The Pageless Book

Photo Above by Brian Gautreau. Photo Below by Hojusaram. Final Photo by Gutter.

During the summer months and once per month during the rest of the year, my minister takes a break from the pulpit and allow members of our congregation, through the Lay Worship Committee, to conduct a service in her stead. Now, I’ve been a member of this church for all of nine or so months. For a scant three of those months, I’ve been a member of the Lay Worship Committee. Yesterday, I conducted my first service, in which I delivered my first sermon.

Of course, for someone who has aspirations of becoming a minister himself at some point in the future, this is all a logical progression of events. However, there is one thing that readers of this blog wouldn’t know about me unless they have met me in person - I am very much an introvert. Despite that I received a number of compliments from fellow church members that I looked in control and self confident at the pulpit, I was a nervous wreck by the end of the service. So I’d like to offer a sincere apology to everyone who approached me after the service - that blank look on my face was shock, and I really do appreciate your feedback. The impression I got from the congregation was that the service was a success. There were a few flub-ups on my behalf, but all-in-all, everything went smoothly.

For the reading please of my online spiritual family, and everyone in the UU blogosphere, I’d like to share my sermon, presented June 29th, 2008.

The Independence of Thought

What would life be like without any of those who dared to question the monolithic institutions of their day? Can anyone here tell me what they think life would be like without men and women who thought for themselves? Anyone? [Audience Participation] Well, I think it’s obvious from the answers everyone has given and your presence in a church with a history of great thinkers, that we all know a thing or two about rebellion against the status quo. However, there is one thing that wasn’t mentioned about a life without men and women who dare to think for themselves; noone would ever have to be offended. For all the good that questioning authority and challenging injustices does, it has this annoying tendency to offend.

I like to think of myself as a open minded individual, yet recently I found myself in the position to be the one offended by someone else’s idea of progress. Last week, a decision came down from the Supreme Court about the death penalty which I still have a hard time accepting. I won’t go into details about the ruling, except to say it is one of the more controversial rulings made in recent years, with good reason. Intellectually, I understand the rationality behind the ruling; emotionally, I’m disgusted. I could very well go with my emotional reaction - and that is so much easier than actually considering all sides of the argument. However, if I didn’t give all sides consideration, I could no longer honestly call myself open minded.

We should remind ourselves, from time to time, that thinking for yourself is in no way easy. The men and women who lived and died fighting the injustices, superstitions, and preconceptions of their day, were terrified every step of the way. Those who have chiseled their way through walls of oppression with their bare hands, did so not knowing whether their efforts had any effect. We each know in the back of our minds that the struggle is still far from over, yet it is so easy not to question, not to think, and allow ourselves to be led.

Emerson had said, in his essay on Intellect, “God offers to every mind its choice between truth and repose. Take which you please, — you can never have both. Between these, as a pendulum, man oscillates. He in whom the love of repose predominates will accept the first creed, the first philosophy, the first political party he meets, — most likely his father’s. He gets rest, commodity, and reputation; but he shuts the door of truth. He in whom the love of truth predominates will keep himself aloof from all moorings, and afloat. He will abstain from dogmatism, and recognize all the opposite negations, between which, as walls, his being is swung. He submits to the inconvenience of suspense and imperfect opinion, but he is a candidate for truth, as the other is not, and respects the highest law of his being.” I couldn’t agree with Emerson more.

Questions and Doubt. Curiosity and Rebellion. For many, these represent the very opposite of what it means to have faith. Yet, it is the seeds of doubt that flower into new sciences. It is the rebellion against the status-quo that brings greater justice and freedom to all people. It is our curiosity which makes the world seem to be filled with wonder, and it is our questions which refine our understanding of the truth. “Doubt is not the opposite of faith; it is one element of faith,” as the theologian Paul Tillich had said.

The independence of thought from outside influences does not diminish faith in the Truth we find, but rather it redefines our relationship with our faith. Blind faith - faith outside the confines of reason, not subjected to the distilling qualities of doubt - is fickle. When someone speaks about losing faith, they are talking about no longer being able to find security in an untested ideal or idea. That feeling of security that blind faith instills can flit away at a moments notice and will only return when no longer questioned.

