, by Lao Tzu, Chapter 10, On Harmony, translated by Peter Merel:
Embracing the Way, you become embraced;
Breathing gently, you become newborn;
Clearing your mind, you become clear;
Nurturing your children, you become impartial;
Opening your heart, you become accepted;
Accepting the world, you embrace the Way.
Bearing and nurturing,
Creating but not owning,
Giving without demanding,
This is harmony.
Our second reading is from the campaign literature of one of the currently leading Republican candidates for president of the United States:
America has been blessed with a rich and diverse natural heritage. In the tradition of [my] hero, Theodore Roosevelt, [I] believe that we are vested with a sacred duty to be proper stewards of the resources upon which the quality of American life depends. Ensuring clean air, safe and healthy water, sustainable land use, ample greenspace - and the faithful care and management of our natural treasures, including our proud National Park System - is a patriotic responsibility. One that must be met not only for the benefit of our generation, but for our children and those to whom we will pass the American legacy.
[I] believe that America's economic and environmental interests are not mutually exclusive, but rather inextricably linked. Our economic prospects depend greatly upon the sustainable use of ample and unspoiled natural resources. A clean and healthy environment is well served by a strong economy. History shows that poverty is a poor steward.
SERMON:
Back in the early 1980s, which currently feels like at least one lifetime ago, I was involved in launching and owning a new business. It may sound somewhat incongruous to you, though it's not at all to me, that I began a tire business, where I sold and serviced large farm tires. I had this big old tire truck and I'd go right out to the farms, to repair and replace those enormous tires you may have seen on tractors and combines. Especially at this time of the year, during the harvest, the tire business was very busy, as heavily loaded combines – particularly on hillsides – would find themselves with tire trouble. Spring was another season when tractors needed to be rolling, sometimes around-the-clock. And so, my busy seasons were spring and fall.
We were living in the northwestern hills of Illinois at that time. If you've never been there, you might be surprised that it’s some truly beautiful country. The glaciers that flattened most of the Midwest happened to miss that little nook, leaving rivers, hills, valleys and lots of woods that are all rather similar to parts of New England. It was lovely. It was a very rural life in a very rural culture. During the down times of the year, the slower month, especially when the business was brand new, I wasn't nearly so busy with the tires. Being an at-home dad with our burgeoning brood of babies was an occupation in and of itself, but many of our neighbors and customers felt that I probably needed a little something more to do.
"You know, Bob Nichols, the road commissioner is going to be retiring soon," several of my customers mentioned. "You ought to see about taking his place. Good part-time work. It’d be a good supplement to your income. You’d possibly do a pretty good job, too. Go see Ron Lawfer," they said. "He'll tell y'all about it."
After hearing this from several people, I decided that I would go see Ron Lawfer and check out this opportunity. Ron was a neighbor who ran a large dairy farm. He lived just down the road to the intersection and around the corner. I’d known him for quite some time. He was one of my customers, too.
"You know why they sent you to see me, don't you, Charlie?" Ron asked after I explained why he had dropped by.
"No. Somebody had mentioned that you are the Boss, and that I should talk with you. That's all."
"Well," Ron said smiling, "what I'm the boss of is the Republican Party here in the township. People told you to come and see me ‘cause, if you're going to be the road commissioner, I’m the one who has to put you on the ticket." Ron’s smile was turning into a pretty good-sized grin by that point.
Things quickly started to become clear. Joe Davies County, Illinois is a staunch Republican stronghold. In our Unitarian Universalist Church there in Stockton, the ratio of Republicans to Democrats was pretty close to the exact opposite of what I’d guess it to be here in Montclair. In Wards Grove Township where I lived, there were three or maybe for households of Democrats, at the most. That meant that everyone else was a Republican because everyone there belonged to one party or the other.
Ron Lawfer stood there smiling. "So, if I were to put you on the ticket that would have to mean that you'd have to be a Republican." He was enjoying himself a little too much.
"Well," I said, "Thanks anyway, Ron. But I guess that makes for A pretty short conversation, because I'm not a Republican."
Ron took off his cap and rubbed his forehead. You haven't ever been a Republican?" He asked.
"Nope."
"Are you sure?"
"Yeh," I said. "Ron, I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I'm sure that I've never been a Republican. My parents are Republicans. Some of my favorite people in the whole world are Republicans. But me, I've never been a Republican."
"You're sure of that? You're sure that you're not a Republican?" He asked several more times to each of my denials. We went back and forth like that for a while until finally he said,
"Then, let me ask you something. You don't need to tell me the answer but I just want you to think about this for a minute.” "Who did you vote for in the last presidential primary election?"
