Race & Power: Then & Now (sermon)

The Unitarian Society, East Brunswick, NJ

October 27, 2019

Fisticuffs.[i] Violent shoving. Spitting in the face. Name calling.

In June, I preached on the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall Rebellion, what is commonly understood as the start of the gay or queer liberation movement. But the aggressive behavior I just described, while it did happen in June of 1969, was not in front of the Stonewall Inn in Greenwich Village.  It took place at General Assembly – yes, our General Assembly, the annual gathering of Unitarian Universalists across the country and the globe – in Boston.

1969 was quite the year.

As I said last week, “Our whole existence as Unitarians, or Universalists, or Unitarian Universalists, we have been engaged in controversies related to race and power.”  Today we are going to explore what happened a half century ago and how echoes, some subtle, some incredibly loud, are reverberating today.

Before I go further, I want to affirm that Unitarian Universalism is, and always has been, a multi-racial, multi-cultural movement. There are people of many races and ethnicities who are Unitarian Universalists, including who are members of this congregation.  Yet, we cannot hide from the reality that we are predominantly white, not only in membership and attendance, but also in cultural comforts and leadership. We have aspirations to be more multi-cultural than we are. We have a gap that we cannot easily explain. It causes pain, and sometimes harm, to the people of color who are us. So, while I tell a story today that is largely Black and white, I want to explicitly recognize, that it is not our only race story.

In 1966, Reverend Steven Frichtman, a white minister at First U in Los Angeles, preached these words upon observing the emergence of Black Power on the civil rights landscape:

 “The future will be hard, stormy, and unpredictable. Our own hearts will often have to change, our subconscious minds must be cleansed. Our own value system must be shaken up. And we must not run away from it because we grow weary in the struggle.”

The United States was responding in one way or another with the emergence of Black Power, whether they knew it or not. Black people were demanding that they get their fair share, that Black is Beautiful. It raised defensiveness and fear for those who were not ready, who felt threatened, or who felt that too much was being asked too quickly. The parallel with our own time, and the emergence of the Black Lives Matters movement, is undeniable.

Until a decade or so ago, this era had been known as the Black Empowerment Controversy. You heard what Reverend Sinkford suggests it be called more accurately: the White Power Controversy.  It has a certain ring of authenticity to it.  In the end, I think what has most stuck is the politic “Empowerment Controversy.”  Even without the nomenclature, race still vibrates throughout this part of our history.

In summarizing this history my primary, but not only, source was, Revisiting the Empowerment Controversy: Black Power and Unitarian Universalism, written by Reverend Mark Morrison-Reed.  Here is an incomplete timeline:

  • UUs proudly take part in the civil rights movement of the early 1960s, including two who would become civil rights martyrs in 1963: Reverend James Reeb and Viola Liuzzo, both white. We also have congregations that attempt to use our polity to assert their right to stay segregationist.
  • Black Power arrives on the scene, nationally and within Unitarian Universalism.
  • In October, 1967, the UUA holds a conference to develop a response to Black Power. Out of this emerges the Black Affairs Council. Unexpected by the white male leaders of the UUA, BAC insists in choosing its own leaders and articulates a philosophy much in line with Black Power.
  • A group with an integrationist philosophy, called Black and White Action, alos forms.  From the beginning, the philosophy of these two groups are in conflict, and competition.
  • In the spring of 1968 there are riots across the nation after the assassination of Dr. King – a man who told us that “a riot is the language of the unheard.”
  • BAC demanded that the UUA fund them for $250,000 a year for four years – a million dollars that in our time would be like $7 million. BAC would have complete control over the money.
  • At General Assembly that year, a vote overwhelmingly approved the formal establishment of BAC and full funding.
  • The 1969 General Assembly was in Boston. The division between BAC and BAWA had grown deeper. BAC council members walked out of General Assembly. Rev. Jack Mendelsohn, a white minister, called for others to join them in solidarity.  Four hundred white people joined the walk out (about one fifth of the voting delegates).  This was when one of Jack’s colleagues spit in his face.
  • Delegates voted to continue the funding for BAC, but not for BAWA.  The vote was very close, nearly 50/50.  This did not bode well and marks the beginning of the end.
  • After GA, the new UUA president discovered that the Association was nearly bankrupt. This had not been made public. Looking to the survival of the Association, President Robert West cut funding in many areas, including to BAC.
  • This was not received well by members of BAC or their allies. It was seen as yet another betrayal by white leaders and a faith movement that continually placed African Americans’ needs last. BAC disaffiliated from the UUA.
  • At General Assembly in 1970, delegates ended all funding to BAC.  BAC eventually disbanded.
  • A significant number of Black Unitarian Universalists, as well as white ones, to left Unitarian Universalism[ii].  Most did not return.

In the fifty years since, there have been numerous reflections from different perspectives on what happened and why. Mark Morrison-Reed has written extensively on this topic. He notes that the passage of time was necessary to allow what had become metal hot had to cool for it to take shape that we might be able to recognize and make use of.  Morrison-Reed’s conclusion in his latest book, which came in 2018, surprised me.  Here are his words:

Theorizing about the role that paternalism and patriarchy played during this era is a more speculative endeavor than chronicling what happened, but the effort leads to the most cogent explanation for why the empowerment tragedy played out as it did. Patriarchy turns to violence to depose the leader when it must, because patriarchy is about the exercise of power. In this case, it was also transracial and manifested in both the generational conflict within the UUA and in BAC/BUUC’s overthrow of the African American old guard.

Morrison-Reed, an African American man, concludes that it was racialized patriarchical power grabs at the heart of the division and rupture. While we lost a higher percentage of Black UUs, we lost members of both races. Both BAC and BAWA had Black and white supporters. Morrison-Reed drilled down deeply in this book, so it’s a compelling supposition.  

While Morrison-Reed names patriarchy as the culprit, this does not let white people off the hook or mean that racism did not play a critical role. It was a complex and deeply destructive combination of race and gender oppression that wreaked havoc, not one or the other.  A havoc that brought lasting loss to our faith movement, loss of cherished members from congregations, and even the splitting of lifelong friendships and marriages.


There are cycles in our faith movement’s engagement with race, racism, and white supremacy culture. After the controversies of the late 1960s and early 1970s, there was a decade or so where we did all kinds of social justice work, as long as it was not explicitly racial justice work. Some might call it avoidance. Some might call it healing. Probably it was a bit of both.

Echoes of the Empowerment Controversy remain with us today. An awareness of the origins of these echoes helps us to build the Beloved Community to which we aspire and about which we dream.

Paula Cole Jones, who works for the UUA and has a decade and a half of experience working with congregations, observed over and over that a person can believe they are a “good UU’ without ever thinking about or dealing with racism or other oppressions at a systems level. This struck her, a Black woman, as wrong. She led the process of creating an 8th Principle to correct this. Together with Bruce Pollack Johnson, a white member of a UU congregation in Philadelphia, they drafted in 2013 what is now known as the 8th Principle, which has been adopted by about a dozen UU congregations and has been recommended to the wider Association for adoption.  It reads

“We, the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association, covenant to affirm and promote: journeying toward spiritual wholeness by working to build a diverse multicultural Beloved Community by our actions that accountably dismantle racism and other oppressions in ourselves and our institutions.”

In 2017, we saw the emergence of Black Lives of UU (BLUU), a Black-led UU organization that is in covenant with the UUA, helping to create Black leadership and healthy spaces for anyone from the Africa diaspora, as well as supporting other people of color, to find and make their place within Unitarian Universalism, instead of having to leave, instead of having to endure frequent microaggressions that come from well-intended typically white ignorance.  Because that is a thing that we UU congregations do fairly well, I’m sad to confirm.

In 2018, the UUA promised BLUU to raise $5.3 million to fund their work, including committing a sizeable portion of its endowment, and inviting other UU organizations, including congregations, to commit as well.  Along with nearly 700 other UU congregations, our congregation took part in the Promise and the Practice. We met the goal of contributing $10 per member to BLUU. Many people, myself included, feel that this our way of making good on a fifty-year-old promise by paying a long-standing debt.

We know that we are not done with race, racism, or white supremacy culture – out there or here, in our midst. America is not post-racial and neither are we. As it has always been, it still seems that General Assembly acts as a thermometer for showing us how hot the issue of race is in any particular year.[iii] This past year’s General Assembly was no exception.

In 2017, the Commission on Institutional Change was established to get to the root to what ails us racially.  You heard an excerpt of their most recent report as one of our readings this morning. At this past year’s GA, the Commission conducted a survey. About one quarter of GA registrants responded.  60% ranked as 10 (the highest score) that the most important work for the future of our faith is anti-racism, anti-oppression, and multi-cultural work.  An additional 30% ranked it with an 8 or 9.[iv]

On the other hand, the efforts to make space for voices of those with marginalized identities encountered the harshest backlash to date at this General Assembly, the wake of which continues to cause damage.

