It was such a great pleasure for me to be going someplace with my father. The first time we went, he taught me how to keep track of the game on a little card, recording the hits, walks, etc. for each inning. It seems the Pirates always played Cincinnati and they always lost, even though these were glory days when the Pirates won two National League pennants. The big stars were Paul Waner and his younger brother, Lloyd, known as “big poison” and “little poison.” My father always took those losses in his wonderful relaxed, resigned way. It was only a game.

After the game we went home to a special, delicious dinner that my grandmother had fixed. And I was happy. JJG

This talk is the second in a series of a talk I gave on December 2 of last year. That talk dealt with an intense experience I went through in May of 1958. That incident might be called many things, a spiritual awakening, a little satori, an epiphany, grace, or just a strong dose of feeling good. Last May 18 was the 50th anniversary of that event. The original intention of this talk was to compare that moment with similar events in the lives of other people, but with the unique difference that each of these events were preceded by immensely different circumstances than those I faced on that evening in 1958. There were many from which to choose but I finally narrowed it down to three divergent events- mine, which occurred during overwhelming stress, that of Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor which occurred during a stroke, and, should I dare be so presumptive, with that of Siddhartha, which occurred after years of intense spiritual seeking.

I thought the preparation for my first talk was difficult. At that time I suffered through a minimum of 15 revisions with countless tweakings in-between. However, this second talk is the end product of having written11 entirely different talks. That is, I wrote 10 completely different presentations, not just versions of a particular talk, before arriving at this one. Soon it became obvious that there is an awful lot I wanted to share but just as obviously I knew I couldn’t share it all. And for the eleventh time I asked myself what on earth it was it that I wanted to try to present in 20 minutes or so.

Ultimately I found a satisfying answer when I looked anew to the original May 18, 1958 experience for an answer. It then became apparent there were three elements in that experience that seem important to address as well as contrast with the other two people:

First, there was the intense psychological pressure I was feeling that day. I won’t repeat the whole picture here other than to say that I became aware of what I was doing to myself late in the evening on May 18 with my despondent thoughts and self accusations. On the spot I resolved to quit torturing myself and further resolved to face only what each moment had in store for me from then on- that is, to get out of my head and live in the here and now. Thus, there is that which precedes such moments of heightened awareness.

The second element was the sense of sudden lightness on my right shoulder. It was almost as though I had been touched compassionately after expressing rage, as an agnostic, at any would be God in the universe for allowing so much suffering in the world, namely mine, that of refugees with whom I had been working, and the ordinary German people I had met and befriended who had undergone the completely unnecessary, horrendous fire-bombings of World War II.

And lastly, there was the absolutely exhilarating joy and sense of peace I experienced following these first two incidents. This resulted in a sense of oneness with the whole natural world and humanity that lasted for months-and has continued off and on to this day. Since that day I have explored the countless ways this and similar experiences in others could be viewed through psychological, religious, philosophical and spiritual eyes. I believe there are pivotal moments or epiphanies, if you will, in the lives of people that change their perspectives and existence completely. This was one of mine. But perhaps even more importantly, this potential for sudden shifts in awareness lies within us all as our true inner nature. So that is my conclusion up front almost before we get started.

Let us deal with the second element first, that of the sensation of a hand being placed on my shoulder. It is more anomalous than the other two elements in terms of finding it explicitly discussed in the epiphanies of others who have written about their experiences. And it is the more difficult one to entertain at all as a religious event in front of a largely humanistic group of people such as you. Perhaps it would be acceptable to suggest the phenomenon was probably a proprioceptive, physiological response to the release of tremendous tension in my shoulder muscles. After all, I have subsequently experienced the pleasant but explosive release of tension in various muscles during deep massage, although I don’t typically carry much tension in my shoulders. Some of you might even believe that it was a psychological event- maybe something like a positive, tactual hallucination brought on by stress. Although I will remind you I did not conceptualize it at the time as being a touch by God. The positive sensation merely followed the release of pent up anger toward a God-if He existed. My focus immediately following the incident was primarily on the expansive sense of oneness that opened.

Certainly it would not be difficult to relate this story in front of any standard Christian congregation. They would “know” it was the hand of God that touched me. And who am I to argue with them. Seriously! Being honest here. What do I know regarding the ultimate nature of the universe? However, for those who like to debate the various attributes of a presumptive anthropomorphic God, a case could be made for an immanent God being a part of, or within, my own body that expressed compassion through the sensation of my shoulder being touched.

Of course, other religions also have something to say about such events, as you can well imagine. The mystical heart is considered to be on the right side in Sufism where it is called the “Ruh”. In yoga, the right side spiritual heart inhabited by Rama is called the “Anahat” Chakria. It is a well known phenomenon that such right side sensations occur, as I experienced, when the mystical heart opens. So… pick and choose. One can reframe such experiences in so many disparate ways with various religious, spiritual, and psychological explanations that the original experience could loose all meaning. I am simply left with remembering how calming and reassuring the sensation was. At this point in my life I do not feel the need to analyze it any further. I have the reassurance of knowing that this also has been experienced by many other spiritual seeking people in widely different cultures.

Perhaps Rumi, the 13th century founder of the mystical order of Mawlawi Sufism, sums it up best:

Into my heart’s night
Along a narrow way
I groped; and lo! The light,
An infinite land of day.

Rumi also described the pure loving of the opened heart as the “astrolabe of God’s mysteries”. The astrolabe was a primitive sextant. I would further describe this aspect of the open heart as the fulcrum upon which all the major religions balance, be they Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or Buddhist. And it is the element with which the so-called ego struggles the most as it, under the guise of organized religion, tries to relegate it to a sacramental level, thus avoiding viewing it as the natural core of our being.

Now, the other two elements are going to be discussed in a different way. These are the nature of the pressures that led up to the oneness experience and the phenomena that occurred during the expansive moment I described in my last talk. As I said previously, I have written a lot, looking at such events from many perspectives. Rather than try to condense them, as I was previously straining to do for the past several weeks, I have decided to start with talk number 10 and read backwards in the talks, getting as far as I can today while leaving ample time for discussion. Then look at the other perspectives another time.

After all, in terms of backwards, I was considered a backwards kid when I entered the first grade of school- no doubt related to my having been a blue baby, thus having had a developmental delay in acquiring written language skills. And one has to ask, as I have, did that result in the two hemispheres of my brain functioning a bit differently than other kids from the start with regard to inductive versus deductive reasoning? Or said differently, with regard to lateral versus linear thinking? But more about these human differences in future talks when I get into my fascination with brain functioning. We are all very similar to each other with regard to how our brains function– and yet delightfully different. For example, when I look at a red object, is my brain experiencing the same thing as yours? The Isihara color-blindness charts indicate that the color receptors in different people’s eyes are seeing red in diverse ways. This being the case, how different are we from each other cerebrally while experiencing, remembering, and later trying to relate to others the more multifaceted events we might label as uplifting or spiritual? So, as the French say, Vive la difference.

One could say that what happened to me on May 18, 1958 was an accident. That is, I certainly could not claim that I had arrived at that moment of expanded awareness by having conscientiously and diligently following any spiritual path. Thus, the event was never an earned or a personal accomplishment on my part. Neither was it sought. It was the serendipitous result of intense psychological pressure that rather imploded in on me and wiped my memory banks clean of suffering. Using the analogy of a computer, my brain, the hard disc was reformatted that day.

By way of contrast, I would now like to relate the story of Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor. She also went through an accident of a different type that also erased her memory banks and just as unexpectedly opened her to expanded awareness. I’m sure many of you, such as Barbara, know about her.

Jill Taylor was a neuroanatomist working on brain research at Harvard University in 1996. On December 10 of that year she awoke in the morning at home with a severe headache, which was unusual for her. She seldom suffered from headaches. Ignoring it she jumped out of bed and climbed onto a piece of exercise equipment to begin her morning exercises. Looking down at her hand grasping the equipment she was surprised at how unique it looked. It looked like a primitive claw. Then she became fascinated with her body doing the exercising. At the same time she became captivated by all the energy she perceived about herself, felt very expansive, euphoric, and yet peaceful. When she tried to think, to understand what was going on, she realized she could not think in words. At that point, being knowledgeable about the brain, she recognized that she had suffered a stroke. A major blood vessel deep in the language area of the left side of her brain had burst. Understanding the seriousness of her condition, she struggled to use the telephone to seek help. She only succeeded in doing this very laboriously without even being able to recognize the number symbols on the dial. And without the ability to any longer speak or recognize the speech of others, contacted a colleague at work by making barking sounds over the phone.

During the subsequent ambulance ride to the hospital she continued in her euphoric, expansive state even though she recognized she was in grave danger of dying. At some point during that ride she even surrendered her spirit. If she lived or died it was all OK. She was identifying now with an energy force wider than her body anyway. She was no longer the disciplined neuroanatomist but felt one with the total universe. With a deep sense of inner peace she turned her physical being over to fate. Besides she could not figure out how she was ever going to squeeze the enormity of all of this energy, expanse and moment back into her body if she did recover.

