For some time, Iraq has not been a center of attention because it has been the same old, same old. Any idea that things were improving were balanced by the inability of the Iraqi government to come to terms with their ethnic differences.
Today, we are seeing the beginning of the "Iraq of the future". In Basra, the Iraqi militia were fighting the Sadr militia. Considering that the Iraqi militia were trained and armed by the US forces, this new development could represent the outcome of our attempt to develop an Iraqi military and police that could take our place when we leave.
Michael Ware, a CNN reporter who spends tons of time in Iraq, has a description of this new development as "Lebanon on steroids".
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
A Different Type of Easter
This Easter provides an opportunity to reflect how far I have traveled from my past. I can recall little from my childhood, although I do have a memory of my sister once being dressed particularly special for Easter. However, I have strong memories of Easter from my earliest days in the seminary through many years of my adulthood. I can recall my repeated statements about the crucial dimension of Easter on Christianity. Without it, Christianity would be null and void. I can recall some of my Easter liturgies where I shared my vision of the importance and relevance of Easter to Christian faith. And now, it is as though someone else said and experienced those views. How could a person like me leave such a large portion of life’s experiences as though they are totally irrelevant to the present?
Growing up with a mother (until see died when I was 13) who was highly committed to a faith experienced initially in her native Ireland, I inherited a commitment to Catholicism as it was presented to me in religious education. The main principle was believing; understanding was not necessarily correlated with belief. It was sufficient to believe without understanding. If my father ranted at times when under the influence of alcohol about his lack of belief, even though he generally adhered to the practices of weekly church attendance, his views were not considered. I grew up as a typical Catholic youth who identified with the inherited belief system, albeit with the pressure that anything else would jeopardize my eternal well-being!
Having been educated in public schools, I found life in a seminary to be a cultural shock. For the first time, I was with all Catholics, many of whom were better educated than I. I was compelled to overcome my intellectual deficiencies while complying with the rigid expectations of the seminary. Without now going into implications of that degree of conformity to external discipline, it is important to realize the Christian feast days, especially Easter, were highly significant moments in the year.
During the first four years of seminary education (1955-1959), I was exposed to traditional interpretations of Catholic beliefs. Clearly, Easter celebrated the physical resurrection of the body of Jesus. The biblical narrations, in general, were presented to us as history. This type of education was radically changed the very next year and through the remainder of my seminary education (1959-1963). With the election of Pope John XXIII, not only did we become invigorated by the Vatican Council and all its theological investigations, we were brought into a new era of biblical understanding. We were finally able to read European theologians who were involved in what could be considered radical views.
First, it is preposterous to think back that in the spring of 1959, our lecturer who received advanced education in scripture adhered to a literal interpretation and, in the fall semester of the same year, another professor introduced us to a totally different way of reading scripture. According to this professor (and consistent generally with current understanding), scripture was NOT history, but stories intended to convey faith perspectives intended for believers. Scripture was not intended to prove anything nor was there any intention to convince anyone of the historical validity of the passages.
At this time, then, we were led to understand the resurrection narrations as literary genre or myths that captured the faith of the community. I, in short, came to understand the resurrection as Jesus being alive, albeit, possibly only in faith. I considered this understanding to be consistent with reality, i.e., not a figment of my imagination as much as a reality beyond the metaphysics of material life. There was no problem for me to share the joy of Easter with people, even though it would have nothing to do with whether Jesus’ bones were still in the ground. I admit that some of my older priest cohorts considered me an unbeliever, but I felt highly committed to a belief in a Risen Jesus as the core component of my faith, even if quite different than their beliefs.
During my relatively brief time as a priest (1963-1969), Easter was a very special feast day. However, I was increasingly disturbed by my perception that the overwhelming majority of priests were continuing to tell people the same message of traditional Catholicism in spite of all the theological and scripture renewal readily available. I saw this dichotomy between what was considered current knowledge and what was generally shared with people as a lie. And the bureaucratic authorities were not apparently interested in any form of continuing education to ensure that only the best in theological investigations would be the norm of religious education. I felt alienated within the church I was ordained to serve.
Without now sharing all of the forces that enabled (forced?) me to leave the active ministry, I was unable to see any evidence that all the forces for change, including the Vatican Council, were effective. Nothing was changing.
During many years of my life subsequent to my leaving the priesthood and becoming married, I had no problem supporting my belief system that was generated between 1959 and 1969) by my constant reading of the best theologians. There was always a parish relatively nearby that would provide liturgies that epitomized the best of what I considered to be Christianity.
So, how did I transition from this relatively stable set of believes to my present status as a non-participant?
