The banality of indifference

Rev. Marisol Caballero
April 27, 2014

The phrase “the banality of evil” refers to how evil can often wear a fairly “normal” exterior. On this Holocaust Remembrance Day, we’ll explore the concepts of “evil,” “good,” and all of the gray area in between.


 

Tonight, at sundown, until sundown tomorrow, marks International Holocaust Remembrance Day, known as Yom HaShoah, or day of destruction. The well-known slogans remind us to, “Never forget.” And to, “Never let it happen again.”

Recently, I began studying philosophy professor, Hannah Arendt’s 1963 book, “Eichmann in Jerusalem, a Report on the Banality of Evil” and the controversy that has surrounded it since its publication. I remembered the phrase, “the banality of evil” one day when I was listening to NPR and heard the account of yet another school shooting. For a split second, I was filled with grief and sympathy, but then was aware of the fact that my mind naturally drifted, quite quickly, to thinking about the song that was in my head. The fact that, a second after hearing of such tragedy, I was cheerfully humming along to whatever annoying pop song was plaguing me was more jarring to me than the shooting, itself. This upset me.

After a brief moment of self-judgment, I began to mourn the fact that things like safety in schools can no longer be taken for granted and that mass-murderers choosing schoolchildren as their targets has become so commonplace that a relatively sensitive and genuinely caring person, such as I like to think of myself, is able to go on, relatively unaffected by such news. I checked and, in the year and some odd months since the tragedy in Newtown, CT, there have been 44 school shootings in the U.S., 13 of them within the first six weeks of 2014, alone.

So, I looked up the phrase and rediscovered Hannah Arendt’s book. I even watched the lackluster 2012 movie, Hannah Arendt, about her life before, during, and after the book’s publication. I’m not sure that I buy her argument that Nazi Adolf Eichmann, the man who was in charge of arranging the transportation of several million Jews to their death in packed train cars, was simply a puny, boring bureaucrat, unable to think for himself; that he was just following orders. She was surprised to find that, as she puts it, “Everybody could see that this man was not a “monster,” but it was difficult indeed not to suspect that he was a clown,” that his, “lack of imagination” and “sheer thoughtlessness” allowed him to “never realize what he was doing.”

No, I’m not sure that I buy any of that. It seems a weak defense. But of course, I wasn’t there. Still, what’s difficult to wrap one’s brain around is that anyone could ever so abandon their conscience or divorce themselves from empathy so entirely as to compartmentalize in that way. Eichmann’s greatest aspiration, it seems, was to rise in the Nazi ranks and to be somebody, having been a disappointment to his father, his community, and been looked down upon by the middle class of his upbringing. He wanted to please the big man in charge, at all costs, even swearing that he had never held any anti-Semitic beliefs, himself.

In truth, there could never be an adequate motive offered by a mass-murderer. We hope, in many contemporary cases, such as mass public shootings, for a mental illness diagnosis to surface. In our efforts to understand horrendous acts of evil, we prefer to remove as much personal agency and responsibility from the perpetrator as possible. We would rather believe that a glitch in the wiring of the brain would provoke such atrocities, rather than believe that someone could, willingly and without remorse, choose to hurt or kill another. If there is an explanation of mental illness, we think, then we may have hope of preventing future tragedies, of curing the sickness.

In an article in The Guardian, entitled, “From, Adam Lanza: The Medicalication of Evil,” Lindsey Fitzharris, a British medical student, warns us that to over-pathologize examples of evil will remove personal accountability from the equation, “While I do believe it is important to determine what factors may have led Lanza to open fire on Sandy Hook Elementary School- and whether this tragic event could have been prevented- I want to remind the U.S. and the world of one thing: evil is about choice. Sickness is about the absence of choice.”

Not only should be careful about pathologizing mass murderers so as to avoid further stigmatization of mental illness, but in doing so, we not only let the perpetrator off the hook, we also avoid confronting the possibility of seeing ourselves in those who are able to choose evil over good. Sure, some who commit evil acts truly may be beyond rehabilitation, unable to feel a shred of empathy for another. Psychosis is real. But, although we may view ourselves as genuinely compassionate, good-natured people, I would reckon that empathy most often lies somewhere on a spectrum between saintly and intrinsically evil. We can’t all be Mother Theresa just as we (thank goodness) aren’t all Hitler. I am sure that we’d rather think of ourselves as closer to the Mother Theresa end of that spectrum, as I believe we tend to be, but the fact still remains that empathic concern is a fluid characteristic.

Our 1st Principle, as Unitarian Universalists, states that, “we affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person.” The drafters of that principle, delegates gathered from UU congregations throughout out movement, were careful not to state a belief in the inherent goodness of every person. Rather, we are concerned with the possibility of goodness in people and strive to treat them accordingly.

