Marilyn Sewell

Worship Service/First Unitarian Portland

2008-06-22T21:16:20Z

Worship Service/First Unitarian Portland

2008-06-01T20:35:11Z

"Did the Devil Make Me Do It?"

Is there a force for evil in the world, countering the force for good? Or are our misdeeds simply the result of ignorance and poor upbringing?

Worship Service/First Unitarian Portland

2008-05-18T20:30:40Z

"Calls to Consciousness"

Though our culture too often distracts us from what is real and vital, our spiritual lives call us to a growing consciousness. as with all forms of growth, there is loss involved - but the gain is living with more depth and fulfillment.

Losing Eight Belles

2008-05-08T16:41:05Z

Having lived in Kentucky for years, I of course follow the Kentucky Derby. Big Brown won this year, as expected, but the horse which captured the attention of the nation was the big-hearted filly Eight Belles. Eight Belles was the only horse spirited enough to go after Big Brown in the final stretch, and she finished second after giving the race her all. Apparently her all was too much, for both front ankles cracked just after she finished the race.

Eight Belles didn't stumble or trip. Perhaps the track was too hard--we know other major tracks, including Keeneland in Lexington, KY, have been changed over to a softer surface in recent years. Perhaps Eight Belles was not mature enough or strong enough to run with "the big boys"--rarely has a filly won the Derby. Race horses often begin and end their time in the sun before they are fully mature--if they look good in a few races, they are much more valuable for breeding than for racing. Huge sums of money are involved here.

So what is comes down to is that these magnificent horses, like most everything else in this society, are really first and foremost a commodity. To see Eight Belles lying helpless on the track and to know that she had to be euthenized there somehow made me indescribably sad. I kept reading the various accounts in the newspapers, trying to figure out what happened, why this beautiful creature had to die.

I finally had to conclude that for me Eight Belles had become a symbol for something much larger than herself: a culture which will sacrifice spirit and life and beauty--all of which Eight Belles epitomized--to the pursuit of the dollar.

What do we value in this world? What are our lives really about?

Worship Service/First Unitarian Portland

2008-05-04T18:22:38Z

"When the Holy Breaks Through"

Our lives can cruise along in very much an ordinary fashion, and then all at once, something unexpected happens, and we are awakened as we had not been previously. How can these epiphanies deepen and mature us, spiritually speaking?

Was Rev. Wright Wrong? ( Redux)

2008-05-01T17:44:33Z

When Obama's minister, Jeremiah Wright, was initially quoted in the news media, I stated in one of my reflections that the big news for me was that white people were so surprised at his comments. I'll stand by that statement. Perhaps more information about the black church might be helpful, to explain how Wright could appear so "wrong."

I should say, to begin with, that although my experience with the black church has not been extensive, I have attended Black worship services from time to time; I took a course in black preaching in seminary and preached in a black church as part of that course; and subsequently facilitated a seminary course in black preaching for Starr King School, our UU seminary in Berkeley. (Two of my African American colleagues had agreed to co-facilitate the class and then for personal reasons had to back out at the last minute, leaving me, a white woman, to do the job. So about 8 African American seminary students and I spent an interesting semester together, and I learned from them.)

Although all black churches are not alike, one can make some generalizations that hold true for many such churches. The minister is the prophet, the truth-teller, the dominant force of the community. His word (and it's a masculine world, by and large) is law. In the sermon, black preachers typically start slowly, interpreting the scripture for their people, and then build to a climax, which is often dramatic and can include shouting, striding up and down the aisles of the church, and chanting repetitious phrases. There may be other ministers and lay ministers in the congregation who will minister to the minister by wiping his brow or giving him water, for he may be exhausted at this point, having given his all to call down the Spirit to his people.

In terms of the content, the black preacher will speak to the experience and the needs of his people, and the message will often contain prophetic words of justice and/or a specific political message. Some ministers are more dramatic, more playful, more intense, more "show-offy" than others. Clearly, Jeremiah Wright is one of these.

But back to the question, was Jeremiah Wright wrong? I believe he was wrong in grandstanding, as he has done, at a very crucial time in the candidacy of his congregant, Barack Obama. Ministers are there to serve others, not themselves or their own egos. Sure, we all have egos that get dragged into play, sometimes in unfortunate ways--but this election is too important and Obama's candidacy too threatened to justify Wright's current behavior. It appears that he wants his 15 minutes of fame, and if he has to sacrifice his congregant, and our potential president, so be it. That's not OK.

Rev. Wright, I have to say you've got it all wrong this time.

One of Every Hundred Citizens in Prisons

2008-04-24T18:19:55Z

In a recent sermon I quoted a statistic which was incorrect--I thought I had remembered that one out of every thousand adult citizens in this country is incarcerated. Actually, it is one out of every hundred. This is one of those figures that is difficult to believe, but it was reported on the front page of NY Times on April 23.

