Always wonder how I would do
When facing the ultimate: death.
Stories about real people with strength,
Rising above turmoil and pain,
Facing each day with peace and beauty.
Stories surely represent a challenge.
Can a bout with virus be a test?
Anyone can endure with grace a battle
… With a microscopic bug!
Sure, everyone but me!
Wife reaches for empathy,
Animals confused by a mope.
Sons pester daughter for more help
To an old man fighting the bug!
Looking back on five days,
Seeing myself as a poor excuse for strength,
I know that I’m not ready for death,
At least a death with lots of pain.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
"Doubt" by Jennifer Michael Hecht
“Doubt” is a very long history of the many proponents of doubt (494 pages plus notes). Jennifer Hecht was able to articulate the ins-and-outs of the various writers who questioned belief systems in their times. This books requires time (not an easy read) and a degree of commitment (why continue when there is a degree of consistency throughout time to question belief systems of their time).
Why did I continue to the end of the book?
Historically, my belief system “matured” from a relatively primitive system of compliance with a set of beliefs to a more differentiated perspective that recognized the fallacies of literalism and the benefits of “interpretation”. This process led me to be a member of the minority within the Christian community who saw a way to hold on to the “inherent truths” conveyed through different forms of writing. Then, reading theologies dealing with pluralism, e.g., Roger Haight’s "Jesus Symbol of God", Jacques Dupuis’ "Toward a Theology of Religious Pluralism", pushed me further along a road where so much of the traditional beliefs were questioned that there was little left over. Over the last few years, Darmuid O’Murchu articulated his understanding that religion, per se, was a paternalistic anachronism designed to sanction personal property when man was transitioning from the hunter-gathered stage to agriculture. We no longer needed religion to enforce a dysfunctional system.
The Catholic Church’s problems with sexual abuse only compounded the problem of its leader’s being unable to be honest. There was a lack of accountability regarding their system of protecting those who abused young people and the culture that protected the system rather than the people entrusted to their care. And then, the lies that bolstered a tradition lacking credibility were infuriating, e.g., statements about the necessity of priests being celibate or the reasons why women could not be ordained. The abuse of power is overwhelming!
Finally, the events of 9/11, the hatred experienced by sectarian Islamism, the continued arrogance of the Roman Church as being the only source of all the truth, coupled with the books by Sam Harris, Susan Jacoby, Jessica Stern, leaves one thinking that the benefits of religion are outweighed by negative outcomes noted throughout history and noted in current events, e.g., crusades, antisemitism, hatred of others who either identify with a different belief system or no belief system.
Why did I continue to the end of the book?
Historically, my belief system “matured” from a relatively primitive system of compliance with a set of beliefs to a more differentiated perspective that recognized the fallacies of literalism and the benefits of “interpretation”. This process led me to be a member of the minority within the Christian community who saw a way to hold on to the “inherent truths” conveyed through different forms of writing. Then, reading theologies dealing with pluralism, e.g., Roger Haight’s "Jesus Symbol of God", Jacques Dupuis’ "Toward a Theology of Religious Pluralism", pushed me further along a road where so much of the traditional beliefs were questioned that there was little left over. Over the last few years, Darmuid O’Murchu articulated his understanding that religion, per se, was a paternalistic anachronism designed to sanction personal property when man was transitioning from the hunter-gathered stage to agriculture. We no longer needed religion to enforce a dysfunctional system.
The Catholic Church’s problems with sexual abuse only compounded the problem of its leader’s being unable to be honest. There was a lack of accountability regarding their system of protecting those who abused young people and the culture that protected the system rather than the people entrusted to their care. And then, the lies that bolstered a tradition lacking credibility were infuriating, e.g., statements about the necessity of priests being celibate or the reasons why women could not be ordained. The abuse of power is overwhelming!
Finally, the events of 9/11, the hatred experienced by sectarian Islamism, the continued arrogance of the Roman Church as being the only source of all the truth, coupled with the books by Sam Harris, Susan Jacoby, Jessica Stern, leaves one thinking that the benefits of religion are outweighed by negative outcomes noted throughout history and noted in current events, e.g., crusades, antisemitism, hatred of others who either identify with a different belief system or no belief system.
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Conflicts among Democrats regarding Iraq's Future
Nearly all pundits continue to focus on the inability of the Democrats to have a coherent position on our military involvement in Iraq. However, the reality of what is happening in Iraq gives no ground to a strong position on our involvement.
