not a sacrifice

don’t think that it’s a sacrifice or act like it’s special that i spend time with my kid. and don’t dare act like my partner is a bad mom because she lets me.

yes i do mornings and bedtime. that means i have taken two of the sweetest times of the day. yes sometimes i resent getting up early. you think that mama doesn’t sometimes resent having to do all of her writing in the middle of the night to get blocks of time for a creative process? when she is already prone to insomnia?

we make the arrangements that seem to work best for our little pirate crew. i hope that you do too. that however you choose to constitute a family you work together to make it work

habibti has spelled out clearly what all mama’s know. they start behind and can never really live up to the good momma. not staying home with the kid, or not going out to work, not whatever. it’s always what more the mama could do. us papas start off as good papas as long as we decide to be involved in our kids lives and not beat them. we build credit from there.

habibti… no one will do better by the little pirate than you. goddess bless for your patience and love for the both of us. for fighting for a world that she can grow in and sharing every last thing with her. and no one sees you take her in the middle of the night and sing twinkle, twinkle.. until she goes back to sleep while she trys to rip off your glasses because papa is just not doing it tonight. and no one sees you for the millionth time stop in the middle of that article you are working on and dance around the room with baby when if it were me i would just want to shout for her trying to dance on my keyboard again.

habibti spelled it out to me clearest, but my mama told me the same in other ways. always, even though she would do, did do everything for her boys, she always worried that folks would figure out how she wasn’t doing enough  and would let her know lest she think that she was a good mama.  june cleaver, come down from the screen and coaching little league. not good enough. i can watch how she still worries if she is good enough.  well mama you are.

and i would guess that every other mama knows what it is like to love with your whole world and get sideways looks like it’s not enough. oh but if papa lifts a finger he’s a saint.

well i’m not. i like to think that i am working against patriarchy, but every man i know in my generation is trying to be an involved father. and some are heartbroken because they can’t afford it the market and the sexism say that they have to work overtime all the time because they need the money and no one will pay mama what she is worth. and with the conservative religious background i got a lot of them believe they ought to be striving to be the patriarch, not to smash the role. but we all know that kids are precious and we want in. and it doesn’t hurt that we get mad credit for playing with baby, which is the best part of the day anyway.

and there are how many single mom’s out there proving we are superflous anyway? and there are how many endless possibilities of how to make a family and raise a kid with love and support other than the mama and papa nuclear family if we would just get the hell out of the way and let people do it.

it’s not a sacrifice. i’m blessed and thanks for the compliments all, but more to the mama who lets me be involved and you all should recognize that that is a sacrifice, for her. everything that i do that could conceivably be a mama role will at some moment be alluded to let her know she’s not doing it. and when i fuck it up (say when i dropped baby and broke her leg at 2 mos) she’ll get more dirty looks than i do for giving me the opportunity, because we all know men are inept with kids and she should have kept an eye on us.

so… blessings to everyone who cares for babies. and thanks to all the mama’s who will let a boy be a papa and not just a sperm donor when you aren’t under any obligation to.

thoughts

a handful of thoughts that keep germinating, but i have not been able to pull together fully. hoping that getting them out will allow me to let them grow instead of being trapped inside and bouncing in circles

-spirituality is about connecting to power that transcends the self. people who are spiritually connected put that power to use in ways that are liberatory/ oppressive/ both at the same time.

-religions are attempts to organize people around shared experience of connection to transcendant power, or the promise of that experience. because of this they are fertile ground for oppressive/ dominating movements and for liberatory/ community creating movements

-powerful spiritual events and symbols become the sites of struggle between opressive and liberatory meanings as people and religious groupd contend for who will harness their power and for what. because of this they often serve opposing functions (e.g. guadalupe who is both a con of the catholic church to dominate indigenous culture and the trojan horse by which idigenous culture flourishes in catholicism)

-i think that the goal of the spiritual life is to sift and chose those ways of connecting and interpretations of connection to power that provide for our own and others liberation and for forging mutual connections, while uprooting methods and interpretations that lead to dominance and breaking of mutual relations.

-listening to praise songs in church throughout the fall i have had the intuition that we are at least to some extent trying to create the god/dess we are praising. that maybe this/ these ultimate source(s) of creative power needs our help to take shape and part of our co creation is the responsibility we have in shaping our divinity.