There are two major elements to this change.
First, my continued reading introduced new dimensions of understanding. It became clear that Jesus clearly was only interested in being a good Jew. He advocated reform of Judaism, but he clearly never envisioned establishing a church. The literary genre of the New Testament could only be understood within the context of the time (Dominic Crossen was a major influence). Jesus was definitely a rabble rouser who was involved in addressing major social injustices. He clearly was killed by Romans because he was an instigator. The Jews had nothing to do with his death. And, the resurrection was a story that appeared later as the small group of Jesus Jews saw that their belief was invigorated by the lively presence of Jesus (however one would want to describe that experience).
James Carroll’s book on Constantine was another major influence in seeing that Christianity, as we know it, can only be attributed to the King’s annexation of Christianity to his kingdom in order to secure his power.
But, I was still an active believer at least in a very convoluted way, i.e., I had to repeatedly remind myself of the relatively little reality that this belief system had for support.
My reading of the various books of Dairmuid O’Murchu was extraordinarily pivotal in my recognizing that not only Christianity, but also all religions, are really systems designed to promote material power structures. Writing from an evolutionary perspective, he made it clear that however one understands God, God was clearly present in a world that preceded any form of organized religion by eons of millennia. And it would be hard to understand any God not being benign to a universe empowered in some fashion by events ultimately subject to the Ground of Being. It would be impossible to understand such a God as not being known through evolution since evolution is the ongoing experience of how we know God.
And yet, I still could untangle all of this in a way that enabled me to regularly participate in Church worship. What was the breaking point?
Referring once again to Carroll’s book on Constantine, I was overwhelmed with my ignorance first of all. In spite of my education and reading, I was ignorant of the extent of the influence of secular power in the development of Catholicism. Finding out how much of anti-Semitism was a product of the Catholic Church was very disturbing. And then, reading Garry Will’s book, “Papal Sin”, brought into extreme clarity the actual lies that are supported by the official church. While I was aware of the dichotomy between what I knew as true and what were the official positions of the Catholic Church on many subjects, I had never got to the point of labeling this dichotomy as “lies”. However, since then, it has been a sore point whenever the church leaders defend positions that are untenable.
A few examples of how the church leaders defend what are clearly untenable positions:
1. Priesthood has to male and celibate because Jesus established priesthood as such.
Jesus did not establish any priesthood far less dictate the nature of the conditions of gender and celibacy. Jesus never envisioned himself as establishing a church, a religion distinguished from Judaism.
2. Necessity of recognizing Jesus as a means of salvation.
There are a number of theologians who have written on the issue of how the uniqueness of Jesus could be reconciled with the apparent value of other religions in helping people live a virtuous life. Even without adopting some of the more liberal theological views, I think that it was preposterous that the current pope would issue an encyclical in this day and age that reiterated the necessity of all peoples to come to Jesus and, in the process, clearly state the inferiority of all that was not Catholic.
3. The immorality of birth control.
While this issue is totally disregarded by all, it is amazing and disturbing to me that the official church cannot come out and say they were wrong.
So, at this point, I find myself unable to believe much of what I did formerly and am sufficiently angered by the Church’s leadership that I can no longer participate in church worship. While I used to able to translate the myth into a reality that I could share with others, there is no point in it now that I cannot tolerate the abuse of knowledge and leadership by those in authority.
My point in terms of leadership has more to do with providing people a way to change and adapt to the ever-changing culture and mores. While there are examples of great leadership, the examples only highlight the point of the general lack of leadership. Whether we focus on gender issues, or war, or race, or poverty, the church generally upholds traditional views even if unhelpful.
At this time, then, my God is known through evolution. He/she is utterly compassionate and loving that can support our hopes and dreams. Morality can best be defined through our commands to respect and nurture the evolutionary process which clearly includes how we deal with one another. And ultimately, in death, we will continue to be part that process as has been those who preceded us. And at this point, we can ponder how well we are doing since it does appear that we are pursuing almost the unimaginable, viz., destruction of the planet we call home. However, God is more that our world, and to the surprise of some of church leaders, we can remain part of evolutionary process that is more than this world, as we know it.
Growing up with a mother (until see died when I was 13) who was highly committed to a faith experienced initially in her native Ireland, I inherited a commitment to Catholicism as it was presented to me in religious education. The main principle was believing; understanding was not necessarily correlated with belief. It was sufficient to believe without understanding. If my father ranted at times when under the influence of alcohol about his lack of belief, even though he generally adhered to the practices of weekly church attendance, his views were not considered. I grew up as a typical Catholic youth who identified with the inherited belief system, albeit with the pressure that anything else would jeopardize my eternal well-being!
