I have been reading “Out of My Life and Thought,” an autobiography by Albert Schweitzer. One thing that amazes me about Schweitzer is how little respect was given to his “thought” by my bible and theology professors at Wake Forest, Columbia, Princeton, and Vanderbilt. Sure, everyone conceded that he had been a great man, and had done a great thing with his hospital in western Africa, started in the early 1900’s. Schweitzer was an accomplished organist, biblical scholar, and then went to medical school around 30 years of age. And, he kept up his scholarly writing and organ playing even after becoming the overseer of a mission in Africa as its lead doctor for decades.
Two things have really impressed me in reading this book: Schweitzer’s explanation of why he decided to be a “jungle doctor,” and his explanation of how he came to the central conviction of his theological and ethical thought. Schweitzer said of becoming a doctor: “I wanted to be a doctor that I might be able to work without having to talk.” He also explains how everybody who knew what a promising scholar and musician he was thought he was crazy for deciding to be a mission doctor. And, later in the book, he explains how he had begun to reflect on the erosion of modern western civilization by the turn of the century (1900)), and that his thoughts had come to full bloom while in Africa during WWI. Schweitzer was driven to diagnose the societal sickness that had resulted in loss of meaning, loss of true ideals, and warring around the world. His reflections show that he was interested in Eastern thought as well as Western. Eventually, one day while he was travelling upstream on a river in Africa to make a house call on a missionary’s wife who was real sick, it came to him: “Reverence for Life.” This was the deepest spiritual and ethical principal that allowed life to thrive in its full material and spiritual aspects. Reverence for life, all life, as he liked to say. Schweitzer puts it this way:
Lost in thought I sat on the deck of the barge, struggling to find the elementary and universal conception of the ethical which I had not discovered in any philosophy. Sheet after sheet I covered with disconnected sentences, merely to keep myself concentrated on the problem. Late on the third day, at the very moment when, at sunset, we were making our way through a herd of hippopotamuses, there flashed upon my mind, unforeseen and unsought, the phrase, “Reverence for Life.” The iron door had yielded: the path in the thicket had become visible. Now I had found my way to the idea in which affirmation of the world and ethics are contained side by side.
- Albert Schweitzer, Out of My Life and Thought, 1933
I want to let Schweitzer explain in his own words what he means by “Reverence for Life” as the foundational conception for thinking and living.
If man affirms his will-to-live, he acts naturally and honestly. He affirms an act which has already been accomplished in his instinctive thought by repeating it in his conscious thought. The beginning of thought, a beginning which continually repeats itself, is that man does not simply accept his existence as something given, but experiences it as something unfathomably mysterious. Affirmation of life is the spiritual act by which man ceases to live unreflectively and begins to devote himself to his life with reverence in order to raise it to its true value. To affirm life is to deepen, to make more inward, and to exalt the will-to-live.
At the same time the man who has become a thinking being feels a compulsion to give to every will-to-live the same reverence for life that he gives to his own. He experiences that other life in his own. He accepts as being good: to preserve life, to promote life, to raise to its highest value life which is capable of development; and as being evil: to destroy life, to injure life, to repress life which is capable of development. This is the absolute, fundamental principle of the moral, and it is a necessity of thought.
The great fault of all ethics hitherto has been that they believed themselves to have to deal only with the relations of man to man. In reality, however, the question is what is his attitude to the world and all life that comes within his reach. A man is ethical only when life, as such, is sacred to him, that of plants and animals as that of his fellow men, and when he devotes himself helpfully to all life that is in need of help.
-Albert Schweitzer
Earlier in the same book, Schweitzer explains his view on religions and philosophies that deny the will-to-live. He considers the Christianity of the Middle Ages and Eastern thought as world-denying spiritualities. He finds these ways of thought as unnatural and thus unspiritual. Of the detachment of other-wordly Christianity and the detachment taught in Eastern religion he says this:
Man has now to decide what his relation to his will-to-live shall be. He can deny it. But if he bids his will-to-live change into will-to-not-live, . . . he involves himself in self-contradiction. He raises to the position of his philosophy of life something unnatural, something which is in itself untrue, and which cannot be carried to completion. Indian thought, and Schopenhauer’s also, is full of inconsistencies because it cannot help making concessions time after time to the will-to-live, which persists in spite of all negation of the world, though it will not admit that the concessions are really such. Negation of the will-to-live is self-consistent only if it is really willing actually to put an end to physical existence.