Ultimately she did recover after 8 years of therapy and learned to walk and talk again. I invite you to read her inspiring story in her book My Stroke of Insight or look at her videos readily available to download for free on the internet. Known as the Singin’ Scientist she inspires audiences with not only her story but has found out how to share the energy and beauty of “being” experienced in the expanse of the present moment by openly using presence, and enthusiasm. She has not lost contact with that inner brilliance she called “the flow” during her stroke.

Hence, we can vicariously glimpse our own inner, brilliant nature by watching her videos. However, few of us would want to learn what she did by having a stroke-although I suspect some of you may have stumbled onto that route.

Still, there are other ways to glimpse this inner nature than through strokes or by spending years relentlessly pursuing a spiritual path-

Traumatic life situations can sometimes help us become aware of this inner nature. During my first presentation on December 2, I discussed the accidental epiphany that took place on May 18, 1958 as I walked despondently through a park in Kassel, Germany. At that point my dark mood reached such a crescendo that I recognized in my gut the futility of continuing the despairing thoughts and feelings generating this mood. I knew they were getting me nowhere and abandoned them completely with the resolution to focus on whatever the reality of the moment held from then on. This act has always struck me as one of committing emotional suicide to all my previous thoughts, feelings, beliefs about life, and expectations. There was a firm commitment to living in the present, although I wouldn’t have thought to word it quite that way at the time. Neither was it an act of will, but rather one of resignation. So it sometimes happens to people when they get so fed up with what is happening in their lives that they stop doing everything detrimental that they are doing to themselves. Then are amazed at how wonderful the world is perceived. Suddenly they are standing in the middle of an alive, beautiful, affectionate universe that is flowing in and out of itself as one living and breathing organism.

When I first heard Jill Taylor on a video talking about her surrendering in the ambulance I knew exactly what she was talking about. In that Kassel park I surrendered all the pressing thoughts, feelings, beliefs, and perceived obligations that made up what I thought of as my life, replacing them with the commitment to live only in the present, come hell or high water, or even nothing. But such a commitment to live only in the now does not mean to deny or ignore our thoughts and feelings. You have to be aware of something in order to surrender it unless, of course, a blood vessel bursts in your brain cutting you off from these thoughts.

It is important to note that there is a vast difference between surrender and denial. In surrender, as I am using it here, you are fully aware of what you are doing to yourself- right now- in this moment- as well as the futility of continuing your actions. And you surrender, stop. It’s not an act of will. You simply surrender to whatever might be present beyond the hyperbole of the circular feelings and thoughts you now understand you are entertaining. It’s sort of a “Well, it couldn’t be any worse!” type of conclusion.

Denial is an act of secretly hanging onto something you believe, feel, want, or are planning to continue doing anyway. Generally we push these denial decisions out of our consciousness. And these are the decision fulcrums upon which all this spiritual insight stuff rests… all this awareness stuff you now keep hearing about all over the place in books, on the radio, on Oprah’s program on TV, all over the internet– until it fairly comes out of our ears. Generally we are unaware of these decisions. However, when we do allow ourselves to become aware of them, we find that these decisions lie just below the surface of consciousness. All we need to do is become quiet and focus on what is going on inwardly. Then we will become cognizant of them… of all the thoughts, perceptions, beliefs, and feelings going on between our ears. Which allows us to see the fullness of what is really going… “what is”. This ability or facility is naturally there, in us. There’s nothing “supernatural” about it. And when it is freed we see the fullness of what is, be it the fathomless energy of our interconnected, dependently arising thoughts, a beautiful rose rooted in mother earth reaching for the sun, or a robin opening our hearts- everything around us and within us is filled with vibrant, loving spaciousness.

Oh well…. this freedom seldom last very long does it? Predictably it is not long before our linear, thinking mind, or our so-called egoic mind, fires up again. For many people this is only a matter of seconds. For example, you may have just become enthralled with the mystery behind the existence of a beautiful flower when just as suddenly something pushes a button inside your mind and you became conscious of the time and of the more “important” things you should be doing than standing there looking at some flower or other. Or you were snapped out of the expansive moment by a comment made by someone near you who feels the need to talk. And the moment is lost. Or you may have been looking up at a star filled sky in the evening and felt one with the spaciousness of the universe. But in the next instant you began to try and identify this or that constellation you had read was there and the sense of oneness evaporated as your thinking mind quickly took over.

This happens to all of us. And it happens so fast that most people do not recognize (1) that for a brief moment they were into an entirely different mode of awareness and that (2) there is a parallel between this type of lateral thinking or expanded awareness and what mystics variously call enlightenment, the numinous, grace, Satori, and so forth, or what some neuroscientists, such as Jill Taylor, speak of as right brain functioning-which is not exactly the entire picture. Actually the whole brain is fired up and alive in heightened awareness. There is scientific evidence of this. The Tibetan Buddhists refer to this expansive, state of brilliance as Rigpa. But I am out of time again, so my left brain informs me. At least I think it’s my left brain. I am left handed so there is a 40% chance that is my right brain speaking. I actually don’t know which side is running my mouth and I did my dissertation on this stuff.

However, I think you have a glimpse of what I will be talking about during the next talk or so.

June 22, 2008

When:Sunday Afternoon, July 13, 2008 beginning at 2:00 p.m.
Where:Grand Caverns Regional Park in Grottoes, VA Shelter #2
What: Local Harvest Potluck

(You’re encouraged to bring a dish featuring locally grown foods. Non-alcoholic beverages will be provided.)
Music by our own UU talent
Children’s activities
Volleyball competition
(HUU vs UUFW)

This event is a joint initiative of the Unitarian Universalist Fellowships of Harrisonburg and Waynesboro. All current and former UUs and friends in our area will be welcome. For more information call Kathleen Burke, 540-432-1303 or Florence Ferguson, 540-828-7048. To learn about the diverse recreational activities available at Grand Caverns, visit the website, www.uvrpa.org/grandcaverns.htm

13 April 2008

Serendipity caused this sermon. Last fall my bird club book club was reading Annie Dillard’s 1974 classic, Pilgrim at Tinker Creek, her Pulitzer prizing-winning account of her time living in a home near Hollins College and observing the natural world around her. Simultaneously, I was reading Henry David Thoreau’s Walden in preparation for visiting Concord and Walden Pond. Ah ha, I thought, look at the parallels! There’s a sermon here! And, of course, there is, but a thought about a sermon is one thing, and actually writing one’s thoughts in a sufficiently coherent fashion and making them mildly inspiring and perhaps a bit entertaining is quite another, and I have really struggled with this topic.

Speaking about Thoreau to this audience is especially daunting, since we have our own HUU Thoreau expert, Robin McNallie, in our midst, and I know that a number of you have visited Walden Pond yourselves. One of the first things I learned from the Thoreau Society, which is the oldest literary society dedicated to an American author, was that Henry David pronounced his last name as “thorough,” like a “thorough job,” but I think it will be easier on our ears if I continue in the error of my ways and refer to Henry David as Thoreau. I talked over this point with Robin, and he absolved me from my guilt and said that he did the same thing with his students: told them the correct pronunciation and then used the common one.

So why have these two books-Thoreau’s Walden and Dillard’s Pilgrim at Tinker Creek­-been so popular? I’ll tell you some more reasons later on, but first let me start with the most obvious reason: they inspire us to follow their example and get our own cabin in the woods and explore nature. If only we have our own cabin in the woods, then we too could observe nature carefully and deduce our place in the world. At least for us folks who have don’t have to worry daily about safety, shelter and food, that focus on figuring out our place seems to be a strong human concern. (As I was in a water aerobics class with Kathy and Charlie the other week and discussing this upcoming sermon, Kathy pointed out that to them it’s not a cabin in the woods but a boat in the bay, but you get the idea– a place to run away to.). I have a longtime friend who talked for years about buying a cabin in West Virginia to use at a getaway, and she finally did about five years ago. Apparently, just owning that cabin has scratched her cabin itch because since then she has spent just two nights in it.

When I visited Walden Pond, I had a number of surprises. If I had been in charge of naming stuff, I’d have called it Walden Lake-I was surprised how large it was, but I felt a little justified because Thoreau speaks of it as a small lake too. Speaking of sizes, I was also surprised by how small the replica of Thoreau’s cabin was and how small the statue of Thoreau himself was. The cabin is 15 by 10, the size that Thoreau built it, but to our eyes it looks just like one room. All three of these size surprises were a good lesson: size is a lesser factor in claim to fame and endurance than the resonance of ideas, and that, of course, is the kernel of Thoreau’s greatness.

Thoreau began his time at Walden on the Fourth of July, 1845, and ended on September 6, 1847-two years, two months, and two days. The cabin, which he built himself for a total cost of $28.12 and one-half cents, was about a mile and a half from Concord.[1] The guide who took me through the nearby Ralph Waldo Emerson house in Concord explained that Thoreau didn’t spend every night in his cabin. When the weather was really cold, he stayed in the Emerson’s spacious home and occasionally went to town to barter or buy supplies. At one point during his Walden Pond experience, Thoreau left the area entirely to visit Mount Katahdin in Maine. So Thoreau’s “little cabin experience” was certainly not that of a total hermit.