The article went on to say that we are, of course, the world leader in "producing prisoners" (and "producing" is probably the correct term), with China a distant second. The U.S. has less than 5 percent of the world's population and almost a quarter of the world's prisoners.

Criminologists and legal scholars in other industrialized countries are apparently shocked by what they see when they look at our figures. For example, the U.S. has 751 in prison for every 100,000 people; England's rate is 151, Germany's is 88; Japan's is 63. Russia is the only country that comes close to us, at 627 per 100,000.

Explanations are given: guns easily available, the drug trade, lack of a social safety net, and the American temperament, with its emphasis on individual responsibility. Several experts have pointed to one salient factor, a surprising one: democracy. In the rest of the world, criminal justice professionals tend to be civil servants, insulated from popular demand for tough sentencing, whereas we have a highly politicized criminal justice system.

Whatever the reason, putting people in jail for long periods of time for dubious reasons is not serving us well. There is little emphasis these days on rehabilitation--the justice system (surely a misnomer) is mostly heavy on punishment. So what are these folks going to do when they get out? Be upstanding citizens that go out and get good jobs and pay taxes, perhaps? Not a likely scenario.

Maybe we need to ask whom we are punishing and why, and what the result is of all this recrimination. Vengeance doesn't work on the individual level, nor on the societal. Maybe we should consider mercy--at least for those non-dangerous "criminals" who are filling our prisons and stealing our tax dollars from social services and schools--which, incidentally, they could be attending more cheaply than it costs us to keep them in jail.

Worship Service/First Unitarian Portland

2008-04-20T21:14:04Z

"Is Marriage Obsolete?"

Increasingly, couples find it unnecessary to marry in order to live together, or even to have children together. Other people marry 3, 4, or 5 times, sequentially. Is marriage itself becoming outmoded?

Moms and Guilt

2008-04-17T19:58:57Z

Last Sunday I preached on the topic "What Do Our Children Require of Us?" In this sermon, I pointed out that the consensus of professionals in the field of child development is that perhaps the majority of children in this country are not getting the care that they need in order to grow into healthy adults. These researchers point to a troubling shift in child-rearing patterns since1970's, saying that since then there has been a huge increase in the numbers of babies and young children being cared for in daycare, the great majority of which is unsatisfactory. This conclusion is overwhelming, if you look at the literature. On Monday, I received a call from a congregant, a mom who has her child in day care, complaining that my sermon had "made her feel guilty." I knew this response was a risk I took in preaching this sermon, because women have been guilt-tripped forever about the needs of their children. If the child has a problem of any kind, look no further than the mother, the "experts" have said, for a very long time. This has been a heavy burden to bear--it was for me when I was a single mother, and it is for all moms--and I don't wish to add to that burden. (The current literature, incidentally, is not "mom-centric," but more focused on policy.)

I went on to say in the sermon that I do not consider the daycare problem something that resulted from the women's movement. I went on to characterize the problem as a systemic one, referring to national priorities and policies, both in government and in business. I tried to be clear about this perspective--but the guilt button is easy to push.

So for you moms out there in cyberland--I know from experience that we all balance a tremendous load of responsiblity, and it's easy to blame ourselves when we can't do it all. Own only what is yours to own, and no more. Understand that we are living in a culture that doesn't really value children and families, so families must struggle in a very difficult context. Families that have money have more choices; families in which two parents can share the care of children have more leeway; families in work situations that allow them to stay home part or all of the time find child-rearing easier. But there are those families who have a single mother working two jobs to survive, no interested dad, no extended family around to pick up the slack. These moms have no choice but daycare, and that daycare should be a lot better than it currently is, and that is the responsibility of all of us.

Let me end by repeating what I called for at the beginning of my sermon: "So what is it that children require of us? I think they require three things: (1) to feel safe, (2) to feel loved, and (3) to feel hope. Children get these qualities from consistent positive contact from stable, loving adults." I hope all of us, parents and non-parents alike, will concern ourselves with the cultural and political changes that are needed for our children to grow into healthy, productive, loving adults.

Worship Service/First Unitarian Portland

2008-04-13T21:10:24Z

"What Do Our Children Require of Us?"

children are vulnerable, and in their trust and innocence, they depend upon grown-ups. What is it they need from us, in order to grow into healthy, confident, loving adults?"

Re-defining Sin

2008-04-07T20:41:41Z

It seems that the Vatican has been tinkering with the notion of sin. It's about time. There was a recent suggestion by a bishop from the Vatican's "office of sin and penance" (I think Unitarian Universalists could use such an office, actually--more on this later), in which sins such as trashing God's green earth (corporate polluters) and robbing the poor (economic inequity) should be recognized along with the usual bread-and-butter individual sins.

I say "about time," because far more pain and suffering are caused by these systemic sins than by the paltry seven deadly sins conjured up in the medieval period. Do you even know what these are, my friends? I confess I had to look them up myself, to get all seven. They are: lust, gluttony, pride, envy, anger, avarice, and sloth.