The only basis for extracting our combat forces is one that indicates that our intervention is inevitably doomed and staying only exposes more to death and delays in the inevitable. But how can one agree with this position without misgivings? Iraq will not disintegrate into chaos without the involvement of other nations, e.g., Iran, presumably an unacceptable situation.
The reason for all the confusion seems to be based on the inability to lay blame on our administration for our intervention to the point where we accept our responsibility for the current and projected mess. Only then can we openly advocate for the approach with the most promise, viz., multinational intervention with the United States as a partner. We want to appear in control with a hope that our image will survive in tact. We are not in control and will not be able to control the future. Yet, we cannot abdicate our responsibility for causing the mess. We need help and help will come when we declare we are in need of the assistance of others.
The only basis for extracting our combat forces is one that indicates that our intervention is inevitably doomed and staying only exposes more to death and delays in the inevitable. But how can one agree with this position without misgivings? Iraq will not disintegrate into chaos without the involvement of other nations, e.g., Iran, presumably an unacceptable situation.
The reason for all the confusion seems to be based on the inability to lay blame on our administration for our intervention to the point where we accept our responsibility for the current and projected mess. Only then can we openly advocate for the approach with the most promise, viz., multinational intervention with the United States as a partner. We want to appear in control with a hope that our image will survive in tact. We are not in control and will not be able to control the future. Yet, we cannot abdicate our responsibility for causing the mess. We need help and help will come when we declare we are in need of the assistance of others.
Will Islam Moderate?
Minimally, there is a need for us all to become more, far more, literate about Islam. We will never be able to navigate through life without more involvement with Islam, if for no other reason than demographics. Their numbers will increase more than those of other religions.
Many Westerners hope that the extremes of Islam will moderate with time. Undoubtedly, there is some truth to this perspective. However, Geneive Abdo provides a healthly and somewhat sober view that Islam identification with western values is not realistic.
Muslims both identify with Islam values and, more importantly, reject western values, as expressed in Europe and the United States. There is no reason to expect that their value system will change significantly.
Listening to US politicians talk about the “war” with those who reject the American Way of Life suggests that, with effort, we will again establish control over values that dominate the world. This goal seems very unrealistic.
Only by finding ways to work with those with Islam values will we avoid the endless conflict that looms in our future.
Many Westerners hope that the extremes of Islam will moderate with time. Undoubtedly, there is some truth to this perspective. However, Geneive Abdo provides a healthly and somewhat sober view that Islam identification with western values is not realistic.
Muslims both identify with Islam values and, more importantly, reject western values, as expressed in Europe and the United States. There is no reason to expect that their value system will change significantly.
Listening to US politicians talk about the “war” with those who reject the American Way of Life suggests that, with effort, we will again establish control over values that dominate the world. This goal seems very unrealistic.
Only by finding ways to work with those with Islam values will we avoid the endless conflict that looms in our future.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Another Reason for Failure in Iraq
H.D.S. Greenway is a person with wonderful insight into many international situations. His weekly column in the Boston Globe focuses on the inevitable failure of the current surge in Iraq.
He is not the first to come to such a conclusion. However, his reasoning provides another basis for the conclusion.
Referencing the usual scenarios of an intervening power that either bolsters the existing government or secures power for the opposition, he notes that the US and its coalition has (1) undermined the existing (Sunis), (2) established a new power source (Shiites), only then (3) concluding that the new power based (Shiites) is not acceptable. Now, the US is fighting both the Sunni insurgents and the Shiite militia, confirming that everyone will only hate us more!
He is not the first to come to such a conclusion. However, his reasoning provides another basis for the conclusion.
Referencing the usual scenarios of an intervening power that either bolsters the existing government or secures power for the opposition, he notes that the US and its coalition has (1) undermined the existing (Sunis), (2) established a new power source (Shiites), only then (3) concluding that the new power based (Shiites) is not acceptable. Now, the US is fighting both the Sunni insurgents and the Shiite militia, confirming that everyone will only hate us more!
Wednesday, March 7, 2007
"Cobra II" by Michael R. Gordon and Gen. Bernard E. Trainor
Even though my reading of virtually all well-publicized books on Iraq seemed to reiterate similar information, I was compelled to read the one yet unread book: Cobra II by Michael R. Gordon and General Bernard E. Trainor. While the detailed contents (507 pages plus notes and appendixes) is extraordinarily well-written (as in a novel), the substance is very depressing.