Last year, professor Steve Taylor wrote in Psychology Today, “empathy or lack of empathy aren’t fixed. Although people with a psychopathic personality appear to be unable to develop empathy, for most of us, empathy- or goodness- is a quality that can be cultivated. This is recognized by Buddhism, and most other spiritual traditions… As we become more open and more connected, [we become] more selfless and altruistic.” This is evident in Tibetan Buddhism’s idea of recognizing that every human was, at some point in time, your mother, and treating them as such. We are aware of the Golden Rule. The Platinum Rule goes one step further, “Do unto others as they would have you do unto them.”

It is within human nature to desire to think of ourselves as “the good guys.” As liberals, progressive folk, we like to think of ourselves as standing “on the right side of history.” Hopefully, with dedication, our legacies may prove this to be the case. But, because we believe ourselves to be good, does this prevent us from perpetrating or being complicit in evil? If we can so easily dismiss horrors of the nightly news as ordinary, commonplace occurrences, how far removed are we from the ability to set aside conscience, altogether? What makes otherwise “normal” people commit acts of evil?

This was a major question in the recent television series, Breaking Bad. The lead character could have been a modern day Eichmann- a boring, dweeby high school chemistry teacher who, upon being diagnosed with terminal lung cancer, begins to manufacture “crystal meth.” For several seasons, the audience bears witness to Walter White’s moral degradation, as he, little-by-little, goes from dull family man to ruthless, amoral drug lord, by looking past one scruple after another.

It’s amazing how people can transform. We don’t often think about the fact that Hitler was once a giggling baby that someone cherished. I saw a photograph of a young, teenage Osama Bin Laden this week. He and over a dozen siblings and cousins were posing in front of a pink Cadillac while on vacation in Europe in the ’70’s. They were all dressed in the styles of the day, both women and men. No hint of radical Islam. And there he stood, laughing and young, big hair and sideburns, dressed like J.J. from “Good Times.” I couldn’t look away.

These days, most accept that evil is not a metaphysical force. “The Devil made me do it” doesn’t hold much weight anymore. But, I wonder if we have not adopted a seeping, dangerous cultural denial of evil’s existence as a systemic reality. We take cultural ills and reduce them to interpersonal incidents before we then reduce them to background noise on the nightly news. It’s someone else’s loss, someone else’s kid, someone else’s town.

Instead of stepping back to recognize the living system at play, we zoom in so closely that we no longer have to focus at all. Epidemic gun violence becomes to us unrelated cases of mental illness, or neglectful parents, or the product of violent video games. Racism becomes individual prejudice, mere name-calling, men in white sheets, rather than the very foundation that our society was built upon that was never fully reconciled and still affords great privilege to those born with white skin. Genocide becomes an egregious terror that lesser civilized nations carry out, rather than our nation’s own shameful history. Misogyny becomes cat-calls and ditsy blond stereotypes, rather than the worldwide actuality of the continued mistreatment of women and girls. And, anti-Semitism becomes the painful memories of far-away Europe, rather than the continued presence of Neo-Nazi hate groups within our own communities. And so on…

Ignoring our own nation’s atrocities, choosing the privilege of being able to not have to think about evil in terms of systems in which we live our lives, creates of us a chilling similarity to the many nameless, ordinary accomplices to historical events such as the Holocaust. Before the world wars, Germany was widely respected, thought of the world over as a center of culture, science, intellect, and art. Flunkies “following orders,” bystanders, and other banal people helped the evil cause in their action and inaction.

It would be maddening to fully empathize with each and every story of evil, day in, day out. The anger and grief would eventually deaden our ability to experience joy. We can, however, choose not to outright ignore. Together, we can choose not to accept hopelessness, not to choose personal insignificance, but to be part of the collective response. We can choose to work toward repairing the evil present in our world with good. And, we can begin within ourselves. Systems are not always easy to notice, especially because we are busy playing our parts within them.

So, how not to feel like any problem, any evil is too big to care about? How do we battle the urge toward indifference? Where do we find the middle ground between a depressing, bleak outlook and total moral blindness and lack of concern? Longtime Buddhist scholar and activist, Joanna Macy, tells us that we find it in community. She says that, “[this work] needs to be done in groups so we can hear it from each other. Then you realize that it gives a lie to the isolation we have been conditioned to experience in recent centuries… And because the truth is speaking in the work, it unlocks the heart… there comes a time when the little band of heroes feels totally outnumbered and bleak, like Frodo in Lord of the Rings or Pilgrim in Pilgrim’s Progress. You learn to say, “It looks bleak. Big deal, it looks bleak.”