-Albert Schweitzer
About this will-to-live, I am reminded of one of my favorite passages from the book of Ecclesiastes which discovers this persistent will-to-live even in the midst of a depressing reflection on the fact that death comes to all.
But all this I laid to heart, examining it all, how the righteous and the wise and their deeds are in the hand of God; whether it is love or hate man does not know. Everything before them is vanity, since one fate comes to all, to the righteous and the wicked, to the good and the evil, to the clean and the unclean, to him who sacrifices and him who does not sacrifice. As is the good man, so is the sinner; and he who swears is as he who shuns an oath. This is an evil in all that is done under the sun, that one fate comes to all; also the hearts of men are full of evil, and madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead.
But he who is joined with all the living has hope, for a living dog is better than a dead lion. For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward; but the memory of them is lost.
Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished, and they have no more for ever any share in all that is done under the sun.
So go eat your bread with enjoyment, and drink your wine with a merry heart; for God has already approved what you do.
Let your garments be always white; let not oil be lacking on your head.
Enjoy life with the wife whom you love, all the days of your vain life which he has given you under the sun, because that is your portion in life and in your toil at which you toil under the sun. Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might; for there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol, to which you are going.
Ecclesiastes 9:1-10
We find this will-to-live as a surprise at times. Times when we thought we were empty of life, it has swelled within us like an invading presence, mysterious and gracious. As Schweitzer says: “as something unfathomably mysterious.”
Monday, June 8, 2009
Friday, May 29, 2009
Ziggy Stardust Goes to Church
I had really had enough after court today, but I came back after a hearing I lost very badly, and worked on a legal memorandum for another case – I worked straight through lunch until the end of day. I even forgot about a meeting to watch police videos at 2 p.m.
After work at the Public Defender’s Office, I headed over to Knoxville for my church office hours. I dropped off a long letter with 25 pages of supporting documents by 1st TN Bank requesting the trustee over a trust benefitting our church allow expenditure of funds to keep the building from falling down/keep it parts of it from falling on us! By the time I got to church, I was even more tired than before. I was praying on the way that nobody would come by to see me. I was in no condition to be pastor to anyone. I walked in the church building, towards my study, and I could hear some awful music playing. The custodian/groundskeeper was working upstairs and some terrible country music was playing (well, maybe it was good for country music, but that is still terrible to me). So, I just got my little music box, took it into the chapel, and put in a live recording of David Bowie from 1972. My niece, Catherine, loaned it to me today. I am really glad she gave me that today. I just sat back and listened to Ziggy Stardust and Changes and Five Years, and for some reason I just felt a little more alive, and a little less dead. And, then, I heard someone coming through the door. It just happened to be someone who attends my church that was the best person for me to see. We sat around an hour or so working on a couple of things I was helping him with, and, well, life seemed a little more balanced out.
I am listening to that David Bowie CD right now. “Ground control to Major Tom . . . “ I have liked David Bowie from the first time I heard him in middle school, still liked him through high school and college and even now. I don’t know for sure what it is I like about David Bowie. I think it is because he is just so distinctive and his music just comes out of him, like he just never gave a shit whether anyone else liked it or not. It is as if he just had to write and sing this music to live. And, I like it – always have. Probably my favorite song he every wrote or played is “Rebel, Rebel,” which is not on this live CD. But, well, I take that back (I’m still listening), I take that back: “Moonage Day Dream” is my favorite right now!!!! And, well, Changes and My Death and Jean Jeanie and Ziggy Stardust!
Now, I probably won’t put David Bowie on for a few days or even a month. This is music that I like to listen to up loud and with no one around, except maybe my son, who really likes it too.
David Bowie music is not love songs, not so much story telling songs, but an expression of intense experiences and imaginings in words that form a picture and music that cries out with those words. David Bowie is not political music, but just these expressions of life and yearnings for life. It has love in some of it, rebellion in some of it, sadness in some of it, reflection in some of it. But, in all of it, it has life. It is music for life in the midst of a world that often feels like tiredness and death. It is the life of Bowie music that I really like. It is irreverent in one sense, but shows “reverence to life” in its depths. Bowie does a great cover of Waiting for the Man by Lou Reed.