It remains a mystery how so many could deny the validity of what so many others thought to be major problems with any military action intended to change the regime in Iraq. Cobra II reinforced the notion that all the planning efforts were designed to accommodate Rumsfeld’s biases intended to transform the military. Inputs contrary to these biases were ultimately disregarded.
Troops pathetically trying to adjust to realities not considered during the planning phase would be comical, if not so sad. Plans based only on preconceived notions seldom work. In this case, adjustments were made by the force of reality bearing in on the military as they attempted to implement the plan. The military adjusted to unexpected geography and the presence and strength of the Fedayeen, the non-military resistance fighters.
And, after finally getting to Baghdad, the inability to establish security independently of the US military become another casualty of the biased planning.
It will never be known whether the denied advice of (1) needing 350,000 troops on the ground to secure the area, (2) establishing quick transition to Iraq control of the government, (3) maintaining the available, if weak, institutions of police and civil service, would have made the difference will never be known.
It is clear that what happened epitomizes the failures of this administration to govern properly.
It remains a mystery how so many could deny the validity of what so many others thought to be major problems with any military action intended to change the regime in Iraq. Cobra II reinforced the notion that all the planning efforts were designed to accommodate Rumsfeld’s biases intended to transform the military. Inputs contrary to these biases were ultimately disregarded.
Troops pathetically trying to adjust to realities not considered during the planning phase would be comical, if not so sad. Plans based only on preconceived notions seldom work. In this case, adjustments were made by the force of reality bearing in on the military as they attempted to implement the plan. The military adjusted to unexpected geography and the presence and strength of the Fedayeen, the non-military resistance fighters.
And, after finally getting to Baghdad, the inability to establish security independently of the US military become another casualty of the biased planning.
It will never be known whether the denied advice of (1) needing 350,000 troops on the ground to secure the area, (2) establishing quick transition to Iraq control of the government, (3) maintaining the available, if weak, institutions of police and civil service, would have made the difference will never be known.
It is clear that what happened epitomizes the failures of this administration to govern properly.
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
Obama: Leader for Tomorrow!
Retirement is such a blessing! One unexpected pleasure is the luxury that time permits watching, of all things, speeches. Sunday's anticipated interest in how Senators Obama and Clinton would succeed in satisfying the pundits as well as their supporters was justified by the reality. Their speeches in Selma were terrific!
The time has come to support someone new, someone without the history that complicates decision-making. Today, Nicholas Kristof speaks to the unusual set of experiences that shaped Obama's present perception of reality.
Living in a biracial family with experiences in Thailand as a youngster plus grandparents with openness to a world that was in the process of transitioning to a more open society, promoted his interest in community organization (before law school) and civil rights (after law school).
What he says and how he says it, makes a person believe that it is possible to get on track to a world and society that will act more responsively to its inherent common good. There are too many problems with solutions only amenable to cooperation among people and nations.
Obama does readily accept donations.
https://donate.barackobama.com/page/contribute/matcher?match_campaign_id=2&match_is_pledge=1
The time has come to support someone new, someone without the history that complicates decision-making. Today, Nicholas Kristof speaks to the unusual set of experiences that shaped Obama's present perception of reality.
Living in a biracial family with experiences in Thailand as a youngster plus grandparents with openness to a world that was in the process of transitioning to a more open society, promoted his interest in community organization (before law school) and civil rights (after law school).
What he says and how he says it, makes a person believe that it is possible to get on track to a world and society that will act more responsively to its inherent common good. There are too many problems with solutions only amenable to cooperation among people and nations.
Obama does readily accept donations.
https://donate.barackobama.com/page/contribute/matcher?match_campaign_id=2&match_is_pledge=1
Growth at Twelve Weeks!
Awesome the reality,
Beauty in flesh,
Only two inches,
Twelve weeks,
But still all there!
Is it “intelligent design”?
Or, “evolution”?
Or, God?
Enough to wonder,
At mystery unfolding.
Enough to know,
A body alive,
A body yet to hold.
Beauty in flesh,
Only two inches,
Twelve weeks,
But still all there!
Is it “intelligent design”?
Or, “evolution”?
Or, God?
Enough to wonder,
At mystery unfolding.