Having been educated in public schools, I found life in a seminary to be a cultural shock. For the first time, I was with all Catholics, many of whom were better educated than I. I was compelled to overcome my intellectual deficiencies while complying with the rigid expectations of the seminary. Without now going into implications of that degree of conformity to external discipline, it is important to realize the Christian feast days, especially Easter, were highly significant moments in the year.
During the first four years of seminary education (1955-1959), I was exposed to traditional interpretations of Catholic beliefs. Clearly, Easter celebrated the physical resurrection of the body of Jesus. The biblical narrations, in general, were presented to us as history. This type of education was radically changed the very next year and through the remainder of my seminary education (1959-1963). With the election of Pope John XXIII, not only did we become invigorated by the Vatican Council and all its theological investigations, we were brought into a new era of biblical understanding. We were finally able to read European theologians who were involved in what could be considered radical views.
First, it is preposterous to think back that in the spring of 1959, our lecturer who received advanced education in scripture adhered to a literal interpretation and, in the fall semester of the same year, another professor introduced us to a totally different way of reading scripture. According to this professor (and consistent generally with current understanding), scripture was NOT history, but stories intended to convey faith perspectives intended for believers. Scripture was not intended to prove anything nor was there any intention to convince anyone of the historical validity of the passages.
At this time, then, we were led to understand the resurrection narrations as literary genre or myths that captured the faith of the community. I, in short, came to understand the resurrection as Jesus being alive, albeit, possibly only in faith. I considered this understanding to be consistent with reality, i.e., not a figment of my imagination as much as a reality beyond the metaphysics of material life. There was no problem for me to share the joy of Easter with people, even though it would have nothing to do with whether Jesus’ bones were still in the ground. I admit that some of my older priest cohorts considered me an unbeliever, but I felt highly committed to a belief in a Risen Jesus as the core component of my faith, even if quite different than their beliefs.
During my relatively brief time as a priest (1963-1969), Easter was a very special feast day. However, I was increasingly disturbed by my perception that the overwhelming majority of priests were continuing to tell people the same message of traditional Catholicism in spite of all the theological and scripture renewal readily available. I saw this dichotomy between what was considered current knowledge and what was generally shared with people as a lie. And the bureaucratic authorities were not apparently interested in any form of continuing education to ensure that only the best in theological investigations would be the norm of religious education. I felt alienated within the church I was ordained to serve.
Without now sharing all of the forces that enabled (forced?) me to leave the active ministry, I was unable to see any evidence that all the forces for change, including the Vatican Council, were effective. Nothing was changing.
During many years of my life subsequent to my leaving the priesthood and becoming married, I had no problem supporting my belief system that was generated between 1959 and 1969) by my constant reading of the best theologians. There was always a parish relatively nearby that would provide liturgies that epitomized the best of what I considered to be Christianity.
So, how did I transition from this relatively stable set of believes to my present status as a non-participant?
There are two major elements to this change.
First, my continued reading introduced new dimensions of understanding. It became clear that Jesus clearly was only interested in being a good Jew. He advocated reform of Judaism, but he clearly never envisioned establishing a church. The literary genre of the New Testament could only be understood within the context of the time (Dominic Crossen was a major influence). Jesus was definitely a rabble rouser who was involved in addressing major social injustices. He clearly was killed by Romans because he was an instigator. The Jews had nothing to do with his death. And, the resurrection was a story that appeared later as the small group of Jesus Jews saw that their belief was invigorated by the lively presence of Jesus (however one would want to describe that experience).
James Carroll’s book on Constantine was another major influence in seeing that Christianity, as we know it, can only be attributed to the King’s annexation of Christianity to his kingdom in order to secure his power.
But, I was still an active believer at least in a very convoluted way, i.e., I had to repeatedly remind myself of the relatively little reality that this belief system had for support.
My reading of the various books of Dairmuid O’Murchu was extraordinarily pivotal in my recognizing that not only Christianity, but also all religions, are really systems designed to promote material power structures. Writing from an evolutionary perspective, he made it clear that however one understands God, God was clearly present in a world that preceded any form of organized religion by eons of millennia. And it would be hard to understand any God not being benign to a universe empowered in some fashion by events ultimately subject to the Ground of Being. It would be impossible to understand such a God as not being known through evolution since evolution is the ongoing experience of how we know God.
And yet, I still could untangle all of this in a way that enabled me to regularly participate in Church worship. What was the breaking point?