Archbishop Desmond Tutu speaks to this in his book, “No Future Without Forgiveness.” After apartheid, South Africa sought to find a middle ground of moving forward. Somewhere between the Nuremburg Trials after WWII and the national amnesia that continues to take place in the United States’ attitude toward our own history of genocide and slavery. Post-apartheid South Africa was too complex for either option. Both sides were still living side by side, both had committed atrocities, and all wounds were still fresh. The middle way, the extremely difficult path toward forgiveness was chosen and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was established.

Tutu said, “It was pointed out that we none of us posses a kind of fiat by which we can say, “Let bygones be bygones” and hey presto, they become bygones. Our common experience is in fact the opposite- that the past, far from disappearing or lying down and being quiet, has an embarrassing and persistent way of returning and haunting us unless it has in fact been dealt with adequately.”

On my fridge is a magnetic quote by Gloria Steinem, “The truth shall set you free, but first it will piss you off.” I’ll add that it will also make you cry and fill you with grief, but we shall be free.

Never forget. And, never let it happen again.


 

Podcasts of sermons are also available for free on iTunes. You can find them here.

Most sermons delivered at the First UU Church of Austin during the past 14 years are available online through this website. You will find links to them in the right sidebar menu labeled Sermons. The Indexes link leads to tables of all sermons for each year listed by date (newest to oldest) with topic and speaker. Click on the topic to go to a sermon.

Jesus’ Grandmothers

Rev. Meg Barnhouse
April 20, 2014

Who were the women in Rabbi Jesus’ family tree? What did their oddness say about him?


 

Some people call the genealogies in the Bible “the begats,” and they are hard to read. Why would I want to be reading you one? Well, because there are stories embedded in this one. Every name has a story (same with each of our genealogies) and I thought you might be interested in these. Women are hardly ever mentioned in these. This is the genealogy of Rabbi Jesus. Count on your fingers the women in this as I read it.

Matthew 1 – The Genealogy of Jesus

1 A record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ the son of David, the son of Abraham:

2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob,

Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,

3 Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar,

Perez the father of Hezron,

Hezron the father of Ram,

4 Ram the father of Amminadab,

Amminadab the father of Nahshon,

Nahshon the father of Salmon,

5 Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab,

Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth,

Obed the father of Jesse,

6 and Jesse the father of King David.

David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife,

…then 24 generations without the mention of a woman, then…

16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

The usual genealogy in the Bible is a list of fathers. The mothers are rarely mentioned. In this genealogy of Jesus, there are a several items of interest. One is that it’s a list of Joseph’s forbears, which leads you to believe that the Virgin Birth didn’t mean the same thing to Matthew that it does to people today, but that’s another sermon. The second unusual thing is that there are four grandmothers mentioned in Jesus’ list of forbears: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, the wife of Uriah. Not only are they mentioned, but they are women with interesting stories, stories I would like to tell you today.

Matthew wrote this genealogy in a time when the rules for women were narrow and mean. There wasn’t much women who weren’t married to kings or emperors could do to distinguish themselves in the Greek and Roman cultures. The most you could go for was to be really good, stay under the radar, do what you were supposed to do, and not get yourself in trouble. It was easy to get in trouble. If you got pregnant without being married, if you didn’t get pregnant when you were married, if you got raped, if your husband died, all of those things were bad, and they were your fault.

Were these grandmothers of Jesus exemplary church ladies, following all the rules to the letter and making cautious moves so their lives could be free of turbulence and pleasing to those around them? NO. These women did not do the nice thing, pleasing those around them. What they did would now be called risk-taking. Doing the higher right thing, rather than the nice thing. Good rather than nice.

These women embody the difference between being good and being nice.

TAMAR

Tamar’s story is in the book of Genesis (38:6-30). It was the custom of the day, if a man died leaving no children, his brother would marry the widow as one of his wives and have children with her to be counted as the children of his dead brother. That way the brother’s line would continue. Tamar’s husband was one of the sons of Judah. Judah was the one the whole nation was named after later. Judah was a brother of Joseph, one of the ones who sold Joseph to the Egyptians and then told their father that Joseph had been eaten by a wild animal. They gave their father the coat of many colors, dipped in animal blood, as evidence. It wouldn’t have fooled CSI, but it was enough for Jacob, their father.

Anyway, Judah moved away and married, and had some sons and the eldest son married a woman named Tamar. The story says he was wicked in the Lord’s sight, so the Lord killed him. Judah told his next son, Onan, to have intercourse with her and make some children. He spilled his seed on the ground in front of her, refusing to make children with her. The god in the story gets mad at him for that, so he died too. We still have people whose beliefs about solo sex are shaped by interpreting this story wrong, and “Onanism” should be a term for refusing to do the right thing, instead of a term for having sex by yourself. Whew. This is awkward to talk about, but that’s the scriptures for you. The third son was still too young to fulfill the brotherly obligation, so Judah told Tamar to go back to her father’s house and live there as a widow. He worried that the third son would die too, as it seemed to him that some kind of doom was emanating from Tamar

11 Judah then said to his daughter-in-law Tamar, “Live as a widow in your father’s house until my son Shelah grows up.” For he thought, “He may die too, just like his brothers.” So Tamar went to live in her father’s house.