Although Walden wasn’t published for nearly eight years after Thoreau abandoned his cabin and wasn’t an immediate success, its reputation has steadily grown as readers recognized the importance of his ideas written in fine prose. I’m not proud about the fact that I spent nearly sixty-two years without ever having read Walden, though I could recognize many famous quotes from it.

Walden appealed to contemporary writer Annie Dillard at a much younger age than it did to me. Dillard, born like me in 1945, grew up in an affluent Pittsburgh family and attended Hollins College, in the southern end of the Shenandoah Valley, where she studied literature and creative writing. She married her writing teacher, poet R. H. Dillard, the person she said who taught her everything she knows about writing. In 1968 Annie Dillard received a Masters Degree in English from Hollins, and her forty-page thesis was about Walden Pond as “the central image and focal point for Thoreau’s narrative movement between heaven and earth.”[2] Although I’ve not read her thesis, I bet this following quote from Thoreau was fundamentally important to her work: He says of Walden, “A lake is the landscape’s most beautiful and expressive feature. It is earth’s eye; looking into which the beholder measures the depth of his own nature.”[3] Being a lover of lakes myself, I think Thoreau is right on target.

So maybe her study of Walden prompted Dillard to go to her own “little cabin in the woods,” but it is worth mentioning that in 1971 when she was 26 she had pneumonia and nearly died. I’m firmly convinced that such a life-threatening experience like that can dramatically change the subsequent course of one’s life. Dillard decided that as a result of her near demise that she needed to experience life more fully and subsequently moved to Tinker Creek. As her book begins, she tells the reader what she is attempting: “I propose to keep here what Thoreau called a ‘meteorological journal of the mind,’ telling some tales and describing some of the sights of this rather tamed valley, and exploring, in fear and trembling, some of the unmapped dim reaches and unholy fastnesses to which those tales and sights so dizzyingly lead.”[4] She wrote Pilgrim based on the journals she had kept about her Tinker Creek experience. When published, her book was almost immediately recognized as a masterpiece and won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 1975. Although I haven’t read all of Dillard’s subsequent work, I think she has never been able to equal the success of Pilgrim. I suspect that winning a Pulitzer when you’re not quite thirty may set a person up for a standard of future achievement that is just hard to meet.

Just like Thoreau, Dillard chose a “little cabin in the woods” that was not in what we would call real wilderness. Dillard’s wilderness experience took place in a house surrounded on three sides by Tinker Creek, but apparently the creek runs through a somewhat suburban neighborhood. While Dillard lived at Tinker Creek and intensely observed nature around her, again like Thoreau she didn’t spend all her time there. She spent a lot of time in the libraries researching various topics of interest, and her book shows it. Pilgrim has far more information than you would even want to know on a Sunday morning about factoids of the natural world like parasites, a mosquito’s biting a copperhead, the number of muscles in the jaw of a goat moth, and a frog being sucked to death by a giant water bug.

I’ve concluded that three factors have made both Walden and Pilgrim such enduring classics and worth our time this morning. The first is their literary organization and style. Both authors are superb writers and structured their books in a similar fashion. Each book is organized around four seasons of life in the woods, yet both authors actually spend more than a year living in their respective little cabins and wrote their books over a larger expanse of time. To my mind Thoreau sounds pretty nineteenth century-but that’s simply a given. Thoreau tends to an epigrammatic, a terse style, while Dillard’s writing style is complex and beautifully descriptive. Because it’s so complex, I asked Pat to do a handout of some of the quotes from both this morning. You can easily see how their writing differs, and overall I’d estimate that Dillard uses two words to every one of Thoreau’s. But writing style is not why we come to the UUs.

The second factor of their appeal is that both authors offer us a window into natural science. Thoreau’s science was actually pretty original. For example, he carefully measured the depth of Walden Pond and made lots of notations about the fish in it. He was a dedicated journal keeper and became such a careful note taker about plants that professional botanists today consider his notes as a reliable source of information about plant life 160 years ago.[5] Based on his data, they have concluded that plants bloomed a couple weeks later then than now. Dillard too was a scientist, but in her case, noticing something carefully in the woods apparently made her run off to the library to research on it. She had a microscope in her cabin and reports on her examination of pond water. Her stories are fascinating and amply support the cosmic questions that she asks, but she is a user of science, not a creator of it.

But it’s probable that neither outstanding literary style nor science by themselves t have made Walden and Pilgrim classics. Instead, both authors connect human lives and nature in ways that have universal appeal. Thoreau’s themes are ones that still resonate today: self-reliance, contemplation, and closeness to nature that transcends the supposedly crass existence of most people. We look to Thoreau as a beacon towards the simple life.

Dillard’s themes, on the other hand, are more complex and more overtly spiritual; she was reared a Presbyterian, but while writing Pilgrim she was thinking enough out of the Protestant box to name her goldfish for a famous UU, William Ellery Channing. In the 1990s she converted to Roman Catholicism. In Pilgrim she looks at nature and makes some not-always-pleasant connections between her observations and the divine, eco-theology, as one scholar as named it. She asks all kinds of hard questions about the divine. How can people be moral in an amoral world? Why would a compassionate deity create a world so fertile that billions must necessarily die in order for the world to continue? What if God doesn’t care any more about us than we do for all the death that surrounds us daily?[1] One of her most telling points for me was her chapter about being nibbled. She compared the beauty and wholeness of spring insects and leaves to their frayed state in August. Everything alive gets nibbled. We may be perfect at birth, but life is gonna nibble us until we die.[2]

So there are three good reasons to cherish both Walden and Pilgrim. They are beautifully written, they offer us an accessible glimpse into science in the world around us, and they make connections between the natural world and the divine. Yet, beyond those, there is the simply appeal of going off into our own “little cabin in the woods.” But let me end with a caution.

The beauty of creating a world within a book is that you include and exclude what you want, and both authors don’t tell us about all the inconveniences of life maintenance even in a little cabin in the woods. Although Thoreau grew some of his own food, I was surprised to learn from Wikipedia that his mother cleaned his cabin and brought him meals. Oh, if the rest of us were so lucky to have that kind of assistance with our daily lives, then we too could have more time to ponder our place in nature! Although Dillard was apparently married during the time she wrote Pilgrim, there is no mention of her husband and no reference to trying to be self-sufficient. Before beating ourselves up for not having the perseverance to live as simply as Thoreau and Dillard did in their little cabins, we need to remember that their books are edited accounts of the authors’ lives. To some degree it’s our imaginations that make life in the woods so simple.

So I don’t think that we should give up our fantasies for running off to our own versions of a little cabin in the woods. We all need time to get away from daily responsibilities and make time to think about our place in the world at large. The other week I decided for the sake of writing an authentic sermon that I too needed a little cabin in the woods experience all by myself, so I rented a heated cabin at Lost River State Park in West Virginia, just about an hour from here. No television, no phone. Now, three nights in a cabin, of course, is a lot different than a couple years, but it taught me some lessons.

So what did I get from it? An escape from distraction-no major housework to do, no cats to tend, no mail or email. I hiked each day, and it was the first time I had hiked much in late winter/early spring. . Since most trees at Lost River are deciduous, the forest looked a bit naked, and I could see long distances. Some trails were still so leaf-covered that I had to look twice to make sure I stayed on them. The only green around came from two sources. The first was the moss; if I had been Annie Dillard, it would have sent me scurrying to the library to learn about the different kinds. Is moss an evergreen or just an early bloomer? I still don’t know, but the brown of the forest highlighted the beauty of the moss. The other source of green was the mountain laurel, which I didn’t know until then was an evergreen. So learning some stuff about nature was fun. However, the plague of flies in my cabin and the abundance of green logs that made very unsatisfactory fires weren’t fun at all. Quite frankly, that particular little cabin experience left much to be desired.

Thoreau and Dillard offer us worthwhile and stimulating models for thinking about nature and our place in it .They offer us the hope that “getting away from it all” will give us new insight. Spring is definitely here, and it’s a good time for us to step once again into nature and enjoy the world around us. Let’s each make an opportunity this year to enjoy our own little cabins in the woods and ponder our places in nature.

[1] “Fecundity,” p. 167.
[2] “The Horns of the Altar,” p. 242.
[1] “Economy,” Walden, pp.48 and 49..
[2] “Annie Dillard,” Wikipedia.
[3] “The Ponds,” Walden.
[4] Pilgrim at Tinker Creek (New York:HarperPerennial, 1974), p. 11.
[5] Michelle Nijhuis, “Teaming Up with Thoreau,” Smithsonian, October, 2007, p. 64.

READINGS:

The first reading this morning, about the Fellowship movement within UUA, is taken from the most recent UU World magazine and a new book, The Fellowship Movement: A growth strategy and its legacy.