Well, let me close while I crank up “Moonage Day Dream” one more time. Bowie, envisioning himself with a real alien, sings: “Don’t fake it baby; lay the real thing on me. The church of man, love, that’s such a holy place to be. . . Don’t fake it baby. Let me know you really care. Make me jump into the air.” Bowie is just imagining and experiencing and letting it rip in a ‘MoonageDay Dream.’ And, the guitar is ripping too, and it takes me somewhere I am happy to go. Bowie had this strong feeling about who he was and there just wasn’t anywhere in society to express it, no roles that fit him. So, he cast himself as a character in his own play: Ziggy Stardust, imagined himself in space at times, coming into this world as an alien at times. And, somehow he made it work. That kind of will to live, to not be suppressed, to take risks . . . there’s really something in there that feels like hope and faith. It feels like life, the upspringing of life, and certainly not feeling dead while you are alive. The Chapel felt dead until I turned on Bowie’s music in the Chapel: something about Ziggy Stardust in the Chapel made me feel good. Sometimes I forget how strange I really am!
After work at the Public Defender’s Office, I headed over to Knoxville for my church office hours. I dropped off a long letter with 25 pages of supporting documents by 1st TN Bank requesting the trustee over a trust benefitting our church allow expenditure of funds to keep the building from falling down/keep it parts of it from falling on us! By the time I got to church, I was even more tired than before. I was praying on the way that nobody would come by to see me. I was in no condition to be pastor to anyone. I walked in the church building, towards my study, and I could hear some awful music playing. The custodian/groundskeeper was working upstairs and some terrible country music was playing (well, maybe it was good for country music, but that is still terrible to me). So, I just got my little music box, took it into the chapel, and put in a live recording of David Bowie from 1972. My niece, Catherine, loaned it to me today. I am really glad she gave me that today. I just sat back and listened to Ziggy Stardust and Changes and Five Years, and for some reason I just felt a little more alive, and a little less dead. And, then, I heard someone coming through the door. It just happened to be someone who attends my church that was the best person for me to see. We sat around an hour or so working on a couple of things I was helping him with, and, well, life seemed a little more balanced out.
I am listening to that David Bowie CD right now. “Ground control to Major Tom . . . “ I have liked David Bowie from the first time I heard him in middle school, still liked him through high school and college and even now. I don’t know for sure what it is I like about David Bowie. I think it is because he is just so distinctive and his music just comes out of him, like he just never gave a shit whether anyone else liked it or not. It is as if he just had to write and sing this music to live. And, I like it – always have. Probably my favorite song he every wrote or played is “Rebel, Rebel,” which is not on this live CD. But, well, I take that back (I’m still listening), I take that back: “Moonage Day Dream” is my favorite right now!!!! And, well, Changes and My Death and Jean Jeanie and Ziggy Stardust!
Now, I probably won’t put David Bowie on for a few days or even a month. This is music that I like to listen to up loud and with no one around, except maybe my son, who really likes it too.
David Bowie music is not love songs, not so much story telling songs, but an expression of intense experiences and imaginings in words that form a picture and music that cries out with those words. David Bowie is not political music, but just these expressions of life and yearnings for life. It has love in some of it, rebellion in some of it, sadness in some of it, reflection in some of it. But, in all of it, it has life. It is music for life in the midst of a world that often feels like tiredness and death. It is the life of Bowie music that I really like. It is irreverent in one sense, but shows “reverence to life” in its depths. Bowie does a great cover of Waiting for the Man by Lou Reed.
Well, let me close while I crank up “Moonage Day Dream” one more time. Bowie, envisioning himself with a real alien, sings: “Don’t fake it baby; lay the real thing on me. The church of man, love, that’s such a holy place to be. . . Don’t fake it baby. Let me know you really care. Make me jump into the air.” Bowie is just imagining and experiencing and letting it rip in a ‘MoonageDay Dream.’ And, the guitar is ripping too, and it takes me somewhere I am happy to go. Bowie had this strong feeling about who he was and there just wasn’t anywhere in society to express it, no roles that fit him. So, he cast himself as a character in his own play: Ziggy Stardust, imagined himself in space at times, coming into this world as an alien at times. And, somehow he made it work. That kind of will to live, to not be suppressed, to take risks . . . there’s really something in there that feels like hope and faith. It feels like life, the upspringing of life, and certainly not feeling dead while you are alive. The Chapel felt dead until I turned on Bowie’s music in the Chapel: something about Ziggy Stardust in the Chapel made me feel good. Sometimes I forget how strange I really am!