12 After a long time Judah’s wife, the daughter of Shua, died. When Judah had recovered from his grief, he went up to Timnah, to the men who were shearing his sheep, and his friend Hirah the Adullamite went with him.

13 When Tamar was told, “Your father-in-law is on his way to Timnah to shear his sheep,”

14 she took off her widow’s clothes, covered herself with a veil to disguise herself, and then sat down at the entrance to Enaim, which is on the road to Timnah. For she saw that, though Shelah had now grown up, she had not been given to him as his wife.

15 When Judah saw her, he thought she was a prostitute, for she had covered her face.

16 Not realizing that she was his daughter-inlaw, he went over to her by the roadside and said, “Come now, let me sleep with you.” “And what will you give me to sleep with you?” she asked.

17 “I’ll send you a young goat from my flock,” he said. “Will you give me something as a pledge until you send it?” she asked.

18 He said, “What pledge should I give you?” “Your seal and its cord, and the staff in your hand,” she answered. So he gave them to her and slept with her, and she became pregnant by him.

19 After she left, she took off her veil and put on her widow’s clothes again.

20 Meanwhile Judah sent the young goat by his friend the Adullamite in order to get his pledge back from the woman, but he did not find her.

21 He asked the men who lived there, “Where is the shrine prostitute who was beside the road at Enaim?” “There hasn’t been any shrine prostitute here,” they said.

22 So he went back to Judah and said, “I didn’t find her. Besides, the men who lived there said, ‘There hasn’t been any shrine prostitute here.’ “

23 Then Judah said, “Let her keep what she has, or we will become a laughingstock. After all, I did send her this young goat, but you didn’t find her.”

24 About three months later Judah was told, “Your daughter-in-law Tamar is guilty of prostitution, and as a result she is now pregnant.” Judah said, “Bring her out and have her burned to death!”

25 As she was being brought out, she sent a message to her father-in-law. “I am pregnant by the man who owns these,” she said. And she added, “See if you recognize whose seal and cord and staff these are.”

26 Judah recognized them and said, “She is more righteous than I, since I wouldn’t give her to my son Shelah.” And he did not sleep with her again.

27 When the time came for her to give birth, there were twin boys in her womb.

28 As she was giving birth, one of them put out his hand; so the midwife took a scarlet thread and tied it on his wrist and said, “This one came out first.”

29 But when he drew back his hand, his brother came out, and she said, “So this is how you have broken out!” And he was named Perez.

30 Then his brother, who had the scarlet thread on his wrist, came out and he was given the name Zerah. She was good, not nice.

According to the Book of Ruth, this Peretz becomes the great great great great grandfather of Boaz, who is the great grandfather of David.

RAHAB

Rahab was a prostitute who lived in Jericho. The Israelites wanted to conquer that town, and their commander, Joshua, sent two spies to look it over.

Joshua 2 Rahab and the Spies

1 Then Joshua son of Nun secretly sent two spies from Shittim. “Go, look over the land,” he said, “especially Jericho.” So they went and entered the house of a prostitute named Rahab and stayed there.

2 The king of Jericho was told, “Look! Some of the Israelites have come here tonight to spy out the land.”

3 So the king of Jericho sent this message to Rahab: “Bring out the men who came to you and entered your house, because they have come to spy out the whole land.”

4 But the woman had taken the two men and hidden them. She said, “Yes, the men came to me, but I did not know where they had come from.

5 At dusk, when it was time to close the city gate, the men left. I don’t know which way they went. Go after them quickly. You may catch up with them.”

6 (But she had taken them up to the roof and hidden them under the stalks of flax she had laid out on the roof.)

7 So the men set out in pursuit of the spies on the road that leads to the fords of the Jordan, and as soon as the pursuers had gone out, the gate was shut….

She made a deal with the spies for the life of her family. ” please swear to me by the LORD that you will show kindness to my family, because I have shown kindness to you. Give me a sure sign

13 that you will spare the lives of my father and mother, my brothers and sisters, and all who belong to them, and that you will save us from death.”

14 “Our lives for your lives!” the men assured her. “If you don’t tell what we are doing, we will treat you kindly and faithfully when the LORD gives us the land.”

15 So she let them down by a rope through the window, for the house she lived in was part of the city wall.

16 Now she had said to them, “Go to the hills so the pursuers will not find you. Hide yourselves there three days until they return, and then go on your way

21 “Agreed,” she replied. “Let it be as you say.”