The story of the growth of Unitarian Universalism in the last sixty years is largely the story of the fellowship movement and its aftermath. Between 1948 and 1967 the main growth strategy . . . was to plant small, autonomous, lay-led congregation just about everywhere ten or more religious liberals could be brought together. (For those of you who wonder, HUU was founded in 1991.) 30% of the UUA’s current congregations started as fellowships during those two decades. Some are still small and lay-led, (such as ours). Others have evolved into full-service congregations.

Judgments about the success of the fellowship movement run the spectrum from wildly positive to extremely negative. The positive views are that along with growing the denomination, fellowships brought innovation, vitality and lay leadership into a religious community greatly in need of fresh air. At the other end of the spectrum is the view that the fellowship movement spawned small, introverted . . . groups that did not want to grow or welcome newcomers and did not identify with the larger denomination.

Fellowships brought freedom. The shadow side of this freedom is anarchy-a lack of order and structure, and the inability to create and sustain a center. When each person is free to create his or her own religion, there is no grounding, no common core.

The second readings are quotes from the Unitarian Universalist Association’s website about shared ministry:

Unitarian Universalism, as a democratic faith, affirms the “priesthood of all believers;” we are all lay ministers, whether or not we choose to be professional religious leaders. This belief in the “priesthood of all believers” is central to who we are as a religious movement.

The task before us is to foster and develop a ministering congregation. A ministering congregation … has an intentional and ongoing “shared ministry program,” a process for helping lay people discover their gifts and live out their ministries in the church and in their daily lives.

When Unitarian Universalists speak of ministry, we are describing what we all do together as members of our faith communities. We have ordained ministers in our tradition, of course, but those who serve their world in the name of the church extend far beyond the clergy. Though we are a diverse population, a common truth for Unitarian Universalist communities remains: regardless of the size or constellation of the congregation, the ministry in our faith communities is mutual. … As people of faith, our ministry involves taking care of one another, maintaining an emotional and spiritual connection throughout life’s changes. As we engage in mutual ministry, we feed one another. And in so doing, we are able in turn to lend our succor to the world. Our pastoral presence, our religious education, and our social action are all grounded in the ministry we give to and receive from one another.

Our Spiritual Center

by David Lane

The spiritual center of our community.

Think about that phrase for a moment: The spiritual center of our community.

My guess is that a Methodist or a Catholic might well be able to respond to that phrase in an instant. And probably for good reason. What centers their religious communities is as clear and exact as the creeds and confessions they affirm every Sunday morning. Statements of belief, declarations of faith, these are the things that in large measure define what Methodists or Catholics have in common, what defines the meaning of membership in these (and many other) faith communities.

And that’s the main reason I think that UUs have trouble with the concept of a spiritual center. It’s not that we don’t have a spiritual center. But we know deep down that whatever it is that we truly most sincerely, most authentically believe, that belief is not, and could not be, and in fact should not be, the spiritual center of a community of seekers, of those for whom there is indeed ONE LIGHT, but MANY WINDOWS.

So if it’s not belief, what is it that draws us together on Sunday mornings like this one? Can something other than belief be the basis of a religious community?

Rabbi Jesus told a marvelous story two thousand years ago. About a Samaritan. You know the story well. A religious heretic whose views and values were at odds with the religious establishment in Jerusalem. A man attacked by thieves and left for dead by the roadside. An act of compassion and generosity entirely outside the controlling stereotypes and ideologies of the day.

Clearer than any creed or confession, this parable may well illustrate the nature of true religion. Not in the apparent learning or wisdom of the priest and the Levite who never stopped to help. But in the decency and direct action of a fellow human being, the true “neighbor,” the true exponent in this parable of the Torah’s injunction to love neighbor as self.

So perhaps the spiritual center of a religious community is not just or even mainly to be found in the words we may use to define it. But in the deeds of compassion that connect us as neighbors, in the acts of service and support through which we discover our better selves.

Another way of saying this is to use the word MINISTRY. Another difficult word, I admit. A word many UUs have trouble with (like prayer, and worship, and faith). But a word worth reclaiming perhaps.

For ministry means to serve and support. And that is exactly what the Samaritan did. He didn’t teach or preach except by example. He recognized simple human need and acted.

In the same way as the parable does, I submit that what our mission statement calls us to do (both for each other and for the larger communities around us) is ministry.

That mission statement doesn’t ask as to believe the same things. Instead it asks us to act for a common purpose, to serve and support each other in work we can best do together:

• the work of sense-making, of finding meaning in a world of change and uncertainty,

• the work of care-giving, of connecting with compassion to the needs of others,

• the work of justice-seeking, of building a better world for the whole human family.

This is the work of every religious community, ours included. And supporting that work, serving the community that does that work, is what ministry is.

And that’s what I’m proposing this morning: that we recognize our spiritual center at HUU as the ministry of common tasks we covenant to do when we join the HUU community. In the opportunities for service we encounter here, we minister to each other in small and large ways, and in that ministry (just as the Samaritan did) we may find the spiritual center that connects us and binds us together.

And we do see it in small and large ways right here on Sunday morning, don’t we?

• The flowers one member brings for us, week in and week out
• The coffee one member brews for us after every service
• The music that choir and soloists regularly offer
• The new kitchen floor, sanctuary lighting, and podium sound system all member-installed
• The child care and children’s religious education members regularly provide
• The monthly potluck dishes prepared in dozens of kitchens
• The services themselves presented by members and friends 52 Sundays a year

And that’s only the most visible part of the story. Think of the decision-making, the money-raising, the forward planning, the personal investment of time, energy, and talent, in short, the huge labor that goes into support of the life and well-being of this congregation. And for the most part all of it done quietly, behind the scenes.

This is real ministry. And it is clearly shared ministry. We do it together because our size and needs require it. But we also share ministry because our principles demand it.

• “Inherent worth and dignity of every person” (our first principle) suggests that everyone has something valuable to contribute to the work of our community.

• “Encouragement to spiritual growth” (our third principle) suggests that everyone has something valuable to gain from contributing to that work.

• “Use of the democratic process” (our fifth principle) reminds us that in ministry the opportunity to serve and contribute is open to all.

Thus, ministry excludes no one - it belongs to everyone by virtue of membership in the community. This means all members are ministers, distinguished only by their abilities and gifts. What other denominations have called the Priesthood of All Believers or the Ministry of Gifts, is just precisely what UUs have come to call Shared Ministry. Listen to what our association leaders have to say about it:

• From Our Professional Ministry: Structure, Support and Renewal (1992):

Unitarian Universalism, as a democratic faith, affirms the “priesthood of all believers;” we are all lay ministers, whether or not we choose to be professional religious leaders. This belief in the “priesthood of all believers” is central to who we are as a religious movement.

• From “Our Ministry,” in The Unitarian Universalist Pocket Guide (2004):

When Unitarian Universalists speak of ministry, we are describing what we all do together as members of our faith communities. . . As we engage in mutual ministry, we feed one another. And in so doing, we are able to turn to lend our succor to the world. Our pastoral presence, our religious education, and our social action are all grounded in the ministry we give to and receive from one another.

• From “Sharing Ministry” (www.uua.org > Home > Congregational Life):

Where formerly people may have thought of themselves as “just a volunteer” or one of a nameless group of people performing a task, now, more and more, members of Unitarian Universalist congregations understand that ministry is something shared by all who are part of a spiritual community; a way to put faith into action for the benefit of the church and the wider community.

In that new understanding, our spiritual center becomes clear. Ministry is the work we do together as a religious community. And in that work we find “truth and meaning,” reflections of the One Light we all see, but see differently through the Many Windows of our hearts and minds.

Our Vision

by Bernie Mathes

Last spring the HUU Board created the Lay Ministry Task Force to explore ways to provide ministerial support to the congregation while we are financially unable to hire a minister. I want to be sure to acknowledge the valuable input from Carol Quintero, who was initially on the Task Force, but had to withdraw this fall. The Task Force wants to thank the HUU Board for their support as we developed the vision for the Shared Ministry Team. We expect that team will carry forth this vision that our task force has created and the board has endorsed.

Our task force spoke with numerous ministers, both within and beyond Unitarian Universalism, read much from the Unitarian Universalist Association, and spoke with HUU committee chairs. We soon moved from “lay ministry” to “shared ministry,” a phrase, as we understand it, that applies to all who do the work of religious community, both to lay members and to ministry professionals. UUA documents that explain the term are very clear in identifying ministry not just as the work of specialized individuals, but as the work of every congregation member, seminary-trained or not.

We discussed the roles that ministers traditionally play in a congregation. We looked at the existing structures and strengths of HUU. We tried to imagine a Shared Ministry Team that would build on those structures and strengths. We consulted with the board, using them as a sounding board and seeking their guidance. The result of our 10 months of meetings and conversations is before you now.

The mission statement for the Shared Ministry Team that will be established is in your order of service. Allow me to read it:

The mission of the HUU Shared Ministry Team will be to increase coherence, consistency, and communication in the on-going work of our congregation:

• By building on our congregation’s past achievements and current strengths
• By supporting the efforts of members and friends to address our congregation’s key religious tasks (sense-making, care-giving, and justice-seeking)
• By strengthening connections between HUU and the larger social and religious communities in which it exists.