Think about it--how does a little lust compete with a tobacco company's lies? How does just a pinch of envy measure up against a manufacturer of land mines? Give me the individual sins any day, compared to the systemic.

And as far as Unitarian Universalists go, a cursory look at the seven deadlies tells us that this list is just not suitable for us. These are just not our big sins.

In fact, we could do with a little more of some of these. Take lust, for instance. We could be more embodied, more passionate. Can you imagine anyone saying, "Now those Unitarians, they're a lusty lot"? And how about anger? We like to repress ours--after all, we wouldn't want to appear unseemly or impolite. Another of the seven we could use more of is sloth. Sloth--what an appealing sin! But Unitarian Universalists are worker bees, doing one project after the next. I know every time I attempt to be slothful, I just become paralyzed with guilt and remorse.

Actually, though, our paramount sin, our really big one, is in fact one of the deadly seven--it is pride. We believe that we can think our way to salvation instead of depending upon mercy and grace. Too often we are self-righteous, disregarding our own moral and ethical failings, and thinking of ourselves as just a cut above the rest.

There is one main reason why black churches are so exciting, so full of passion, on Sunday morning--you see, people who are hurting, people who are oppressed, know know they need one another and know they need God. Too often Unitarian Universalist services can be emotionally dead places, because UU's think that we are in control (and we are so very wrong); and we think that man is the measure of things (just the measure of little things); and we think that we don't desperately need one another (and we do), and we think that we don't need God (because we'd rather split theological hairs than humble ourselves and pray).

My grandmother, who read her big black Bible daily, and outloud, used to say, "Pride is the only unforgivable sin." As a child, I never understood her. Now I think I do. Pride is the only sin, you see, that irrevocably separates us from God--it is the sin of putting ourselves in the place of God. And it follows that we then separate ourselves also from others and sever those bonds of compassion that make us one.

So I suggest that we Unitarian Universalists have an office of sin and repentance, too. But of course we couldn't use that language, since many UU's don't believe that sin even exists--just bad parenting. We could call our office something like "Office for the Support of the Morally Gifted." Yes, it's a euphemism, but hey you do what you've got to do.

Too Risky to Keep Silent?

2008-03-31T21:30:41Z

We all have those times when we must choose whether to speak or to remain silent. How should we decide? By what criteria? Two articles in today's NY Times made me consider this issue.

One was an article in the "Health" section (D1) which told the story of a physician who thought he spotted what might have been a malignant melanoma--that is, a suspicious-looking mole--on the shin of a woman in a nearby seat at a poetry reading. He knew that if a melanoma is discovered in an early stage, it is quite curable, but left unchecked to grow, it is one of the deadliest of cancers. Should he say anything and risk awkwardness and maybe defensiveness on her part? Or should he speak to her? He decided to speaking, apologizing in advance for being intrusive, but saying that as a physician he was concerned about the mole. She thanked him and responded that a dermatologist had thought her mole was benign--and then she moved on quickly. He had embarrassed her, he knew, and he did feel awkward--but even so, he says, it had been too risky to keep silent.

The other article was on the front page and concerned the decision Olympic athletes have: should they publicly condemn China, because of the Chinese government's support of Sudan and its policy on Darfur.

Jessica Mendoza, an outfielder on the U.S. Olympic softball team, does not hesitate to speak out about Darfur. She has decided to participate in a coalition of more than 200 athletes who are trying to bring more awareness to the situation in Darfur. When she is not in uniform, she will be wearing her "Team Darfur" wristbands around Beijing, and she hopes to visit the Darfur region after the Olympics.

But personal and business considerations have kept some better known athletes from joining the coalition. Many are reluctant to speak out, apparently. One young athlete who has a $90 million endorsement contract with Nike said that he needed more information. Nike says that they do not limit or censor athletes' comments. Many companies, of course, now do business in China.

So when is it too risky to keep silent? When should we speak out? I think we should speak out when we have the power to make a difference. When a life could possibly be saved, or an injustice made just.

All of us have power, and yet power has somehow gotten a bad rap--perhaps it's Lord Acton's dictum that "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Yes, it can--but it doesn't have do. Power itself is neutral--it is neither bad nor good: everything rests in the intentional use of the power.

When do we speak and when do we keep silent? We speak when we have the power to save a life--or even to redeem a situation that's going downhill, to the detriment of the group (of whatever kind). And we speak when we are called upon to speak--because of time and place and historical moment--to right a wrong or to remove one of the claims of injustice.

Yes, to speak up and be wrong is sometimes embarrassing, sometimes hard on the ego. But to wind through one's days never taking the risks set before us is to really not live at all. What are we trying to do--to be safe? What a fantasy that is! No one of us in mortal form is ever safe. We have only this moment, only this hour, this day, to live with integrity and passionate love. Don't waste another minute with idle reflection. It is always too risky to be silent when anything wrong can be set right, and you have the power to do so.