Last month, the Commission on Institutional Change reflected on General Assembly, asking some truly compelling questions that fit well with our theme of belonging this month. The Commission asks, “Can we recognize that there are legitimate and differing interpretation of our past and present? Can we reconcile our differences in love?”[v]

Whether we apply these questions within Unitarian Universalism, or to the transformations taking place in our larger culture, we must wrestle with what it is to be a predominantly white community in a society that is increasingly “browning,” — something that I personally welcome, but recognize causes me to have to learn new ways of being, to face uncomfortable truths, and to let go of certain expectations I was taught to have because of my white racial identity. 

I think this is harder for those of us who have sat more solidly in traditional positions of power.  I am thinking here of straight white males of Baby Boom generation — some of whom sit in this very room, and for whom I have genuine affection; one of whom I share a home and a life with.

The backlash that our nation experienced in response to the civil rights movement, in response to Black Power, has not gone away.  In fact, in recent years, it has intensified. In addition to backlash from more conservative quarters, there is also unmanaged fragilities, both mild and extreme kinds, from all directions: conservative, center, liberal, and progressive. 

We are not immune, though we like to hold ourselves apart from it. Indeed, we are in the midst of it. If we do not engage in thoughtful, intentional self-examination, it may very well, if we allow it, pull us apart.

Let us join with Reverend Sinkford, who says at the top of your order of service, that most days, he believes there is growing traction to point us toward hope.

Let us live into our aspirations of a deep and true belonging for all who are on the journey to Beloved Community.

Let us find ways to recognize legitimate and differing interpretations of our past and of our present. And may we work for a future together.

Let us find ways to reconcile in love.

Let us not grow weary in the struggle.

Amen.  Blessed be.

[i] Morrison-Reed, Mark. Revisiting the Empowerment Controversy

[ii] Takahashi-Morris, Roush, & Spencer. The Arc of the Universe is Long, p. 11

[iii] Arc, p. 446

[iv] UUWorld https://www.uuworld.org/articles/coic-survey-preview

[v] https://www.uua.org/uuagovernance/committees/commission-institutional-change/blog/deepening-spiritually-reflecting

Posted in Justice, Sermons, Unitarian Universalism | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

This is Not a Drill: A Global Call to Strike for the Climate (sermon)

September 15, 2019

The Unitarian Society, East Brunswick, NJ

Reverend Karen G. Johnston

We refuse to bequeath a dying planet to future generations by failing to act now.

We act in peace, with ferocious love of these lands in our hearts.

We act on behalf of life.

Powerful words in the midst of a topic – in the midst of a REALITY – that is so heavy it is leaden beyond leaden, it is difficult to offer the proper invitation, sufficient space, for full consideration.

We refuse to bequeath a dying planet to future generations by failing to act now.

We act in peace, with ferocious love of these lands in our hearts.

We act on behalf of life.

Last month I preached of how we have shifted from climate change in the present tense to climate changed – past tense, the change already happening, damage already done and now beyond our prevention, to be sure, and beyond our fixing, but not yet – according to many – beyond our being able to minimize, not yet beyond the choice to lessen the suffering – to lessen our suffering and the suffering of others, never the first without the other.

There are so many voices, some in resonance with each other, some in contradiction – and these are just the science-based ones.  David Wallace Wells who tells us that climate nihilism is just as much a delusion as climate denial. Jonathan Franzen, in this week’s New Yorker, telling us that it’s beyond time to stop pretending. We can read Dahr Jamail’s The End of Ice and weep lavishly for all that has been lost, is being lost.

We can listen to visionary feminist fiction writers of the 1990s who knew what was in store.

Starhawk’s Fifth Sacred Thing and Octavia Butler’s Parable trilogy (with its two books).  A quarter of a century ago these wise women were listening to the Earth, to activists and healers, could perceive the path we have been on, are on. In these offerings of fiction, there is wisdom of how we might realistically move forward in a climate constricted world.

Currently, there is Jem Bendell, a British academic, who speaks of “an uneven ending of our normal modes of sustenance, security, pleasure, identity, meaning and hope.”[1] Or, in other words, collapse. His approach to this fraught topic is that a failure to normalize conversations about collapse, will cause us, and the planet, even more harm.

We refuse to bequeath a dying planet to future generations by failing to act now.

We act in peace, with ferocious love of these lands in our hearts.

We act on behalf of life.


Jem is just one in the multi-voice environmental movement that is Extinction Rebellion. Called XR for short, its hourglass symbol on the back of my robe today, it is a global movement formed less than a year ago in the United Kingdom. Non-violent, artistically creative, and intentionally disruptive, Extinction Rebellion gives shape to the rebellious instinct against the existential threat that we call climate crisis. 

Extinction Rebellion’s primary demands are fundamentally intersectional. They recognize that we cannot end dominion over nature without attending to all forms of dominion, of cultural oppression. The struggle for climate justice is “the struggle for racial, gender, sexual, and economic equality.”[1]

Thanks to XR, the UK declared carbon neutrality by 2050 — and XR continues to push for even sooner, for truly, 2050 is far too late. XR presses for municipalities all over the world – nearly a thousand so far – to declare climate emergencies.  Just a week or two ago, they pressured the New York Times to recognize the hypocrisy of so-called objectively reporting on climate change and sponsoring a major conference of the oil industry conference. Due to XR’s, and others’ actions, they scrapped their sponsorship!   

Three months ago, XR published a handbook called, This Is Not a Drill, from which this sermon takes its title. In it, there is a mini-primer on Donut Economics by “Renegade Economist” Kate Raworth, advocating for an economy that makes us thrive, whether or not it grows, rather than the kind we currently have, which is an economy that grows, whether or not it makes us thrive. One chapter is a deeply disturbing window into how the ultra-rich are preparing for collapse (FYI: it does not include you and me).  There is a recipe for how to hold successful non-violent, civilly-disobedient actions, including how to feed people.  And it includes XR’s declaration of emergency, which ends with these three lines:

We refuse to bequeath a dying planet to future generations by failing to act now.

We act in peace, with ferocious love of these lands in our hearts.

We act on behalf of life.

XR is intentionally non-partisan. And though some faith leaders are associated with it, it is not a faith-based movement. Even so, I wonder if you hear, like my nephew did, the echoes of the ancient text of Deuteronomy from Hebrew Scriptures:

“Now choose life, so that you and your children may live.”

What I find resonant — theologically, spiritually — with XR is part of our Universalist heritage: there is no individual salvation. All salvation is universal.  All liberation is collective.  And thusly must we bring it about.

Extinction Rebellion’s message and methods are dramatic because the reality we are facing is existential. Last October’s IPCC report informed the world we had less than 12 years to…to what? Not to prevent climate change – it’s too late for that.  Eleven years to make changes now so that we might create a path to net zero CO2 emissions by mid-century,[2] which is one goal in averting total disaster. That eleven-year forecast is conservative. So conservative, that it does not serve us in fully understanding the emergency in our midst: time and time again, the timelines put out by the IPCC have shown themselves to be wild under-estimates.


This is perhaps why Extinction Rebellion, and other climate movements have gone global so rapidly, resonating so deeply, captivating the imaginations of so many, including people who had never considered themselves activists. XR has emerged as part of the same Zeitgeist as the Sunrise Movement in this country. And as the climate strike movement that has blossomed out of the actions of now 16-year-old Swedish Greta Thunberg (you might remember her from our Earth Day service called, “I Want You to Panic”).  Last fall, Greta stopped attending school on Fridays, choosing instead to sit outside her nation’s parliament building to demand that the government respond in a way that is proportionate to the emergency at hand.  This year, she has taken a leave of absence to focus on the climate crisis. She traveled to the U.S. on a solar-powered ship, not wanting to fly, given the carbon footprint.  She is here to do many things, including attend to the United Nations climate talks beginning a week from tomorrow.

Days before that meeting is the global strike for the climate on September 20. THIS FRIDAY. Initiated by youth climate activists, the call is for ALL to participate – and it is just five days away.   The global climate strike is supported by many organizations world-wide, including the Unitarian Universalist Association, including the Board of this congregation. 

Including the Central Jersey Climate Coalition, a group begun by students, faculty, and staff at Rutgers, responding to the call to strike.  We are blessed that some of these pragmatic, diligent, insistent organizers are here with us this morning.  They’ll have some time after my sermon to speak invite you to take part in the rally.  I’m hoping that they will stay for at least some of coffee hour to share with you more of their passion on this topic.  

The call to strike is wide – whatever level of participation your circumstance allows (and maybe stretching beyond your comfort zone).  Perhaps you can still put in for a day off from work this Friday.  If you own a business, you shut it down for the day (I know of at least one TUS congregant who is considering this – pretty impressive, if you ask me). Or if you can leave work early, you could join one of the 10 rallies statewide. 

If you are in this area, you can go to the rally at Rutgers at 2:30, with a march to Representative Frank Pallone’s office, demanding that he call hearings on the Green New Deal, since he is the chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.   