We imagine a team of three congregation members who will take on this mission. They will serve three-year terms. During the start up years we will add a fourth and fifth member to allow each member a full three year term.

The shared ministry team will be a TEAM, meeting regularly and working collaboratively to further the spiritual growth of our fellowship. They will support committees in their work, looking for synergy and collaboration among congregational organizations; they will help congregants coordinate life passage events; they will maintain connections to our UU district and the UUA; they will ensure that HUU is represented at interfaith meetings and will keep the well-being of the entire congregation foremost in their priorities. Other responsibilities are listed in the handout.

We have also indicated what they will not do-they will not share in the governance of the congregation or direct activities of the committees, they will not routinely serve as Sunday speakers; they will not provide psychological counseling, nor will they be salaried.

I want to take a moment to discuss how the Shared Ministry team will be selected. We have listed the qualifications in the handout. We invite all who are interested to submit an application in May. The Task Force will interview applicants and refer qualified candidates to the Board. We hope to have these three individuals in place by the fall, so they can plan their structure and working relationships before they formally begin their duties in January.

We in no way propose or endorse the idea that by creating a Shared Ministry Team the ongoing collective ministry of this amazing congregation will be diminished. In fact, we hope that with the shared ministry team’s support, this collective ministry will grow and thrive.

We are sure there will be many questions about our proposal. We have scheduled a community dialogue session for April 20, two weeks from today, after the service. That will give everyone time to read the proposal and formulate your questions and comments. If you chose, you can email your questions and comments to the task force prior to the dialogue and we will answer them on the 20^th. Our email address is

shared-ministry@huuweb.org

This has been an exciting and exhausting process for us. We went from exquisite breakfasts to basic bagels and coffee as we moved from task force members to friends. In our search we did not find a comparable program. HUU will be forging new ground and our new Shared Ministry Team will help create this new vision.

For many years, as a Lutheran pastor, on Easter Sunday, the first words I would say were, “Christ has risen!” The congregation would answer in reply, “he is risen, indeed!” After nearly 25 years of Lutheran ministry I discovered Unitarian Universalism and eventually transferred my ordination. Now, as a UU minister, I wonder what I can say on Easter Sunday!

I know that, if I were to say, “Christ has risen!” you wouldn’t know what to say in reply! Not only would you not know the proper response, you would probably be rather taken aback that, in a UU Congregation I would say “Christ has risen!” Those of you who grew up UU and haven’t visited many Christian congregations on Easter Sunday haven’t heard those words year after year.

I wonder what words Unitarian Universalists might use! About the best I can come up with is, “Spring is here!” and your reply would be, “Spring is here, indeed!” But, compared with “Christ has risen!” sayings about the return of spring and the blooming of daffodils just doesn’t seem all that powerful.

At the same time, I’m aware that the words “Christ has risen!” present some major challenges to the UU belief system which most of us have! Even in my Lutheran days I was convinced that Easter is not just about a resuscitated corpse. Easter Sunday was a challenge for me then too! So, as has been the case for many years, I’m still having difficulty finding the appropriate words for Easter Sunday!

The folks who invited me to be here this morning are aware of the difficulties which Easter Sunday presents to Unitarian Universalists, so they offered me the challenge of being here today, and, being one to take up a challenge,　I’ve been searching for words. This caveat is my way of saying that my words today will be inadequate, and may present a bit of a challenge to us all. So, the challenge of Easter Sunday isn’t just to me it’s to everybody here!

With that said, let’s see where we go.

It seems to me that Easter Sunday demands a look at the Easter story the story of the Resurrection. I’m convinced that there are some surprises about that story a problem is that we’ve heard it frequently and others have used the stories in problematic ways, so that we have trouble with Easter. But, being up to a challenge, let’s look again!

Now, whenever I look at the Christian scriptures, I have some basic understandings as a starting place. I believe that the Christian scriptures evolved.

These are accounts which:

• were at first passed on by word of mouth the oral tradition;
• were written by several different people;
• were written over a period of about 100 years;
• were written by people who were not eye witnesses of Jesus of Nazareth;
• and were not intended to be anything like a modern news report.

In addition, in the case of the Gospels, the writers of Matthew and Luke had the earlier Gospel of Mark in front of them when they wrote their own Gospels. There isn’t time to get into all that many scholars, after deep study, have come to such conclusions. This poster is a visual depiction of the relationships among the synoptic Gospels Mark, Matthew and Luke. This depiction helps me appreciate some of the complexities of the Gospels.

My starting point in approaching the Gospels is that Mark was written first, and that when the writers of Matthew and Luke wrote, they had “Mark” in front of them. They had other sources as well, and, Mark was the common element. The obvious question then becomes, “why would Matthew & Luke use other words to tell their story?” Using these approaches of the Christian scriptures I’d like to look at the Easter
story with you.

Use your imagination with me and imagine that we have arrived at Jesus’ tomb. Only in our imagining, let’s arrive about 20 years after Jesus’ death. We, as early believers, or as the merely curious, gather at a place where we think Jesus of Nazareth was buried. There we hear someone tell a story that goes something like this:

“After Jesus of Nazareth had been crucified on Friday, Very early on the first day of the week Mary Magdalen (and some other women) went to the tomb when the sun had risen. They saw that the stone was rolled back.

And entering the tomb they saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe; and they were amazed. And he said to them: “Do not be amazed. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, the crucified. He has been raised. He is not here. See the place where they laid him.” (16:5-6)

And the women went out and fled from the tomb; for trembling and astonishment had come upon them. And they said nothing to anyone because they were afraid.”

If you can imagine that scene, of being with this band of pilgrims who had gathered at this holy shrine, what would be your reaction? My guess is that first you would be surprised at what you didn’t hear. Where is the mention of the two angels, and the earthquake, and the Roman guards and the Risen Christ meeting the disciples? Well, those aren’t part of the story yet. We have imagined ourselves to have gathered before those were added. This is all　 the story we have heard. What is our reaction?

What we in our imaginations have tried to do is go behind Mark’s written narrative and get at the oral story which preceded it. Modern scholarship has worked at that, partly by subtracting elements that Mark seems to have added to the earlier oral tradition. What we have imagined hearing is what scholars hypothesize to be the earliest oral tradition.

We modern inquirers must remember that this “earliest oral tradition” still doesn’t claim to be an historical, newspaper-type account. What we have heard is a story of faith, … and our time at the tomb continues.

We hear the story teller proclaim “He has been raised,” then point to the tomb, and say “He is not here, see the place where they laid him.”

What is the impact of the message we have heard? “He isn’t here….”　 In other words, this pilgrimage to the tomb was meant to end with the awareness that our pilgrimage isn’t the point. In many ways the pilgrimage is fruitless - you can’t find the living among the dead!

In our imaginative trip we’ve taken a step behind Mark, but we still aren’t at an historical record - and we can’t get to that yet (if we ever can at all). What we can do is explore what the story is saying to those gathered at the tomb.

When we focus on the story and its impact we find that there are two levels; that the story has a double focus. The more obvious level, the explicit focus is on certain events - namely, the visit of some women to Jesus’ tomb on the Sunday after he was killed. The second level, the implicit focus is on us - we who have heard the story. Now the spotlight is on us, the listeners. If we are among the merely curious, we may ask what effect this story was meant to have on the people listening.

What would it be like to hear that the women who went to the tomb were told that Jesus had been raised and have it pointed out that the tomb was empty and then be so frightened and confused that they flee, saying nothing? We could reflect on what wasn’t said, but, let’s use our imaginations a bit more and return to the time when Mark took this earlier oral account and retold it in written form. What did he keep? What did he add? Why? What of the traditional accounts is still missing?

So we come to “Easter According to Mark: the written tradition.”

As it appears in Mark 16, the Easter story is succinct, fleeting, and troubling. For one thing most of what Christian traditional piety associates with Easter isn’t there! There is no mention of guards at the tomb, no emergence of Jesus, no burial shroud. Mark does not describe Jesus’ resurrection. It would be 100 years later before there was an attempt to describe Jesus’ emergence from the tomb – and that account did not make it into scripture!

There are some surprises in Mark!

Is it surprising to you that there is no text in the New Testament which describes Jesus’ resurrection or claims that there were any witnesses to it? Is it surprising that the story ends without the disciples believing that Jesus of Nazareth had been raised from the dead?

Notice Mark’s ending. Mark concludes with the confusion of the three women who had gone to visit Jesus’ grave. The original ending of Mark was with verse 8, with the women running out, beside themselves with terror and not saying anything to anybody. That ending was so surprising, so troubling to somebody in the early church that eleven more verses were added - the “second ending.” (Even back then people preferred a “happy ending.”!)

It is this second ending which brings Mark into closer harmony with the more elaborate stories in the later Gospels of Matthew, Luke and John.

But, let’s not get ahead of ourselves, let’s revisit the story as Mark’s gospel originally had it.