-i feel like the best gamble to make spiritually is that god wants to be just and she will empower push us to liberation and community if we will cooperate

progressive christianity part 2

<!– @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } H3 { margin-bottom: 0.08in } A:link { so-language: zxx } –>

here is another article (also posted below) that gives some self definition to progressive christianity. notice that it gives as three of the four primary sources white, american and european theological movements. also i would love to be corrected but to the best of my knowledge all of the primary theologians associated with the movements are men, though in the case of the evangelicals certainly not all the activists. i pray that this is a mistake on my part that just shows the depth to which my own theological education has been skewed.

liberation theologies are also seen as a necessary source, but all lumped into one. It is made clear that christianity is to be transformed by these voices, but that transformation is again framed as service to “the least of these”. it seems that progressive christianity is supposed to be the realm of those inheritors of the previously mentioned (white, male dominated) traditions who are now willing to listen to “the previously voiceless people” and take on/co-opt? their insights. missing, at least in this article, is a clear recognition that all of these liberation forms of christianity are critiques of traditional/ white male theology. without that recognition it remains possible for progressive christianity to be focused on white men and congratulate itself on evolving and learning from the majority of the world that has been/ is oppressed by white, christian men.

i would like to see a recognition of the reality that christianity has been a powerfully oppressive force and that many forms of it still are. i feel like the 8 points in the previous post came a bit closer in the recognition of privilege, but did so in a way that centered those people who have privilege to renounce. as i try to imagine a christianity that i would want to claim, it would center the destruction of domination systems “casting down the mighty from their thrones and lifting up the lowly” while recognizing that depending on our personal histories, identities and social locations we all have different roles in that process. different places in the struggle and different ways that we need to cooperate in our own lifting up and casting down.

September 4, 2006
By Dr. Delwin Brown
Dean Emeritus, Pacific School of Religion

Our Progressive Christian Heritage

Progressive Christianity today is not a single party line; it is a family of perspectives and practices that seek to be faithful to Christ. It is diverse because it draws from a variety of Christian expressions rooted in the biblical witness.

Progressive Christianity draws from the witness of evangelical Christians in the middle of the 19th century. These first American evangelicals were on the front lines of the movements to abolish slavery, to give women the right to vote, to mitigate poverty and overcome sharp class divisions. What can we take from their example?

• They understood that their progressive, even revolutionary, stances were required of them as Christians. They were not progressives who also happened to be Christians. They were progressives because they were Christians, in order to be faithful to the gospel.

• Their pursuit of justice was a spiritual discipline. Their efforts were not dependent on the likelihood of success. They were not based on calculations; they sprang from the conviction that Jesus came to overcome socially and culturally created injustices.

• They were united in Christian spirit rather than Christian beliefs. They understood that Christians could disagree on matters of theology and still be united in service to God and neighbor.

Progressive Christianity also draws from the witness of the liberal Christian movement around the turn of the 20th century. The liberals welcomed progress as a gift of God. They supported the advance of the physical sciences and democratic practices. They led in the analysis and critique of structural injustices in society. They were intellectuals and reformers. What should we honor in their example?

• They took seriously the doctrine of the incarnation, the Christian claim that God is in and with this world, so they, too, made their home in the world without reserve.

• They saw sin and salvation to be structural as well as personal. For them, sinful relations had to be addressed through collective action and public policy as well as through personal spiritual discipline.

• They believed that Christian faith requires, not repetition of the past, but the obligation to re-think the meaning of discipleship in each age.

Progressive Christianity learns from the neo-orthodox Christians of the mid-20th century who openly opposed the equation of Christian faith with the political ideology of the Third Reich. They insisted on the distinctiveness of Christian identity. What can we take from them?

• They proclaimed the otherness of the incarnate God. They insisted that God is always with us, but God is never reducible to our cultural practices, our political convictions, even to our religious beliefs.

• They understood the centrality of Christ as the source of Christian identity. The Bible is the primary source for knowing God’s revelation in Christ, but that revelation is Christ, not the Bible. From modern knowledge we have much to learn and nothing to fear, but our best knowledge does not displace the Christ of the biblical witness.

• Being Christian means being something in particular, so the purpose of Christian community is to explore, develop, and sustain Christian identity through preaching, liturgy, and education.

Finally, progressive Christianity must hear and be transformed by the manifold witnesses of the liberation forms of Christian faith that emerged in the last part of the 20th century and continue with force today. These include the voices of the racial/ethnic communities, the feminists and womanists, those who have suffered from colonialism, the poor and other previously voiceless people, and indeed the silent cries of the earth itself! From them, to be authentic, progressive Christianity must learn that:

• God is on the side of the powerless, human and non-human. God loves all equally, but to overcome injustice God joins with those who are its victims. Those who would follow God in Christ are called to serve “the least of these” among us.