However, that is not the faith of this religion. We are encouraged to question and doubt, here. In this house, we are free to be curious, to rebel against antiquated traditions, to play hide-and-seek with God, and to think for ourselves. That faith is unshakeable. It is tested in the laboratories of our lives, and found good and true time and time again. And although our faith is diverse and sometimes at odds with fellow Unitarian Universalists, we use our differences only to further refine that which we find to be true.

Click on one link below.

written by John \\ tags: Faith, Freedom, Questions, Reason, Thought

Photo Above by Danielle Blue. Photo Below by Wired Protocol.

I come from a lower middle-class family with two blue-collar working parents. When my mother had first met my step-father, he was a union steel worker, which was at the time a secure job you could count on until retirement. Someone forgot to tell the company owners that, because throughout my childhood our family suffered temporary lay-offs which lead to unpaid bills and eventual eviction notices. I don’t blame my parents; they were raised in an industrial society and were unprepared for the shift to a technological white-collar based economy.

In time, the temporary lay-offs stretched from weeks into months, until one day they closed down the plant at which my step-father worked. This event sent my parents into a panic. I remember long nights of listening to them argue about money, bills, and blaming each other for how bad things had gotten. At some point, I became tired of worrying and fearing the next crisis. Had we not survived these issues before? My parents had always seemed to pull their resources and their wits together at the last minute, finding a means for us to survive as a family. I began to see all the arguing and worrying as a waste of time and energy that could have been better spent resolving or even preventing my family’s financial problems. We would always survive; the question became how well we would survive.

In stark contrast to my parents, I had developed hope for the future. Now this wasn’t a naive hope - after all we had been through, I learned that hard times are always a pink slip away. However, times would not always be hard, and every passing moment of in-fighting was another lost opportunity to make the hard times a little less hard. Why waste that energy and time?

So, when my wife came home early from work seven months ago and told me with a stunned look on her face that she had been let go, I didn’t panic. I knew that we would make this work - no stressing needed. I was pretty confident that she would have a new job within the next couple of months. Even though I was wrong, and we have struggled through these last seven months, I knew that we would survive. There was no question in my mind that this was a temporary situation.

On Saturday, my wife visited me on my lunch break at work and told me that she had an interview with a local company. This company she was referring to has a great reputation, and she is looking forward to working for them. After such a long period of shrinking prospects and temporary positions, we may finally be looking at the opportunity for which we’ve been waiting. The hard times are almost over. Do you know what? They weren’t all that hard after all.

What does this have to do with spirituality? It shows that hope does win out in the end. These financial issues that I have witnessed in the past and am living with in the present are a microcosm of the ills in this world. Faith - that which is at the very heart of spirituality - does not need to be blind, deaf, or dumb to our present situation to be maintained. Not once when I expressed hope for the future did I ignore the truth of the present, and I am aware, even now, that this new opportunity isn’t guaranteed. However, it is the message of spirituality that, no matter how horrible things become, we have the capacity to survive, adapt, and even thrive. It is what experience has taught me and what history proves. Even in our worst hour, we have been living off the fruits of Hope.

Click on one link below.

written by John \\ tags: Faith, Family, Life, Spirituality, Work

Photo Above by ButterflySha. Photo Below by Steve Evans.

“If the only prayer you ever say in your whole life is ‘thank you,’ that would suffice.”
- Meister Eckhart, 1260– 1328.

I don’t remember the exact time it first happened, but I do remember it was during a gathering with my in-laws. My wife was seated on my right, and her grandmother was on my left side. On one end of the table was my father-in-law, and on the other end was my mother-in-law. Across from us was my brother-in-law, his wife, and between them sat Samantha, my niece and god-child. Food, glorious sustenance, was set out before us. Before anyone could lay one hand on a roll, Samantha said, for the first time of what would become a tradition at such gatherings, “We need to say the words!” My wife and I looked at each other in mild displeasure.