Here’s what I know: If we continue with our business as usual, fed by our own versions of denial and wishful thinking – that is what our elected officials will do too.

On Friday, I will not be here (none of our church staff will be; as an employer, on the church side we are honoring the strike). Our emails will be silent as well.  (Of course, if you have a pastoral emergency, still call or text me!)  In the afternoon, I will be at the Rutgers rally.  I’m hoping to see some of you there, too.  Or you can start at the other local rally at the Reformed Church in Highland Park at 3pm. Both rallies are coordinated and will join together on our way to Representative Pallone’s office.

In the morning on Friday, the President of our Unitarian Universalist Association, Reverend Susan Frederick-Gray, is speaking at Community Church in New York City, as is the new Activist-in-Chief of 350.org – May Boeve. I’ve been wondering about whether I can squeeze that into what will be a busy, busy day. If any of you want to make a congregational trip of it, please let me know.


Before we hear from some Rutgers students, I want to bring your attention to the ClimateSpirit gathering happening this evening.  Its goal is to create over time a pocket of deep community through connecting, singing, sharing, and eating, providing a resilient space to process climate grief, in order to make room in your psyche, soul, or spirit to do whatever it is that is yours to do. I’m thankful to TUS member Stephanie Sasso, who will be leading the singing. It’s open to ages high school and older. It starts at 5:30. Each of you is invited.  All of you are welcome.  As are your friends, your neighbors, the wider community. Word of it has gone far and wide.  I can’t tell if we will have five people or fifty.


It is not easy to make room in our psyches, in our heartminds, for the reality of climate chaos, no matter the scale. If we did — if we do –it means that it is not just other people who must stop “business as usual.”  It is we who must do this.  And must do it now, for time is ever so short.

Let us, in whatever ways possible, rise up to the call, not only of this strike, but of this larger moment.  Let us raise up our personal sense of connection and our communal sense of hope. 

Let us refuse to bequeath a dying planet to future generations by failing to act now.

Let us act in peace, with ferocious love of these lands in our hearts.

Let us affirm: we act on behalf of life.

Amen.  And may it be so.

I’d like to welcome Rutgers folks from the Central Jersey Climate Coalition to come forward and share a few words with the congregation.  While they are speaking, baskets of climate strike buttons are being passed around.  Please take one – two if you will give the other away – to show your support for this global effort.

[1] Yamin, Farhana. This Is Not a Drill.

[1] Jem Bendell, Doom & Bloom, This is Not a Drill

[2] https://insideclimatenews.org/news/27082019/12-years-climate-change-explained-ipcc-science-solutions

Posted in Earth, Justice, Resistance, Sermons, Unitarian Universalism | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Each a Part of the Beautiful Whole (sermon)

Water Ingathering 2019

September 8, 2019

The Unitarian Society, East Brunswick, NJ

All of us need all of us to make it.

These are words from Reverend Theresa Ines Soto, the Senior Minister at First Unitarian in Oakland California.

All of us need all of us to make it.

No matter our shape or size, no matter the hue of our skin, no matter if our brains are neurotypical or not. Whether we are tall or short or inbetween.  Young or once young. Old or gonna be old.  Cranky, cheerful, skeptical, naïve – there’s room for you here.  Not despite whatever it is that makes you you, but because of what makes you you.

What makes you you, makes us us.

Each of us, a part of the Beautiful Whole.

All of us need all of us to make it.

The author, environmentalist, and Mormon, Terry Tempest Williams wrote a book awhile back called, Finding Beauty in a Broken World.  The last third of the book is about the unexpected complexity of prairie dog communities. The middle third is about healing after the Rwandan genocide.  The first third of the book is about learning how to make mosaics. 

She writes about a class she took from a master mosaicist in Ravenna, Italy.   There she learned that the tiles used in mosaics are called “tessera.”  She also learned the eleven classical rules. 

Number one: The play of light is the first rule of mosaic.

Number three: Tesserae (the plural of tessera) are irregular, rough, individualized, unique.

Number eight: There is perfection in imperfection. The interstices or gaps between the tesserae speak their own language.

Number nine: Many colors are used to create one color from afar.

Finally, number eleven: The play of light is the first and last rule of mosaic.

Tempest Williams learns things in this class beyond how to make a mosaic.  She learns classical history: the first mosaics were made in Mesopotamia, two and a half millennia before Jesus walked the earth, but died out as an art form.  It reappeared in 9th century Greece, first made of pebbles, a cheaper alternative to carpet.  Then, as cut stone became the primary material, the art form spread geographically: Greece, Turkey, Egypt, and those famous ones in Pompeii, buried under volcanic ash.

She learned other things.  Wisdom that might be applied beyond making a literal mosaic. How it is not only interesting, but necessary, to have diversity of color, of texture, of shape, of size.  How sometimes, it is not commonality that ties one tessera to another, but is the tension between them.  That somethings, if we perceive them from too close, in distance or time, they appear messy or disjointed, perhaps even at odds.  But with distance, there is a beautiful blending and belonging that was not, could not be, perceived close up. 

Her teacher said, “A mosaic is a conversation between what is broken… Mosaics are created out of community.”

All of us need all of us to make it.


This past summer, I took a mosaic class while I was in Santa Fe.  I’ve placed what I made here for you to admire.

I made this!

I, too, like Terry Tempest Williams, learned some life lessons from those hours in the studio. For example, there were times when I was frustrated at my own limits. The teacher used the tools with ease. When I used them, I was clumsy. Still, the teacher showed me how to use the tool; she never offered to do it for me—which meant that by practicing, I had to figure it out for myself.

I learned that there were two ways for us to turn large sheets of glass into smaller, usable pieces: the intentional precision of a pistol-handled glass cutter. Or using a ball-peen hammer and a thwack of force. Each method renders very different results, both of which are necessary. The beauty of our mosaics emerged from a mixture of precision and chaos, control and surrender.

As instructed when I registered for the class, I arrived with a design in mind. However, the further along I got—transferring the design from my imagination to paper, then to the wooden base — the less the mosaic looked like my original design. Vision is essential, but I had to hold mine loosely so the final project could reveal itself to me along the way.

Here is the wisdom I gleaned from this class, different from Terry Tempest Williams’:

As much as you can, surround yourself with skillful teachers, no matter what you are learning. Let them teach you. But don’t let them do it for you. That learning is yours to do.

Respect the fragments and shards, whether they’re multi-hued glass or your life’s own story. Yes, they offer the occasional sharp cut, but they can offer also beauty and new ways to perceive the world. 

Resist the urge to fully map out the future. Instead, cultivate humility and a capacity to trust. Know that there is a bigger picture out there, something bigger than any one of us, and we can connect with it, hitch our tent to it, and discover unexpected beauty. 


Terry Tempest Williams wrote,

“Mosaic celebrates brokenness and the beauty of being brought together.”

May you get through this life, not unscathed, but with all your broken parts available for you to piece together into a beautiful whole.

May we all.

All of us need all of us to make it.

Amen. Blessed be.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Lucky Pocket & Love Match

Have you ever had the experience of putting on your winter coat for the first time since last season and finding money in the pocket?  Or heard a story about someone buying something at a thrift store and finding money in it – an old book, the pocket of a pair of jeans, something like that?

Do you ever “hide” money from yourself and then have the joy of finding it anew?  I love it when that happens.

Well, in our congregation’s budget we have a pocket like that – a lucky pocket.  Officially, it is called the Shortfall Reserve, which is a pretty boring title, though it describes the purpose well: if we have a shortfall in our budget, this money is reserved to help fill the deficit.

Anyway, I am proposing that from now on, we call it our “Lucky Pocket.”

In past years, this Lucky Pocket has helped us so that when our budget didn’t balance, we haven’t felt the depth of cuts that we might have otherwise had.  This Lucky Pocket has been a gift from generations that have gone before you, who sit here now, who looked into the future and knew there might come a time when having a little extra money in reserve would help.

Now it’s our time to look to the future. Now it’s our time to put some money into that Lucky Pocket and build it up for a time when we really need it.

And lucky for us, there is a special incentive to do this.  A small group of donors have created a fund – I have been calling it “the Love Match.”  This fund holds $4,000 and will match, dollar for dollar, what you – and you – and you – and all of us – donate to the Lucky Pocket from now until November 17th.

We are not asking for you to make a special pledge – which means you promise to give money in the future.  We are asking for you to give money now – perhaps today, but between now and Sunday, November 17th.  Cash, check, electronic bank transfer, the swipe of your debit or credit card.  As often as you would like between now and November 17th.  You can give all at once, or each week.  You can give $10, or you can give $10 each time you are here.

The Love Match will match it, dollar for dollar, up to $4000.  That means that we have a chance between now and November 17th to put into the Lucky Pocket an additional $8000.

And it’s already begun!  Every member of the Board of Trustees is participating.  They have already ponied-up, hoping to inspire you all to do the same.  Altogether, they have given $950, which will be matched by the Love Match. So we are already nearly a quarter of the way there.

Now, it’s your turn.