So she sent them away and they departed. And she tied the scarlet cord in the window. She and her family were spared when Joshua and his troops took the city. She was good to her family, compromised herself for them and saved them.

RUTH

Ruth was a foreigner, from Moab. She married the son of Naomi, who was from Judah, Israel. Naomi’s husband died, then her two sons. She told Ruth and her other daughter-in-law Orpah (where Oprah got her name) to go back to their mothers and find other men to marry. But Ruth replied, “Don’t urge me to leave you or to turn back from you. Where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God my God.

17 Where you die I will die, and there I will be buried. May the LORD deal with me, be it ever so severely, if anything but death separates you and me.”

18 When Naomi realized that Ruth was determined to go with her, she stopped urging her.

Isn’t it interesting that the words many people say at their weddings were originally said between a woman and her mother-in-law?

They got to Judah at the time of the barley harvest, and Ruth went to work in the field of a near kinsman Naomi pointed out to her. He wasn’t next in line for her, but second. Ruth reaped in the fields, and he noticed her. He offered her protection and food, and she stayed with his folks in the field. When the harvest was over, Naomi told her to go to the threshing floor where the men slept and lie down with him. He did not reject her. His mom was Rahab, remember from the genealogy? He was thrilled, but wanted to do the honorable thing, so he went and negotiated with the next in line so that he could take her as his wife. They made it happen the way they wanted it to, and she gave birth to Obed, King David’s grandfather.

BATHSHEBA

King David saw her bathing on the roof, and she was beautiful. Uriah, her husband, was off fighting David’s war. He called her to the palace and she slept with him. She found out she was pregnant, and David called her husband home for R and R. Uriah refused to go home while the war was still being fought. He slept at the gate of the city with his some of his men, like an athlete who won’t shave until the championship is won. David got him drunk and tried to send him home, but he slept with his men at the gate again. Then David placed him in the fight so he would get killed. He was killed, and Bathsheba mourned him, but she went to the palace and became David’s wife, and bore a son. The story says God was mad at David, so the son got sick and died. One of Bathsheba’s next sons was one of Jesus’ grandfathers.

What are these women doing in this genealogy? Commentators have worked for years trying to figure out what they had in common. They all made choices that were risky. They gathered up all the dice and rolled them, changing their lives. Life pushed them one way and another. Loved ones were killed, but they chose life. They put themselves in danger of rejection and harm. They chose life.

Especially Ruth and Tamar made a leap, instead of subsiding into resignation and bitterness over their fate. They didn’t shrug and say, well, I got dealt a bad hand, I’m just unlucky, or I’ve been done wrong. They took what power they had and used it to move their lives forward.

The gospel writer is telling the story of Messiah, the Redeemer. In the beginning of his story he embeds five women who chose to do a brave thing, even though it could get them into trouble. Is there something about redemption that takes guts? That takes a willingness to face rejection? Foreigners, a prostitute, a beauty who married King David, but is named in the genealogy as “wife of Uriah,” and Mary, the young woman who was with child before she had been with a man, yet her baby’s lineage is traced through her husband. Mystery comes into the world, redemption comes into the world with its own morality, with its own sense of the good that plays in all shades in between black and white. These are family stories that would not play well in some sweet Pleasantville. They are real families, real choices, real risks, and we learn that you never know how redemption will come to the world.


 

Podcasts of this and other sermons are also available for free on iTunes. You can find them here.

Most sermons delivered at the First UU Church of Austin during the past 14 years are available online through this website. You will find links to them in the right sidebar menu labeled Sermons. The Indexes link leads to tables of all sermons for each year listed by date (newest to oldest) with topic and speaker. Click on the topic to go to a sermon.

 

May 4 2014 Congregational Meeting

Greetings,

This is to inform you of the First UU Austin regularly scheduled congregational meeting on Sunday, May 4th, at 1:30 p.m. in the Sanctuary.

According to our Bylaws:

Individuals who have been members of the church for 30 days or more and who have (as an individual or part of a family unit) made a recorded financial contribution during the last 12 months and at least 30 days prior to the meeting, have the right to vote at all official church meetings.

Agenda:

1. Welcome and Call to Order, Michael Kersey – 5 min

a. Unison Reading of Covenant and Lighting of Chalice

b. Adopt Consent Agenda (Minutes from Last Meeting and Rules of order)

c. Adopt Agenda

2. Update: State of the Church, Rev. Meg Barnhouse – 10 min

3. Congregational vote on Board of Trustee and Nominating Committee candidates – 30 min

4. Joys and Concerns – 10 min

5. Closing Reading and Extinguish Chalice – 5 min

6. Adjourn

The following materials are available here for your information prior to the meeting:

May 2014 Congregational Meeting Packet

Rules of Procedure (updated with most recent version)

2014 Nominees

Depression

Rev. Meg Barnhouse
April 13, 2014

So many people suffer from bouts of depression. What helps? How does one be a friend to someone who is depressed? What causes it? How is it different from sorrow?