Why displeasure, you may ask? What exactly was it that I have against saying grace? It is because I felt excluded. Many non-Christians feel singled out when called upon to pray in public. Think of the position we are placed in: we can either pretend to pray with everyone else, betraying our own beliefs while insulting the integrity of the beliefs of others, or we can stand there in awkward silence, feeling out of place and perhaps a little bit ostracized. That may not be the intention of the practice of public prayer, but it is often the effect.

Non-Christians often develop a negative attitude in regards to prayer in general, due to our Christian brethren’s insistence on public prayer. In all honesty, this negativity may be part of what fuels the debate on school prayer. It is this reluctance to pray that concerns me - not only my own resistance to prayer, but the lack of prayer among non-Christians in general. The problem is that prayer is so much apart of the Christian experience, than when a person leaves the Christian religion, they feel they must leave behind this deeply spiritual practice as well.

The truth is, prayer has always been a meaningful method of communing with the Divine and has existed since the dawn of civilization. No one group of people can lay claim to this practice as being exclusively their own. As people of alternative spiritual paths, we need to recognize that it is everyone’s inherited right to communicate with the Divine through prayer. We need to reclaim prayer as our own and find a meaningful way in which people of all faiths can pray together.

So how will I reintegrate prayer into my spiritual practices without alienating my Christian in-laws? By requesting a silent prayer when in public, and praying in earnest when alone. Ironically enough, that is exactly how Jesus recommended that his followers pray. In Matthew 6:5, Jesus instructs his followers saying, “And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men.”

This passage in the Bible leads me to believe that perhaps even the early Christians felt excluded because of the practice of public prayer in ancient Rome. It does no one harm to gently remind them of that possibility. Next time I am at a gathering with family, perhaps I will do just that.

Originally posted September 29th, 2007.

Click on one link below.

written by John \\ tags: Christian, Faith, Family, Prayer, Religion, Ritual, Tradition

Above Photo by Steven Keys. Photo Below by Maria Ganessas.

“Young man—Young man—Your arm’s too short to box with God.”
- James Weldon Johnson, 1871–1938.

The above famed quote, often reiterated by Christians and other mainstream monotheists, is assumed to mean that you cannot fight against God’s will, or defeat the universal truth of God. It has been used as a condescending way to counter the arguments of those that fall outside the bounds of mainstream religion. Yet, I feel that the full extent of meaning behind the quote is lost to those who use it in arrogance as a verbal parry. The irony of the situation is that it is the religions themselves who provide the target with which to box - not God.

How so, you might ask. After all, the greatness of the Divine is beyond the reach of men and women of this world. How then can I fault monotheistic religions for making this claim? How can I point and show that it is they who are the cause of this conflict? The answer - another ironic twist. The fault that I find with the mainstream religions of the western world is the same fault that they had found with the fallen polytheistic religions - idolatry.

Most monotheistic religions believe that they know the difference between an idol and the One True God. The God they worship is, of course, assumed to be correct, while the God that everyone else worships is implied to be the idol. Just what does it mean to worship an idol? The practice of literally bowing before a statue in reverence has not been common in western culture since before the colonization of the Americas. In this society, idolatry has come to mean the worship of ideas as God.

What ideas do we, as a society, worship as God? There are no lack of choices; we as a society have chosen to venerate sex, money, movie stars, musicians, and athletes as the end-all and be-all. We are a society of vices and it has long been the mainstream religious establishments that have fought against our idolatries. So, what gives me the right to say that they, too, are idolaters? Their idols are their ideas of what God is or is not and their presumed exclusive access to the “Truth.”

Let me give you an example of how these faiths set up idols on God’s throne. Were I to claim that only adherents of my particular faith will receive God’s heavenly reward, I would be rejecting a God that would choose to give the heavenly reward to all people. If I were to claim that only the literal interpretation of a particular holy text is the correct and final word of God, I would be rejecting a God that would choose to speak freely with whomever listened. The moment I told you that your concept of God is incorrect, I would presume to tell God what God can and can not do. Your arms are too short to box with God, but I could claim God is small enough to fit inside a box? We box not with God, but instead with the mainstream religions’ narrow concept of God.