Well, in the previous presidential primary a very liberal but unsuccessful John Anderson, a Republican congressman from Illinois, had nearly turned the party on its ear with his very energetic bid for his party's nomination to be president. I'd been an enthusiastic supporter of John Anderson's. In Illinois it's very easy to change your party affiliation during a primary election. You can walk right in and make the change at the polling place when you go in to vote. In the previous primary, a very strong crossover vote had nearly seen John Anderson win the nomination, at least in Illinois.
I had been one of those crossover voters, and I had not yet changed my party affiliation back to what it had been. I was officially a Republican. Ron Lawfer knew it because, of course as the party chair, he would have been informed of any new registrations. I shrugged my shoulders and said, "You’re right. I am a Republican!"
"I thought you might be," he said. "That's good enough for me, Charlie. If you want to run for road commissioner, I'd be more than happy to put your name up for nomination." And he did. So, I was elected to the office in a landslide victory, capturing even a greater percentage of the vote than any of the other candidates running for other offices, because after all I carried the three Democratic households too. "Hmmm," I thought, even as I assumed my office, "I'm a Republican?!"
You've been hearing the announcements from Nick Lewis for our Annual Auction coming up this Saturday evening. If you've been to the auction before, you know that it's really a lot of fun in itself. And you have the chance to set up a lot of great social activities and many other opportunities for the whole year to come. One of the items I always put up for bid (besides a couple of "joyful mysteries") is the opportunity to choose a sermon theme that I will then pursue and deliver. This morning’s sermon is the result of Chris and Deb Corbett's winning bid from last year's auction. They didn't tell me their theme until later in the spring. Deb said that they'd been wondering about how a Republican might feel welcomed and included – or not – in our Unitarian Universalist congregation. That's when I remembered the story about my political career back in Stockton. It wasn't so much about me discovering that I was a Republican, although I love the irony in that. It was much more about discovering that we are all much more alike than otherwise. And it was also about being a part of the Unitarian Universalist congregation in Stockton that was predominantly Republican.
About a week after my conversation with Deb, I sat down with someone in my office who was new to the congregation. He and his family were planning to join as new members with the group that we welcomed last June. "I might just mention," he said, "that I'm a Republican."
"How does that work for you?" I asked.
"No problem," he said. "I don't feel there's any lack of congruity between my Republican values in my Unitarian Universalist values. The more I learn about Unitarian universalism, the more I feel right at home here."
"Good," I said. "I would hope that there wouldn't need to be any conflict. And I'm hoping that that is and can continue to be the case. And I hope that you'll let me know if there should ever be anything done or said that might make you feel otherwise."
Just as I know that, even though we call ourselves and aspire to be an inclusive community, this is not always as theologically a comfortable place as it might be for Unitarian Universalist Christians. It is also, I'm sure, not as comfortable as it might be for those with a more conservative social or political outlook.
I received an e-mail from Ed Haenlin last month. Many of you will remember Ed; he was a liturgist one month, and among other things had been a member of the Men's Group. He and his wife Ann Litke are both very thoughtful people whom I admired a great deal. They were wonderful members of the congregation, who moved out to Colorado a couple of years ago. In his note, Ed posed a challenge to me and to us quite straightforwardly. Here it is slightly abridged:
Dear Charlie,
Still reading the Gazette each month, or at least skimming it, I noted with great interest your future sermon, "Is There Room at the Table for Me? ..." It's of interest to me, because I've noted in our [new] congregation [in Colorado] that some members feel free to say (though not on numerous occasions) things disparaging of Republicans or the Religious Right, comments that would be rightly considered inimical to our covenant if directed at members of other groups.
<Start humor> So I mentioned to Ann the title, and she said with a smile "the answer is, No." Sharing some of her feeling but being basically more temperate, I suggested our position should be "Don't ask, don't tell." After all, why alienate some of the people most capable of generosity toward the Building Fund, the operating budget, and so on? <End humor>
Seriously, someone in our congregation whom I know to be Republican--and as upset as I am over the Bush policies and incompetence--has hinted that there are more Republicans than one might expect in our midst. If so, I think they are very circumspect and perhaps tolerant toward those who mistakenly assume we all agree on whom to vote for.
Even though our congressman is Democratic... the Grand Valley in which we live with another 125,000 souls is judged to be fairly conservative. The older conservatives are from the older style, the one I largely agree with, the one that wishes to conserve what's good in local culture and conserve the natural landscape and agricultural tradition and not be wasteful of public moneys. We meet some of these people through the Mesa Land Trust (a great story for another time) and we find we can talk with them and party with them.
One particular incident hipped me to this issue: during a congregational meeting where most of the really active members were present, someone remarked that although we're a diverse congregation, at least thank god we had not attracted Republicans. Another member, a businessman who lives openly with his gay [partner], both church members, with a spark of anger said, "there are more than you imagine." The matter was dropped there, but it started me thinking. In friendship, Ed.