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Being Comfortable and Being Alive
A dog, it seems to me, likes to stay in his comfort zone. And, a dog gets used to certain routines, and sticks with those routines, if able. But, even a dog appears to like something new sometimes as well – so long as it is not too drastically new. But, most dogs (unless they live out in the country) are dependent on their humans to guide them in the routine and the new and different. A dog if left free about all the time, will develop its own routines. I had two dogs growing up and they could roam as they pleased, and they developed some pretty clear routines. Of course, I don’t know how often they ventured out for the new and different. Those times of going out for the new and different seemed to be reserved for times when they sensed some female dog was in heat (my dogs were both male). Then, they might end up who knows where, and of course, that might in turn expand their horizons (once the heat was over) and become part of their new routines.
Humans are more self-determining than most dogs are, and so this matter of routine and the new and different would seem to be more open-ended for humans than dogs. I might even venture to say that humans should be able to imagine more possibilities than dogs are able to imagine. But, sometimes it seems like humans are far too much like dogs only far less faithful.
A human, it seems to me, likes to stay in his or her comfort zone. And, a human gets used to certain routines, and sticks with those routines, if able. But, even a human appears to like something new sometimes as well – so long as it is not too drastically new. And, mostly everything else I wrote in the first paragraph about dogs applies to humans. Clearly, the human will risk all sorts of things new and different when “in heat” as well. I would like to think that there are also other passions in human life that might cause us to leave our comfort zone behind, discover new possibilities and expand our routines, so that our routines are not a closed stationary circle but more like a circle ever expanding with lots of ways in and out.
One thing that I think is different between dogs and humans is this: if a human stays too long in his or her comfort zone, it becomes very uncomfortable. There is something in us that has to venture out, take risks, be free or it gets sick and maybe even dies. Deep down, humans may be more like wild animals than domestic ones. That’s why we have so many prisons constructed both internally and externally to hold us. So long as you live afraid, you are dangerous. You must either lock yourself up or somebody else must lock you up. Those who live afraid either attack themselves constantly or attack others. Or, the less aggressive either monitor themselves constantly or monitor others continually.
But, to be free. Free from monitoring one’s self, free from monitoring others. Free from hatred of self, free from hatred of others. Free from internal prisons, free from external prisons. Free to live in one’s routines without being caged in by one’s routines. Free to dream about something, envision something, and then go about doing it. Free not to simply imagine engaging in life, but engaging in life. Free from fear of rejection. Free to laugh at one’s fears, when they get in the way of one’s dreams. Free to welcome each new day like a dog does. Free to meet your loved ones with joy like a dog does. Free to get excited about eating like a dog does. Free to lay down without a care in the world like a dog does. Free!
For a human to be free, for you and me to be free, we have to push out our walls or else they push in on us. I think a dog can probably stay in his comfort zone and still happily remain a dog. In the end, you either shake your fist at your fears and face them, or they shake their fist at you and you tremble. I think of the First Commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me.” Our fears that control us are our false gods. Our fears that simply warn us of danger, and having done their job move on, are normal. Our fears that stay with us and continually warn and control us – well, those are false gods.
The First Commandment is probably the least understood of all the commandments. It seems to me that most religious people understand it as God stomping his feet and wanting everybody to applaud him. What it really is is God calling human beings out of their bondage: like when God called his people to leave the land of slavery and cross the Red Sea into a land of freedom – a land in which only God had ultimate authority (i.e., Pharoah is not God; I am!). Apparently, even when you come out from external bondage, it takes some time to shake off the shackles of internal bondage too. And, even the mighty Spirit of God seemed to have been much more successful in getting his people out of Egypt than getting Egypt out of his people.
The external idols are always easier to destroy than the internal ones. We can recognize that wooden idol as not being worthy of our allegiance or reverence, but we can’t seem to recognize the invisible and internal creations of our minds and hearts. They haunt our days and nights, commanding our obedience, and we bow down before them days without number. But, the liberating and resounding word comes within: “You shall have no other gods before me.” If you ever hear that internally as the battle cry of freedom (not just from others, but from your self as well!), you are on your way to the promised land – a land of freedom, a land where your routines provide a secure home base from which to launch a series of experiments that in turn expand your routes in life again and again. A dog and a human likes to stay in his or her comfort zone, but a human gets real uncomfortable when that comfort zone doesn’t expand regularly. It’s just part of being human: reaching for that wild tameness, or that tame wildness.
Humans are more self-determining than most dogs are, and so this matter of routine and the new and different would seem to be more open-ended for humans than dogs. I might even venture to say that humans should be able to imagine more possibilities than dogs are able to imagine. But, sometimes it seems like humans are far too much like dogs only far less faithful.
A human, it seems to me, likes to stay in his or her comfort zone. And, a human gets used to certain routines, and sticks with those routines, if able. But, even a human appears to like something new sometimes as well – so long as it is not too drastically new. And, mostly everything else I wrote in the first paragraph about dogs applies to humans. Clearly, the human will risk all sorts of things new and different when “in heat” as well. I would like to think that there are also other passions in human life that might cause us to leave our comfort zone behind, discover new possibilities and expand our routines, so that our routines are not a closed stationary circle but more like a circle ever expanding with lots of ways in and out.
One thing that I think is different between dogs and humans is this: if a human stays too long in his or her comfort zone, it becomes very uncomfortable. There is something in us that has to venture out, take risks, be free or it gets sick and maybe even dies. Deep down, humans may be more like wild animals than domestic ones. That’s why we have so many prisons constructed both internally and externally to hold us. So long as you live afraid, you are dangerous. You must either lock yourself up or somebody else must lock you up. Those who live afraid either attack themselves constantly or attack others. Or, the less aggressive either monitor themselves constantly or monitor others continually.
But, to be free. Free from monitoring one’s self, free from monitoring others. Free from hatred of self, free from hatred of others. Free from internal prisons, free from external prisons. Free to live in one’s routines without being caged in by one’s routines. Free to dream about something, envision something, and then go about doing it. Free not to simply imagine engaging in life, but engaging in life. Free from fear of rejection. Free to laugh at one’s fears, when they get in the way of one’s dreams. Free to welcome each new day like a dog does. Free to meet your loved ones with joy like a dog does. Free to get excited about eating like a dog does. Free to lay down without a care in the world like a dog does. Free!
For a human to be free, for you and me to be free, we have to push out our walls or else they push in on us. I think a dog can probably stay in his comfort zone and still happily remain a dog. In the end, you either shake your fist at your fears and face them, or they shake their fist at you and you tremble. I think of the First Commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me.” Our fears that control us are our false gods. Our fears that simply warn us of danger, and having done their job move on, are normal. Our fears that stay with us and continually warn and control us – well, those are false gods.
The First Commandment is probably the least understood of all the commandments. It seems to me that most religious people understand it as God stomping his feet and wanting everybody to applaud him. What it really is is God calling human beings out of their bondage: like when God called his people to leave the land of slavery and cross the Red Sea into a land of freedom – a land in which only God had ultimate authority (i.e., Pharoah is not God; I am!). Apparently, even when you come out from external bondage, it takes some time to shake off the shackles of internal bondage too. And, even the mighty Spirit of God seemed to have been much more successful in getting his people out of Egypt than getting Egypt out of his people.
The external idols are always easier to destroy than the internal ones. We can recognize that wooden idol as not being worthy of our allegiance or reverence, but we can’t seem to recognize the invisible and internal creations of our minds and hearts. They haunt our days and nights, commanding our obedience, and we bow down before them days without number. But, the liberating and resounding word comes within: “You shall have no other gods before me.” If you ever hear that internally as the battle cry of freedom (not just from others, but from your self as well!), you are on your way to the promised land – a land of freedom, a land where your routines provide a secure home base from which to launch a series of experiments that in turn expand your routes in life again and again. A dog and a human likes to stay in his or her comfort zone, but a human gets real uncomfortable when that comfort zone doesn’t expand regularly. It’s just part of being human: reaching for that wild tameness, or that tame wildness.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Preaching and Truth-Telling
I remember meeting a Presbyterian minister when I was at my seminary for a study week a few years ago. He was telling a story to those of us sitting around the table one night about a small group of ministers who gathered each week to eat, talk, pray, cuss, and sometimes drink. He said that once somebody came up with the idea that each of them would prepare and preach a sermon for the others like no other sermon they had ever preached. This sermon, for the pastor’s group only, would be what they would like to preach if they felt free to do it. Each minister prepared for their day. And, as this minister told us, his face glowed. You could tell this had been an experience that was very deep and dear for him. He said that the sermons were amazing. He said the first minister to preach really opened the door by just laying himself out there, with brutal honesty, and glorious mercy. As the minister tells it, at times they all laughed so hard, the sermon had to stop; and at times a couple of them cried so hard, the sermon had to stop for a minute. Each sermon by each minister was an act of freedom and grace and trust and courage. There were admissions made that would never be shared outside that group. There were cuss words said, there was anger expressed, there was love, there was real flesh and blood human life shot through with the grace of the living God, and there was ecstatic praise of God. It makes me think about the relationship between preaching the Gospel and telling the Truth. It is hard to tell the truth in public. It is hard to tell the truth unless you have the security of a powerful trust. When you can really tell the truth, amazing things happen. You are able to tell things that you didn’t even know about until you hear it coming out of your mouth.
Maybe the secret of life is finding a place where you can risk telling the truth of your life. My guess is that love is that place, and love is trust or it isn’t love. Sometimes you have to take the risk in order to find out if the love is trust, which is to say, ‘sometimes you have to trust someone before you are really sure they are trustworthy; otherwise, you will never know.’ Most of us figure out how to do this a little at a time, but there comes a time when you have to either stop and go the other way, or take a leap of faith. Maybe true preaching is like true love – it isn’t discovered without taking those risks, those leaps of faith. When you take risks, you may find out you have relied on those who are unreliable, that you have put your heart in the hands of those who do not care; but, you may also wonder in joy after you have taken the risk: “why didn’t I take this risk years before!!”
Maybe the secret of life is finding a place where you can risk telling the truth of your life. My guess is that love is that place, and love is trust or it isn’t love. Sometimes you have to take the risk in order to find out if the love is trust, which is to say, ‘sometimes you have to trust someone before you are really sure they are trustworthy; otherwise, you will never know.’ Most of us figure out how to do this a little at a time, but there comes a time when you have to either stop and go the other way, or take a leap of faith. Maybe true preaching is like true love – it isn’t discovered without taking those risks, those leaps of faith. When you take risks, you may find out you have relied on those who are unreliable, that you have put your heart in the hands of those who do not care; but, you may also wonder in joy after you have taken the risk: “why didn’t I take this risk years before!!”
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Quiet People Like Me
I like to go off from the crowd, either alone or with one or two friends. Sometimes, even one or two are too many for me to be around. Sometimes, it is enough for me to be with my self. But, just because being with people tends to wear me out, doesn’t mean people don’t mean a lot to me. It is because people mean so much to me that they wear me out. A stranger beside me on a bus. I notice them. I feel uncomfortable. I don’t want to say the wrong thing or give him or her the idea that I don’t care about their existence. But, I don’t know how to sit, what to say. It wears me out. A gathering of seven or eight people. I don’t know how to deal with that many people at once unless I have a clear role. Give me a thousand people in an auditorium, make me the speaker, I am not nervous. Give me four people I don’t know and put me in a room with them with the expectation of social interaction, and I am as nervous as can be.
It is a real misunderstanding of shy people when others think they don’t care about people or don’t care to interact with people. It is often an oversensitivity to others that causes so much reticence to interact. It is because human interaction means so much that many quiet people don’t take the risk of conversing with others.
It is a real misunderstanding of shy people when others think they don’t care about people or don’t care to interact with people. It is often an oversensitivity to others that causes so much reticence to interact. It is because human interaction means so much that many quiet people don’t take the risk of conversing with others.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Criminal Law and Social Control
This morning I am representing a relative of a church member in criminal court. So, this morning I will be a criminal defense attorney opposing the efforts of the government to prosecute my client. I will be playing a role as advocate for the defendant in an adversary system. I have a professional duty to "zealously represent my client," as our ethical standards say. I do not have the duty to sit back with the prosecuting attorney and figure out what will be best for my client (though, I may have to pretend I am doing that to get what my client wants). No, my client wants me to 'beat the case' if I can, and get the government off his back. And, that's exactly what I will try to do. Of course, if I look into things, and we aren't likely to "beat the case," I will negotiate something with the prosecutor that my client can live with. And, that's often what happens. At that point, defense attorney and prosecutor are fairly businesslike with the prosecutor making an offer to resolve the case, the defense attorney perhaps making a suggestion or a counter-offer after talking to his client; and, then, a plea agreement is reached, the matter is announced, and the case is over. The case I have this morning is not too serious. The worst that is likely to happen is 11 months, 29 days of probation. But, if my client fails on probation, it can mean 11 months, 29 days in jail at some later date. I have also stood up with clients entering plea agreements where the client was going to prison for 15 or 20 years. And, I have stood up with one client who heard the verdict of guilty read by the jury, and then heard that she was going to prison for the rest of her life without possibility of parole.
Hearing the judge pronounce a sentence is a fairly solemn moment. It reflects the lack of power that an individual has over his or her own life; and reflects an almost ultimate type of control that the government has over an individual, at least where the punishment strips a man or woman of their liberty and orders them locked up like an animal in a cage. It seems that this type of complete control over an individual should be used very rarely and only to protect society from those who are dangerous. But, in our society, we have chosen to lock up people for all sorts of reasons other than that they are dangerous. We use jail as a means of social control, to try and force citizens to conform to social expectations. "You want to drink alcohol and you are 20! If you do, we will charge you with a crime and lock you up!" "You want to drive a car when you don't have a licence; we will arrest you and lock you up!" "You want to smoke marijuana; we will lock you up in a cage.!" THE GOVERNMENT WILL FORCE YOU TO ACT LIKE THE GOVERNMENT WANTS YOU TO ACT!!!!
Of course, the government's efforts at social control through passing and enforcing the criminal code is basically the effort to control the poor, and the criminal code is not much enforced against the middle and upper classes. In a "good neighborhood" you are never subject to law enforcement "knock and talk," which is when an officer knocks on the door and coerces you into consenting to the search of your house or apartment. In a "good neighborhood" you are not approached and questioned and asked to show I.D., and then politely asked if you mind being patted down "for my safety and yours." The examples are numerous.
The criminal law has two intents: one is to prevent serious crime and punish those who commit serious crime; but, the second intent is social control of the poor or the "alternative." I really have a problem with the second intent of the criminal law. I have no problem understanding why someone who is robbing and raping needs to be locked up. I have a real problem understanding why someone who chooses to use a mind-altering substance should be locked up so long as that person is not violating the interests of others. I have a real problem locking up people for a lot of things. The reason we lock people up for social control is that those who have authority like to use it and show others who is in control. "You want to live life your way - forget it! We make the rules to tell you how to live. You don't obey our rules; we lock you up like a dangerous animal."
I guess when it comes down to it, society has decided that alternative lives and poor lives are dangerous to society. Anytime you can catch them violating any little thing, you best lock them up. And, anytime you can pass a law that will define how they live as criminal, by all means, do it.
Hearing the judge pronounce a sentence is a fairly solemn moment. It reflects the lack of power that an individual has over his or her own life; and reflects an almost ultimate type of control that the government has over an individual, at least where the punishment strips a man or woman of their liberty and orders them locked up like an animal in a cage. It seems that this type of complete control over an individual should be used very rarely and only to protect society from those who are dangerous. But, in our society, we have chosen to lock up people for all sorts of reasons other than that they are dangerous. We use jail as a means of social control, to try and force citizens to conform to social expectations. "You want to drink alcohol and you are 20! If you do, we will charge you with a crime and lock you up!" "You want to drive a car when you don't have a licence; we will arrest you and lock you up!" "You want to smoke marijuana; we will lock you up in a cage.!" THE GOVERNMENT WILL FORCE YOU TO ACT LIKE THE GOVERNMENT WANTS YOU TO ACT!!!!
Of course, the government's efforts at social control through passing and enforcing the criminal code is basically the effort to control the poor, and the criminal code is not much enforced against the middle and upper classes. In a "good neighborhood" you are never subject to law enforcement "knock and talk," which is when an officer knocks on the door and coerces you into consenting to the search of your house or apartment. In a "good neighborhood" you are not approached and questioned and asked to show I.D., and then politely asked if you mind being patted down "for my safety and yours." The examples are numerous.
The criminal law has two intents: one is to prevent serious crime and punish those who commit serious crime; but, the second intent is social control of the poor or the "alternative." I really have a problem with the second intent of the criminal law. I have no problem understanding why someone who is robbing and raping needs to be locked up. I have a real problem understanding why someone who chooses to use a mind-altering substance should be locked up so long as that person is not violating the interests of others. I have a real problem locking up people for a lot of things. The reason we lock people up for social control is that those who have authority like to use it and show others who is in control. "You want to live life your way - forget it! We make the rules to tell you how to live. You don't obey our rules; we lock you up like a dangerous animal."
I guess when it comes down to it, society has decided that alternative lives and poor lives are dangerous to society. Anytime you can catch them violating any little thing, you best lock them up. And, anytime you can pass a law that will define how they live as criminal, by all means, do it.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Quakers
The Quakers began as a religious movement in England when George Fox experienced the 'Inner Light' that enlightens all of life. Fox saw that the clergy did not have the power of truth, but that truth was available to every person in the depths of his or her being. But, Fox's belief wasn't some simple affirmation of humanity. No, it was a spiritual, theological insight that shook him to his core and he found nothing left inside him after the shaking but the still, small voice of God. It was a deep earthshaking experience of God that gave him new eyes with which to view human beings. Fox said: "There is that in every man which is of God."