Trying to force something as great as God to conform to the limits of mortal intellect and ego is like trying to bottle sunlight - it’s absurd. We must stop trying to define the undefinable, limit the limitless and measure the infinite. What we are then left with is a spirituality that does not contradict science, never becomes dated or irrelevant, and is always the source of unity and brotherhood.

Originally Published September 25th, 2007.

Click on one link below.

written by John \\ tags: Christian, Faith, God, Holy Text, Religion, Spirituality

Above Photo by Ibrahim Iujaz. Gun Photo by Jaqian. Ruins Photo by David Ohmer.

The last two verses of the first chapter of The Gated Emptiness refer to a kind of Apocalypse, called cryptically as “the day all eyes close.” I have to be honest and say that these are probably my least favorite passages in the whole text. Having been raised Christian, I am all too familiar with the story of Revelations and its negative impact on the Christian dogma. Religion that relies on fear of punishment as motivation for good is disingenuous at best and psychologically scarring at worst.

However, I do not believe that these passages are hinting at some punishment, but are rather offering a warning. Let me break down what these verses are talking about; they read:

The day on which all eyes close is ever upon us. Where faith falters, hope falls. Where reason replaces emotion, compassion becomes a rule of etiquette. Where love is abandoned for convenience, strange children conceive of dust for limbs and teeth for tongues. To see completely like a yearning beast, to understand with the seat of your soul, is to turn back that day.

On the day which all eyes shall close, there will be no prophets, no artist, no seers. The gardens shall fold, the wisest shall die in crowds of writhing idiots, and all angels shall pull away taking with them every newborn. No sacrifice shall be great enough, no prayer loud enough, no cause of significant enough to hold the tide of the hollowing back.

The first thing we are told is that the day “is ever upon us.” That is to say, that the day on which all eyes close could occur at any time. Where faith - or trust in something greater than ourselves - falters, hope - or the feeling that everything will turn out for the best - falls. When we have little faith in something greater than ourselves, whether that thing is humanity or God or something else, it becomes harder to face life’s challenges. If logic were to completely replace emotion, compassion and mercy towards one another would become meaningless. All of this is fine and well, but what exactly are these verses getting at?

“Strange children” hint at the problem being discussed. “Love abandoned for convenience” is a euphemism for broken or dysfunctional families. Children from dysfunctional families are more likely to be dysfunctional themselves. When these children inherit their parent’s society, the society becomes dysfunctional. A dysfunctional society will eventually fall - that is the day on which all eyes close.

The Gated Emptiness is issuing our society a warning. It isn’t a warning of some cosmic event in which the world in which we live will be destroyed, the good rewarded, and the evil punished. This is a warning about something that has happened to societies in the past and is happening to Western Culture right now. We are becoming a shallow people, arrogant, and short sighted. The Roman Empire fell not because of the outside pressures of barbarians, but because the foolishness of their society bred weakness into every level of their culture. The same is happening again, right now, in every English speaking country.

Are we doomed? Of course not. We are each given choices, yet most of us choose not to exercise those choices, effectively choosing to allow our society to decay. However, if we were to each choose to pay attention to the choices life affords us, and exercise that right to make up our own mind, we help rebuild the fabric of our society. But are we too late? No, we are not too late. The Gated Emptiness describes the death-throws of a society; art and spirituality are discarded, truth is ignored, and the freedom of choice becomes further limited by our inability to see or unwillingness to exercise those choices.

All we are asked to do is open our eyes…

Click on one link below.

written by John \\ tags: Art, Faith, Freedom, Humanity, Spirituality

“Reason is our soul’s left hand, faith her right;
By these we reach divinity.”
- John Donne, 1572 - 1631.

Above Photo by Old Sarge. Photo Below by Zorilla.

Whether the religion in question venerates one god or one hundred gods, believes that their gods are a part of creation or apart from creation, all religions share one trait; the worship of the Divine. While that single similarity seems obvious, it is also the most over looked. It also happens to be the most important.