I ask you, and the Board of Trustees asks you: what can you do to help future TUS when it encounters a time of need?  Can you give $100? $300?  Can you give up a weekly coffee or espresso or cappuccino or latte at your favorite café and give $4.90 to TUS.

I can’t wait to hear at our big Rededication Festivities on November 23 & 24th, that we not only earned the whole Love Match, but that we blew it away.  That our Lucky Pocket was bulging with abundance from all of you—from all of us – who thanked the generations before us, for creating this place for us, and thought of the generations to come, knowing they could rest easier here at TUS.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Doom & Bloom: Reflections on Climate Grief

The Unitarian Society, East Brunswick, NJ

August 11, 2019

Perhaps you know in your body.  Perhaps you know in your head.  Perhaps you know in what Buddhists call your heartmind, that deep place of coherence beyond the binary, beyond the either/or, beyond the one or the other.

We have moved past climate change…

…to climate changed.

Or climate catastrophe or crisis or constriction. Emergency. Breakdown. Chaos. Take your pick.

Instead of stopping global warming, there are some who have given up the notion of prevention and now speak of mitigation. Sometimes, folks with this worldview – and perhaps it is you — speak of adaptation, lower case “as,” a kind of adjustment that forecasts society as still recognizable, our current linear economy more or less intact, just smaller, inconvenient to be sure, but manageable.

There are those who speak of reversing the damage, of seeking salvation (and perhaps even redemption) through technology or artificial intelligence or a combination of both.  Seeding the clouds, carbon capture. Perhaps this is you.

Even though I do not hold these worldviews, if you do, I honor you.

There are those who believe we are well beyond the tipping point, yet believe that it is irresponsible to disseminate that perspective, no matter the science to back it up, for it raises despair.  Perhaps this is you. 

It is not me, though it is tricky for a minister to raise despair without guaranteeing a counterweight of hope, a punchline to the perverse joke of environmental destruction.  Or at least a silver lining.

There are those who do speak of collapse:

“an uneven ending

of our normal modes

of sustenance, security, pleasure, identity,

meaning and hope,”[1]

a definition I borrow from Jem Bendell, an academic in Britain, the founder of the Institute for Leadership and Sustainability and of the Deep Adaptation Forum; and associated with the new movement, Extinction Rebellion.

I want you to hear that again, for it’s important for this morning’s sermon:

an uneven ending of our normal modes of sustenance, security, pleasure, identity, meaning and hope

This is not the collapse of a house of cards, something known from the very beginning will fall apart.  No, this is collapse of what we were raised to believe was rock solid.

Deep Adaptation is a concept put forward by Bendell, whose paper, “Deep Adaptation: A Map for Navigating Climate Tragedy” was published about a year ago (on July 27).  A mere 26 pages, with an additional ten pages of citations, Bendell concludes that collapse is both inevitable and imminent. 

“It is a difficult conclusion to arrive at. And a difficult one to live with.” (Bendell)

Bendell is no cynic or masochist, nor is he particularly morbid, as far as I can tell, having never met him.  He is a person who has turned towards fear and grief for the world. A person who has invited the poison of despair to surface and the terror of species extinction to manifest in his psyche. 

A person who has lived to tell about it on the either side. Doing so, speaking of hope and love; speaking not of Doom and Gloom, but of Doom and BLOOM.

In Deep Adaptation, collapse is coupled with love, community, and compassion. Rather than lose all hope, it is about shifting the shape and texture hope now takes.  Survival at any cost is not the pinnacle of human aspiration.

Instead, how we are with one another – cultivating what some call our humanity, but is much wider than that, more inclusive of all sentient beings – that is our utmost aspiration.  Our goal is not to turn against each other, as Tim deChristopher described in the video reflection we just watched. Not survival at any cost if the cost requires us to be ugly to one another.

Deep Adaptation offers four guiding principles:

  • Resilience: discerning which values and norms we wish to retain and cultivate as we seek to survive. This is a deeper concept than the more typical notion of resilience as bouncing back from adversity – rather than bouncing back to one’s previous circumstance or capacity, it’s about intentional cultivation of some of our capacities that will serve us going forward.

It makes me think of some of what we heard in the video earlier, from Tim deChristopher.  With the impossibility of seven-plus billion people living in a climate constricted world, what kind of society do we want to have.  How do we cultivate it right now? Resilience.

Then the other side of the cultivating resilience coin:

  • Relinquishment: the opposite of cultivating.  This is about letting go – relinquishing – capacities that may have served us in the past, but will no longer do so – in fact, might make things worse.  For instance, buildings along coastlines or on flood plains. Access to foods from halfway across the planet or out of season locally. No more avocadoes in Buffalo. Here in Jersey, peaches only in July and August. Relinquishment.

Third is

  • Restoration which is about rediscovering attitudes and approaches of to life that were largely, or wholly, left by the wayside in our fossil-fuel-saturated, growth-based society. Waking with the rising of the sun, sleeping with its setting.  Moving away from a linear economy of take-make-use-lose to a circular economy where reducing is prioritized first, reusing as second, and recycling is still an option, but only after those first two. Restoration.

The fourth R was not in the original paper, but added in January of this year.  It’s

  • Reconciliation. and it asks, “What could I make peace with to lessen suffering?” It is an invitation to make peace within ourselves, with others in our personal lives or in our cultural circumstances (like healing systemic racism), or with whatever divine source in our lives calls to us.  We do this because without some form of reconciliation, we risk tearing each other apart, increasing our suffering on the way to collapse. Reconciliation.

I attended high school in the early 1980s, the height of the nuclear arms race and the peak of mutually assured mass destruction.  The first sleep-away summer camp this nerd ever went to was during high school and it was studying the impact of nuclear holocaust on literature.  So I think it’s fair to say that my life holds a long-running thread related to the possibility of doom. 

It was in this era of my life that I came across this quote, which I wrote down in this very notebook which I hold in my hand, the first entry in 1984 and the last in 2003.  The quote comes from someone named Elissa Melamed and clearly captured my imagination back then. You can find it at the top of your order of service:

I don’t know how long we have.  We have to do this work because we believe in peace and in building peace.  We start with ourselves, our communities: the circles get larger.  If the bomb falls tomorrow, there’s something so valid about living this way, that we would live this way anyway.

This is the reason to turn towards our grief for the climate, towards our despair for the planet, rather than away.  This is the reason to let surface the fears and, yes, even the terror, that we might release it. It may not let full go of us, but it will take on a different weight and a lesser power in our personal lives and in our collective life.

This should not be done alone.  Isolation makes the burden heavier.  While feeling such heavy feelings may feel beyond possible, the alternative is exponentially more corrosive. To our individual selves and to society.   

Shifting out of isolation, normalizing conversations about the climate emergency we find ourselves in, weaving and reweaving connection of community and growing deep inclusion now — these are our survival tactics. Being present in this way takes practice, for it is not easy to allow ourselves to feel the despair, the rage, the sorrow, the guilt. 

Surfacing our climate grief is not a substitute for enacting change in the public sphere. It is, rather, a tool of such efforts, likely making us more effective, for we come out of such sharing more robust, more able to face the world as it is.  As British psychologist, Susie Orbach, another member of the Extinction Rebellion movement, says, “We need to mourn AND organize. It should not be one or the other.”

This is exactly the reasoning behind one of the new ministries – Adult Religious Education, if you prefer that term better – that I will be facilitating this year.  Starting on September 15 – it’s a Sunday evening – there will be gatherings here called ClimateSpirit.  These gatherings will include food, poetry, activities that are grounding, singing (I am looking for someone to take on the role of leading the songs — I am willing, but we all know there are folks better equipped than I to do this).

Every time we gather, we will begin by grounding ourselves in gratitude, essential to how I was taught to facilitate such groups.  Then we move into space that invites our pain for the world. After that, we engage our imaginative hearts, rather than our skeptical intellects, into seeing with new eyes and then practice going forth into the world.

There will likely be tears.  And definitely laughter.

It will not be a space for sharing the latest horrific news or intellectual debates. We will, as much as possible, veer away from advice giving. We don’t gather to solve each others’ problems; we gather to offer our witness and to receive it, to lessen the weight of the world so that each can be able to do what is theirs to do, whatever that is.

How often will we meet after that first dinner workshop on September 15? I’m not sure. Quarterly? Every other month? Monthly?  It depends on the momentum we generate. 

And I want to fess up. While I have developed this ministry this for you, the congregation I serve, and for our local community, which I also serve, let’s not kid ourselves: I am doing this for me.  I spent most of my summer study leave focusing on the climate crisis.  What I learned or was confirmed for me is devastating.  I need this.  And I know that I am not the only one.

Perhaps you know in your body.  Perhaps you know in your head.  Perhaps you know in what Buddhists call your heartmind, that deep place of coherence beyond the binary, beyond the either/or, beyond the one or the other: you need this, too.

May the ways we prepare for this great turning, whatever it be, be ways that lead in love.