Enough to know,
A body alive,
A body yet to hold.
Thursday, March 1, 2007
New Court House
A building of stone and glass,
Seems like any other,
People come, people go,
Doors open, doors close.
Buildings serve a purpose,
Some are homes,
Some are office and stores,
Some actually serve others.
Serving the cause of justice,
A noble goal,
Deserves a special building,
One will be in Buffalo!
Seems like any other,
People come, people go,
Doors open, doors close.
Buildings serve a purpose,
Some are homes,
Some are office and stores,
Some actually serve others.
Serving the cause of justice,
A noble goal,
Deserves a special building,
One will be in Buffalo!
"House of War" by James Carroll
James Carroll is very open about his personal mission to overcome the years of alienation with his father. Even though his An American Requiem dealt explicitly with his relationship with his father, a relatively famous Air Force General, it was not enough. Working for ten years, James Carroll authored a detailed history (512 pages with an additional 91 pages of notes) of the Pentagon.
Walking through the history of the Pentagon has similarities with the development of a novel. The difference is that the main character is an institution!! While his references lend support to its credibility, only those who actually lived within the environment could vouch for its authenticity.
However, one major point that is consistent with many books written about Iraq is the overwhelming weight of the Pentagon’s influence on US policy. The principle that the Department of Defense is under civilian leadership is somewhat suspect. It seems that civilian authority can be exercised only when aligned with military concurrence. In addition, the reader wonders whether military leaders are themselves absorbed by the Pentagon’s thrust towards domination passed on from one generation to the next. It seems that only after retirement do the leaders fault the Pentagon, referred to as the “retirement syndrome”. Vision becomes clear only in hindsight.
The book serves as a review of the US involvement in the various wars and conflicts since 1941 when, on 9/11, ground was opened for the Pentagon. Hard to believe that on the same day, 60 years later, 9/11 would forever be etched in our memories.
Walking through the history of the Pentagon has similarities with the development of a novel. The difference is that the main character is an institution!! While his references lend support to its credibility, only those who actually lived within the environment could vouch for its authenticity.
However, one major point that is consistent with many books written about Iraq is the overwhelming weight of the Pentagon’s influence on US policy. The principle that the Department of Defense is under civilian leadership is somewhat suspect. It seems that civilian authority can be exercised only when aligned with military concurrence. In addition, the reader wonders whether military leaders are themselves absorbed by the Pentagon’s thrust towards domination passed on from one generation to the next. It seems that only after retirement do the leaders fault the Pentagon, referred to as the “retirement syndrome”. Vision becomes clear only in hindsight.
The book serves as a review of the US involvement in the various wars and conflicts since 1941 when, on 9/11, ground was opened for the Pentagon. Hard to believe that on the same day, 60 years later, 9/11 would forever be etched in our memories.
Credibility of the Bush Administration -- Deja Vu
The ability to believe the government has always been a subject of discussion. It appears that the current administration deserves credit for achieving such high marks for their ability to deceive the American public. It will take a long time for citizens to regain even the jaundiced esteem enjoyed by the Executive Branch in the past.
While the famous distortions regarding WMDs in Iraq are well-known, it now becomes clear that the basis for backing out of the relationship established by the Clinton administration with the North Korean government in 2002 was faulty. Had we been honest with the level of ignorance within the intelligence community about the status of North Korean, it is possible that some consequences we are now confronting may have been avoided.
While the famous distortions regarding WMDs in Iraq are well-known, it now becomes clear that the basis for backing out of the relationship established by the Clinton administration with the North Korean government in 2002 was faulty. Had we been honest with the level of ignorance within the intelligence community about the status of North Korean, it is possible that some consequences we are now confronting may have been avoided.
Forgotten Vote on Multilateralism!
Former Senator Lincoln Chafee zones in on a critical vote that preceded the more famous vote to authorize the President to use force in Iraq. "Senator Levin’s amendment called for United Nations approval before force could be authorized." The amendment was voted down by the essentially the same margin approving the President's use of force.
As Senator Chafee points out, none of the current Presidential aspirants has addressed their failure to vote for Levin's amendment.
There have been so many miscues associated with the Iraq war that it numbs one's ability to absorb more. Yet, we cannot ignore facts that need to be addressed by those who want to lead us during the next phase of our history in Iraq.
As Senator Chafee points out, none of the current Presidential aspirants has addressed their failure to vote for Levin's amendment.
