jimrigby.org

The “I Am” sayings of Jesus first started making sense to me while reading the “I Am” sayings of Krishna in Hinduism. It seems to me that Jesus, like Krishna before him, used the poetry of “I Am” sayings to speak symbolically as the deeper and larger life within us.

Many Christians only look at the one “I Am: saying where Jesus says he is the only way to the Source, but Jesus also speaks as bread, as light, as a door, as a shepherd, as a vine, and as life itself. There are 7 “I Am” sayings and we need to look at them all to get the point of the poetry.

It seems to me the wisdom gained from this poetry is experiential, not doctrinal. The “point” of the poetry, I think, is to feel the life springing from primordial depths within us, and to feel our larger interconnectedness with every other being.

In other words, it seems to me, the “point of the “I Am” sayings is to help us “hear” life speaking to us, within us and all around us. And here is one lesson I have “heard” life teaching me:

“If you will stop running from your death for a moment and look at impermanence calmly and fully, you will see only me (life, love, nature, etc.)

The “observer” whom you are so afraid of losing, who believes itself to be standing outside the currents of change, the grieving observer witnessing others come into being and then piteously pass, that observer is not and has never been truly separate.

What you are calling your “self” is but an ephemeral ripple on a timeless pond. Lose your belief in that illusory isolated self, recognize that I (life, love, nature) am your deeper “Self” and you will lose your terror of death.

It is not you who looks out upon me (life love, nature, etc.) but I (life, love, nature, etc.) who is looking out through your eyes.”

It was good to see so many religious leaders at a pride event recently. Parts of the church are improving their teachings on gender equality but it is time for the church to stop focusing on moralizing long enough to examine why it is so comfortable violating Christ’s clear and direct command not to judge others in the first place. To be sure, we HAVE to judge the fairness of systems and the truthfulness of statements, but why does any church claiming to follow Jesus sit in judgment of people themselves?

A Christian lamented to me the other day that little girls school are declaring themselves nonbinary and so her son has no one to date. I understand how a concerned parent might fear that children are being lured into alternative sexual expressions, but how did Christians get into the business of brainwashing children about gender roles in the first place?

These are CHILDREN. They need to know there are all kinds of people, but it is way too early to shoehorn them into binary gender roles. To be “non-binary” simply means to step out of this culture’s sex obsessed world view and to consider themselves as whole persons.

Many churches need to ask themselves why teaching little girls to be the breeding stock of men, or teaching little boys to be unquestioning unemotional warriors is more important than exploring their spiritual gifts first?

As I say, the church is improving. Every step toward the “beloved community” of universal human rights is to be welcomed, but the church should not feel comfortable addressing sexual morality until it dismantles the entire scaffold of patriarchal assumptions that has led to abusive gender politics in the first place.

What does it mean to be “spiritual” if we define ourselves by the flesh? Think of the damage that has been done to children by teaching them their place in a binary breeding structure before they have explored their full humanity.

The church is in no position to ask individuals to repent if we ourselves will not repent of our own systemic abuses. Homophobia and sexism are not simply isolated flaws of individual Christians, they are the expressions of deep systemic flaws in the church’s teaching that manifest as all kinds of gender violence- child abuse, domestic violence, homophobia and sexism. We do little boys no favor by assigning them a gender role before they have even discovered who they are as a person.

As they say, if one fish washes to shore we must ask what was wrong with that fish, but if a hundred dead fish wash to shore we must ask what is wrong with the water. The sex abuse of children in the church, as well as domestic violence against religious women in Christian homes, is a direct result of men and women who were given their roles as breeders before discovering who they are as human beings.

We are making progress in the church but we are in no position to ask others to repent if we ourselves are not willing to look in the mirror and realize that teaching ancient gender roles instead of universal human rights is a cradle that will only nurture another generation of abuse.

Christianity has been my life’s bridge into radical and universal love but I know countless others have crossed over by other means.

When my more conservative friends tell me only Christians can be saved, I wonder why on earth would anyone want to go to that heaven? If heaven does not have science, heretics and rock and roll it would not be heaven to me anyway. I will not adopt any aspect of any religion that does not make room for outsiders and for unpleasant truths. I have no interest in any religion that does not blossom into a love of flowers, mathematics and people of every sort.

If heaven were an eternity spent with pious self-absorbed sectarians I will gladly book my reservation in hell. I will not spend eternity in a gated community. I will not limit my singing to hymns, nor imprison my mind in a golden cage of dogma. To paraphrase Ludwig Feuerbach, I will not pluck out my eyes that I might believe better.