Referring once again to Carroll’s book on Constantine, I was overwhelmed with my ignorance first of all. In spite of my education and reading, I was ignorant of the extent of the influence of secular power in the development of Catholicism. Finding out how much of anti-Semitism was a product of the Catholic Church was very disturbing. And then, reading Garry Will’s book, “Papal Sin”, brought into extreme clarity the actual lies that are supported by the official church. While I was aware of the dichotomy between what I knew as true and what were the official positions of the Catholic Church on many subjects, I had never got to the point of labeling this dichotomy as “lies”. However, since then, it has been a sore point whenever the church leaders defend positions that are untenable.
A few examples of how the church leaders defend what are clearly untenable positions:
1. Priesthood has to male and celibate because Jesus established priesthood as such.
Jesus did not establish any priesthood far less dictate the nature of the conditions of gender and celibacy. Jesus never envisioned himself as establishing a church, a religion distinguished from Judaism.
2. Necessity of recognizing Jesus as a means of salvation.
There are a number of theologians who have written on the issue of how the uniqueness of Jesus could be reconciled with the apparent value of other religions in helping people live a virtuous life. Even without adopting some of the more liberal theological views, I think that it was preposterous that the current pope would issue an encyclical in this day and age that reiterated the necessity of all peoples to come to Jesus and, in the process, clearly state the inferiority of all that was not Catholic.
3. The immorality of birth control.
While this issue is totally disregarded by all, it is amazing and disturbing to me that the official church cannot come out and say they were wrong.
So, at this point, I find myself unable to believe much of what I did formerly and am sufficiently angered by the Church’s leadership that I can no longer participate in church worship. While I used to able to translate the myth into a reality that I could share with others, there is no point in it now that I cannot tolerate the abuse of knowledge and leadership by those in authority.
My point in terms of leadership has more to do with providing people a way to change and adapt to the ever-changing culture and mores. While there are examples of great leadership, the examples only highlight the point of the general lack of leadership. Whether we focus on gender issues, or war, or race, or poverty, the church generally upholds traditional views even if unhelpful.
At this time, then, my God is known through evolution. He/she is utterly compassionate and loving that can support our hopes and dreams. Morality can best be defined through our commands to respect and nurture the evolutionary process which clearly includes how we deal with one another. And ultimately, in death, we will continue to be part that process as has been those who preceded us. And at this point, we can ponder how well we are doing since it does appear that we are pursuing almost the unimaginable, viz., destruction of the planet we call home. However, God is more that our world, and to the surprise of some of church leaders, we can remain part of evolutionary process that is more than this world, as we know it.
Obama's Pastor Revisited!
In a prior blog, I shared my personal experiences of anger toward the United States when our policies supported what I considered either wrong or immoral positions.
Today, I reference again Pastor Wright from the vantage point of a highly distinguished academic with exquisite credentials as a moderate within theological circles. Martin Marty is a historian by trade but has been on the faculty of the University of Chicago as someone who has provided great insights into Christianity from his background as a Lutheran. He is by no means a liberal, even if a helpful source of ecumenism. And surely, he is not a right wing evangelist. From Wikipedia, you can briefly review his personal history. Another dimension of his value, the University of Chicago created the Martin Marty Center that speaks to his distinguished career.
These references to Martin Marty preface the point of this blog. He is a regular participant of the Trinity Church. He understand completely why Obama as well as many others attend the church. And he appreciates the talents of Pastor Wright. In an article published by Chronical of Higher Education, he reviews Pastor's Wright's history of service to our nation as Marine and a Navy Medical Technician. He studied at the University of Chicago where Martin Marty met him. His talents were such that he could have pursued an academic career but he chose the pastoral route. If there is anything that best captures his ministry, it is the hope that he shares with people, hope that his listeners can base their dreams on. Without minimizing the implications of some of his rhetoric, he also references the genre as found in the biblical accounts of his namesake, Jeremiah.
Martin Marty's article will help anyone who is trying to understand why Obama continued to participate in the Trinity Church for all these years and why he continues to be loyal to Pastor Wright.
Today, I reference again Pastor Wright from the vantage point of a highly distinguished academic with exquisite credentials as a moderate within theological circles. Martin Marty is a historian by trade but has been on the faculty of the University of Chicago as someone who has provided great insights into Christianity from his background as a Lutheran. He is by no means a liberal, even if a helpful source of ecumenism. And surely, he is not a right wing evangelist. From Wikipedia, you can briefly review his personal history. Another dimension of his value, the University of Chicago created the Martin Marty Center that speaks to his distinguished career.