May it be so.  Amen.  Blessed be.

[1] Jem Bendell, Doom & Bloom, This is Not a Drill

Posted in Earth, grief, Hope | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

On Not Waiting to Be the Hummingbird (redux)

The Life and Death of Lee Hawkins

First Unitarian Church of Albuquerque

July 14, 2019

A quarter century ago, I asked the coordinator of my grandmother’s hospice care, how my grandmother was doing – not medically, but spiritually.  She said simply, respecting both my grandmother’s confidentiality and my grief-as-curiosity,

“As we live, so we die.”

This was unfortunate for my grandmother, who barely topped five feet but intimidated the beejeezus out of nearly anyone, including her progeny, with her need for control and insistence on her rightness in the world.  Dying was no easy path for her.

Today I want to tell you about a different older woman whom I also loved.  I want to tell you about a different way to encounter dying and death.  I want to tell you about someone who, when the time was right, couldn’t wait to be the hummingbird. 

I want to tell you about Eleanor “Lee” Hawkins.

Lee Hawkins

In the process of becoming a Unitarian Universalist minister, one must go before the daunting Ministerial Fellowship Committee.  When I was preparing for that august meeting, word on the street was that a commonly posed question was a request to name a Unitarian or Universalist or Unitarian Universalist hero from each of the last four centuries.” I knew that I would name Lee as my 21st century choice.

I tell you about Lee as a talisman for myself, a gesture as part of my own spiritual practice of befriending death, my inelegant attempts to live into that line from our reading: “the tenderness yet to come.”  That poem is our reading today because Lee left instructions for me to read it at her memorial service in 2014. 

Lee was, indeed, that hummingbird.  In 2004, a full decade before she died, when her husband was dying at home, he called out to Lee from the bedroom.  It was time. He told her that he was at death’s door.  Lee went to him full of devoted love – they had been married for decades upon decades and were still effervescent with their adoration for each other.  She sat on the bed, and asked, “Rog – what’s it like?” 

Minister or lay person, churched or so-called “unchurched,” organized or free-range, death is the great leveler, and there is much for us to learn and gain and be enriched by these stories and acts of witness. So, I am telling you about Lee because I want her witness in the world – dead as she is now — to enliven and expand your notions of what is to be human in this aching world that always, without exception, ends in death. In this way, I make good on a promise I made to her: to tell the story of her death and her life. 


Born in California, Lee lived much of her life in Staten Island, active in the UU congregation there.  Then, for the last twenty or so years of her life, she was in Northampton, Massachusetts, where she and I were members of the same UU congregation. 

As I understand it, for most of her adult life, Lee spoke of her intention to be aware and in control at the end of her life.  Yes, documents: a will, advanced directive, all that, yes.  But conversations, too, with her family: extraordinary medical interventions, her vision of what a good life is and also what a good death might be. 

Control is the wrong word, conveys the wrong meaning, because she was not controlling death in the way too often depicted in our death-adverse culture – controlling it by keeping it at bay.  What I mean is being in relationship to death, being willing to surrender to death, when the right time comes.

This intention was part and particle of her deeply rational, deeply kind, deeply political being.  As she gained years, having not succumbed to the vagaries, surprises, and tragedies so many of us humans experience, she prepared for the possibility of dying of old age on her terms. 

This impulse was not born of that depression that can accompany the aging process, which is often so much about losing – losing capacities, losing friends, losing out on experiences in the wider world – though anticipating this, and eventually experiencing it, did inform some of the timing and texture Lee’s choices.

While her choice was a personal and private one, shared with her family and closest beloveds, Lee was public about her plans. When the time came – and she did not know exactly what time that was, but when it did – she would “manage her own death.”  That’s the phrase she chose to describe her actions.  “Manage her own death:” facing towards it, not away.

She researched her options methodically and with attention to how her choice might impact her family and community.  She made her decisions in relationship with her adult children – not seeking their approval, but informing them, bringing them along, gaining their assent.  In the end, at the age of 90, still without terminal diagnosis, living in a body weakening and a mind beginning to forget, after significant research, she made it clear that, when the time came, she would stop eating and drinking.

Five springs ago, Lee was living at home, one side of her body weakened so much she could barely use it.  She found herself facing the reality she might fall and lose her autonomy.

In June, I heard from a mutual friend: it was nearly “time.”

Like so many of her friends did at this time, I brought dinner over to Lee.  Each of us did this, knowing we were not just bringing food – Lee barely had any hunger at this point – but coming to spend time with her.  We were having what each of us knew would be our last conversation, our good-bye.  Lee took such delight in the gift of knowingly having a last conversation – she said it was one of the best parts of being public about deciding to manage her death.

That summer I was working as a hospital chaplain intern at a Trauma I hospital — part of preparation for the ministry that all Unitarian Universalist ministers go through.  While “eating” with Lee, I asked her if she would be interested in meeting with my CPE peers and supervisor.   Lee had been a school teacher for decades and never lost that drive to teach.  Indeed, she jumped at the chance.

Seven of us – representing multiple faith traditions — spent a few hours with her, listening to and learning from a person choosing to encounter death with such intention.  One of my favorite moments from that meeting is Lee chiding the ones who didn’t ask questions – “how could they pass up this opportunity?” she queried, impatient at their timidity.

Ever committed to teaching and to public witness of encountering death without fear (or, from her humanist side, superstition), the year before she had taken part in a community dialogue about death.  She had been interviewed by the local newspaper reporter about her plans, engaging in an intimate and frank dialogue that was published in 2013. 

By late August, Lee had intentionally stopped eating and drinking. Surrounded by her three adult children, moving towards death, Lee invited (and her children allowed), that same local newspaper reporter and photographer to be present, to record in word and photo, the process of her dying and her death, which took place on September 2, 2014.

The narrative and photo-narrative was published to much praise… and much condemnation. We have, as a society, for the most part, hidden death away.  So, when a person like Lee, or a journalist, or a newspaper, decides to stop hiding, strong feelings erupt.


Not many of us are ready for death.  I am not ready for death. 

But it does not much matter, our readiness, our assent.  Death comes.  Wise people tell us that if we live our lives knowing that we are going to die – that we are in many ways, always dying, each moment – that our lived days will be fuller and more precious.  A hard lesson to take in, but our ministries, and our very lives, depend upon it.

While you or I may not make the same choices as Lee made, I invite you to consider the invitation her choices extend to us all: to bring intentionality to our lives by bringing intentionality to our deaths before they happen.  To hold conversations with those nearest us, with someone here in this room, even with strangers.  To engage in a process of discernment about the end of life – about the end of your life – and then share what you learn with those nearest and dearest to you. While some say to contemplate death is a morbid preoccupation, it’s actually true that there is a way for such ruminations and meditations to be… enlivening. 

Let me close with another UU voice who has blessed us with reflections upon her own death.  The Rev. Nancy Shaffer was diagnosed with a brain tumor which eventually, and far too soon, took her life on June 5, 2012.  Nancy kept a journal with the intention of having her reflections published, which they were, under the title, While Still There Is Light:

This is not lost on me:

Given that I have a tumor

That – I am told – will someday kill me

I have also the advantage

That I must reflect now –

While I am alive –

On the meaning of my life

And how I want to leave it.

I might have died quickly.

This is harder, perhaps,

But exquisitely richer:

I get to grieve for my own self.

How tender and not-to-be-missed

Is this?

May each of us be more able to face death: that of loved ones — even our own — to know peace and ease, and perhaps even the curiosity of Mary Oliver’s hummingbird.

Amen.  Blessed be. 

Posted in Death, Sermons, Unitarian Universalism | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

All Good Intentions: A Sermon on White Fragility

The Unitarian Society

East Brunswick, NJ

May 5, 2019

Dr. Glen Thomas Rideout is the Director of Music and Worship at the First Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Ann Arbor.  A Black, gay man, he wrote, not all that long ago, about an encounter he had with a white woman at General Assembly, the national gathering of Unitarian Universalists that happen every June.  The thousands gathered had sung, just like we did this morning, There is More Love Somewhere, which is from the African American tradition.

The woman shared how she changed the words from “there is more love somewhere” to “there is more love right here,” because this reflected her experience of finding love and belonging within Unitarian Universalism.  She asked, why, at GA, it wasn’t sung with those changed words.

Dr. Rideout, tired but willing, said, “Thank you for trusting me with that question,” and then continued his response.  Here are his own words:

… I explained to her why I thought it was necessary — particularly with the music of people of color — that we enter and examine these songs with more curiosity than colonization.

I thanked her, and…I explained that it can be difficult to understand the lived experience of those who have trouble finding the evidence of love in their immediate vicinity; in their church; in their neighborhood; in their city; in their nation; even in their planet.

I thanked her, and I explained that for some who don’t share the privilege of perceiving love “right here,” moving toward that idea of privilege had become a vital practice of Black faith.

I offered that if we, as a spiritual community of Unitarian Universalists, populated by well-meaning people, are to mean anything to the lives and the deaths of people of color, we must begin by learning — not squelching — the forms of expression that arise from these living perspectives.