The moment a seeker starts questioning one aspect of the religion in which she was born, the tendency is to question all aspects of that religion, including the teachings, rituals, and practices. This usually results one of two extreme reactions - either the adoption of a radically different religion to spite the religion of their parents or the rejection of the Divine in all forms resulting in atheism.

To avoid such drastic changes in belief and maintain the emotionally satisfying and fulfilling connection to the Divine, many religious men and women cling to the teachings of their given faith. They reject anything that contradicts the literal interpretation of their religion to avoid having to question and endanger their faith. They forgo reason to satisfy their spiritual hunger.

The ideal situation is to be able openly to question the teachings and practices of any given religion, and yet to feel no loss for that with the Divine. In western society, we’ve been convinced that ideal is all but unattainable and unrealistic. Western society has been informed incorrectly. We merely need to recognize that spiritual and reason are not opposites, but rather two different ways of understanding. Spirituality is meant for understanding one’s self, while reason is meant for understanding the world beyond one’s self.

From this perspective, how each individual religion defines the Divine is irrelevant as we believe that the Divine is beyond definition. One or many, a part of or apart from, involved or observing - all of the definitions that we apply to the Divine are merely for the convenience of our limited human intellect. It is our deeper emotions to which the Divine appeals; the logic of definitions are meaningless.

Once we have moved away from trying to define, contain, and restrict our spirituality to our intellect, several amazing things happen. We find that we are free to worship the Divine in the way that most satisfies that spiritual hunger. As a culture, we begin to see all religions as different means of devotion to the same source. One more barrier that divides us against one another will have been torn down, and one less issue will be distracting us from the larger problems we face.
Originally Posted September 25, 2007.

Click on one link below.

written by John \\ tags: Atheism, Faith, God, Reason, Religion, Spirituality

Recently, I had the pleasure of interviewing Reverend Kit Ketcham from Ms. Kitty’s Saloon and Road Show. As one of the most beloved minster bloggers in the Unitarian Universalist blogosphere, it is an honor having her as my first interview on The Pageless Book. I am thankful that she agreed to the interview and hope that you visit her blog to read more of her mirth and wisdom. Namaste.

Above Photo by Philip Kromer. Photo Below of Reverend Kit Ketcham. Bread Photo by Miheco.
Volunteer Sign Photo by Tim Parkinson.

It’s hard to know when to respond to the seductiveness of the world and when to respond to its challenge. If the world were merely seductive, that would be easy. If it were merely challenging, that would be no problem. But I rise in the morning torn between the desire to improve the world and a desire to enjoy the world. This makes it hard to plan the day. - E.B. White

John Pageless: You first started your blog about a year and a half ago. I’ve went back and read your first post, but it only indicated in a vague manner your original purpose for blogging. Can you please clarify your original purpose for your blog and discuss how has that purpose changed over the last year and a half?

Rev. Ketcham: I originally started the blog because I wanted to comment on someone’s post and found that I needed to register if I wanted to really get into commenting. And I’ve always liked to write, so it was attractive from that perspective. I had no original purpose for the blog, but my old moniker from Citizens’ Band radio days was Ms. Kitty and I wanted to use that. I also have a secret desire to be a torch singer and figured if I had my own saloon, they’d have to let me be part of the show!

JP: As the daughter of a Baptist preacher, you had a strong religious upbringing. Yet at some point, you moved on to become a Unitarian Universalist, only to later take up ministry yourself. From what I understand of your blog, this was in part to the social revolution of the 1960’s. What initially lead you on this spiritual journey and how has it impacted your ministry?

Rev. K: I think I always secretly wanted to be a minister, but when I graduated from college in 1963, the only thing they were training women to do was become Christian Education directors, aka glorified Sunday School teachers in my opinion. But the careers I have had, starting right after college, were all in social service work - welfare caseworker, community center work, teaching/counseling - and all formed a foundation for me which made ministry a wonderful next step. For me, the social service work was more important than the religion I was attached to, until I felt a strong call to the ministry and then I moved into the position of leading others in social service work.

As a minister, I feel a strong pull to do interfaith work. I think UUs will get much more done in the world if we link arms with other religious communities. I would say that my sense of this impacts my ministry deeply. I want to be involved with people of other faiths; I want my congregation to be involved with people of other faiths. I don’t see how we can change the world without creating coalitions of progressive people.

JP: Unitarian Universalism is an evolving tradition; young, yet not without a solid historical foundation. You’ve witnessed and even wrote about this religion’s evolution. Where do you see Unitarian Universalism in the future and what part do you play now to help create that future?

Rev. K: I think of Unitarian Universalism as the catalytic agent in our society; think “yeast” in a loaf of bread. I’m not sure it matters whether we have zillions of members or not. I’m inclined to think that we have made a huge difference in society since our inception. I’m also a believer in getting the message out; we have a message of salvation that is different from traditional faith. I read blogs and hear stories of how things play out in other congregations and I can see that there is a wide variety of healthy activist congregations; I think the East coast, because of its population decline, may be struggling with a lessening of energy, while the West is the recipient of new energy because we are increasing in our population. I know some of my colleagues in the East feel frustrated by that lack of energy. I don’t sense the lack of energy here; I sense a constant upwelling of energy and growth.

I hope we don’t get bogged down in the numbers game, thinking that the only way we can make a difference is by increasing our numbers. We need to focus on our mission, which is to change society. If people are attracted to us by our actions in society, that’s much healthier growth than people who come through the doors because we have cute sermon titles.

JP: One of the positive aspects of Unitarian Universalism is that we are exposed to a large number of religions and philosophies. We are probably one of the most inclusive spiritual traditions in America today. This lends itself to an honest approach to spiritual exploration and self discovery. However, suppose this religion and the religion you were born into did not exist; which other religion or philosophy would you be most likely to take up and why?

Rev. K: I am pretty sure that if I had it to do over again, I would be a Quaker, because I am very attracted to their practice of non-violence. But circumstances led me to UUism and I am happy here. However, if I ever retire to a place where there is no UU congregation and there is a Quaker meeting, I know where I’ll go! I’m a Christian at heart; Jesus’s message is foundational for me. But I’m not likely to choose a Christian church these days. Too many integrity issues bog down the message of Jesus in traditions where they are still fighting about gender, sexual orientation, etc.

JP: I’ve been fairly public about my intention to become a Unitarian Universalist minister. Even though my journey has been waylaid by recent financial difficulties, I’m still resolute on making ministry a part of my life. As someone who has been raised by a preacher and became a minister herself, is there any advice you would impart to me?

Rev. K: Hmmm. The journey into ministry often takes a long time. I would just recommend that you not be discouraged and that you recognize that every day you spend NOT a minister is preparation for becoming a minister. Use everything that happens to you as preparation. It’s the figurative money in the bank of life. I can’t visualize what kind of minister I would be today if I hadn’t put in all those years in social service work, in being a parent and spouse, in learning to lead highly intelligent people in social groups, in living from paycheck to paycheck, in volunteering in various ways. Be involved as deeply as you can in your local congregation; start something new there; try your wings at something new.

Click on one link below.

written by John \\ tags: Blogging, Faith, Interviews, Ministry, Religion, Unitarian Universalism

Photo above by Stefan. Photo below by Karen Eliot.

“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”

- Buddha Gautama Siddharta (563-483 B.C.)

Every spiritual teacher worth listening to has offered themselves up to be questioned. All of the great spiritual teachers have said to their followers, “Don’t take my word for it; go see for yourself.” Jesus suggested that we should know the truth by its results the same way we know a tree by its fruit. The Prophet Mohammad had said that “The search of knowledge is an obligation laid on every Muslim.” Yet, when we look at the organizations that promote the teachings of one particular teacher, we come against resistance to questioning. Why should it be that way?

When we surround ourselves only with those who agree with our ideas and beliefs, we start taking those ideas and beliefs for granted. Relying on these notions as being true, our faith becomes blind and misguided. Without regular challenge, a spiritual journey becomes a religious institution and stagnates like standing water. Religious institutions become resistant to external questioning because of lack constant of internal questioning.

Inconsistency in the texts of major religions are actually beneficial in that they challenge each individual to think beyond the text. However, the mechanism for unity is so strong in institutions, that these inconsistencies are overlooked, glossed over, or justified with poor reasoning. In contrast, when faced with someone else’s religion, members of these organizations cannot help seeing contradictions and flaws in reason. Truth be told, institutions train its members to see nothing but the problems inherent in other views while blinding them to the problems within their own.

This is probably the biggest hurtle that religious tolerance faces; the mentality that allows for questioning of other faiths, but not of one’s own. It is so much easier to question the beliefs of another person than to question your own. I always try to remember that, whether I am writing about my own faith or the beliefs of others. And yet that isn’t enough - we must each be willing to be questioned.

What I write here is controversial by its nature, but more importantly, by its design. I want to challenge and be challenged. I question your beliefs to spur you into questioning mine. If you learn nothing else from what is written here, learn to think for yourself and question authority. It is true that no one religion can be founded on that principle, but a community where every individual is a philosopher-prophet-priest demands it.

My question for you is whether or not Unitarian Universalism is that community. Do we follow Timothy Leary’s creed to think for ourselves and question authority? Can we say we live up to the Buddha’s denial of rumored wisdom? Are we taking a good long look at the fruit our trees bear? I ask this because there is a very strong current against mystic or divine experiences within our religion and I believe even this needs to be questioned.

Click on one link below.

written by John \\ tags: Faith, Individuality, Questions, Reason, Religion, Religious Tolerance, Timothy Leary, Unitarian Universalism

Photo above by Bruno Girin. Photo below by Falk Lademann.

Although I have this document available here at The Pageless Book and discussed its origin briefly in my “About Me” page, I am yet to address the subject of The Gated Emptiness in a complete and forthcoming way. It has been looming over me like a Gorilla these past few months and I have been carrying on as if it is perfectly normal to have this 400 pound beast sitting on my website. Truth be told, I fear the judgment of those from whom I seek friendship.

Although Unitarian Universalism is a free faith that encourages the responsible search for truth, in whatever form it may take, it would be careless of me not to recognize that I am a bit of an odd duck even among their number. I was interested in becoming a minister before deciding on becoming a UU, which makes discussion of my decision to join awkward, in the least. Over a third of UUs identify themselves as humanists; I am one of the few theists. UUism tends to favor rational empirical truths over those of a spiritual nature, yet I cannot help but feel that there is more to reality than what logic dictates. My greatest offense, however, is in taking Emerson too literally; I’ve written my own holy book.

How can I be taken seriously when I believe that God inspired these spiritual truths within me, which I have now written down to share? I have to take it on faith that people would be open minded enough to understand, yet be tolerant enough to weather the ridicule I know I will face. It all comes down to having a sense of humor, I guess. Luckily, I tend not to take myself too seriously and rarely expect others to do so.

Let me be plain as to exactly how I feel about The Gated Emptiness; I believe this to be an holy text. This text is not the only truth, nor do I believe it to be absolute truth. The holiness of any writing has more to do with the reader than what is actually written. I am not special in anyway other than in the way in which we are all special. Anyone who commits themselves to the Divine in a meaningful way can write an inspired text. Most important of all, I am not interested starting a new religion; there are far too many of them as it is.

What I do want is to promote is the movement away from institutionalized spirituality and towards an individualized spirituality. It may be pointed out that UUism and other liberal religions already are making such a movement, but the truth is that we are few and the institutions are legions. You only need to look at American politics and the recent events in the Middle East to understand the danger that these institutions pose to humanity as a whole. The Gated Emptiness warns against these institutions and serves as an example of what needs to be done.