These references to Martin Marty preface the point of this blog. He is a regular participant of the Trinity Church. He understand completely why Obama as well as many others attend the church. And he appreciates the talents of Pastor Wright. In an article published by Chronical of Higher Education, he reviews Pastor's Wright's history of service to our nation as Marine and a Navy Medical Technician. He studied at the University of Chicago where Martin Marty met him. His talents were such that he could have pursued an academic career but he chose the pastoral route. If there is anything that best captures his ministry, it is the hope that he shares with people, hope that his listeners can base their dreams on. Without minimizing the implications of some of his rhetoric, he also references the genre as found in the biblical accounts of his namesake, Jeremiah.
Martin Marty's article will help anyone who is trying to understand why Obama continued to participate in the Trinity Church for all these years and why he continues to be loyal to Pastor Wright.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
New Memory!
Memories long ago,
New parent with first baby,
Waking with joy, resting beside you,
Could life be any better?
And now, in a visit to New York City,
A new beginning with a granddaughter,
Now settled for a moment between
Mother and Grandfather!
Watching an infant from a new view,
Rouses the old memory, and
Ignites the new image with fire!
Hard to believe,
Life could be so good,
When so unfair to some,
To me, filled with thanks.
New parent with first baby,
Waking with joy, resting beside you,
Could life be any better?
And now, in a visit to New York City,
A new beginning with a granddaughter,
Now settled for a moment between
Mother and Grandfather!
Watching an infant from a new view,
Rouses the old memory, and
Ignites the new image with fire!
Hard to believe,
Life could be so good,
When so unfair to some,
To me, filled with thanks.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Controversial Pastor of Obama
Even some commentators who convey a positive impression of Obama's speech will still call for more action regarding his relationship with the controversial pastor.
There may be similarity in what Falwell and other right-wing evangelists said about the relationship between 9/11 and our national sins, e.g., gay rights, abortion, i.e., God was punishing us, and Wright's controversial statements regarding the relationship between 9/11 and our national and international policies. However, I personally would argue that there is a difference. And, secondly, I would agree with some of the more controversial statements of Wright.
First, I would argue that the right-wing evangelists were attacking what I consider to be private morality of individuals while Wright was attacking national policies that were directed against people or nations, or, as serious, policies that purposefully avoided involvement with others in need.
One could say that I defend Wright's remarks (admittedly, taken out of context, they are very, very strong) since I have stated similar things, at least with some of those close to me (even though some of them would disagree with me).
The bottom line is that I too share anger at our political leaders who have not provided leadership in areas I consider paramount, e.g., health care and education. I cite my personal letter to the National Democratic Committee that was attached to a donation. In this letter, I expressed my anger with President Clinton who I criticized for being driven by polls rather than conviction about what would be good for our nation. I indicated that he had the capacity to bring our nation to places it never dreamed possible if he had used his innate skills and intelligence. My anger at Bush et al. regarding their policies that have ruined other nations, created more terrorists, wrecked our nation's moral standing in the world, destroyed our relationships with other nations, wrecked our nation's financial status, has been shared with many, to the point of irritating if not offending some.
I can understand why those who are black would be angry, just as I can understand why some of us whites are angry. It is hard not to believe that our biases against the Palestinians did not ultimately result in a disastrous situation made worse in the Middle East. It is hard not to believe that our support of Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war did not result ultimately in his thinking he could go into Kuwait. It is hard not to believe that our support of the Taliban in order to wreck the Russian economy did not result in the disaster that Afghanistan became. It is hard to believe that if we had provided more benign leadership that the extreme anger demonstrated by the radical Islamists may have been ameliorated. And surely, since 9/11, if we ever had made the commitment to use would our moral authority and the now estimated $3 trillion costs of our wars, to finance our needs as well as support the initiatives of other nations who would have benefited by our generosity, that we would possibly not be in such a horrendous situation that gets played our repeatedly in our news.
Those who now argue that such controversial statements of Wright have no place surely do not see the world as I do. While I admit that I wish that he was slightly more politically nuanced, I can understand that the rhetoric of a pastor can overreach to make a point. Surely, I made similar statements when I was in such a position. I was then angry at the Catholic Church for not doing more to promote unity. I was angry at white people who escaped urban areas to avoid the hassles of dealing with minorities (even though I subsequently was guilty of the same thing to ensure my children's well-being). I was angry at the narrowness of those who were considered religious authorities. In fact, this anger is still present, even if dissipated by virtue of my lack of involvement.
The long and short of it is that there are things that are worthy of anger (not to the point of violence).