 

Sermon: 
A Few Thoughts About Depression

There are lots of us who have moments of feeling like life is too overwhelming to be handled. Nothing will change for the better, we will never find what we seek, there will be no true sweetness or love for us. Happiness is a thing we cannot grasp or remember. For the fortunate ones among us, this feeling lasts a day or two and then it lifts.

For others, it stays, and it can take lives. The voices inside that watch and criticize multiply and feed on the spirit. There is no spark of hope to light the path. The mind is in a deep pit and there is no way out There is no energy to make choices or even to take care of routine necessities. Some keep functioning in their jobs and families, but inside it feels like a toxic wasteland. It hurts, mentally and physically. The body can ache as the soul twists in pain. Some people sleep all the time, some sleep fitfully. Every morning at three-thirty they wake up for an hour before being able to fall back to sleep Some people eat everything in sight, some stop eating. Sometimes depression looks like a long angry spell, and sometimes it looks like collecting things you don’t need. Hoarding is a kind of depression, including the hoarding of animals.

Depression is not sadness, although feelings of sadness can be present in depression. In sadness, you grieve the loss of someone you loved or a dream you cherished. You cry, you mourn, you feel awful. It’s healthy and appropriate. Some people think that if you are completely well-adjusted and mentally fit, you will be able to go through any situation in full serenity and peace. Not so. In many situations, sadness is the appropriate emotion to feel. If you weren’t feeling it, there would be something wrong.

Depression is not anger, although feelings of anger and resentment can be present in depression. Anger is meant to alert us to a situation that is harmful to us. We look around to see what needs to change, what needs to move. If we have to stay in a situation that is harmful to us, we may develop depression.

Low self-esteem and feelings of inferiority are also part of depression. I would like to say, though, that low self-esteem seems to be part of the human condition. Most people feel like everyone else knows something they don’t know, like there was a life handbook given out and they didn’t get one. Many people feel inferior when they compare themselves to others. The thing we don’t notice is that we are comparing our insides to their outsides. In depression, though, feelings of inferiority and regret grow into deep shame and feelings of worthlessness. You feel there is something wrong with you. There is a deep emptiness inside.

Depression has been around for a long time. King Saul, in the Bible, is described as suffering from periods of deep melancholy. The music David played for him on his harp helped alleviate the King’s pain. For some music is healing, for others it can be the beauty of nature. Many therapies have been tried throughout the ages. Hippocrates recommended a vegetable diet and abstinence from all excesses. Others tried entertaining stories, dirty jokes, exhortation and confrontation, counting your blessings, looking at people were are less fortunate than you, etc.

These days there are lots of cures to try. The biomedical discoveries about depression and its causes are coming thick and fast. Lots of things can mimic depression. Hormone imbalance, food allergies, thyroid mis-function, sensitivity to cyclical changes in the light as seasons change, certain medications, head injuries, diabetes, hypoglycemia, and other things.

If you don’t have any of those things, if you truly have clinical depression, you have an illness like any other illness of the body. There is no shame in it. There is no reason to be embarrassed. It happens to people. Like many illnesses, there are causative factors in the environment and in the mind of the sufferer. When you have a heart attack, the doctors give medicine and now they complement that with talk therapy and changes to your diet and lifestyle. Depression is that way too. The medicine is there, and it is good. If one doesn’t work for you, try another one. Each one works in a different way, and one will be better than another. Changes to diet and lifestyle are important too. Alcohol is a depressant. Nicotine can make depression worse. Some artificial sweeteners crash the level of serotonin in your body. Serotonin in necessary for the feeling of wellbeing that we enjoy. Exercise is an element in the cure of depression. Sometimes depression can be alleviated by walking thirty minutes a day three times a week. The problem is people who are severely depressed can’t make themselves do that.

The various anti-depressant medications are highly effective, unless a person is using alcohol at the same time. The problem is people have a shame reaction to them that we don’t have as much to heart medicine or diabetes medicine. We still feel like it’s a weakness of character. Like if we could just pull ourselves together we could beat this thing. Mind over illness in a powerful thing, and it works as well on depression as it does on arthritis and cancer. Sometimes yes, mostly no.

Talk therapy can do some good. What do we do in talk therapy to help with depression? One approach is called “Cognitive Therapy.” That theory holds that it is mistaken ways of thinking that lead to depression. You work with someone to become aware of some ways you might be thinking that sap your spirit. Another thing therapists do is talk with you about your anger or your sadness in which you may have gotten stuck. They will ask about depression in your family medical history, as it can run in families. There are lots of different therapies, and each of them seems to work with equal effectiveness.

