Theme: Widening the Circle – Our world is fraught with tension, stress and polarization. This service explores how we can deepen understanding, respond with kindness and intentionally create the peace, liberty and justice humans inherently seek.
Thought for Contemplation: “There is not a single conversation that kindest cannot make infinitely better.” – by Cleo Wade
Sermon preceded by this reading:
SERMON
Rev. “Twinkle” Marie Manning
“Make of yourself a light,” The Buddha said.
“Make of yourself a light,” Mary Oliver reminded.
What the world needs most is light.
Now, and from the beginning of the beginning of the stories of many established religious paths and spiritual traditions, the message of light is present.
When ancient leaders and way-showers looked upon the faces of the frightened and into the hearts of the suffering, instinctually, intuitively, primally, they made manifest all manner of light to heal, to harken, to welcome.
The Circles we create function as both beacon and solarium. A signal to alert seekers of its presence. A place of solace for those within its embrace.
Brightly beckoning those of like mind and spirit to enter the Circle.
Benevolently sheltering those who do.
Circles of comfort.
Circles of celebration.
Circles of companionship;
those within accompanying each other on their journeys.
Sometimes, Circles of exclusivity are necessary.
Indeed, sometimes Circles of indefinitive dilution saturate a group’s purpose beyond recognition.
Know that there is a world of difference between bigoted exclusion and intentional inclusion.
How do we know when it’s best to widen our Circles?
When is it more beneficial to maintain margins in missions of origin?
Boundaries to contain, and to keep out, for the protection of those within?
Are there merits to expansion?
Are there solid grounds for exclusivity?
Several years ago I attended a service where the guest speaker spoke about his lineage in Freemasonry. He spoke about the fraternal bonds of the order, the history and current activities of the group – to the extent he could as with many groups there are things that are held in confidence only accessible toor easily understood by the members of the group.
In his instance, he spoke of storytelling being a core part of his group’s practice. While some of the order had begun to open to women, his was a mens-only chapter and so the teaching and sharing catered to the views and experiences of men. It was integral to his reason for being part of that specific chapter.
At the coffee hour afterwards we were sitting at the same table and I was introduced as an interfaith minister and the leader of the women’s enrichment programs, including womens retreats and workshops.
Upon hearing my titles the man’s posture and demeanor visibly changed. Shoulders tensing, his smile slightly more fixed. His immediate comment to me was that he supposed I was opposed to mens-only groups.
My response surprised him.I referred to his lecture where he spoke about the stories designed from the male perspective, and I said the same is true for womenin our Circles. Our stories, our rituals, the depths we can explore together as a group of women, even our music – our chanting and dancing and drumming, would change completely if a man were among us.
The feminine language in our lyrics and poetry, the female-centered topics in our programs are integral parts of these gatherings.
I agreed: Men and Women should be able to access spaces exclusive to them.
In fact, I believe it is integral for a woman’s wellbeing to be regularly in the company of other women.
I assumed this to be true of men as well.
Upon hearing this, the man relaxed visibly and the door opened for us to be able to learn more about each other. We discovered many similarities in how we teach and facilitate, even though our audiences and group members were vastly different.
We also bumped up against areas of disagreement, yet were able to navigate potential polarization as we had early on found common ground in our ministries.
Sadly, in society, our differences in opinion and in our practices function as a distraction that drives individuals into factions that need not be.
We can hold two divergent truths.
Sometimes in the pursuit of “being more inclusive” we end up dismantling things that are vital in their more exclusive forms.
For instance:
I am part of support groups for parents whose children have died.Within those CirclesThere are several are sub-groups, Or sub-circles, Parents can join That relate specifically to the way their children died. These are exclusive groups. Designed for processing and coping and witnessing one another.
There is immense value in a close-knit, narrowly-focused, singularly-serving, Circle. The value of which would not only be diminished, but would be utterly erased if it were more inclusive.
As a woman with decades of experience leading and participating in female-centered Circles, I can with confidence and enthusiasm affirm the benefit in the exclusivity of such a forum.
As a grieving mother of a son whose death was indescribably violent, I can insist that an intentionally exclusively-closed Circle is necessary to enable the vulnerable expression of that particular grief.
There is also immense value in other arenas for Circles to be far more inclusive.
Widening to the point ofcontaining polar opposites of spectrums of experience and belief.
Spiritually, yes. Yet perhaps even more so in today’s age:
Politically.
Such a profoundly widened Circle Is inherently necessary in our communities.How could it be any other way, residing in a state such as Maine and in a country such as the United States where the scope of that which people hold dear is broad, yet specific to their own understandings.
Much of the time we are charitable when it comes to giving credit to others, as they, like us, pursue paths to truth.
We give the benefit of the doubt to others in countless circumstances,yet struggle to do so in regards to opposing political beliefs. Sometimes our opposition reveals itself as an unwillingness to listen to another’s political views. We change topic or otherwise remove ourselves from potentially uncomfortable conversations about politics. Being inaccessible and dismissive.
Other times our opposition is so strong, and our hearts so hardened against any other truth but our own, it manifests as complete disregard for the other perspective. We find ourselves compelled to enter conversations with, or about, another’s political viewpoints combatively. Ready to fight. Harsh words at the ready.
Worse still we turn the other, in our own minds, into our enemy. And with that frame of mind, it is easy to fast track to name-calling, gaslighting and engaging in various forms slander, outright or subtle, designed to discredit the other person.
As people of faith we proclaim Love as one of our essential philosophies. One of our essential actions.
Yet all too often Love is replaced with animosity when it comes to each other’s political inclinations. Making effective, let alone compassionate, communication all but impossible.
Cleo Wade tells us,“There is not a single conversation that kindest cannot make infinitely better.”