“The thing that would really help him is if Reverend Wright came out and apologized,” said Michael Cromartie, vice president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a conservative group that studies religious issues and public policy. One of Mr. Wright’s most criticized comments is his assertion that corrupt United States foreign policy brought about the Sept. 11 attacks; now he must retract that statement, said Mr. Cromartie, just as the Rev. Jerry Falwell apologized after he blamed the attacks in part on gay people and those who have performed abortions.
There may be similarity in what Falwell and other right-wing evangelists said about the relationship between 9/11 and our national sins, e.g., gay rights, abortion, i.e., God was punishing us, and Wright's controversial statements regarding the relationship between 9/11 and our national and international policies. However, I personally would argue that there is a difference. And, secondly, I would agree with some of the more controversial statements of Wright.
First, I would argue that the right-wing evangelists were attacking what I consider to be private morality of individuals while Wright was attacking national policies that were directed against people or nations, or, as serious, policies that purposefully avoided involvement with others in need.
One could say that I defend Wright's remarks (admittedly, taken out of context, they are very, very strong) since I have stated similar things, at least with some of those close to me (even though some of them would disagree with me).
The bottom line is that I too share anger at our political leaders who have not provided leadership in areas I consider paramount, e.g., health care and education. I cite my personal letter to the National Democratic Committee that was attached to a donation. In this letter, I expressed my anger with President Clinton who I criticized for being driven by polls rather than conviction about what would be good for our nation. I indicated that he had the capacity to bring our nation to places it never dreamed possible if he had used his innate skills and intelligence. My anger at Bush et al. regarding their policies that have ruined other nations, created more terrorists, wrecked our nation's moral standing in the world, destroyed our relationships with other nations, wrecked our nation's financial status, has been shared with many, to the point of irritating if not offending some.
I can understand why those who are black would be angry, just as I can understand why some of us whites are angry. It is hard not to believe that our biases against the Palestinians did not ultimately result in a disastrous situation made worse in the Middle East. It is hard not to believe that our support of Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war did not result ultimately in his thinking he could go into Kuwait. It is hard not to believe that our support of the Taliban in order to wreck the Russian economy did not result in the disaster that Afghanistan became. It is hard to believe that if we had provided more benign leadership that the extreme anger demonstrated by the radical Islamists may have been ameliorated. And surely, since 9/11, if we ever had made the commitment to use would our moral authority and the now estimated $3 trillion costs of our wars, to finance our needs as well as support the initiatives of other nations who would have benefited by our generosity, that we would possibly not be in such a horrendous situation that gets played our repeatedly in our news.
Those who now argue that such controversial statements of Wright have no place surely do not see the world as I do. While I admit that I wish that he was slightly more politically nuanced, I can understand that the rhetoric of a pastor can overreach to make a point. Surely, I made similar statements when I was in such a position. I was then angry at the Catholic Church for not doing more to promote unity. I was angry at white people who escaped urban areas to avoid the hassles of dealing with minorities (even though I subsequently was guilty of the same thing to ensure my children's well-being). I was angry at the narrowness of those who were considered religious authorities. In fact, this anger is still present, even if dissipated by virtue of my lack of involvement.
The long and short of it is that there are things that are worthy of anger (not to the point of violence).
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Eve Katherine: DOB 17 March 2008
Another baby added to the family,
A family reaching out to share more love,
A baby welcomed as though there were no other.
Eve Katherine joins Joseph, now the big brother,
She’ll be better for him, as her Dad’s siblings for him,
And, in turn, we’ll all be better for her!
The simple plea repeated by all,
“May only the baby be healthy”,
Rings true when the baby emerges,
Unscathed by misguided genes.
Eve Katherine, we thank God for your presence,
We know that you are gift for us to cherish,
No day will pass without your knowing you’re loved.
Blown Away with Obama's Speech!
If ever there was any doubt about Obama's capacity to deal with "trouble", he surely demonstrated that he can confront any problems with a profound sense of his person and reality. He does not disguise the ugly with verbal tricks or minimize the problems confronting our nation. His speech today is a testimony to this person's remarkable strength, integrity, honesty, and vision. If I were ever to need a reason for supporting his candidacy, today was more than enough!
Sunday, March 16, 2008
A Wonderful New World of Babies!
There was a time when it seemed that our adult children were part of a generation that viewed child birth differently. People can live and develop without having to experiencing parenthood. But, that time is now long past as we prepare to have our fourth grandchild tomorrow in just 15 months!
We always knew that we missed much in the life of our first grandchild. While tripping to New York as often as possible, we knew that we missed so much of those moments when growth and development is evident. The times when a baby starts to track, the moment when the baby starts to turn over were only seen much after the fact.