I believe we do not have to die to enter eternity, we only have to enter fully into this present moment to experience that which does not belong to time. I believe heaven is actually a symbol of what the world looks and feels like when we love radically and universally.

I believe angels are symbols of all those wonderful insights that make us grateful enough to sing the songs of eternity in the here and now. I do not need supernatural beings singing to me of heaven. I already have frogs and cicadas serenading me with the Hymn of the Cosmos.

I believe the prayer of love is not that we should be rescued from an actual hell. Love’s prayer is that our love be strong enough to descend into the hellish nightmare of those who feel they are the damned and to sing of a love that knows no outcasts.

Dealing with undigested religion can be like watching people chew with their mouths open.

A lot can be learned from reading scripture, but when religious people regularly regurgitate scripture verses onto every conversation it is a sign that they have not digested the message.

The Stoic Epictetus once lamented that so many people talk about philosophy but so many never get around to living it::

“Suppose, for example, that in talking athletes, I said, “Show me your muscles,” and they answered, “Look at my jumping weights.” Go to, you and your jumping weights! What I want to see is the effect of the jumping weights.” (Discourses, I, 4)

Fully digested food is found in the form of skin, muscles and teeth, not in partially chewed fragments or in regurgitated mishmash. Like food, religion can be hard to look at until it is digested.

When religion consists of answers to questions the speaker has never authentically asked, it is not yet fully chewed. When religion consists of imposing what one was taught upon others, it is being regurgitated. Undigested religion speaks only in terms of hypothetical beliefs, magical rituals and inherited rules.

Digested religion should become an example of authenticity and love. As long as religion can only be expressed AS religion, it is unfinished. Just as we best exemplify education, not by pointing at our books, but by being wise, just as we best exemplify fitness by growing muscles, not by pointing at our exercise equipment; in the same way, we best exemplify faith by compassion, wisdom and fairness, not by pointing at the religion itself but by blossoming into kindness and truth.

Until religion has fully digested and become love, wisdom and justice, it can be best to keep one’s mouth closed and keep chewing.

I believe any God needing to be protected from heresy has been made up by religious hierarchy to defend dogma too weak to stand on its own.

I believe any God offended at the human condition has been concocted to frighten us into obedience to some obsolete moral code.

I believe any religion based on saving us from an invisible threat is an appeal to reason ecclipsing fear.

I believe all nondemocratic religious hierarchies are bullying garbed in big hats and velvet robes.

I believe dogma that cannot be questioned is actually superstition in sanctimonious window dressing.

I believe healthy religion does not call us to find scapegoats for our problems, but to present ourselves as living sacrifices for the common good.

I believe true “saviors” do not call us to love and serve themselves but to find the greatness within our own hearts to recognize our kinship with all humankind and the web of life.

I believe the exclusiveness to which true religion calls us is not loyalty to any one sect, but commitment to universal love and justice.

For many, patriotism and religion are a kind of disguised narcissism.

Narcissistic patriots may praise America, but feel no obligation to care for its people or to protect its lands. They may wave the flag and rejoice in the military, but it is glory and power they really love, not their country.

Narcissistic religionists may praise Jesus, or whatever being they worship, but their prayers make it clear that religion is a way of cajoling divine power to protect and serve themselves. However much they may praise their “God,” it is themselves they truly worship.

The problem with only loving ourselves is that we are going to die. Such self love therefore brings about inevitable fear and disappointment. Only by loving all of life and nature can our love of self find fulfillment in the larger common life..

While we love only our own small lives, we are holding onto ashes. Narcissistic religion is like loving a reflection of ourselves in a mirror. Such self absorption will never really meet our needs, never lead us to meaningful lives, never give us the experience of truly loving another being.

As Jesus said, if we hold onto our lives we will surely lose them. One does not have to be traditionally religious to understand there is something deeper within us than our social selves. When we observe the web of life, or the cosmic process, something deep within us stirs. The happiness we seek in life is not our luggage. We are vessels for IT. Knowing this, we are wise to give ourselves fully, joyfully and with abandon to the pulse of life within our deeper being.

The stream that will not empty itself becomes stagnant and cut off from its source. Only by “dying” from our smaller lives into a deeper and larger love can we find what the life within us is seeking to find.

If mystics use the word “God” at all they use it as a symbol of a deeper larger mystery. Whatever is meant by the symbol “God,” Van Gogh was right:

“The best way to know God is to love many things.”

Here in Austin you get the pleasure to meet a lot of remarkable people, not the least of which for me was Molly Ivins. Molly was a fearless journalist who regularly took on the vested power and wealth on behalf of those who weren’t being heard. She always seemed to do so with a sophisticated intelligence and with an almost surgical sarcasm.