How do you help someone with depression? Cheering them up isn’t the way. You can acknowledge their suffering as you would with someone who is battling any illness. You can’t ask them to snap out of it. They can’t always beat it with their will. Some people seem to feel it’s noble to struggle with it unaided, and it is as noble as struggling, medicine-free, with high blood pressure or multiple sclerosis. How do you help someone? You can encourage them to treat it as a lifethreatening illness and get on some medicine. It might not work, but it might.

If you do try medicine to complement your talk therapy or exercise, be aware that not every medicine works for everyone, and you may have to try several before you get it to the best point. Also, medicines tend to “poop out” after several years, and you need to switch.

If you think about suicide, please consider that it may be a helpful urge to kill off a part of your life. You should try making huge changes before you kill off all of it. Maybe a few relationships need to go, a few expectations. Maybe you will need to accept that you’ve disappointed someone or lost everything. Life comes up through cracks in the pavement, past rocks and on the precarious sides of cliffs. The pain is great and you think there’s no hope anymore, but that’s the depression dementor doing its work, and they lie. Talk about it. Get support. Get sober. Let go of the shame. Hang onto moments of joy.


 

Podcasts of this and other sermons are also available for free on iTunes. You can find them here.

Most sermons delivered at the First UU Church of Austin during the past 14 years are available online through this website. You will find links to them in the right sidebar menu labeled Sermons. The Indexes link leads to tables of all sermons for each year listed by date (newest to oldest) with topic and speaker. Click on the topic to go to a sermon.

 

God wants you to be rich!

Rev. Meg Barnhouse
April 6, 2014

The Third Commandment forbids taking God’s name in vain. So many people say “God bless you!” to the poor but do not help to change the situation. So many politicians say “God bless America” at the end of their speeches, but what do they mean by that? Might using God’s name for ulterior motives be taking that name in vain?


 

Sermon:

Hypocrisy and the Third Commandment

In the summers we used to go up to Roaring River, my Uncle David’s farm near Daniel’s Pass, NC. I remember riding in the back seat of his old Jeep and being reprimanded sternly. This was unusual for him – he wasn’t a stern person. He was the second youngest of thirteen children, and he had been always in trouble. What had I done? I had said “Gah ….. ” about something. I have no idea how to spell that. It’s a Southern child’s word. “Golly,” I knew, was forbidden, as it was a way to not say “God,” which was really really forbidden, since it was taking the Lord’s name in vain. Which brings us to the Third Commandment, the next in this year’s series:

“You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.

The original Hebrew says, “La Tisah Ess Shaim Adoshem L’shav.” The key word is “Tisah” which does not mean “to take” or “to say” God’s name. Tisah is Hebrew for “to carry,” which means the commandment is telling us, “Do not CARRY God’s name in vain.” This word implies lifting up, carrying like a banner or a flag. “In vain” means uselessly, or in an empty way. It’s the only one of the Commandments that is tagged with this “The Lord will not hold anyone guiltless (literally will not cleanse) someone who does that. Is it possible that the scriptures mean to condemn little kids who say “Golly” or even “My God, that’s an ugly dog” more than murderers? No, it is not possible.

Ancient Jews avoided saying the name of God altogether. They used four letters YOD-HE-VAV-HE without vowels. These four letters are called the Tetragrammaton Instead of making the sounds ‘Yuh” “huh” Wuh” “huh” they say “Adonai,” which is translated “the Lord,” or just “ha-shem,” which means “the name.” This way they will avoid taking God’s name in vain. In English you sometimes see the word “God” written “G-d.”

Later on, Christian scholars added the vowels from the word “Adonai” to the Tetragrammaton, and pronounced it “Jehovah.”

When Moses was talking to God in the burning bush, he asks God’s name. “I am who I am,” is what the translation says. It would better say “I will be who I will be.” I remember one preacher saying that was God saying that he would be the same yesterday, today, and forever. It doesn’t sound like that to me. If a person said to you “I will be who I will be, “would you think that meant they were unchanging? I think that preacher was seeing what he already believed. That happens all the time in life. We see what supports the things we already think. To me, “I will be who I will be” implies that God is changing. I could be reading into the text what I already believe as well, though there is a little more evidence in the rest of the Exodus story. When God leads the people in the wilderness, he forms a pillar of smoke by day and fire by night. Smoke, fire. Those are constantly changing forms. I just think that is interesting. He wasn’t a hawk or a dragonfly. Those are also changeable, but in smoke and in fire you can see shapes, different people see different shapes. You can’t grab hold of either one, no matter how close you get.

