The Williston-West Navigator

Here we are, on the precipice, about to embark on a new journey. Our pastoral search will be a journey that some may find overwhelming with anxiety, while others see tremendous opportunity. I guess it is another example of the glass is half empty or half full.

We have two very difficult tasks. Finding an interim minister to take over, for the short term, immediately after Eric retires is the first step. The process of pastoral succession has been developed over the years by the church hierarchy to help prevent churches from acting too quickly and calling the wrong choice as successor without doing the necessary work to determine what we as a church community need and want in our spiritual leader. The interim is trained to assist us as we develop a profile of who we are, and what our needs are so that we may select the right candidate to call as Eric’s successor.

The committee to select the interim minister has been named. The members are Sam Saltonstall, Gracie Johnston, Bill Whelan, Ellie Brown and Ted Malette, your moderator. Our first meeting will be January 31 at 6 pm when we will meet with our conference minister to begin the process. We will keep the church informed as the committee addresses its task.

Once the interim is in place the Council will name the Pastoral Search Committee based on the church bylaws. We will draw up a committee of 7 to 9 members from across the entire church family that will be charged with the responsibility of finding the right person for us.

With all of our prayers and the guidance of those who have worked through this process for other churches I am confident we will find a new leader who will take us on the faith journey Jesus has in mind for us. We have been so fortunate to have been led by a person with the talents that Eric has shared with us. Now the door of opportunity has opened wide for travel down a new road. Let us seize this chance and take the right steps to a bright future.

May God bless us all!

Three days ago, before House Republican leaders were forced to scuttle a vote yesterday on a $54 billion budget-cutting bill that would have scaled back Medicaid, food stamp and student loan programs, I stood in line at the Nashville Airport, wondering why so few Americans seemed outraged by this threat to some of our Nation’s poorest children.

Just like that, a woman cooing at two infants distracted me.

The tousled-haired twins in a two-seater stroller are, their grandmother told me, "so different." The younger one is a Energizer Bunny-quick crawler; the older one barely scoots, but his rosy fingers "pick everything apart."

Grandma, it turned out, is from Louisiana. And though Katrina didn’t directly touch her family, she "still can’t believe that what happened there happened in America," she said. "I know the bridge those poor people were stuck on..."

Her sharp blue eyes became slits.

"You don’t think I’d smash in a grocery store window to get some water for these babies?" she asked.

Her passion for her grandsons made me wonder: Is it numbers—which are as cold and bloodless as her twins are warm and alive – that keep us from caring more about poor children?

Are they to blame for the yawns that greet the hair-raising words "13 million U.S. children live in poverty"? Do numbers explain why the sentence "More than 9 million U.S. children have no health insurance" elicits a stunned blink or a sharp inhalation, but then is forgotten?

Our responses to numbers reflect our experiences. We hear "nine," and some of us flash on our fourth-grade son’s age, or the play we just saw with that title, or the number of times that 50 Cent got shot, the rapper-turned-actor repeatedly reminds us.

Who can experience "13 million"?

The thought of a sick child, at least, inspires feeling. Some people recall their terror at their young son’s wails after a hard playground fall, their daughter’s terrifying limpness during a fever. Like the Nashville grandma, they might have done anything to halt that one child’s hurt.

But "9 million"?

It’s a number. So are the stunning census statistics that the number of children living in poverty grew by almost 13 percent over the past four years and that those living in extreme poverty – annual income below $7,610 for a family of three – increased by 20 percent. According to data from the National Center for Health Statistics, every 19 minutes a U.S. born baby dies before his first birthday.

Such numbers give us a momentary jolt. Then we turn on "Sportscenter," answer e-mails. A number is a number. A child is a child.

Unless he’s ours.

Many of us have gotten to where a youngster’s welfare doesn’t trouble us unless we’ve kissed, read to or held her. Anyone who has fleetingly experienced true hunger can’t forget that panicked feeling – yet we won’t demand that Congress keep helping kids who experience it day after day.

The proposed budget cuts would eliminate some Medicaid protections instituted in the 1960s, when half of young military draftees were being turned away because of physical, mental and developmental conditions that basic health care might have prevented, says Children’s Defense Fund Health Director Alison Buist.

Republican leaders had to delay the vote despite having made major concessions on oil and gas exploration and drilling. Moderates still opposed provisions that would have curbed vital social services. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said the bill promoted "cutting taxes for the wealthiest Americans at the expense of the middle class and hurting those who need our help most."

Of course, for many people the phrase "needy Americans" conjures images of job-allergic welfare moms. In fact, 87 percent of uninsured children have at least one employed parent. "So you have lots of parents trying to do the right thing who can’t get ahead," Buist says. "Their kid has an asthma attack, they take off work and they lose their job... We think, ‘I have a co-pay.’ But we don’t realize how poor is poor. According to the federal poverty level, that’s $16,090 a year for a family of three -- $309 a week to pay for food and rent and heat and transportation," Buist says. For a family living on that amount, "a $5 co-pay and a premium are a lot of money."