A lot of Molly Ivins fans wish she were here to guide us through the Trump years, but if Molly saw the gathering storm clouds in America very clearly. It seems to me she left us with plenty of insights for what she saw as the coming struggle. Here are 9 bits of Molly’s wisdom you may find helpful:

“When politicians start talking about large groups of their fellow Americans as ‘enemies,’ it’s time for a quiet stir of alertness. Polarizing people is a good way to win an election, and also a good way to wreck a country.”

“Listen to the people who are talking about how to fix what’s wrong, not the ones who just work people into a snit over the problems. Listen to the people who have ideas about how to fix things, not the ones who just blame others.”

“The trouble with blaming powerless people is that although it’s not nearly as scary as blaming the powerful, it does miss the point. Poor people do not shut down factories… Poor people didn’t decide to use ‘contract employees’ because they cost less and don’t get any benefits.”

“How the American right managed to convince itself that the programs to alleviate poverty are responsible for the consequences of poverty will someday be studied as a notorious mass illusion.”

“Whenever you hear a politician carry on about what a mess the schools are, be aware that you are looking at the culprit.”

“On the whole, I prefer not to be lectured on patriotism by those who keep offshore mail drops in order to avoid paying their taxes.”

“It is possible to read the history of this country as one long struggle to extend the liberties established in our Constitution to everyone in America.”

When I knew only my own religion, I thought my savior was the only child of God. When I learned from other religions, I realized every sentient being is to be loved like a one and only child of our common source.

When I knew only my own religion, I believed my group had been specially chosen to save the world. When I learned from other religions, I understood we are all cells in one body and so we are all “chosen” to SERVE the world.When I knew only my own religion, I thought God was male.

When I learned from other religions, I realized only my religion’s WORD for God is male. Our cosmic source is beyond binary gender and thus can be expressed by love in all its many ethical forms.When I knew only my own religion, I believed prophecy meant predicting the future.

When I learned from other religions, I realized that prophecy is understanding the future implications of our current actions.

When I knew only my own religion, I believed the “Word of God” was found on the ink spots of the pages of my religion’s holy book. When I learned from other religions, I realized the “Word”refers, not to any one scripture, but to the creative principle behind them all.

When I knew only my own religion, I thought “salvation” meant being lifted to a gated community of people just like me. When I learned from other religions, I realized “salvation” means finding a love big enough to encompass us all.

I am hearing a lot of talk of “common sense” from the MAGA movement these days. The gist of the argument is that the consensus of those with cultural privilege provides a kind of measuring rod of all sane thought. Because the voices of the poor or marginalized people seems strange to the privileged majority they are considered divisive almost by definition. The voice of those excluded are seen as a kind of assault on the majority because they disrupt the consensus of the privileged group to which one happens to belong.

Einstein had to fight “common sense” dismissal of his new theories. They made no sense within the old consensus and, therefore, violated the assumptions people already had. He concluded, “Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.”

Rene Descartes, who some describe as European philosophy’s bridge into modern thought, also had to struggle against dismissal by lesser minds:

“Common sense is the most widely shared commodity in the world, for everyone is convinced they are well supplied with it.”

It seems to me the ancient philosophic opiate of “common sense” is being used to shut down any justice claims for the poor, for LGBTQ persons, or even for the inconvenient truths of science. If new ideas violate the consensus of the people who count as real Americans, they can and should be disregarded.

“Common sense” arguments often propose a privileged group whose experiences count, and an outside group whose claims can be ignored in the name of unity. We need to ask ourselves a question, “what does the word “unity” mean in a time of injustice?”

It seems to me that many of us who live in comfortable privilege desire a unity where we all get along, and where no one brings up discrepancies of power and possession. To that end, books must be removed from public schools if they cause a disturbance in the “common sense” arguments MAGA people have inherited from their patriarchal, white supremacist and capitalist roots.

Because such a consensus cannot actually stand before the light of reason, it must be protected under the suffocating shade of the term “common sense.”

I want unity as much as anyone. By nature, I am conflict avoidant, but I think it is important to stand with anyone being bullied. The wounded feelings of the privileged do not belong on the same ethical scale as the broken hopes and bodies of the oppressed.

Can there be true unity without justice? Should the enslaver and the enslaved “just get along” or does the enslaved have rights that transcend the “common sense” logic of any unfair political or economic system? Can there be true unity in a patriarchal or Gay bashing nation, or must justice proceed any legitimate concept of unity?