Mark 16:1-8

1. (Saturday night)

And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might go and anoint Jesus. (16:1)

II. (Sunday morning)

And very early on the first day of the week they went to the tomb when the sun had risen. (16:2)

III. (The stone)

And they were saying to one another, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the door of the tomb?” And looking up, they saw that the stone was rolled back, for it was very large.” (16:3-4)

IV. (The Two-fold Message)

A. And entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe; and they were amazed. And he said to them: “Do not be amazed. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, the crucified. He has been raised. He is not here. See the place where they laid him.” (16:5-6)

B. “But go, tell his disciples, and especially Peter, that he goes before you to the Galilee; there you will see him, as he told you.” (16:7)

V. (The Reaction)

And they went out and fled from the tomb; for trembling and astonishment had come upon them. And they said nothing to anyone because they were afraid. ((16:8)

That’s the original ending - rather abrupt. Instead of joy and proclamation there is confusion, fear, and silence.

Compare Mark’s written story with what you’ve heard during most of your life time. What isn’t in Mark? Any surprises yet?

One surprise in the original Mark is that the risen Jesus does not appear at all! According to the original Gospel of Mark, after Jesus was sealed in the tomb he was never seen again. There is that statement from the young man that they would see Jesus in the Galilee, but when? Was that to be in a few days, a few weeks, or at the end of time? We aren’t told. 　In any case, Mark doesn’t mention it any more. The women aren’t told to tell the disciples to go to the Galilee, and judging from the women’s reaction, they didn’t tell anyone, so no one went. It some ways that prediction of a future appearance seems to be sort of “tacked on.” Mark’s focus and emphasis is on the announcement that Jesus has been raised, he is absent and he is unavailable.

So, what do we have? We have some surprises!

If some women did discover an empty tomb on Easter Sunday morning, that discovery led to confusion rather than faith. Mark is clearly saying that the empty tomb isn’t the origin of the Christian faith. It isn’t an empty tomb which creates faith.

Mark’s story raises as many questions as it answers.

In fact, it puts Easter in the interrogative mode that’s something that we UUs can appreciate! That’s one of the reasons I resonate with the story as it is in Mark it’s much more evocative - perhaps it can be a bit provocative for us.

What this approach to the Easter story does for me is provide me with an invitation. The writer of Mark surprises me and leaves me with the question, “what will you decide?”

Basically, “what will you decide about the way Jesus of Nazareth talked of God?”

What Jesus had said was that the basic Power of the universe, the Kingdom of Heaven, God, is inclusive, caring, and is to lead to hope, co-operation among people and tender care of the earth. (I know, that is a simplified version, I’ll have to save more for another time.)

A summarized way of saying this is that Mark is inviting us to come to what could be called “Christ consciousness.”

Now, knowing something about Unitarian Universalists, I suspect that many of you will find the words “Christ consciousness” somewhat “suspect.”! I also suspect that I could talk about Buddha consciousness” without any problems! So, would you at least temporarily suspend your disbelief and hang in there with me?

What I mean by “Christ consciousness” is the awareness that, when you consider the teachings of the historical Jesus of Nazareth, when you are open to being touched and transformed by their power, a “Word-Event happens” 　you come to a particular understanding of the universe, of the nature of reality, of the way things are to be among people and how we live on the earth.

We come to understand that “there is that of the divine in each person.”

My “Christ consciousness” is my recognition of that divinity within myself andvevery other human being. (I know, I also have “Buddha consciousness” and “Shiva consciousness” but this is Easter Sunday, so I’m talking about Christ consciousness today!)

Remember that there is the historical Jesus of Nazareth and there is the Risen Christ of faith.

Easter marks the transition point, the move from simply appreciating the remarkable life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, to being willing to live your life based on those teachings.

“Christ consciousness” describes the inner awareness of those who are willing to be thus transformed.

I am aware that my words are again inadequate. We are at a mystical level here seeking to put words onto an experience of the divine.

With the understanding that the words are not adequate, for me “Christ consciousness” is an awareness of our unity with God.

There is a sense of “Oneness” with all that is, with all of reality.

I don’t have that sense of Oneness all the time, and, sometimes, I do have glimpses of it. Those are good times! That sense of Oneness assures me that things are going to be all right, The universe is a friendly, hospitable place, There is a basic purpose and meaning to life. There is an end point omega point toward which we are evolving. (I know, there are many sad, difficult, hurtful, painful, tragic, unnecessary things which happen and, most of those are what people do to each other and themselves.)

There are lessons to learn along the way,

And, at the heart of the universe, there is “justice, equity and (gracious) compassion in human relations.” There is acceptance of one another, There is the “goal of world community with peace, liberty and justice for all.” There is the “direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder which moves us to a renewal of spirit and an openness to the forces which create and uphold life.” There are the virtues of gentleness, patience.

You may recognize that some of those words are quotes are from the UU Principles & Purposes.

What I’m suggesting is that, one way to describe a part of what our Principles and Purposes talk about is the phrase “Christ consciousness.”

That “direct experience of transcending mystery and wonder” that’s one way, for some people, to talk about Christ Consciousness.

Because I am conscious of the divinity within me (my Christ consciousness), I am simultaneously aware of the divinity within you.

I don’t always have that Christ consciousness when I lose that consciousness and then return to it that is “resurrection”! It feels like coming to life,　 again”! It seems to me that that return is what Easter is about!

Whatever you tell yourself about the original Easter story, the fact is, some pretty cowardly people folks who deserted their dear teacher when he was arrested some pretty cowardly people came to be full of courage. They came to base theirlives on the way Jesus of Nazareth had taught them. They came to Christ Consciousness.

Then, rather than just telling stories about the historical Jesus of Nazareth, they became aware of an ongoing presence the “direct experience of the transcendent,” they came to Christ consciousness. That change is what Easter is about.

Well, that’s about as far as I can go this morning. For me, Easter is still a challenge a challenge to return, again and again, to Christ consciousness - to living my life based on what is Real and True rather than on　 the simple “facts” of the “ordinary world.”

The writer of the Gospel of Mark takes us, on a Sunday morning, to an empty tomb and surprises us. We are confronted with the question as to how we will decide about Jesus of Nazareth’s view of reality. There isn’t time to consider all of Jesus’ teachings.

We have to be satisfied with some basic questions - questions such as:

• Is the universe based on cut-throat competition or extensive co-operation?
• Is creation to be exploited or extended?
• Must we have all the answers beforehand, or will we venture forth even in some uncertainty?
• Is gracious compassion at the heart of the universe?
• No matter what you decide about the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth, you still have to decide about those basic questions.
• Will we respect and honor the transcending mystery and wonder of the cosmos?
• Will we take the responsibility for diligently working out our own salvation with all due reverence?

No matter what you decide about Jesus’ tomb, you’ve still got some basic questions to answer. Looking back to a tomb - empty or not -　 doesn’t have much to do withfaith. The way you wrestle with those questions does. And that’s an Easter surprise! May that surprise be our invitation, and encouragement, to let ourselves be renewed, and to renew our commitment to what is Ultimate.

When we do, no matter when or what day it is, or what the day is like, we will be observing a glorious Easter Sunday.

As I sat on a plane writing this sermon, I struggled to think of where to start and how to begin. There are many different angles to cover and things to talk about when it occurred to me-there generally is no starting point in a connection. When one forms-it just keeps going, similar to the phrase or feeling of being connected to someone or something and you don’t know where you end and the other person or thing begins. It’s connected. So, I picked a point and went from there, we will see where it goes.

I got this idea for this sermon because I feel that as a culture and as a society we are losing the connection with each other and with ourselves, and not only are we losing this but we are embracing it and teaching it to our children!

Take for example where you are sitting. Is there an empty seat next to you? Is that on purpose? When you arrived here did you look for seats that would mean you would either sit next to someone you know-or by yourself? For us college students how many times have you gotten on the bus and sat by yourself-away from strangers? Or for all of us when we go somewhere like a movie and you sit away from people almost ensuring that you are with your group of friends and there is very minimal interaction between you and the strangers. After all we have been told since the age of three to never talk to strangers. Thus starting the trend of teaching ourselves-strangers are bad don’t interact with them. If you can’t talk to them, how can you learn from them? How can there be peace if there is no understanding-which comes from talking?

We are starting to embrace this concept in our schools as well. There are two occasions that have stuck out in my mind recently where we are starting to teach our children this concept of no touching. The first was occurred a few years ago, I was in a practicum observing a k-5 resource room. A resource room is a place for kids with special needs, or disabilities, to go to receive extra help learning the curriculum. While there I would sometimes work with a third grader named Nicholas. Nicholas had a learning disability in reading and I would sometimes help him read. Sometimes I might read the story first, then he would repeat after me, or he would read the story on his own and I would help him with words he did not know. One day, we were working together and he read an entire short story on his own with no help from me-and he didn’t struggle while reading it. He was SO proud of himself and excited that he jumped out of his chair and gave me a big hug! At which point his teacher told him to stop because it is not appropriate to hug a teacher. After all, hugging a child in a school setting can be considered sexual harassment and we can lose our jobs. So here we are telling this excited eight year old that when he does something great-he cannot touch an adult. Instead his rewards are an over clichéd “good job” and maybe a high five-but no hugging because it is dangerous.