And she said, “Thank you. I’ve never heard it expressed that way. I’ve never understood it that way. And I will never sing it that same way again.”

More curiosity than colonization.  That’s a powerful contrast.

What also caught my attention is this white woman’s response.  Thoughtful. Thankful. Willing. Open. Curious.  The exact opposite of most of the defensive, reactive responses from our Time For All Ages.  The exact opposite of what Dr. Robin DiAngelo calls “white fragility.”

Dr. DiAngelo, an Associate Professor of Education at the University of Washington, is the best-selling author of a book based on a longstanding concept for which she coined the term, back in 2011, “white fragility.” Published by (Unitarian Universalism’s own) Beacon Press, it is currently at #3 (on the paperback, non-fiction list) on the New York Times Bestseller list and has garnered much attention far and wide. 

Dr. DiAngelo has presented at General Assembly and is scheduled to present again this year.  For a religious denomination that is majority white and declares that racial justice and dismantling white supremacy are crucial, her work is challenging, compelling, constructive – though not comfortable or comforting – and in my opinion, crucial.

So, just what IS white fragility?

Even if the term is new, the concept isn’t.  Likely by any person of color recognizes the behavior, though probably fewer white people do, even well-meaning, well-intentioned, liberal and progressive white folks.  It takes many forms.  In my white experience, it is unavoidable and inevitable. And it is also workable.

When I say that it’s not a new concept, think of the passage from Dr. King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail, where he takes to task white moderates, calling them – us? – a greater stumbling block than the KKK.  He describes the white moderate as someone “who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice.” This devotion to order, as well as the preference for the absence of tension, are the bedrock of white fragility. 


DiAngelo’s framework for understanding how race – and in particular, whiteness – operates has been clarifying and challenging and expanding for me. I raise it here, on Sunday morning, because I think it might be useful to you, whether you are white or a person of color. And because it can be helpful to us as a congregation that is majority white, but aspires to engage in racial justice work and to be welcoming and truly inclusive to people of color here, not just in our intention, but in our actual impact. 

As we heard in this morning’s reading, Dr. DiAngelo posits that in our modern, post-civil rights society, there is a good/bad binary when it comes to racism. Racism is bad, so only bad people can be racist. If I am a good person, then I can’t be racist.

However, this false binary precludes us from seeing that good people can say or do things with racist implications or impacts all the time.   And while it happens without diminishing our inherent worth or our essential goodness, it does seem to lead to white people becoming defensive and failing to see harm we cause.  DiAngelo writes

Within this paradigm, to suggest that I am racist is to deliver a deep moral blow—a kind of character assassination. Having received this blow, I must defend my character, and that is where all my energy will go—to deflecting the charge, rather than reflecting on my behavior. In this way, the good/ bad binary makes it nearly impossible to talk to white people about racism, what it is, how it shapes all of us, and the inevitable ways that we are conditioned to participate in it.

And then she names the problem with this:

If we cannot discuss these dynamics or see ourselves within them, we cannot stop participating in racism.

This defense of our character – and I am here speaking to other white folks in the room – expresses itself in recognizable ways, for which she uses the umbrella term, “white fragility.”  DiAngelo has developed a list of qualities or behaviors that make up white fragility; it is included in your order of service. It’s too dense to recite in wholesale from the pulpit. I encourage you to take it home with you as a prompt for family conversations or personal reflection, being sure to pay attention to the reactions that arise within you as you do.


Having just explored the second to last item on her list – “defensiveness about any suggestion that we are connected to racism” – I want to raise to you the last item: “a focus on intentions over impact.”  

I want to raise it because some of what we use to form community, including in our covenant of right relations (the bullet point to assume the good intentions of others) can lead us to minimize harmful impacts.

I want to raise it because I think that if we are going to engage in the dismantling of white supremacy culture and the marginalization of any group of people, we have to start paying attention the impact of our actions, not just our intentions.

A simple example to illustrate the point: I accidentally step on someone else’s toe.  I didn’t intend to, yet I hurt them.  The impact is pain, perhaps injury.  It is not enough to say that I didn’t mean it. To be in right relationship, I must tend to the pain I caused.  Pretty straightforward in that situation.  Yet racism coupled with white fragility makes it more convoluted.

I remember that the first time I was told that a phrase I had just used was racist, I felt the sting of being called out.  Racist? Me? That simple term?  Then I listened and learned that the word “gyp” – as in, being tricked out of something – is based on a racist stereotype of gypsies – the Roma people – as deceptive thieves. Though I did not intend harm, I was thankful to be informed that was the impact of my use of such a phrase, so that I could choose a different way to convey the same meaning.


My white colleague, Molly Housh Gordon’s, who serves our Unitarian Universalist congregation in Columbia, Missouri, describes white fragility as,

“when white people cannot bear to face conversations about race because of the pain of becoming aware of deeply unjust circumstances that people of color have endured with their lives.”

She goes on to acknowledge that other forms of fragility exist, all of which are located in any identity that has privilege in our society: male fragility, able-bodied fragility, hetero- fragility, wealth fragility, cisgender fragility, and more.

Notice your own internal response to that list, especially if you hold one of those identities. 

Do you notice a defensiveness rising, a wish to argue, or rationalize? 

Do you see rising within you a response like, “well, what am I supposed to do, feel guilty?”

or an impulse to deflect? 

Do you want to talk about good intentions, those of others or your own, rather than to have to sit with the reality of the impact of whiteness – my whiteness, your whiteness if you are white?

I raise up all these possible reactions because I know them personally and intimately. Intellectually, I share Dr. DiAngelo’s suppositions about how race operates in America; and still I find myself emotionally wanting to argue against some of her points. 

For me, though I’m not proud of it, these suppositions sometimes feel like accusations. Then I realize, that’s on me – she’s naming a challenging reality, not making an accusation. That emotional reception, the one that contorts it into an “accusation,” that’s my responsibility to own.  And I can choose a different response; I can choose to be curious. 

Rev. Housh Gordon has a playful, but effective, way of thinking about the white fragility response.  She calls to mind a comedy sketch popular from Key and Peele of Luther, the Anger Translator.  At the 2015 White House Correspondent’s Dinner, the comedian Keegan-Michael Key played Obama’s Anger Translator in real time, standing behind the president as Obama said everything in measured, politic tones.  Luther would rant and rave in a way that would never be allowed as a leader of color in our society.  

image by Yuri Gripas

Rev. Housh Gordon feels that white fragility is not an anger translator, but a SHAME translator.  So when

A person of color says: “Hey that thing you participated in hurt me.” And from the shame translator on my shoulder I hear: “You are a bad person unworthy of love.”

Or someone writes: “You received a head start in life because of the color of your skin.” And from the shame translator on my shoulder I hear: “You deserve none of the good or joy you have found in this life.”

Rev. Housh Gordon concluded

These shame translations are lies – the have nothing to do with what is being said or meant, and yet until we build the resilience to override those creeping voices of shame and self-doubt with curiosity and humility, they are powerful enough to shut down transformation and conversation the world over. They have done it for centuries.

What if, instead of shame, we bring curiosity to such circumstances, like the white woman from the story by Dr. Rideout?  This is, of course, not a one-time task, but an ongoing practice; and even a life-long calling.  It is for this reason that a small group of congregants here, at this time all white, and I are hoping to put together a covenantal book discussion group next year, to delve more deeply into this worthy work.  Perhaps you will join us?


DiAngelo describes a situation that I think many of us can recognize, perhaps even from interactions here in this congregation:

 [it’s] the big family dinner at which Uncle Bob says something racially offensive. Everyone cringes but no one challenges him because nobody wants to ruin the dinner. Or the party where someone tells a racist joke but we keep silent because we don’t want to be accused of being too politically correct and be told to lighten up.

These are examples of what DiAngelo calls white solidarity (fourth from the bottom on the printed list in your order of service), a term that raises all kinds of defensive alarms for me, because it sounds like the behavior of groups like the KKK or the people with tiki torches in Charlottesville.

But I have also observed in myself when I have kept quiet instead of speaking up. So I’m trying to stay curious, rather than let that shame translator be what feeds my reaction.

In those examples, we could trade out racist here for sexist, and a similar dynamic is at play. 

I have observed in such situations, in myself and in others, that there is a process of rationalizing staying silent by convincing myself that the person who just said the racist or sexist thing had good intentions, just problematic expression.  I have given that benefit of the doubt around good intention more weight than the possible impact of creating an unwelcoming environment or causing outright harm. I know I am not alone as I have spoken with some of you who have been in this struggle. I think this is something worthy of our grappling with, individually and together as a community.

I want to close with these wise words from Dr. DiAngelo, which she speaks as a white person, with resonance around any of our privileged identities:

I did not set this system up, but it does unfairly benefit me, I do use it to my advantage, and I am responsible for interrupting it. I need to work hard to change my role in this system, but I can’t do it alone. This understanding leads me to gratitude when others help me.