Not only were congressional Republicans proposing cuts to programs that help the helpless, but in the next few weeks they could give $70 billion in tax relief to the nation’s wealthiest citizens - - which enrages CDF Chief Executive Marian Wright Edelman as much as it baffles her. "Who takes from the poor to give to the rich in times like these?" she asks.

It is obscene that this nation’s 347 billionaires - - whose net worth exceeds $1 trillion and who received massive tax cuts in 2001, 2003 and last year - - could get additional tax cuts while some poor kids get less medical care. Yesterday, House Majority Leader Roy Blunt (R-MO) suggested that GOP leaders would make more concessions, adding, "I think we’ll have the votes next week."

Maybe not. Numbers are numbers. But when it comes to that child at risk, pretend that he or she is yours - - or mine, or the twins adored by that Nashville grandmother.

Pretend that the proposed budget cuts threatened the child whose peanut-butter-and-jelly lunch you daily slap together, and whose sleeping face fills your flung-open heart. Think of that child. Think of those billionaires.

Then tell Congress whom you’d rather help.

Dear Fellow Members of Williston-West:

As we begin 2006, we’re faced with a significant financial challenge here at the church. Our budget, which we as Trustees pared down to the bare bones, is roughly $15,000 over our anticipated income. This comes from three different areas. First, our income for 2005 was lower than anticipated as some people did not complete paying what they had pledged. Second, our expenses are up for things like oil and insurance, and because of this our budget is higher than last year. Third, pledges for 2006 are down from what was pledged in 2005.

It’s the last one I want to address today. The first two we can’t do anything about...but we CAN change the pledges for 2006! The Stewardship committee was hard-pressed to talk to everyone before the end of the year, and I’m sure there are some of you who haven’t pledged yet just because you haven’t been reminded to. If this is you, PLEASE contact a Steward, a Trustee, or Eric and we’ll make sure you get the chance! This would be a huge help to us as we make plans to address the deficit.

Others of you may want to think about your pledges, and about the importance of Williston-West in your lives and the lives of your families. Can you change your pledge and give a little more? As Eric often says, "Think about buying less expensive bottles of wine." Seriously, please do look at your pledge, and at your lives, and ask yourself if you can increase your pledge to help keep the church vibrant and healthy.

As Trustees, we’re faced with hard choices sometimes. When we first realized that we had a significant budget problem, we looked at every line item in the budget (as an aside, if any of you would like to go over the budget with us so that you understand it better, please let us know...we’d be happy to meet with you!). The conclusion we came to is that to solve the deficit by cutting the budget, we would have to cut the entire budget for Music and Christian Education! Obviously, those aren’t acceptable choices...music is an integral part of the church service, and the children are the future of the church, so we can’t take those away. That leaves us with two possibilities; raise more money or take the money out of our Endowment. The purpose of the Endowment is to guarantee the long-term health of the church, and to take more money out of it than our charter allows damages that purpose. If we have to, we’ll do that...but with your help, we hope not to.

So...please, look at your pledge carefully. Any amount more that you can give will help your church family, and will help guarantee that Williston-West will be as helpful and positive for our children and their children as it is for us. And, of course...if you can’t give more, thank you for the generosity you’ve already shown!

In looking back at our church year during 2005, I reviewed information discussed at the Retreat held in May. It struck me that a lot of energy was generated for a number of projects – some of which have been completed and others that seem to have slipped off of our radar.

I also reviewed some of the information that was viewed about our UCC Heritage. Our UCC tradition, as you may remember, is a blend of four different traditions which came together to lay the foundation of what we do today. Here is a list of some of the "firsts" that came out of those traditions:

• 1620: Pilgrims seek spiritual freedom by leaving Europe traveling to the New World.
• 1630: Pilgrims experiment in democracy by electing its own ministers and self-governance.
• 1700: Congregationalists were among the first to take a stand against slavery.
• 1773: Meeting at the "Old South Meeting House" to protest taxation on tea, which lead to the Boston Tea Party.
• 1773: The first published African American poet, Phillis Wheatley, was a young member of the Old South congregation.
• 1777: The Liberty Bell was saved from being melted for the manufacture of cannons by hiding it in the floorboards of the Old Zion Reformed Church.
• 1785: First Ordained African American pastor, Lemuel Haynes.
• 1839: Congregationalists lead a movement to free the slaves of The Amistad.
• 1846: First integrated anti-slavery society is organized by a Congregationalist.
• 1853: First female ordained pastor, Antoinette Brown.
• 1943: Reinhold Neibuhr preaches a sermon that contained what is now known as the Serenity Prayer.
• 1952: Paul Tillich publishes "The Courage to Be"
• 1959: Martin Luther King asks the UCC to intervene in a Federal Court case to rule that the airwaves are public and not private property, opening the radio to news about the growing civil rights movement.
• 1972: First ordination of an openly gay minister, William Johnson.
• 1973: UCC sends Benjamin Chavis to assist the African American community in overcoming racial intolerance and intimidation. They raised $1 Million to pay for his bail when he was wrongly accused of the arson of a white-owned grocery store.
• 1976: First African-American leader of an integrated denomination in a main-line church in the U.S.
• 1995: First published hymnal that honors both male and female images of God, The New Century Hymnal.