I am quite aware of my biases and limitations, which is precisely why I say we must insist on a common standard of human rights that transcends personal, sectarian or economic standards. I believe we ALL need to decide which human rights are essential for human beings to live lives of dignity, and then I believe we must offer those same rights to everyone with no exceptions.

Furthermore, I believe we people of privilege need to leave the echo chambers of our numb consensus and listen to the cries of those crushed under the tonnage of the self righteous indifference many label as “common sense.”

As a minister, I take abusive Christianity very personally. While I believe religion can be a beautiful thing, I must also confess the kind of Christianity we often witness in public is more likely to be a problem for humankind than a gift. Here are 9 of my least favorite clichés I hear from my Christian colleagues.

1. “GOD NEVER GIVES US MORE THAN WE CAN HANDLE”

When someone is feeling crushed by life, it can be very difficult to honor their pain and fear. It might seem helpful to say, “God never gives us more than we can handle” but, to someone in pain, it can also feel like we Christians are more protective of our theology than of our wounded friend. Life isn’t always fair. Sometimes, people just need us to sit with them in their pain. We cannot do that and also try to paste their lives together with our own theological duct tape.

2. “HATE THE SIN, LOVE THE SINNER”

When Gandhi originally said this, I suspect he meant we should remember to love human beings no matter how painful their words or deeds might be. It is one thing to say ‘love the oppressor, hate the oppression,” but it is something else to say “love the LGBTQIA+ person, but hate their deepest emotions and loves.” That’s like saying “love the bird, hate the feathers.” Whenever we fall into inflexible abstract ethics about other people someone is about to get plucked.

3. “EVERYTHING HAPPENS FOR A REASON”

When I first began working with survivors of sexual assault, I was astounded by the fact that almost all of them had been taught to blame themselves. It seems we would rather blame ourselves than accept the fact that much of life is outside our control. It is important to understand that life can be terribly unfair. It really doesn’t help a survivor of trauma to have to invent some kind of lesson their pain is supposed to be teaching them. A lifetime of ministry has convinced me that, while we can learn something from almost anything that happens to us, still, terrible things are not sent into our lives to teach us a lesson. Sometimes, bad things just happen.

4. “THE MIRACLES IN THE BIBLE PROVE THAT GOD EXISTS”

Many Christians roll their eyes when they hear the miracles described by other faiths. We should realize that it feels just as ridiculous when we use our own scripture as evidence for our beliefs. The biblical witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection are no more convincing to an outsider than are Odysseus’ shipmates that Poseidon rules the waves.

5. “BIBLICAL MARRIAGE”

The trope “Biblical marriage” is an incredibly dishonest cliché. The Bible has marriages that include rape, polygamy, impregnated slaves and the casting out of inconvenient wives and children. The lessons to be gathered from the various versions of “biblical marriage” are a.) that we must be very flexible when it comes to sexual ethics, and b.) that forcing one sexual code on everyone can be the spiritual equivalent of a gang rape.

6. “WE NEED TO PUT GOD BACK IN SCHOOLS”

The idea that God is letting school shootings happen because the religious right is not able to dominate the public sector is incredibly toxic. Again, if Jesus is to be believed, the heart of Christianity is being a good neighbor. It is an obvious fact of history that when ANY religion gains domination over a nation’s political structure it becomes deadly. Theocracy becomes deadly first for its enemies, then for its nation, and, ultimately, its cruelty cuts the heart of that religion itself.

7. USING “CHRISTIAN” AS A SYNONYM FOR “ETHICAL.” Religion is always risky business. Any form of Christianity that deems itself as good by definition will quickly fill up with narcissists whose praise of Jesus is actually a disguise for their own inflated egos and false sense of superiority.

8. “GOD MUST HAVE NEEDED A LITTLE ANGEL IN THE CHOIR…”

Some Christian funerals have the most brutal and cruel clichés one will ever hear. One of the most common clichés used in funerals is that God must have needed the deceased person for some purpose in heaven. It’s fine if adults want to say such things tongue and cheek, but, when there are grieving parents or bewildered siblings in the room we have to consider how the idea that God kills people to use them in heaven might complicate the grieving process for many left behind who loved them.

9. AND, FINALLY, “ANY PRAYER GIVEN IN THE NAME OF JESUS TO A MIXED CROWD”

Again, Jesus summarized his teachings as being a good neighbor. There is nothing Christlike about forcing Jesus on others. If Christian clergy’s compassion has not grown enough to include everyone in the room, they should not be leading a service in mixed company. Prayer requires consent. Clergy are not mature enough to lead community gatherings until their love is big enough to include Christian and non-Christian equally.