I would hope that we would not feel so free in making disparaging remarks about Republicans here. I would hope that we would strive to live up to our mission and be more welcoming than that. I think I need to insert a small caveat at this point. First and last, as I talk about Republicans this morning, I'm talking about people, and in particular about people who embrace a conservative political perspective regarding how our country can best go about serving the largest common good – both domestically and abroad. I'm not talking about the neoconservative perspectives and values of serving oneself at the expense of others, the further marginalization of the already marginalized, the drive to divide and conquer, or the value of gaining strength as the beneficiary of hate.
The new member I spoke with last spring expressed his grief at the neocons having, at least temporarily, stolen away the Republican Party's dearest values. In a sermon I gave a couple of months ago, I quoted former President Jimmy Carter as having expressed similar feelings that had been shared with him by many of his former Republican political rivals and sometimes partners. Indeed, over the past several years I have spoken to many Republicans who feel that they have been misrepresented by the current administration, which they feel is most out of sync with traditional Republican values, and who are eager to reclaim their party.
To the point of Republicans having a place at the UU table is Russell W. Peterson, former Republican governor of Delaware, and Former Head of the US Council on Environmental Quality under presidents Nixon and Ford. Governor Peterson is also a longtime member of First Unitarian Society of Wilmington, Delaware. I heard him speak at General Assembly couple of years ago and bought his book, "Patriots, Stand Up! This Land Is Our Land; Fight to Take It Back." (Cedar Tree Books, 2003) In it, he could have hardly been more vehement in his disallowance of neocon ideology within Republicanism.
So, we're not here this morning discussing the appropriateness of the theft of traditional American values. We are not here to try to find a way to embrace an ideology that is anti-American and anti-humanitarian. We are not here in an attempt to be tolerant of a self-serving neocon ideology. Nor are we here to claim that the Democratic Party has a lock on the moral high ground. Who could be a partisan in the state of New Jersey and be naïve about that truth?
We are here to try to know ourselves better by having a better understanding of ourselves and each other by creating an atmosphere where it is safe to have varying viewpoints -- world viewpoints -- regarding how to make the world a better place for everyone and everything. First and last, we are here to talk about people and about being in right relationship with one another.
Is there room at the Unitarian Universalist table for Republicans? I surely do hope that there is. If there is not, we have not yet even begun to learn what it means when we say in our welcoming words each week, "We are welcoming of all seekers after truth, beauty, justice and compassion cherishing our diversity..." There are many ways of viewing the larger good, and there are very many valid ways of serving that potential goodness. I suspect that when we limit our dialogue partners to those whose views are the same as our own, we are actually limiting our view of what the largest common good might be. It is only by being in a truly diverse conversation, that we can begin to appreciate a greater largeness than we might otherwise imagine.
Pablo Neruda, Chilean writer and much loved Communist politician, wrote, “All paths lead to the same goal: to convey to others what we are. And we must pass through solitude and difficulty, isolation and silence in order to reach forth to the enchanted place where we can dance our clumsy dance and sing our sorrowful song - but in this dance or in this song there are fulfilled the most ancient rites of our conscience in the awareness of being human and of believing in a common destiny.”
Liberal religion is not about a liberal political party. It’s about a religious approach that is liberal. One that includes , one that includes the use of reason and tolerance and the freedom of conscience. That is not about limiting who we are as human beings. It’s about expanding ourselves as human beings. We are not here to limit ourselves, one another, nor anyone else. We are here together to grow our souls. And not just our own, but the world’s with us.
So grant that we may be a loyal opposition to any religious views, all religious views that would define morality in any way that lessens the capacity of justice and equity and compassion in the world around us. And grant too that we might be larger than our political perspectives, more than Democrats or Republicans, but human beings in concert, seeking a common vision of the beloved community, with the capacity to embrace others with differing views on obtaining that worthy aspiration.
Is there room at the table? I know that there is because, whether we think so or not, we are already sitting together at that table. The question is – How gracious are we willing to be? And then, are we willing to boldly and lovingly make our claim and then to accept the claim made by others? To answer our friend Ed Haenlin, please… do ask, and please do tell. Is there room at the table for that? I pray there is.
Lao Tsu wrote:
Opening your heart, you become accepted;
Accepting the world, you embrace the Way.
Bearing and nurturing,
Creating but not owning,
Giving without demanding,
This is harmony.
So I’ll be Ron Lawfer for a minute… Let me ask, are you a Republican? Are you sure? Are you sure that you have never been? Please don't be so sure that you don't take the risk to listen to others who might be helpful to you in your pursuit of morality and value, your pursuit of truth and meaning, your pursuit of reason, tolerance and freedom of conscience. It's a part of accepting one another. We can do that here; or at least we can learn to do that -- to accept ourselves and one another. This is our holy journey.
|