• The search for truth must be undertaken in the company of the powerless. Wisdom and virtue is to be found in all people, in all classes, in all races and ethnic groups. But the persistent habit of humanity is to demean and ignore what the “least ones” have to say, their insights into the gospel, their voices as vehicles of judgment and grace.

• Salvation, in the biblical view, is the promise for all dimensions of human life and for all creation. To be sure, salvation is the promise for individuals, too, but as St. Paul insists, salvation is also for “the entire creation”–as unbelievable as it seems, for individuals, communities, and even the earth.

Progressive Christianity draws from each of these traditions in its distinctiveness. But it must share, too, the one belief that adherents of these traditions held in common, namely, their Christian hope. They believed that a radically better day is possible, by God’s grace and through human faithfulness, and so they each sought, in their own ways, to serve its coming.

progressive christianity part 1

i’ve been reading a bit recently about how “progressive
christians” define themselves. partly trying to figure out if i
am one, partly looking for the roots of why the christian social
justice organizations that i hae worked for have been so self
congratulatory in their work and white in their makeup.

the center for progressive christianity has 8 points that they
give as defining progressive christianity.  my first reaction
looking at them is that they are quite close to my approach to
keeping the faith and at the same time are clearly articulated
assuming that progressive christianity is a white/ privileged
movement.

the 8 points:

By calling ourselves progressive,
we mean we are Christians who…
1.Have
found an approach to God through the life and teachings of Jesus.

2.
Recognize the faithfulness of other people who have other names for
the way to God’s realm, and acknowledge that their ways are true for
them, as our ways are true for us.

3.
Understand the sharing of bread and wine in Jesus’s name to be a
representation of an ancient vision of God’s feast for all peoples

4.Invite
all people to participate in our community and worship life without
insisting that they become like us in order to be acceptable
(including but not limited to):

believers
and agnostics,
conventional Christians and questioning
skeptics,
women and men,
those of all sexual orientations and
gender identities,
those of all races and cultures,
those of
all classes and abilities,
those who hope for a better world and
those who have lost hope

5.
Know that the way we behave toward one another and toward other
people is the fullest expression of what we believe.

6.
Find more grace in the search for understanding than we do in
dogmatic certainty – more value in questioning than in absolutes.

7.
Form ourselves into communities dedicated to equipping one another
for the work we feel called to do: striving for peace and justice
among all people, protecting and restoring the integrity of all God’s
creation, and bringing hope to those Jesus called the least of his
sisters and brothers

8.
Recognize that being followers of Jesus is costly, and entails
selfless love, conscientious resistance to evil, and renunciation of
privilege.

it
is points 4, 7, and 8 that i am thinking of specifically when i say
that these are articulated in a way that assume and centers whiteness
and privilege.

4
talks about inviting all, but without insisting that they will be
like us. whenever there is an us, even if you don’t have to become
like it, that us is the center and others may be invited but they
will always be others. From the work I have done in progressive
christian organizations i would say that the center is: white, upper
middle class to wealthy (possibly downwardly mobile), peace movement
liberal, middle aged, college educated, mainline protestant.

7
progressive christians are the ones who bring hope to the least of
these, not themselves the least of these. i fear that matthew 25 may
have been one of jesus’ most unfortunate teachings at least as i have
seen it play out in the lives of white, liberal christians (an
accusation, but also a confession), who are always serving people who
are less than themselves.

8
centers privilege by centering it’s renunciation. it is true that
everyone is privileged in some ways and oppressed in others,
but centering how you deal with privilege means centering people for
whom privilege is a primary experience of life. means maintaining the
margins and center of the wider culture.  went to the link to the
study guide for this point hoping that it would be expanded in a way
that the resistance to evil took precedence and muted this focus on
the privileged. certainly if a struggle for justice and against evil
was central, could be a sidenote that just received overemphasis here
. unfortunately giving up the idea that we are special becomes the
meaning of this point, which is not even a good definition of privilege.

i do think that a central task for christians is to deal with and let go of christian privilege, but to assume that all christians share a primary experience of privilege in their other identities

i do appreciate how these eight points are very concerned with focusing christian identity in action for justice and the questions and process of questioning instead of acceptance of a set of doctrinal assertions.

PERSECUTION FANTASIES

A function of privilege that christians seem to be particularly good at enacting is imagining that when our dominance is challenged even the tiniest bit we cry persecution and pretend that christians are an oppressed people.

The christian anti-defamation commission (cadc) is one organization that is setup to protect christians from these terrible wrongs. This video makes clear comparisons between what the cadc calls “the top ten instances of christian bashing in america, 2008” and actual oppression in the form of gay-bashing.