Also, when Moses asks to see God, he is allowed to, but he only sees the back of God as God passes by. Some scholars say this means we never see God, we just see where God has been. I like that thought.

The Divine Force is always changing, and we only see where it has been. Even that is open to question and interpretation.

So “God” isn’t really the name of God, it’s just a human word in English to describe the concept of the Divine One. In other languages the concept is called “Deus, Dio, Dios, Zeus, Allah, then there are lots of particular names for particular gods or aspects of the one god: Krishna, Shiva, Yemaya, Oshun, Morrigan, Nana. Thousands of names.

Lao-Tse, the father of Taoism, writes in the Tao te Ching, “The Tao that can be named is not the Tao.” The nameless is the origin of heaven and earth.

While naming is the origin of the myriad things.” In naming you begin to separate, you begin particularity; you begin to limit the One.

That’s a lot about the name of God. From those who won’t name the Divine at all, to those who hint at a name but refuse to pronounce it. These are folks who want to be very careful not to misuse the name. It’s not crystal clear what the misuse of the name is. If it’s not likely to be cussing that is going to cause God to be more displeased with you than if you had stolen or killed, what is it?

Then there are those who pronounce it all the time. “God bless you,” “God told me to talk to you,” “God has a wonderful plan for your life.” A lot of these people are kind hearted and good folks. They are sincere believers. Then there are those who use it thoughtlessly. Then there are those who use it for power or greed. Pat Robertson said we had hurricane Sandy because God was angry with America and had withdrawn his protection from the country because of the pagans, feminists, abortionists and gay people. There is the Phelps family who pickets the funerals of American soldiers with big posters that read “God hates fags.” There are those, like Ted Haggart, President of the American Association of Evangelicals, representing about 30 million people, who lift high the banner of the name of God to wade into the fray against gay and lesbian American citizens. A few days ago he was accused by a gay escort of hiring him once a month and asking him to buy crystal meth so they could get high together. There are those like Jimmy Swaggart, who raised millions as a televangelist, then was caught, twice, with prostitutes. Once DUI. Of course, those things could happen to anyone, I guess. But not everyone makes money making people feel guilty, then feel like there is hope for them if they send money in to support the television ministry.

Some preachers regularly ask for donations, claiming that those that give will reap the benefit of God’s blessing. People are told if they give enough, even if they are in debt, God will erase their debt. And if God doesn’t ease their financial troubles, then they aren’t giving enough. This principle is known as the “prosperity gospel.”

A person who used to work for Robert Tilton’s ministries said they were given bundles of envelopes and a letter opener. They were to take out the cash and toss the letters. They pulled in nearly $1,000 an hour.

The problem came when the televangelist watchdog group, The Trinity Foundation, founded by a man named Ole Anthony, sent a squad of detectives to Tilton’s office. They went through the dumpster and found piles of letters that were still folded in their envelopes, which had been slit to extract the money. One of the detectives, who earns a salary of $80.00 a week at the Foundation, carries a letter from that dumpster in his wallet. A worried mother was writing for prayers for her son, who was suicidal. “This reminds me why we do this,” he said. They leaked the story to Diane Sawyer and Prime Time, and Tilton went down.

Politicians who cloak their ambition in God talk are breaking the Third Commandment by introducing legislation to keep the Ten Commandments in the courthouses, but not knowing what they are, sponsoring anti-gay legislation when your numbers sink in the polls, hammering at folks about family values while cheating on their spouses, stealing money or beating their children. Those who say God is punishing homosexuals by sending AIDS. Those people are carrying the name of God in an empty way, pretending to know the mind of God.

These commandments are binding for Jews and Muslims as well, and those who break them are those who say God is punishing the US for its foreign policies with hurricanes and floods, those who say “In the name of God” before they blow someone up or cut off someone’s head.

It seems this commandment is about religious hypocrisy and violence, about claiming that you know something about what God thinks, who God would bomb, what God would drive.

Do UUs fall short of our ideals of behavior and right relationship? Yes. All the time. We are short with one another when we should be kind. We male-bash, or we get ugly about our differences of opinion, or we denigrate one another, or ignore the stranger in our midst because it’s uncomfortable to talk to someone new or because we just don’t have energy for a conversation that day. Or we don’t go to the polls and vote our principles. Do we carry the banner or our principles cynically, for power or money? Maybe. I can’t really figure out how to do that, but maybe during the discussion you can help me. There is good religion and bad religion. Most of it is mixed. Only a little religion has to do with God, I think. No one really knows, even though most people speak like they do. Our task is to clean up our own hearts and minds, and to name hypocrisy as breaking the Third Commandment.


 

Podcasts of this and other sermons are also available for free on iTunes. You can find them here.

http://itunes.apple.com/podcast/first-unitarian-universalist/id372427776