Illicit Relationships

There's a nice article in the Spokesman-Review today about my friends Jim and Andrea (Andy) CastroLang, and how their relationship began within the context of the Roman Catholic Church. They met when Jim was a priest and Andy a lay worker. Their relationship was clearly inappropriate within the context of the Church, which eventually led them to their affiliation with the United Church of Christ, where two people in love who desire to be married can also practice ministry.

As I read about Jim and Andy I wondered how many ministerial marriages began under circumstances that the church, then or now, regarded as illicit. My relationship with Sally was a clear violation that could've cost me my ministerial career before it began. That fact has led to my restraint in conversations about ministerial boundaries. I don't approve of predatory behavior among clergy or other professionals, but it seems that a bit of humility and forgiveness is always appropriate, no matter what insurance companies or the most (self)righteous among us say.

Of course the current fight in the larger culture isn't about priests marrying, or student ministers marrying members of the church they serve. It's about extending the right to marry to same sex couples. The critics contend their opposition is in defense of heterosexual marriage. Horse hockey. They also resort to sacred writ to bolster their arguments. Oh goodie. I always find myself moved by arguments wherein one religious group or another cite eternal law dictated by their Invisible Friend as justification for the oppression du jour.

This would be funnier if real people weren't so devastated by the discrimination, and if the groups that hold out for such oppression weren't so eager to extend their narrow views to public policy. Let me end by just saying that if you can read about Texas Gov. Rick Perry and his support from the American Family Association and not see the parallels with Sharia law, then you need to consider cutting back on your medication.

Debt-Deal Burger

Sally asked me to come up with an idea for supper last night. That was on my mind as I read about the efforts to achieve an agreement on raising the national debt ceiling. In the end I decided we could have Garden burger patty melts.

I sauteed some sweet onions in a large pan where I also browned the Garden burgers. This is a great, low-fat meal, right?

I then placed the patties on sliced artisan bread, topped them with the onions and a couple nice slices of Irish cheese. Then I grilled the whole thing. Low-fat burger, high-fat cheese? Well, it was a compromise, I admit.

Sticking to Principles

I consider myself to be a highly principled person. I also understand that living with other being requires some degree of give and take. Total lack of flexibility on one's part requires that the other always be the one that compromises, and thus unprincipled.

Of course, if you're a principled Republican dealing with unprincipled Democrats you needn't ever negotiate. Go ahead and sign pre-election pledges that make sure you'll never have to engage in any form of compromise. Compromise is for unprincipled scum, like Democrats.

As I was saying, I think of myself as being principled. This came out again in Washington DC when I attempted to use an ATM at a restaurant across from our hotel. I requested $100, and the ATM dispensed but $20, along with a note stating it was out of cash but that I was being charged $2.15 for the transaction anyway. That $2.15 was on top of the $2 that AAA charges every time I use my travel card. Thus my $20 withdrawal cost me $4.15!

Being highly principled, I was not about to accept such treatment. I asked for the manager of the restaurant and explained in great detail what had happened. I finished with a flourish, "Four dollars and 15 cents is an unacceptable price for withdrawing twenty dollars!" The manager was sympathetic: "I could reimburse you out of my own pocket." Being highly principled, I couldn't allow her to remedy the situation at her expense. Then she played the trump card...

"Would you like a cookie?"

Oh, those soft yet crispy oatmeal cookies we'd been enjoying! My resolve melted like butter on a summer sidewalk. "Sure, I'll take a cookie!" I left the restaurant $4.15 poorer, enjoying the richness of a fresh, oatmeal and rum raisin cookie.

Note to President Obama: Try baking some cookies before your next conversation with Speaker Boehner and the House Republicans. They are a highly principled lot, I know. But then, so was I.

Back Northwest

Sally and I just returned from 9 days in Washington, DC. The timing of the trip was not our decision, as Sally was attending the national gathering of the Soil and Water Conservation Society. I had always heard that DC was pretty hot in the summer. Yep, it was. The heatwave that gripped much of the country last week was in full force in DC. Triple digit temperatures combined with high humidity to produce heat indexes in the range of 115 degrees. Sweltering.

Still we enjoyed ourselves. Though we didn't do some things we might otherwise have attempted, such as bike riding or longer urban hikes, we got around quite a bit, carefully planning our outdoor activities to end before 10am. It was a successful strategy.

We returned to Spokane thankful that dry heat just isn't as debilitating as all that humidity. It was 91 for our jaunt home via buses 60 and 43, but seemed quite pleasant.

For a quick visual review of our trip, I posted some photos on facebook. The album can be accessed by clicking here.

Soccer - Women's World Cup

I just watched a Sunday sports event so riveting that Sally (!) even watched and got excited. The U.S. and Brazil, two tournament favorites, matched up in the quarterfinal. The first 90 minutes of regulation and 30 minutes of extra time merely featured an own-goal by Brazil, a controversial foul and red card on the U.S., a penalty kick save by U.S. goalie Hope Solo that was disallowed for some imaginary violation and re-awarded, and a second goal by Brazil following a missed offside call.

Thus the U.S. played 55 minutes short one player, trailing much of that time. It seemed the game was destined to be remembered as one the refs gave away. And then....

And to think I could have been in church this morning.

A Second Look at Stewardship

I've always been at odds with church fundraising philosophies. In the past few years church stewardship resources have taken the position, expressed one way or another, that they are "encouraging generosity." Reading between the lines, I understand them to say that their members are not being generous enough toward the church. I have yet to hear a church admit that it should be more generous to causes or people beyond it's own institutional needs.

I like to think that I am already a generous person. Indeed, I am capable of amazing acts of generosity. I am, however, somewhat discerning about the causes I support. For example, just cause you say you need my money seems a poor reason for me to fork it over.

If churches really wanted to bring out my generosity they should spend some time realigning their financial priorities toward saving the planet, changing the world, and challenging injustice rather than buying new furniture, or developing programs aimed at guilting me into being more generous.

On my commute to the church over the past two years I regularly drove by one or two individuals standing at the corner of 5th and Walnut with a cardboard sign stating their need. The individuals were representatives of a small group of regulars who took turns and shared signs. I know there are organizations in Spokane that provide services for the homeless (though admittedly they don't serve Coors Light) so I didn't contribute.

Perhaps those panhandlers should have offered drive-by educational sessions encouraging generosity. Right before distributing pledge forms....

Slavemakers III - A Clarification

A comment from my smarter younger brother prompts me to say a further word or two about corporations. Given my professional experience in not-for-profit organizations, both religious and secular, it might be surmised that I maintain a more positive assessment of such ventures. Nay, not so. Whereas for profit corporations make no bones about existing for the profit of their stockholders, nonprofits craft lofty mission statements that easily distract the uninformed into believing that they exist to serve higher purposes. The naked truth is that the overriding purpose of all organizations, including nonprofits, is to continue their own existence, mission be damned.

If churches just had access to more resources they would be able to... do much more of the little to which they already aspire. Witness the Crystal Cathedral. Churches spend the vast majority of their resources on staff and facilities. Vast. Given more money, they expand staff and facilities. Liberal religious groups generally act as if this is not true of them, but that is only because they are inept at attracting the numbers of members and dollars that more conservative groups leverage.

My brother's comment to the effect that corporations simply reflect the sorry human condition raises a significant question for me. Who is responsible for, or even responsive to, the question of the greater good? Corporations in the U.S. and the world do exactly what they say they will do, which is maximize the profit of their shareholders. They utilize their power and resources in the public sphere in that pursuit. Rather than blaming the corporations, I should ask why we allow any group that is not committed to the greater good to exercise such influence. And what is the greater good? And who the hell are we?