There have been so many miscues associated with the Iraq war that it numbs one's ability to absorb more. Yet, we cannot ignore facts that need to be addressed by those who want to lead us during the next phase of our history in Iraq.
Another Look at the Controversy in the Anglican Community
Discussions in Tanzania about the governance of the Anglican Church were of personal interest. The issue of how religion based on historical, and often rigid, tradition can transition to new understanding influenced by current ethos and cultural mores is relevant to all Christian churches, as well as other religions, especially those based on some form of text considered to be derived from God.
The Anglican Church epitomized the leading edge of evolution of Christian belief and morality. It has demonstrated the ability to change while permitting a wide range of theological understanding of Christian faith. The issue of ordaining gay bishops and blessing gay and lesbian unions is now threatening a world-wide ecclesiastical structure that accepted ambiguity as an essential ingredient of life.
Jack Miles (1) presents an entirely different perspective. In fact, he indicates that the foundation of the Anglican Church as an inherently “national” church was based on an interpretation of the structure of the early church. All local churches were essentially autonomous. The bishop of Rome did not have control over local churches. The rationale for the Anglican Church in America becoming the Episcopal Church was logically determined by the establishment of our national constitution. If the nation was no longer aligned to England, then the church had to develop its autonomy. The need to maintain aligned with the Anglican community was no longer needed. Maintaining communion with the greater Anglican community is inconsistent with its foundation.
In short, this current controversy may represent an opportunity for the Episcopal Church to gain its rightful autonomy.
____________________________________________________________________
(1)Born in Chicago, Jack Miles was a Jesuit seminarian from 1960 to 1970, studying at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome and the Hebrew University in Jerusalem before completing a doctorate in the department of Near Eastern Languages at Harvard. He is fluent in several languages.
Over a period of nearly twenty years (1975–95), Jack Miles was an editor at Doubleday, the executive editor at the University of California Press, the literary editor at The Los Angeles Times, and a member of the Times editorial board, writing on politics and culture.
Jack Miles has been a Mellon visiting professor of humanities at Caltech, the director of the Humanities Center at the Claremont Graduate University, a Regents' Lecturer at the University of California, a visiting fellow with the Committee on the Conceptual Foundations of Science at the University of Chicago, and scholar in residence at the Getty Research Institute.
Currently senior fellow for religious affairs with the Pacific Council on International Policy and general editor of the forthcoming Norton Anthology of World Religions.
The Anglican Church epitomized the leading edge of evolution of Christian belief and morality. It has demonstrated the ability to change while permitting a wide range of theological understanding of Christian faith. The issue of ordaining gay bishops and blessing gay and lesbian unions is now threatening a world-wide ecclesiastical structure that accepted ambiguity as an essential ingredient of life.
Jack Miles (1) presents an entirely different perspective. In fact, he indicates that the foundation of the Anglican Church as an inherently “national” church was based on an interpretation of the structure of the early church. All local churches were essentially autonomous. The bishop of Rome did not have control over local churches. The rationale for the Anglican Church in America becoming the Episcopal Church was logically determined by the establishment of our national constitution. If the nation was no longer aligned to England, then the church had to develop its autonomy. The need to maintain aligned with the Anglican community was no longer needed. Maintaining communion with the greater Anglican community is inconsistent with its foundation.
In short, this current controversy may represent an opportunity for the Episcopal Church to gain its rightful autonomy.
____________________________________________________________________
(1)Born in Chicago, Jack Miles was a Jesuit seminarian from 1960 to 1970, studying at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome and the Hebrew University in Jerusalem before completing a doctorate in the department of Near Eastern Languages at Harvard. He is fluent in several languages.
Over a period of nearly twenty years (1975–95), Jack Miles was an editor at Doubleday, the executive editor at the University of California Press, the literary editor at The Los Angeles Times, and a member of the Times editorial board, writing on politics and culture.
Jack Miles has been a Mellon visiting professor of humanities at Caltech, the director of the Humanities Center at the Claremont Graduate University, a Regents' Lecturer at the University of California, a visiting fellow with the Committee on the Conceptual Foundations of Science at the University of Chicago, and scholar in residence at the Getty Research Institute.
Currently senior fellow for religious affairs with the Pacific Council on International Policy and general editor of the forthcoming Norton Anthology of World Religions.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)