The other occasion happened two summers ago. I was working as a camp counselor for kids with disabilities, ironically called therapeutic recreation. In this camp, there was an eight year old boy named William and he had autism. He would sometimes touch, or poke, the other kids and while it was never inappropriate the other kids didn’t like it as much. William also had a small crush on this girl named miracle, and he was trying to get her attention so he put his hand on her back (demonstrate this.) Unfortunately, Miracle didn’t feel the same way and she didn’t always like it when he touched her and this would sometimes create problems. When this happened again, William was pulled aside by the person in charge of that classroom and told “you are not allowed to touch anyone ever.” You are not allowed to touch anyone-ever. Here we are telling this 8 year old that he can never touch anyone. This is a problem because people with autism generally don’t understand metaphorical language and take what you say literally at face value. So we just told someone, who takes what you say literally, and because of his disability is already misunderstood by the mass public that he cannot touch anyone ever. Wow. Fortunately, or unfortunately depending on which view point you take, he didn’t follow that advice but the underlying message is still there. If we teach each other to never talk to strangers, and do not touch others, how you connect with them? How can you learn from one another?

This has even infiltrated popular advertising. I saw a bumper sticker a year or so ago that said “have you hugged your child today?” At first I thought it was great and I wanted to know where they got it so I could have one for myself, but then as I thought about it, it disturbed me. Why do we need to be reminded to hug our own children? Right now our schools are becoming dangerous, our streets are becoming unsafe to play on, and college campuses are places for mass murder. We are fighting a war with a group of people we don’t understand and that’s translating over into our country with the prejudices. Maybe, if we hugged our children and each other we would see a happier and peaceful society.

I wondered when did this teaching and embracing of anti touch, anti interaction happen? Is it in our nature? Perhaps this stems from Americans pride in independence from England, and our sense of “we don’t need you, we can make it on our own” has slowly turned into “I don’t need you.” On the flip side of independence, comes dependence, something that is not really looked highly upon in our society. To me it appears that the main acceptable time to be dependent on someone is when you’re a child, and even then we are teaching them to be independent young citizens. While this is a good thing to learn, it should be ok to tell our kids and students that needing someone isn’t always a bad thing.

So while we are embracing this way of life that breeds independence of each other we still crave a connection with someone. This is evident in all the support groups one can join, and all the books and songs that talk about that special connection with someone.

In 2003 the commission for children at risk published an article entitled “hardwired to connect.” This report was published to share new strategies to reduce the number of U.S. children who are suffering from EBD such as depression, anxiety, attention deficit, conduct disorders, and thoughts of suicide. In this study they found that in 2002, Twenty-one percent of U.S. children ages 9 to 17 had a diagnosable mental disorder or addiction; 8 percent of high school students suffered from clinical depression, and about 20 percent of students report seriously having considered suicide that year. These reports are startling and may have even gotten worse as this was six years ago and the world has become slightly more dangerous.

On a more positive note, the commission also found that children are hardwired to connect to others, and are hardwired for moral and spiritual meaning. They stated that these connections have gotten significantly weaker with a big factor being the high divorce rate resulting in more single parent households, particularly those with an absent father. This report challenges the U.S. to strengthen authoritative communities, which are groups of people who are dedicated to one another and want to pass on what it means to be a good person, and to promote connectedness.

So how can we live up to this challenge which has been posed to us 6 years ago? Following the JMU model “be the change” I say we start with ourselves. The first step: touch yourself, mentally, physically, and spiritually. If we are more open to who we are, more connected with our bodies then we can model that to each other. We can show ourselves and others that it is ok to be connected.

One beginning is to become aware of what is out there for us. I recently joined the caring committee and became the JMU liaison between this group and the JMU group. Doing so was a great decision as I ate a wonderful homemade meal instead of my typical canned college dinners for one, but it also helped me feel more connected to this church and it is something I am passionate about-helping others. This group is dedicated towards helping those in our church who are in need and is also dedicated towards building a stronger more connected church. Do not hesitate to ask anyone of us for help, as we are here for you.

I believe that each person was born with a gift. It could be something big like the abiltity to sing really well, it could also be the gift of being able to listen to others, or be really kind to others. It could even be something simple as making the best eggs and coffee in the morning, something I think my roommate possess and I look forward to every Saturday morning because of it. But each person has something. So I want you all to close your eyes and I want you to touch yourself mentally, explore your mind and either find what gift you have, or at least something positive about yourself. I want you to hold onto that thought throughout the day and the continuing ones. As we leave this friendly place think of that gift and how you can share it with someone. And as you share it with someone think of how you can be connected.

I have a belief that if we are open to each other in mind, body, and spirit then we can connect with each other and with that connection comes peace.

The 2008 General Assembly will be June 25-29: 2008 in Ft. Lauderdale, FL. This year everyone 18 and older must show a government-issued ID (driver’s license, state-issued non-driver’s license, or passport) to enter the Fort Lauderdale/Broward County Convention Center where the events will be held. Additional information is available from UUA.

Story for all Ages

John Godfrey Saxe’s ( 1816-1887) version of the famous Indian legend

It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.

The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
“God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!”

The Second, feeling of the tusk
Cried, “Ho! what have we here,
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me ’tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!”

The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up he spake:
“I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant
Is very like a snake!”

The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee:
“What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain,” quoth he;
“‘Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!”

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: “E’en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!”

The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope.
“I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant
Is very like a rope!”

And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!

Moral:

So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen.

Service: Lost Scrolls of HUU

Note: Old woman is helped to the speaker’s podium. She is dressed all in red with red hat carrying a cane.

If there is anyone out there that doesn’t know me I’m….oh yes I’m Kathleen Burke and I am still congregational liaison to the Board of Trustees at Harrisonburg Unitarian Universalists (HUU) today February 2058 as I have been since 2007. As you know since our membership is up to 250 members, we decided to again expand the size of our space. Since we can’t expand up, for fear of getting in the way of local air traffic, we have decided to expand down. During the process of clearing out the basement, we came upon some interesting documents hidden away since 2008. Let’s call them “The Lost Scrolls of HUU.” (laugh) Seems they were the efforts of that board to communicate with the congregation of 2008, and apparently, they got misplaced for some reason.(Not very good at organizing as I remember) After deciphering the primitive handwriting of that time, we thought you would be interested to hear what was going on then, so we can better understand how we got where we are now. Perhaps we’ll even learn about the communication breakdown that occurred way back then.

The first is the lost scroll of Beryl Lawson

February, 2008

To the Congregation of HUU, I send you greetings. I feel moved to share with all of you what some may call a spiritual experience.

As you may know, the Board of Trustees of this congregation met last month in retreat to discuss and act upon some of the challenges with which we are faced. As we are charged with the governance of the church we take very seriously the obligations with which you have entrusted us .

In a sense, the Board is a microcosm of the entire congregation. We are seven individuals with differing personalities and means of dealing with questions that arise. Some of us are active and bold and fast in deciding things. Others of us are deliberative and thoughtful and take time before coming to decisions.

As you may see, this can be a source of difficulty. If taken to the extreme it is an issue that may well divide us and destroy the possibility of working together for the common good.

Fortunately, we have a wonderful statement of the three basic religious tasks, which the board adopted following the recommendations of the Long Range Planning Task Force of several years ago. Let me remind you of them: they are: Sense making, Care giving and Justice seeking.

With these three tasks before us we have been able to listen to each other to try to make sense of what is before us, care for each other, those who may be tired, unwell or just not ready to give his or her all, and try to do justice to what we are here to do.

Working from this point of view I found that the retreat was wonderful. We cared for each other, respecting each other’s needs and fed each other royally.

We strove mightily to state clearly what we needed to do, spelling out how we planned to do the task and came away with detailed action items that will make it easier to do our job.

Respecting each other was an expression of justice seeking . We were learning to put our needs second to the needs of the others.

Can you see why I say, that for me, this was a spiritual experience?

The great thing about basic principles is that they can be applied in many circumstances and with many people, whether in small groups like a family or a congregation, or in large groups like a country or countries. I saw that these principles applied in our retreat among a few of us. I charge us, as a congregation of truth seekers to try to make sense of life: how things work? why we are here? How can we help each other look deeper into the world and its puzzles?

As a community of souls looking to change the world, how do we care for each other? For our community? For the world?

As people who may have some idea of what it means to be different how can we seek for justice for those who suffer for being different? For those of the minorities of whatever religion, class, race or sexual preference?

As some of you may know, I am a charter member of HUU. Coming in at the beginning has given me a long range perspective, one might say. I’ve seen us starting out in someone’s living room. I’ve seen us trying to learn what Unitarian Universalism is. I have been present for many a debate as to the meaning of church, worship, spiritual and prayer. Amen. Did we want a minister? Did we not want a minister? Should we own our own building? Where? How could we afford it? And through it all I feel we have tried to use our principles and our three chief religious tasks to guide us. Perhaps we have not always succeeded but we cannot ever be accused of giving up. I hope we never will.