And now we know that there is a great difference when grandchildren are relatively nearby. Being with our two most recent grandchildren as often we are, gives us a vantage point to appreciate the wonder of it all, both directly and indirectly, through the eyes and smiles of our adult children and spouses.
Being a grandparent is nothing new. So many have enjoyed the experience as we are, but admittedly, the experience remains as unique as parenting itself.
We always knew that we missed much in the life of our first grandchild. While tripping to New York as often as possible, we knew that we missed so much of those moments when growth and development is evident. The times when a baby starts to track, the moment when the baby starts to turn over were only seen much after the fact.
And now we know that there is a great difference when grandchildren are relatively nearby. Being with our two most recent grandchildren as often we are, gives us a vantage point to appreciate the wonder of it all, both directly and indirectly, through the eyes and smiles of our adult children and spouses.
Being a grandparent is nothing new. So many have enjoyed the experience as we are, but admittedly, the experience remains as unique as parenting itself.
Iraq: A Never Ending Sad Story
Listening to those who perceive such a positive change in Iraq due to the impact of the additional US military, one would be hard pressed to disagree with the glowing reports of gains.
And yet, we have noticed nothing that speaks to real change. There is no evidence the ethnic divisions are being bridged. Signs of reconciliation are not in sight. While there is additional stability in areas where we have the additional manpower, we also read that other areas are not secured and, for some, signs of deterioration. Areas in southern Iraq that were stabilized by the British are now experiencing internal conflict. Iraqi military is doing better, but at a price. We fortified the Sunnis with arms and money to help us and, in turn, they now are using their strength to solidify their own political aims.
Today, we read that Iraqi refined oil is used in the black market to support the insurgency, those very people who terrorize their fellow countrymen and kill our military. As much as 70% of the revenue from the refined oil is lost! And, John Burns reviews his five years in Baghdad by relating how mismanaged the whole invasion as been with the conclusion that the people only want the stability that they had under Hussein! To think that all of this money and blood (not only US and allied forces, but Iraqis themselves) will hopefully result in the stability enjoyed by the people by the infamous dictator!
And yet, we have noticed nothing that speaks to real change. There is no evidence the ethnic divisions are being bridged. Signs of reconciliation are not in sight. While there is additional stability in areas where we have the additional manpower, we also read that other areas are not secured and, for some, signs of deterioration. Areas in southern Iraq that were stabilized by the British are now experiencing internal conflict. Iraqi military is doing better, but at a price. We fortified the Sunnis with arms and money to help us and, in turn, they now are using their strength to solidify their own political aims.
Today, we read that Iraqi refined oil is used in the black market to support the insurgency, those very people who terrorize their fellow countrymen and kill our military. As much as 70% of the revenue from the refined oil is lost! And, John Burns reviews his five years in Baghdad by relating how mismanaged the whole invasion as been with the conclusion that the people only want the stability that they had under Hussein! To think that all of this money and blood (not only US and allied forces, but Iraqis themselves) will hopefully result in the stability enjoyed by the people by the infamous dictator!
Thursday, March 6, 2008
My Letter to Obama!
45 Glades Road
Scituate, MA 02066
6 March 2008
Obama for America
P.O. Box 8102
Chicago, IL 60680
Dear Senator Obama,
I am one of many who support your candidacy for the President of the United States with money and time. There is an urgent need for you to address in a better way the most fundamental reason why you, rather than either Senators Clinton or McCain, should become the next President. It is not that you have not stated your unique qualifications for President, but you have to do it more clearly and more often. I offer my perspective as though I were one of your speech writers.
Sincerely,
Edward J. Toomey
Scituate, MA 02066
6 March 2008
Obama for America
P.O. Box 8102
Chicago, IL 60680
Dear Senator Obama,
I am one of many who support your candidacy for the President of the United States with money and time. There is an urgent need for you to address in a better way the most fundamental reason why you, rather than either Senators Clinton or McCain, should become the next President. It is not that you have not stated your unique qualifications for President, but you have to do it more clearly and more often. I offer my perspective as though I were one of your speech writers.
Senator Clinton and I have been involved in a highly contested campaign to become the Democratic nominee for President of the United States. If she is surprised that this contest did not end on February 5, I can report my surprise that I am ahead in the count for pledged delegates as of 6 March! Even though I was confident, no one predicted my success! And yet, now that it becomes clear that I will end up with more pledged delegates, efforts are under discussion to develop a strategy to ensure that the people’s vote will be overruled by the Super Delegates.
Let me say quickly that Senator Clinton has all the prerequisites to be the next President. Let me also say that our policies are not significantly different. Why would a voter select one rather than another?