And these gentle words from Rev. Joe Cherry, which we heard in the prayer:

May we be bold enough to step into our discomfort,
brave enough to be clumsy there,
loving enough to forgive ourselves and others.

Amen. Blessed be

Posted in Justice, Sermons, Unitarian Universalism | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

I Want You to Panic: An Earth Day Sermon

April 21, 2019 The Unitarian Society, East Brunswick, New Jersey

Not my words, but I stand here before you to amplify them.

I want you to see the faces of our current leaders. Our real leaders.  Not presidents and prime ministers, or CEOs of world-wide corporations.  I want you to see not future leaders, but current leaders, leading us right now. 

Greta Thunberg, whose TED talk you just heard, and whose Twitter Feed describes her as “16-year-old climate activist with Asperger,” who began striking for the climate last August by not attending school on Fridays, launching a global movement.

13-year-old Alexandria Villaseñor, who strikes outside the United Nations every Friday and has done so since mid-December.

Zayne Cowie, whose book we heard earlier, which he co-wrote with some help.  He’s been a regular climate striker outside City Hall in New York.  I think he’s 9.

Nadia Nazar, co-founder along with Jamie Margolin and Madelaine Tew, of Zero Hour – all of whom at the ages of 16 co-founded Zero Hour, a youth climate activist group based out of Baltimore.

Here is Lilly Platt of Holland.  Since the age of eight years, she was involved in cleaning up plastic pollution.  At the age of ten, she heard about Greta and her strike, and immediately began striking too.

This crew of young people is known as Juliana et al v. United States, 21 young people who filed a lawsuit in 2015, asserting that the government has violated the youths’ rights by encouraging and allowing activities that negatively impact the climate, such that it significantly harms their right to life and liberty.

It is not just these young individuals and small groups, but whole youth and young adult movements emerging: Zero Hour as I mentioned before, the Sunrise Movement, and Extinction Rebellion, where just this past week 63 people were arrested outside City Hall in New York and arrests in London for acts of civil disobedience this week are approaching nearly one thousand.

They are living into the truth of this aphorism, attributed to our Unitarian forbear, Edward Everett Hale, echoing ancient Talmudic wisdom:

Are the words of 16-year-old Greta Thunberg’s TED talk still echoing in your ears? Making your heart both soar with inspiration and sore with the challenge she lays leaden at our feet? 

There are losses that cannot be reversed or retrieved.  This is our heart-breaking legacy.

Yet, it is within our means to prevent still greater losses. There is no time to lose in starting or growing the deeply-rooted, radical transformation necessary. 

This morning, I bring you no scientific facts about climate change. There are other sources for that. Outside on our frontage we already declare to our larger community that “Climate Change is Real!” Rather than provide facts, I am here to PREACH.  

Some say it is the preacher’s role to preach hope. Others say the preacher’s role is to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable, so there’s that.  You can let me know which (or both) this ends up being for you.

When it comes to climate change, climate changeD, climate chaos, climate constriction, climate collapse…whatever you call it — preaching hope is not a straight-forward thing. It’s there; hope is still there.  It’s just not in the shape you expect.  It doesn’t feel good or comforting. It doesn’t smile at you or speak softly in your ear or make you laugh with joy.

Hope comes as resilience in reckoning with our utter vulnerability.  Hope comes in being able to watch the horrifying images of what has been lost alongside the beautiful ones of this majestic, corrupted world. Hope comes from being able to face our own complicity, coming to terms with what we must give up.  As we heard Greta Thunberg tell us, hope comes in the shape of action.

At this point, hope does not mean reversal.  It might mean mitigation.  It definitely means adaptation.

Hope takes the shape of youth climate activists – like Greta, like the others whose pictures I have shown, like local ones – Eden Summerlin who is a Unitarian Universalist from the Morristown congregation; like Rachel Gurevich, a 14-year-old who lives here in East Brunswick, both of whom organized a climate strike and rally on March 15, as part of the global movement to get adults in power to up our game. 

I spoke with Rachel recently — I haven’t met her (yet). She wants you to know what the youth are up to. She hopes you will come out to the next climate strike rally that they are in the midst of planning — not to take over, they are doing just fine without us adults — but to be there in solidarity, to be there to amplify their voices.

In January of this year – just three months ago – Greta Thunberg addressed the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.  In a speech called “Our House is on Fire,” she said,

Too often I feel as if I am home, watching television reporting that my house is on fire.  My response? I walk over to the window and wave at the fire fighters who are trying to put it out.  It’s absurd, when you think about it.  Yet I recognize myself in this analogy, and wonder if some part of you might recognize yourself, too?  I’m there, waving at the fire fighters, not really taking in that it’s my house on fire; acting like it’s some random other person’s house on the television, far away, that is on fire. (Thank you to my colleague, Rev. Sara Goodman, for this metaphor.)

This stuff is hard.  Some of us choose to not go to deep into the bad news, because it’s so heavy, so despairing.  I’m guessing most of us do small dives into the information by choice or we can’t avoid it. Some of us might do deep dives, becoming paralyzed by what we learn there, or try to use dissociation as a strategy so that our minds can try to comprehend it but we don’t feel the feelings – the fear, the terror.

Rather than dissociating from the terror of extinction, we can choose to rebel against extinction but we must create safe and brave spaces where we can experience the fear and terror, acknowledge it in more than intellectual ways, work through it, and come out the other side, learning resilience, as part of our preparations to do the necessary work of adaptation to the new planet we have made. In the fall, when I preached on this, I called them Islands of Sanity (a term borrowed from Margaret Wheatley). 

These places must have singing in them, I think. And laughter, like the poet and Mad Farmer, Wendell Berry says, for when we are expecting the end of the world.

We can give them all the pretty names, but that does not matter if we do not create these spaces and places of adaptation.

The words from Rebecca Solnit for our chalice lighting today spoke of hope that comes from “small groups that seem at the outset unrealistic in their ambition” yet shape possibilities that come to fruition – the fall of the Soviet Union, for example.  This is not just poetic or philosophical or anecdotal.  The research of Dr. Erica Chenowith, political scientist at Harvard’s Kennedy School, tells us that for a peaceful mass movement to succeed, all we need is 3.5% of the population to come together, to mobilize, to join forces, in order to shift habits as entrenched as our abuse of the planet and her natural resources.

Today is not only Earth Day, it is Easter, which we celebrated in our Sanctuary Garden at an early service this morning.  Like our call to worship which hearkened us to rise, Easter is a holiday that celebrates rising again, rebirth, and as I preached in the garden, in the spirit of poet Wendell Berry, to practice resurrection. Might we try that? Do we have any choice?

Friends, the earth remains our only home. And we, fellow travelers, its only hope for healing and wholeness, so rise! Dear Ones, Rise! (words from Gretchen Haley)

As we bring together our voices in a chant that was sung at the March Strike 4 Climate event in Morristown, let us let echo in our ears and hearts these at once exhilarating and daunting words from Greta Thunberg:

Amen.  Blessed be.

** With deep gratitude to Sarah Metcalf, who presented as part of a team a worship service on climate change at the Unitarian Society of Northampton and Florence and who shared her presentation with me, that mine might be inspired by her knowledge and dedication to this issue.

Posted in Earth, grief, Sermons | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

From Phone Booth to Cell Phone: Building the Next RE Program (sermon)

I borrow this series of questions from my colleague, Rev. Peter Boullata.  You might also remember that I asked you these same questions about a year and a half ago when I preached about change and generational shifts.

The need to speak on the phone in public persists. We just meet that need differently now. What was once ubiquitous and obvious – for instance, a rotary phone – becomes if not obsolete, rare and antiquated.

Congregations are famous – or infamous – for being one of the last bastions of “But we’ve never done it that way before.”  We humans have a tendency to stick with the familiar.

Yet, this mindset leads us to problem-solve by applying past solutions to new challenges, hoping and assuming that will work. Apparently, Henry Ford once said, “If I gave my customers what they wanted, I would have invented a faster horse.”

We can no longer try to invent a faster religious education program.

In this era of no obligation to attend religious services or to be affiliated with a religious institution, in this era of getting one’s needs met through the internet, we Unitarian Universalists and we UU congregations have something deeply meaningful to offer.  We’ve just got to figure out how to do it in this new cultural and societal context.

About a year ago, I preached on the necessity of “fail, fail again, fail better.” I raised up to you some of the concerning trends in attendance in our RE program, in UU RE programs across the nation, and said that we would be entering into a phase of experi-learning – trying out new things because the old model of Sunday School was not working and the new next thing to meet the needs of children, youth, parents, and families has not yet been invented.

That said, we cannot let go of that essential quality of a religious education program that we heard about in today’s reading, The Playground Atheist from Jake Morrill, in which our children know that they are not alone. 