I’ve perhaps gone on too long.

I send you my greetings and best wishes that we may as a congregation of Unitarian Universalists renew our efforts to use our three religious tasks so that we may grow and be better able to serve each other and the world..

Who knows where we might be in one hundred years if we live out our goals?

All my respect and love,
Beryl Lawson

Next the lost scroll of Ralph Grove -

The Gospel According to Owl

In the year 2008 of the common era it came to pass that a famous Unitarian minister from Transylvania came to Harrisonburg with a request to hold a public inquiry at HUU on a topic of great religious importance. The most reverent visitor, speaking through an interpreter, asked to call a meeting of the learned lay ministers of the congregation, who might be skillful in debate, in order to have a great exchange of ideas about the nature of the key religious tasks of the congregation.

A congregational meeting was called in which the members were told of the great and wise visitor and of his desire to hold a public inquiry into matters of congregational spirit. “This visitor is not only famous but a great traveler”, they were told, “and if we cannot bring forth someone learned and articulate in such matters who can put forth a respectable intellectual showing, then it will be said everywhere that the UUs of Harrisonburg are of no account, and our good name will be injured.” The Board members held a long meeting in which they debated the possibilities of who might represent HUU in argument against the visitor. Shall we invite a learned UU minister from Boston? Shall we seek a Professor of Theology from the University. At last they decided to ask the advice of a sage member of the congregation, identified here only as The Owl.

The Owl thought for a while about this challenge then spoke. “Leave it to me”, said the Owl. “If I can offer great wisdom to counter this visitor’s philosophy, then all will be fine. If not, then all you have to say is “Oh, that Owl fellow is a crackpot! He came to the meeting uninvited and spoke without thinking. Pay him no attention!” The Board accepted his offer to be scapegoat for the congregation and sent him forth with their blessing.

On the day of the appointed meeting, a great crowd was gathered in the sanctuary, where a whiteboard was set up at the front for the two to draw their competing arguments about key religious tasks, since they spoke no common language.

After the participants had been introduced, a hush fell over the room as the visitor took the floor. He began by drawing a large circle on the board, after which he rested and looked at his challenger. The Owl arose at once and drew a line right through the center of the circle, dividing it into two equal halves. He looked at the visitor, who, with a nod of his head, indicated his approval. The Owl then drew a second line, dividing the circle into quarters. With a motion of his hands, he made a gesture as if he would draw three of the quarters to himself, while pushing the other quarter to the visitor. The visitor nodded again, visibly impressed.

The visitor then stood and held his hand in the form of an open tulip. He then stretched out his fingers and waved them several times in the air, pointed up. The Owl made a gesture exactly the reverse so that his fingers pointed to the ground, to which the visitor gave another sign of approval. Then the visitor pointed to himself and with his fingers imitated an animal walking on the ground. Finally he pointed to his stomach and made a sign as if her were pulling something out. The Owl took an egg from his pocket and, shaking his arms, imitated the act of flying. Finally, the visitor bowed to The Owl in a gesture of strong reverence of his wisdom.

After he had made his goodbyes and was traveling from Harrisonburg, the visitor was asked by his traveling companion to explain the debate. “I first drew a circle to show that humanity is one”, said the visitor. My opponent then drew it into halves to say that we are separate individuals, but still part of the same whole. He then showed that we care for each other, by sharing one fourth of all that he had with me. Next I illustrated the supreme mystery of life by pointing to the heaven above as the source of life and soul. He responded by also pointing to the earth to illustrate that there are many sources of wisdom and that we should make sense of the mystery by grounding ourselves in rationality. Finally I showed that although we have souls, we also walk on the earth and must seek justice in order to make it a better world. He responded that justice is born of a single act, like a bird from an egg, and that our commitment can give it wings like an eagle. What a brilliant person! Truly the UUs of Harrisonburg are a wise and enlightened group.

That same day, the congregation asked The Owl to explain to them the great debate they had witnessed, for they understood little of it. “Well, the poor fellow was obviously dirt poor and very hungry, for the first thing he drew was a huge pie! I divided the pie into pieces to show that I would share them with him, but he didn’t understand so I gave him one piece while I kept the other three. Then he held his hand up as if to say, Oh if only we had a cup of fair trade coffee to go with the pie! I made a gesture to say, Yes, and we can flavor it with organic sugar and vegan cream substitute! Finally, he pointed to his stomach as if to say, I am very hungry, so let’s end  this debate and go eat! I answered to show that I could fly like a bird since I was so empty, because there was nothing to eat at home this morning except for this one lousy egg and I had to get up so early for this debate that I haven’t had time to eat even that!” Hah! Wise man indeed!

Then the lost scroll of Amy Thompson

When I was approached to serve on the Board 3 years ago, I was surprised even to be considered – would I be able do the job? I was asked to serve because I’m the parent of young kids and would provide a unique perspective for board decisions. But, just what does it mean to be a board member? What are the responsibilities? I would have to find out.

My tenure on the board began soon after an unsettled time at HUU when the previous minister had left. So the first several months were spent trying to understand what had happened and what we were supposed to do next. In addition to handling ordinary business, the board is to provide long-range vision for the purpose of the congregation. It’s exciting to have some input in, and influence on, the direction of a spiritual organization.

Each year, the board has a retreat where we gather for a weekend to plan the coming year. This gives us a longer, uninterrupted time to discuss important issues, more than the monthly, after-service meetings. In 2006, The Board first talked about the Long Range Planning Committee’s suggestions. That committee looked at how we can grow as a congregation and one of their conclusions was that we need to have clear spiritual goals before we can consider physical growth. They proposed the idea of three key religious tasks for us to uphold – sense-making, care-giving, and justice-seeking. This concept has been the core of The Board’s work since then.

We agreed that these are ideas that we already incorporate, and that we could make them more obvious to the congregation. In 2007, we decided to continue emphasizing these 3 key religious tasks and to look into setting up a lay ministry team that was also suggested by the Long Range Planning Committee. The tasks dovetail nicely with the concept of shared ministry.

The shared ministry task force has spent this past year carefully researching the concept of shared ministry and how to set up a team to formalize the work of those 3 key religious tasks. We need to recognize that we already do shared ministry, sense-making, care-giving, and justice-seeking, and that as we refine these skills, we will become known in the larger Valley community as a place where people can come to take advantage of all we have to offer.

These concepts of religious tasks and shared ministry have been a focus of the Board of HUU for several years already and will undoubtedly continue to be a focus in the future. One of the benefits of being on The Board is that we share responsibility, like sharing ministry. We have seven different personalities and perspectives, but we work together to set goals for the future. After learning the ropes in my first year, I felt that I actually could make a positive contribution to the workings of our congregation. Being on the board makes me feel more a part of this congregation.

Then there is the lost scroll of Eyeore/Lincoln Gray

(you really had to meet this guy-such a nice wife) anyway just remember that Eeyore is a character in the book series Winnie-the-Pooh by A.A. Milne. He is a pessimistic, gloomy, old, depressed, grey stuffed donkey. His philosophy is shared by others who share the dubious distinction of being Gray.

The Scroll of Eeyore (a pessimist’s manifesto) “Absolutely pointless! Everything is pointless,” it says in an even older scroll labeled Ecclesiastes from the year 973 BC. That scroll writer sure seems to have some worthwhile and long-lasting wisdom. So now, some 2981 years later, nothing has changed.

Why did I agree to serve on this Board of Trustees? I guess I got my arm (actually my tail) twisted again. This Board will never get anything done; never define the key tasks for this religious community; never get us to look outward and not just inward. We will never make any sense of our spiritual lives. Care-giving (to each other-that is) is understandable. I can understand that because I could use some care myself once in a rare while (not that anyone cares about old sad Gray donkeys). But justice-seeking and sense-making? We pessimists just believe that the world is unfair and that there is no real justice. Even worse is how to do the mandated Board Services that we need to put on at the beginning of February each year. Do you really think this folly will continue for another 50 years? I hope not. How could we possible say anything that has any meaning? Many people, much more dedicated and more inspired than this writer, have surely tried to explain the meaning of life , to define the key religious tasks, and to write meaningful services. Communication between the Board and the congregation will probably fail. I predict, in fact, that this scroll will not be found or read to a congregation for another 2981 years, not until the year 4989.

The names Ecclesiastes and Eeyore seem somewhat similar. He and I seem to think alike; I wonder if we are related. I wonder if he was gray like I am. I think it is appropriate that the spell-checker of my computer’s “Scroll-processor” wishes to change the title of this scroll (and my name) from Eeyore to “eyesore”.

Actually the Board Retreat wasn’t all that bad, but I will never admit that to anyone. It is remarkable that a liberal religious presence has persisted in the great valley of the Shenandoah River for almost twenty years, but what is that in the span of millennia and what is that compared to the religious presence in the great valley of the Jordan River? So I will end with more words from the wise Ecclesiastes: “Yet when I surveyed all that my hands had done and what I had toiled to achieve, everything was meaningless, a chasing after the wind; nothing was gained under the sun.” (Ecclesiastes 2:11)