Senator Clinton repeatedly attacks me on the basis of the lack prior experience that would ensure my ability to assume the role of Commander in Chief. The ads were apparently successful, in spite of the fact that it is hard to know what are the specific experiences she has had to prepare her any better than I. Visiting other nations and meeting their leaders does not constitute the type of experiences that would prepare someone for the role of Commander in Chief. Secondly, if experience is determined to be the basis for selecting the next President, then Senator McCain will clearly win! Neither Senator Clinton nor I have had anywhere near as much experience in foreign and military affairs as Senator McCain.
Experience is not a sufficient basis for selecting a person for the next President. While I have more than enough experience to become President, I could argue that there is no historical basis for concluding that experience and success in leadership are correlated. Too many with experience have been colossal failures; so often those without a long history of experience become great leaders.
However, the ultimate reason why a voter would select me as the next President is based on a set of qualities that are different than those noted in Senators Clinton or McCain. I want to bring a whole new approach to the role of the President that will restore hope within our own peoples and respect throughout the world. It sounds audacious, but anything less will not suffice.
My campaign is built on the premise that partisan politics has become so divisive that it has eroded the effectiveness of the government. Without denying basic differences between the philosophies of the Democratic and Republican parties, our history has demonstrated an ability to bridge these differences in order to bring successful policies to life. My candidacy is premised on my ability to do just that. Being a fighter, as claimed so often by Senator Clinton, is part of the reason for our partisan politics. Everyone fights for what they feel is correct, regardless of the effects on our nation and the world. Second, except for our national defense, there is no place for unilateral international intervention. The world’s problems are multinational and global in nature. Success will only be had if we join others in confronting those problems for the well-being of all.
I would come to Day One with an agenda to address our domestic needs, many though they are, but I would work to ensure that our two parties get a fair hearing and my support in their working together to develop programs that can be implemented as quickly as possible. I would meet with leaders of other nations, without conditions but with a prepared agenda, to ensure their awareness that the United States will partner with any and all nations in coming to terms with global issues effecting security, economy, and environment that will improve the human rights and living conditions of all peoples.
And for all of this to happen, my campaign is built on creating coalitions of voters that will be the ground out of which these many problems will be addressed. For, unless enough people want me as their President, enough people who are Democrats, Independents, Republicans, young, old, working or unemployed, … unless enough people vote for me to demonstrate to the Congress and powers of lobbyists that there is a new day with a new leader for a new chapter in our history, then my efforts will not be successful. I will only as successful as I can be if enough people want me to serve them as their President.
I cannot compete with Senators Clinton or McCain based on experience in the old politics and partisanship. In fact, I have not desire to gain such experience. I think that there are many in our country w
ho know that the old way has not worked for them. There may be some who are afraid to try to a new way even if the old way did not help them. Without promising that all problems will be resolved easily or quickly, I can ensure you that continuing the old way offers little hope for change. I represent another way to start again so that we can become one people who care for all.
Sincerely,
Edward J. Toomey
Kim Cogan's Emerging Status as a Famous Painter
Sharing the joys and frustrations of raising children is virtually synonymous with parenthood. Anyone who has been a parent knows that it is not easy passing through the challenges of being a parent. The anxieties over their well-being as well as the joys of their love are interspersed at random intervals.
One of shared joys is witnessing Kim Cogan's rather rapid emergence as a great painter. While his parents shared his passion and abilities with us over the years, no one was audacious enough to predict that he would actually be able to earn a living as a painter.
In rather short order, he succeeded in selling a large number of paintings in this native locale of San Fransisco. Now, he in entering the proverbial "big time" by having a solo gallery show in New York City.
Gallery Henock
555 W 25th Street
New York City
(Some of his painting for the exhibition are shown on the link).
One never knows how a person succeeds in such a competitive field like the fine arts, but we are happy to share with anyone our joys for Kim Cogan! My daughter, son-in-law, new grandchild and I will be there for his opening night to share his joy and the pride his parents rightly feel.
One of shared joys is witnessing Kim Cogan's rather rapid emergence as a great painter. While his parents shared his passion and abilities with us over the years, no one was audacious enough to predict that he would actually be able to earn a living as a painter.
In rather short order, he succeeded in selling a large number of paintings in this native locale of San Fransisco. Now, he in entering the proverbial "big time" by having a solo gallery show in New York City.
Gallery Henock
555 W 25th Street
New York City
(Some of his painting for the exhibition are shown on the link).
One never knows how a person succeeds in such a competitive field like the fine arts, but we are happy to share with anyone our joys for Kim Cogan! My daughter, son-in-law, new grandchild and I will be there for his opening night to share his joy and the pride his parents rightly feel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)