Over the next few weeks, I will be writing about the meaning behind the Gated Emptiness as I see it. I want to do this because this will help you understand where I am coming from, and will serve as a testament to exactly what it is that I believe. In seeing my own reasoning spelled out, hopefully you will be inspired to work in favor of individualized spirituality, religious tolerance, and the dismantling of the Religious Right - the metaphorical atomic bombs of spirituality. If I do my job well, perhaps you will be inspired to write your own holy book and share it as I have. Regardless of your personal convictions or your view of The Gated Emptiness, I look forward to these next few weeks and the discussion it sparks.

Until then, Namaste.

Click on one link below.

written by John \\ tags: Faith, God, Humanity, Reason, Religion, Religious Tolerance, Spirituality, Unitarian Universalism

Photo above by Britt Selvitelle.
Cross Tattoo Photo by Josh Parrish.
Tattooed Man Photo by Fabrice Koch.

I have this particular image of myself as a minister - clean shaved, short hair, confident in my own quiet way, and smiling. I’m wearing a short sleeved shirt with the ministerial collar all done up, a chalice embroidered on the left breast… and tattoos from the cuff of my short sleeved shirt to my elbow on both arms. Something about the juxtaposition of tattoos and ministerial-wear speaks volumes about the type of person I am.

To be honest, I do not yet have tattoos that covers the area between my elbow and shoulder (also referred to as a half-sleeve by tattoo artists); this is something I want to do in the future. So, how do I know I want this done to my body? Because I already have one tattoo…

My Tattoo

I know what I would be thinking if someone else had said that they wanted huge tattoos based upon one tattoo experience;“This guy thinks he’s tough as nails and probably only has a square inch worth of some poorly done tribal art. He’s just a foolish poser.” That doesn’t really apply to me, though. I have no delusions of being a macho manly-man; it’s just not in my personality. Further more, my first tattoo is 16 inches by 8 inches and is in the center of upper my back. It took two three-hour sessions to finish; I know the type and the intensity of pain involved.

It’s a tattoo of an abstract raven in flight, viewed from above. The raven, which is done in black and blue, has a red snake on its back biting it own tail. The snakes body forms an infinity symbol. I chose this tattoo because ravens are my totem animal - they symbolize me as a spiritual person. The snake symbolizes the fragment of the Divine within me.

Unprofessional Inclinations

Why would someone looking to get into a religious profession want tattoos? That’s a better question to ask. As usual, I have a surprising answer… Tattoos are spiritual. More ministers and preachers should have tattoos. They fuse into your flesh the story of your life in a way that serves as a constant reminder.

Not all tattoos are spiritual - but I would argue that tattoos without special meaning are the exception, not the rule. If you ask someone with a tattoo why they chose to have an image permanently etched into their flesh, most often they’ll tell you a story about an important event in their life or a belief that they hold dear. In my case, I wanted to memorialize my faith in something bigger than myself and my willingness to allow that to guide my life. For others, a tattoo may symbolize the emotional scars left from abusive relationships, an oath made to be the best parent possible, or the sorrow of the losing a spouse to disease.

This meaning - these life changing moments - are what spirituality and religion are about. If religion is about wisdom, tattoos are about remembering the our lessons. If religion is about growing as a person, tattoos are about declaring your individuality. Finally, if religion is about living our lives to the fullest, then we can say that tattoos are the stories that prove us religious.

Bad Ink

The last thing I want you to think is that I believe tattooing is for everybody. There are several religions that frown upon permanent alteration of the human body - I respect those traditions. Some people are more sensitive to pain than others and there are people who just don’t see the need. Most importantly, there are medical conditions that can make tattooing hazardous. This isn’t for everyone.

What I am questioning is the negative stigma we give tattooing in this society - particularly in regards to liberal religions. The judgment we place upon someone with multiple tattoos is that they are dangerous, lived a hard life, cannot be taken seriously, or some combination of the three. It is those types of judgments that are dangerous, that make life harder to live, and shouldn’t be taken seriously. Tattoos are nothing less than outward signs of an inner truth. If you want proof, all you have to do is spend a day at the tattoo parlor and ask the artists or patrons.

Click on one link below.

written by John \\ tags: Art, Career, Faith, Individuality, Ministry, Religion, Ritual, Spirituality