Perhaps you have noticed that I have been talking about it much more lately. In staff meetings, in one-on-one conversations, in committee and board meetings, and even from this pulpit. Even in the weekly eblast, where week before last I inserted this quote from Religious Educator and Independent Consultant, Kimberly Sweeney: 

Someone is learning how to be a person of faith (and I will add conscience) by watching you. Someone is watching us, learning how

  • to speak with integrity about their spiritual leanings and longings;
  • to reach out when there is a death and provide solace;
  • to tell the facts about bodies and sexuality and consent;
  • to show up when someone who is trans or gender-binary is being harassed;
  • to know that families are best defined by love, not the sexual orientation or gender identity of the people in it;
  • to reach out across religious differences and side with love with the vulnerable and marginalized; and
  • to experience that meaning making can come from some other place than consumer culture.

Many of you in this congregation found Unitarian Universalism as adults.  You came out of other religious traditions that you found less than satisfying. This small but mighty religion was here, in congregational form, for you and in some cases, it was life-saving. 

If things keep going the way they are going with our children and youth, both nationally and right here, how we have, according to the data that is available, the worst track record for retaining children and youth of any religious tradition in America, it won’t be around for others who had the same need as you, it won’t be around for your children or grandchildren, if we don’t pay attention to the faith formation needs of children in a new way.

I believe that we as a congregation and that Unitarian Universalism can be, and must be, life-saving. What we offer not as political liberals, but as religious liberals, is sorely needed in our world today:

  • that wisdom comes from many sources and belongs to no single tradition;
  • that human diversity — be it racial, ethnic, national, gender expression, sexual orientation — is natural, holy, and enriching, making the human family whole;
  • that both direct experience of mystery and science-based reason can co-exist and do so for the betterment of culture and society;
  • that we all are a part of an interdependent web of existence, with mutual reliance and collective liberation at its core.

The times are calling us into something new, something unknown, and we are still very much discerning what that is, what it looks like.   In order to say yes to the new, there will come a time when we must say no longer to the old; where we will need to let it go, and await, even cultivate the proper conditions, for what is to come. 

I believe that we – in this congregation — have already past the point when it comes to age-segregated classroom-type religious education.  We just don’t have the attendance to do anything other than a single room approach. Families come, but only once or twice a month – this is true of adults without children, too, but with less noticeable impact on the RE program. 

This shift to a one-room Spirit Lab need not be a loss, but rather an evolution to help us meet the spiritual and ethical needs of children, youth, and parents of today.

Judy Lief, a Buddhist teacher I have long admired and whom I got to meet for the first time last weekend, wrote this about transitions:

Our religious education program is in a time of deep transition. How do we gracefully let go of what is no longer working? How do we ready ourselves to be open to the new possibilities?

We look to our mission statement, grounding ourselves in our core purpose. We persist in our curiosity about new models and possible innovations. We cultivate imagination to stretch beyond what we have known along with the willingness to sit with unknowing. We come together to figuring it out together.

And by together, I mean: together.  Families attending as often as possible (and perhaps a bit a bit more than currently seems possible).  Congregants without children in the RE program showing interest and active support, both volunteering and showing up for what has become – yet again – a dormant Religious Education Committee. The Board committing financially with a budget that allows for trying out new possibilities informed by fairly compensated, experienced religious professionals.

What comes after the Sunday School model of age-segregated classes set apart from the rest of the congregation?  I have taken classes. I have taken webinars. Currently, I am in what is called “a Community of Practice” for ministers of UU congregations who are actively exploring this challenging aspect of the changing congregational landscape. I can assure you: the next big thing does not yet exist.  If it did, I would deliver it to the congregation on a silver platter.

Informed by what the staff of this congregation have been learning, here at TUS, we have been trying out ideas, receiving input, revising and tweaking, and trying the next iteration.  At a speed that sometimes makes my head spin. We have been taking to heart the try, try again, fail, fail faster, fail better motto. We have been strengthening that “muscle” that gets us comfortable, or at least more tolerant, of experimentation, of transition, of change.

We didn’t know that we would go through three transitions in religious education staff in one year.  While we could benefit from some stability in our program, I’m choosing the frame that we have been expanding our capacity to experiment.

Spirit Lab – our religious education program – began meeting in the Gathering Room a few weeks ago, experimenting with how that larger space impacts delivery of content to one room of age-diverse children.  It’s noticeable to the wider congregation because that means a change in coffee hour.  We are trying it out this spring to see how it goes.

We learned in the past several years that family attendance drops off in the spring.  Last year, we ended the formal RE program the Sunday before the Memorial Day weekend; we will continue with this, having All Ages services in the first half of June, then shift to our summer status, where we provide child care only.

Perhaps you have noticed that there is an increase in All Ages services recently? Welcoming children in this space for the whole service, not dumbing down the content, providing activities to children if they stay in the sanctuary, increasing the age of who can attend child care on those days. Acting as if we are really and truly a multi-generational community. Remembering that there are younger humans watching older humans be people of faith and of conscience. And paying attention to whether this impacts attendance.

We are also trying something completely new – tonight, in fact – a non-Sunday morning offering for families, centered around dinner, providing content for both children/youth and parents. We’re calling it a Family Connection Dinner and in addition to dinner, it will have a Spirit Lab for the children and one for the parents. It’s a form of Family Ministry.  We are wondering if this might be a way to meet the spiritual needs of families, since many of our families are coming only once a month Sunday mornings.

Plus, there is more to come.  The Sunday Service Committee has spoken about it, staff whose role is to serve the religious education program have been talking about it, and I’ve checked in with our head of Arrangements.  The Board has been discussing these changes, knowing that the budget they recommend to you next year must be informed by what we have learned this past year of transition and a vision for what is to come. I hope you will come to the Annual Meeting on May 19th, whether you are a Member or Friend, for much will be presented, and hopefully you will choose to discuss it all, including the congregation’s vision for the RE program going forward.  Plus, if you’d like to have an individual conversation with me about all this, I welcome that as well.

One concrete experi-learning change you can expect, likely in August or September, is a space dedicated to the presence of children in the sanctuary. We’ll try it out for a couple of months, to see how it goes, the check in with how it is going.  We may find, like another of our sibling UU congregations, this one outside the Twin Cities in Minneapolis, that inclusion of children made it a bit louder, but it made it also more joyful.

This is how we live into the possibility of a really and truly multi-generational community, one of the few public contexts left for inter-generational interaction as our society grows ever more isolated and ever more segregated.

Let us make sure that we do everything we can so that any child or youth associated with this congregation knows that they, like the Playground Atheist, are never alone.  Strike that.  So that any person associated with this congregation, no matter their age, knows that they are never alone.


[ii] Lief, Judith. Making Friends with Death, p.15.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Ritual for Broken Times: After the New Zealand Massacre

led at First Unitarian Society of Plainfield

March 17, 2019

This afternoon’s ritual space is a lamentation, a condemnation, and rededication in the aftermath of the New Zealand tragedy on Friday where so many, too many, taking part in religious expression at two mosques halfway around the world from here, had their lives stolen by at least one white supremacist, who named the president if this, our, nation as inspiration.

In this vessel are shards of broken ceramics, symbols of what has been shattered by this violence.  Over the broken pieces, I pour what I call “homegrown holy water,” gathered last September in the congregation I serve as a part of our annual Water Ingathering, made holy by the intentions claimed by the congregation in that ritual, used throughout the year for child blessings and prayers before memorial services.  I add it now as an intentional act of healing and witness.

I speak these words of condemnation: not in our name does this violence happen.  We claim those killed, wounded, and touched by this violence as our kin, bring our presence to their side, and condemn this white supremacist hate.  We recognize that the damage from the evils of white supremacy endure long after individual incidents and that it is ours to bring respond, to resist, to create in small and large ways another world.

I now invite each of you, as you are so moved, to come forward to add a stone to mark the death of the fifty, or a gem as symbol of our rededication to a world absent white supremacy. 

As you come forward, I will speak names of some of the victims – may they have found solace in god in their last moments, may their families know comfort in their memories, as well as in a world coming together to resist hate.

Mucad Ibrahim

Husne Ara Parvin

Ramiz Vora

Asif Vora

Ansi Alibava

Ozair Kadir

Lilik Abdul Hamid

Linda Armstrong

Khaled Mustafa

Hamza Mustafa

Sayyad Milne

Haji-Daoud Nabi

Amjad Hamid

Ghulam Hussain

Karam Bibi

Zeeshan Raza

Sohail Shahid

Mohammad Imran Kahn

Mounir Sulaiman

Ashaf al-Masri

As we come to a close, this Prayer of Peace, from the Qu’ran:

In the name of Allah, the beneficent, the merciful.

Praise be to the Lord of the Universe who has created us and made us into tribes and nations, that we may know each other, not that we may despise each other. If the enemy incline towards peace, do thou also incline towards peace, and trust in God, for the Lord is the one that heareth and knoweth all things. And the servants of God, Most Gracious are those who walk on the Earth in humility, and when we address them, we say “PEACE.”

—Based on the Qu’ran, 49:13, 8:61

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment