What's Your Issue?

Maybe it was EB White who first phrased a dilemma often mentioned in UU circles. He said he got up every morning torn - as some have it - between the need to save the world and the desire to savor it. "This," he wrote, "makes it hard to plan the day." I can relate. Maybe you can, too. So I was interested recently, when reading one of Richard Gilbert's books, to find he claimed that an adaptation is needed. "I have concluded," he writes, "that to savor we must serve; in serving we do savor." That certainly puts a different light on it.

Maybe because of the fact that I've always liked White's dilemma, I find that I'm intrigued - and challenged - by Gilbert's different twist. Could he be right? Must we serve to savor? For me, it's a haunting question. Is this the way we both grow a soul and repair the world? Must we serve to savor?

Unitarian and Universalist histories both show strong threads of efforts to serve the world - in direct efforts to relieve suffering and also in actions aimed at changing some systemic problem. Our record isn't always sterling. We are, after all, human. We have days when we approach our ideals and days when they are pretty much ignored or forgotten. Our vision is clear at times, decidedly clouded at others. Still, we can point to fine examples among our "religious ancestors." Some prominent examples include Theodore Parker in the efforts to abolish slavery, Susan B Anthony for women's suffrage, and the Rev James Reeb, killed in Selma, Alabama when he responded to Martin Luther King, Jr's appeal for help in the civil rights movement. The Benevolent Fraternity - now renamed the UU Urban Ministry - has been serving the poor of the Boston area since the 1830s.

Gilbert sees all this and more as evidence that, "the Unitarian Universalist movement lives under a prophetic imperative, a religious mandate for the corporate address of the church to the systemic problems of society. I cannot prove that; I do not assert it as a divine imperative; I only feel it deep in my bones. Otherwise we will be trapped in individualistic self- interest. . ." Those are pretty strong words, passionately expressed. We can talk about how much we agree or disagree. But I would be surprised to find many UUs who wouldn't agree that Unitarian Universalists want to make a difference in our world - to do what they can to make it a better place. We may see justice, peace or the "Beloved Community" as far-off goals, but we want to move in their direction.

Doing that, however, is often quite a complicated task. It means we have to make a lot of choices and avoid a lot of pitfalls. Gilbert recognizes that - enough that he has a set of "Ten Commandments for Social Action." I'm not going to read them all to you. But I will note that one reminds us to keep our sense of humor at the ready and to avoid being a grouch!

But I don't want to spend most of my time this morning on Gilbert's book, even though it offers a lot of helpful stuff. I'm particularly interested in ways that people - UUs or not - navigate the many choices involved in determining the particular areas in which we'll work and then figuring out what steps are possible given the other factors of our lives.

We certainly have plenty of appeals for our time and energy, our skills and efforts and our financial resources. They can be bewildering, even overwhelming. Everywhere we look there's another problem, another crisis, another issue. Sometimes it seems like everything is falling apart around us. Still, we don't have to be immobilized. I'm reminded of the story about a military scout returning from a battlefield reconnaissance mission. "Good news!" he reported to the general. "We can attack in any direction. We're surrounded!"

So which direction will we choose? As I look at different organizations and efforts, it seems there are definite patterns in people's choices, in the motivation that puts them to work. Let's look at some of them.

Sometimes one issue seems to dominate the times. Certainly the Civil Rights movement comes to mind, or the protests against the war in Viet Nam, perhaps early AIDS efforts. Thousands of Americans participated in these movements. But each person had their own motivation - some passionate, some less so. Most of the early civil rights activists were directly affected by Jim Crow, for example. But it took something more - some incident, some inspiration; metaphorically, some straw that made the burden too great to bear. Or maybe it was a vision of a better reality that became too compelling to ignore. Some folks who started out pretty casual became a lot more serious as they became more involved, gained a different perspective and had new, impactful experiences. Many of the activists made great sacrifices for their cause; a few even lost their lives. Similar patterns can be seen in other movements.

But it's not clear that these issues were as dominant at the time as they are from our distant vantage point. Other concerns are always present. The news somehow doesn't reach everyone - or reaches them in some different, low-key or resistant way. Or their priorities and attention lie elsewhere. I confess that I am at a loss to explain the low level of awareness I had at the time of the Civil Rights movement. I was focused on my studies at Berkeley and activism for student rights. I was interested, and served, in the Peace Corps in Africa. But I was pretty much oblivious to the important work underway for racial justice. How could that be? I lived it but can't really explain it. I guess I'd say that a person has to be ready to hear the call for justice or it passes by as so much background noise.

For many people, dedicated efforts begin in crisis - especially if it involves a family member or close friend. Susan G. Komen for the Cure was started by the sister of a breast cancer victim. You've probably heard about - maybe participated in - one of their "Walk for the Cure" events. Locally the Sund- Carrington Foundation, dedicated to helping in missing persons cases, was established after abductions and killings near Yosemite Park. Our own Coleen Sparkman established the Kendall School for autistic children in memory of Coleen and Jim's daughter, Kendall. We know of other efforts, scholarships and memorials. So much good work has come out of bereavement.

Sometimes friendship, even a simple invitation, can be the beginning of significant efforts. When a friend asks for your help, you're likely to respond. It may not be your issue, but you want to help your friend. That's especially true if you know the cause is important to them. Over time, you may find it becomes increasingly important to you, too.

An organization may tap into some feature of our society you find especially important. Joan Patterson has given many hours to Friends of the Library. She and Dorothy Schmidt have also been quite involved in the League of Women Voters. John Arnold has volunteered in literacy programs for many years. All of these help people improve their lives and empower them as citizens. Quite a few of our members are involved in the ACLU or in politics at some level. Marian Ericksen is a long-time Haven volunteer. Claire Patton has served on teams that respond with disaster relief. Bill Greer and Aynslie Frederickson feed people. All of them express their values in concrete action.

Of course, personality, life stage, and existing commitments of various sorts make a difference in our ability to take on prophetic action. We may even be embarrassed that at the use of "prophetic action" might be used anywhere near our names. We have this idea that "prophetic" means we have to be an Isaiah, a Gandhi, a Mother Teresa. In other words, you have to be a saint. It's not so. It's just not so. The prophets were people who believed - and today believe - that people an help to shape history, can move us toward justice and compassion. Every action, large or small, has some effect, some resonance, some result. With a little thought behind our actions, we can indeed be prophetic. We can speak and act for justice and mercy in our everyday interactions.

Some of us are prone to outrage. Some are usually calmer. Either way, we can find steps that lead to health and healing in our communities, our country and our world. We can speak and write. We can work with others to understand and address problems. At times, we need the energy of outrage. In other cases, cooler heads may best be heeded.

Some of us have very active commitments to family - and opportunity to affect young lives or set examples of responsibility and compassion as we support the aged. Time commitments are often an issue, but we may be able to help support the efforts of others. I'm thinking, for instance, of the many folks here who bake brownies, fix mashed potatoes or decorate cookies though they can't work with our regular shelter dinner crews.

You've probably noticed that some of my examples this morning have referred to activities we undertake here at the Fellowship. That seems perfectly natural. We come here because of our shared values and our commitment to live ever deeper lives. And working in cooperation with others means that we're able to be more effective - to do things that would be impossible for any of us alone. Mark Morrison-Reed, now retired from the co-ministry of the Toronto Unitarian Church, writes about the task of the religious community. In part, he reminds us that ". . .alone our vision is too narrow. . . and our strength too limited ... Together, our vision widens and our strength is renewed." And in a similar vein, Margaret Mead writes, "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed it's the only thing that ever has." Sometimes we feel small and isolated, but we have power we have yet to realize. Bit by bit, as we, together, speak and savor and serve, we change the world. In biblical studies, you come across the term "minor prophets." It doesn't refer to these small prophetic actions. But I like that idea. Maybe we can each be a minor prophet as we go through our days.

Day in and day out, we're constantly asked for donations to charities, to cultural, educational and political causes and a variety of other efforts. Sometimes at my house, it seems that 80% or more of the day's mail is made up of appeals! I doubt that Bill Gates or Warren Buffet could respond to them all! I'm certainly not in their class, but I want to be generous, to share what I have. I want to contribute to causes that support my values. I know that any effort, any organization, needs money to be effective - and I am fortunate to be able to offer some.

At the same time, I have some requirements. I want my donations to be spent for the stated purpose and not go mostly to marketing and administrative costs. That means I check on the group's ratings to see what percentage of their contributions goes to the real work. If I hear that the top executives are paid very large salaries, I figure my modest contribution would be better sent elsewhere.

I sift through the mailers and decide which causes are have purposes I really want to support, which ones are there because someone sold their mailing list, which are aimed at ideas and ideals I hold dear. I try to avoid much overlap, and I like to be sure I "cover" my chosen categories even though I can't support every organization. If it comes to a decision among several appeals that look good to me, I know that my contribution makes more impact on organizations that are local, small or serve a unique purpose than on well-known national or international causes. That doesn't mean I refuse the large groups, but I think carefully about it. I never commit to a contribution on the phone - not enough time to think. Besides, those calls are so annoying! With all my thinking and planning, I do sometimes I respond spontaneously to a heartfelt or unexpected appeal. I hope those gifts are informed by all my advance work - but maybe that's just wishful thinking.

Earlier, I mentioned time and temperament as variables that affect our choice of activities. I'd also like to mention the role of talents and skills. Sometimes, caring deeply about a cause or issue isn't the critical factor. Particular projects need particular skills. On one of our Habitat for Humanity crews, I'm good for moral support, maybe for a bit of inspiration and I'm a great go-fer, but that's about as far as it goes. No house will be built by having a hammer in my hand. In fact, it might be better for me to just get out of the way! It's different when someone needs something written for the paper or a newsletter, or asks me to give an invocation or ceremony. Sometimes we become active in an organization because our skills are needed. That in itself can be a pretty powerful motivator. In these cases, the cause chooses us. We go along if it's within our range of interest and expresses our values. And whaddya know? We're activists!

We want to make a difference. We can offer our words and deeds; our talents, our knowledge and our money. We know it's the right thing to do. If Gilbert is right about serving and savoring, it's even basic to our happiness and well-being. Maybe we're all called to be minor prophets. But we can't do everything. So we have to make choices. The specific activities, the intensity of our commitment and even the causes we choose will be different at different times in our lives. That's entirely appropriate. We each make a difference, in our own ways, and in our shared life and work. In the Bee recently, and in our latest newsletter, I'm quoted as saying that "we all have invitations from the Spirit - invitations to love one another, to build the common good, to work for peace in the world." I'll stand by those words. Which invitations will we - each one of us - accept? Which ways will we choose to bless the world?