There is not
a single conversation
that kindest
cannot
make infinitely
better.
“Love your neighbor as yourself” as quoted from Christian scriptures did not have an Asterix after it. Nor did it have a qualifier based on the neighbors’ predisposition. “Love your neighbor, except when they disagree with you” is found: No Where in any spiritual text of any living tradition.
Prophetic faiths must turn to those who implore us to love.
Edwin Markham’s epigram often quoted in our religious Circles about Circles concisely and quirckily declares,
“He drew a circle that shut me out-
Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout.
But love and I had the wit to win:
We drew a circle that took him In!”
Markham, an Oregon State Laurette, spoke often of love, and of grace and of kindness as learned measures to be embraced and practiced. He prayed:
“Teach me, Father, how to go Softly as the grasses grow; …Teach me, Father, how to be Kind and patient as a tree…”
These words of Edwin Markham, and those of Cleo Wade and Mary Oliver, can become templates in our contemplative practices as we seek to ever Widen our Circles of inclusion.
Compassionately. Mindfully.
May we seek to embrace and create harmony with those we disagree with. Whether they be long-held beliefs, new understandings or personified truths. May we seek help if this is difficult. I applaud organizations who offer such open welcome to those with diverse spiritual and political backgrounds.
I am grateful especially to organizations who facilitate respectful conversations and foster the healing of polarization.
Braver Angels is one such organization. Its Mission is to bring Americans together to bridge the partisan divide. Braver Angels affirms the following:
“Politics is tough. It always has been. American politics is competitive, thrilling, frustrating – and infuriating. The stakes are high. Issues are important. Outcomes matter. This is why we care, and should care, about our politics.
But, (they ask) do our politics have to be demonizing? Does it have to bring out the worst in us?”
What can we do instead of actively participating in this extreme polarization? Among Braver Angels goals is to heal the wounds between left and right. It is about challenging institutions to be better. Encouraging individuals and organizations to build community together.
Our world is fraught with tension, stress and polarization.
Clearly evident in the USA political spectrum, and the commentary of and about it. A category whose uncontained polarization infiltrates and eclipses the well-being of our communities, and of our family, friend and spiritual Circles. Braver Angels objective is to move us from hatred and disdain to respect & appreciation.”
That may seem like a pie in the sky dream.
I assure you it is attainable.
Braver Angels model skills to bridge the divide via Workshops, Debates, Music, Public Speaking, Op-Eds, Internship and Mentorship programs. They form local alliances from within a cross section of political persuasions. And they tackle some of the most difficult topics Americans face today. Conversations that, until recently, have been completely shut down.
Conversations for which the moderation of in a thoughtful, respectful, loving setting has been absent on our political and spiritual fronts. Necessary conversations all too often derailed and denied in our us vs them call-out/cancel-culture.
Another organization that serves to increase compassionate communication around difficult topics is Heterodox Academy. Consisting of more than 5,000 professors, educators, administrators, staff and students, Heterodox was created as a resource to enhance the quality of research, education and discourse.
Founded in part by Jonathan Haidt, author of The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion – a book that has been studied by clergy of many faiths all over the world as we seek to find common ground with those in our communities we serve.
They believe that the best way to prevent orthodoxy and ostracism from taking root, is by fostering three key principles:
– open inquiry,
– viewpoint diversity,
and
– constructive disagreement.
What manifests when such paths for discussion are opened up is a welcoming, widening of the Circle, that is more accepting of diverse opinions. It offers the lens of curiosity and creates discovery, innovation and growth that otherwise could not take place in a unilateral framing.
The most common inclination is to segregate based upon political beliefs.
And, some may still wonder,why shouldn’t “we” –
“They” do the same, right?!
Hmmm….
The affirmation, “We are the ones we have been waiting for,” has been spoken by a multitude of speakers over the years. Most endearingly to many of us are these words originating in June Jordan’s “Poem for South African Women,” as spoken to the United Nations; repeated by Alice Walker in her book by the same name; and woven into lyricsby Sweet Honey in the Rock.
Time upon time we are reminded that We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.
We acknowledge this.
We embrace this.
We affirm this!
Except, when we don’t.
All too often, when it comes to politics, many would rather remain in their polarized Circles than consider stepping into one that has room for more world views. We hesitate to initiate Widening when it comes to our Circles of politics. Some of us cringe at the very idea of it. Walls up.
And, when we don’t want to do something, we can easily find all sorts of reasons to not do it.
One of the most fundamental needs for every human being is the need to be Understood. This activates at its highest potential when it is a two way street, the giving and receiving of understanding, mutually explored by all involved.
What could we learn from each other if we set our differences, not merely aside, but in center stage?
What would you want your neighbor, your friend, your family member to understand about your political inclinations and loyalties? Perhaps even expanded to include how your spirituality informs your political inclinations?Or how your political inclinations inform your spirituality as the case may be.
Would you grant them the grace and love to enter an environment where you can learn about theirs?
Are you willing to contribute to Widening the Circle to welcome in those with whom you politically disagree? Will you do so in kindness, in grace, in love? To intentionally create the peace, liberty and justice humans inherently seek.
You are the ones you have been waiting for.
“Make of yourself a light,” The Buddha said.
“Make of yourself a light,” Mary Oliver reminded.
What the world needs most
is light.
Amen.
This sermon was also presented to the Bangor UU Society on February 13th, 2022:
#LivingLifeAsAPrayer
#MakingPeace
#BraverAngels
#HeterodoxAcademy
#LoveThyNeighbor
#CompassionateCommunication
#BuildingTheBelovedCommunity
* “Widening the Circle” sermon first presented in collaboration with the Waterville Congregation on February 6th, 2022.
To view more sermons, click HERE.