The Quakers believe that God - whose image is in the soul of every person - has re-claimed all humanity in Christ. Quakers believe that the seed of renewal and truth of Christ is planted in the soul of every human being. As Thomas Kelly says: "Deep within us all there is an amazing inner sanctuary of the soul, a holy place, a Divine Center, a speaking Voice, to which we may continually return. Eternity is at our hearts, pressing upon our time-torn lives . . . it is a seed stirring to life if we do not choke it. It is the tabernacle of the soul, the Presence in the midst. Here is the slumbering Christ, stirring to be awakened, to become the soul we clothe in earthly form and action. And He is within us all."
Thomas R. Kelly, from "The Light Within," in A TESTAMENT OF DEVOTION.
I have referred to Thomas Kelly's book of four talks in bold letters, because it is a book that comes from the depths of faith. I think that the Quakers, who began as a reform movement with God's revelations to George Fox, really get to the heart of faith. I have found no better guide in recent years to the spiritual life. Quakerism is a mystical faith, but it is grounded in the Gathered Meeting, which unites the people in communal worship and waiting on God and also serves as a check on individual nuttiness.
One other practice I respect very much about Quakers is the spiritual experience of having a "Concern" placed upon them by God, and then responding to this "Concern" as a way of drawing near to both God and people. For example, John Woolman, who lived in the late 1700s, had a concern placed upon his heart about slavery. So, he responded to this concern by refusing to write wills that passed on slaves as part of inheritance, and he travelled from Quaker home to Quaker home to speak personally to Quakers about this concern. When he felt he had done what he needed, he returned to his home.
I have wanted for a long time to go to a Quaker Meeting. They have a traditonal Meeting in West Knoxville that I could attend. If I went, I could go and just be silent - for the time of worship, joining my silence with that of others. Someone might say a few words, but maybe not. Instead I go and sing and pray out loud and preach on Sundays. But, I also have some time of silence in worship. That is the best part for me. All the talk, and singing and praying is really just to set the mood for the silence. It is the better part. Maybe the Quakers have figured out how to have that quality of holy silence without all the noise and orders of worship. Sometime I want to join with them and find out.
The Quakers believe that God - whose image is in the soul of every person - has re-claimed all humanity in Christ. Quakers believe that the seed of renewal and truth of Christ is planted in the soul of every human being. As Thomas Kelly says: "Deep within us all there is an amazing inner sanctuary of the soul, a holy place, a Divine Center, a speaking Voice, to which we may continually return. Eternity is at our hearts, pressing upon our time-torn lives . . . it is a seed stirring to life if we do not choke it. It is the tabernacle of the soul, the Presence in the midst. Here is the slumbering Christ, stirring to be awakened, to become the soul we clothe in earthly form and action. And He is within us all."
Thomas R. Kelly, from "The Light Within," in A TESTAMENT OF DEVOTION.
I have referred to Thomas Kelly's book of four talks in bold letters, because it is a book that comes from the depths of faith. I think that the Quakers, who began as a reform movement with God's revelations to George Fox, really get to the heart of faith. I have found no better guide in recent years to the spiritual life. Quakerism is a mystical faith, but it is grounded in the Gathered Meeting, which unites the people in communal worship and waiting on God and also serves as a check on individual nuttiness.
One other practice I respect very much about Quakers is the spiritual experience of having a "Concern" placed upon them by God, and then responding to this "Concern" as a way of drawing near to both God and people. For example, John Woolman, who lived in the late 1700s, had a concern placed upon his heart about slavery. So, he responded to this concern by refusing to write wills that passed on slaves as part of inheritance, and he travelled from Quaker home to Quaker home to speak personally to Quakers about this concern. When he felt he had done what he needed, he returned to his home.
I have wanted for a long time to go to a Quaker Meeting. They have a traditonal Meeting in West Knoxville that I could attend. If I went, I could go and just be silent - for the time of worship, joining my silence with that of others. Someone might say a few words, but maybe not. Instead I go and sing and pray out loud and preach on Sundays. But, I also have some time of silence in worship. That is the best part for me. All the talk, and singing and praying is really just to set the mood for the silence. It is the better part. Maybe the Quakers have figured out how to have that quality of holy silence without all the noise and orders of worship. Sometime I want to join with them and find out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