These profound accomplishments of the UCC underscore the socially progressive and political stances that our heritage has taken over the years. Perhaps Williston West will not make nationwide history; but we can move toward our goals and stand strong for our beliefs: for what is right! We can complete our projects from the Retreat and those identified by your elected Boards by each of us taking part in their completion! It is imperative that we continue to work to broaden our message of love and inclusion and that we stand up and speak out for our values. We owe it to our children, those that are oppressed and in need, and to ourselves!

Okay, now I am fired up. I am most of the way through The Biology of Transcendence by Joseph Chilton Pearce, which I borrowed from Williston-West’s small but well-selected library. I think I may have to buy the church another copy because mine is becoming dog eared from the thorough reading I have given it. Either way, there will be a copy before long back in the library (which, in case you don’t know, is behind Penney’s office. It is locked when Penney is not working, but during the week it is open, and sometimes on Sundays as well).

Read this book. I know we are all short of time, and I wish I could summarize it so well that you wouldn’t have to read it, but then that would just prove the point of the book. We are so busy defending ourselves within this culture of fear and doubt that we don’t have time to make use of our brain’s potential.

I am not a scientist, and some of the brain talk in this book is a bit hard to read, but the beauty is that the author knows that anything worth knowing is worth repeating, and he repeats himself often throughout the book, helping people like me absorb it. There are many valuable lessons in this book, one being the importance of face to face parent-child contact, particularly in the first year of life (which he terms the ‘in arms’ period), the importance of saying yes more than we say no, of giving our children a chance to explore their environment keeping them only from things that are truly dangerous and letting them sort out the other stuff for themselves. When we say ‘no’ too often we are creating anxiety. We are saying ‘watch out here’, and ‘watch out there’, and ‘be afraid of what is around the corner’. Do you ever hear yourself telling your kids about the cold, cruel world out there? Well, just by saying and thinking this we are creating a perception of the world as dangerous, and thereby creating an environment where our children’s brains develop based on a perception of protection from threats rather than a perception of safety and security. From safety and security we can thrive. From fear we only survive.

One of Pearce’s claims is that the prefrontal brain, which is the newest part of the brain, is most highly developed in societies dominated by peace and love (by the way there have been a very few of these over the past 2000 years). The prefrontal brain allows for heart intelligence, insight, creativity, and invention. In societies dominated by violence and fear the prefrontal brain is smaller because so much energy goes into the older Reptilian brain which consists of our sensory-motor system. We are so busy reacting to threats, there is little left for advanced thought. Think about this in relation to our current experience of society. We are being told there are threats all around us and we need to protect ourselves against them. This experience of culture at risk of attack is not new. In fact, for a very long time cultures have been reinforcing the idea that if we just stick together against all that is bad ‘out there’ we will be okay. This sounds good, and is very tempting, which is why it has been so effective (we all know that bad news sells better than good). But, unfortunately it keeps us trapped in our defensive and reactive mode, and prevents us from becoming.

Pearce also cites his thoughts on Jesus, and the enormous difference between the message Jesus delivered in his time on earth and the interpretation of that message by those who lived to tell the tale. He differentiates between the loving, peaceful message of Jesus and the harsh, judging message we have received, that he died for our sins. Interpreters like Paul reminded us that God will be watching us and judging us. So, we need to obey God’s law to show our appreciation for Jesus’ sacrifice. But didn’t Jesus teach us that God loves us as we are, and that we should not judge one another, but love each other without exception? So, how did the Old Testament God of law and order creep into the good news of Jesus? I am guessing it has something to do with the bottom line, bad news sells better than good, shame and judgment sell better than loving kindness, sin sells better than unconditional acceptance. But what gets me, is that we are talking about all the things Jesus lived for. He was killed because he preached peace, love, and acceptance, so why are we told that he will come again to judge us? Pearce reminds us that if we live in fear of God’s judgment, if we believe we are shameful sinners who need to correct our inherent badness, and ask to be forgiven for it, then we are denying ourselves the gift God gave us, possibility. Living in negativity does not create anything positive. All it does is to teach us to build walls around the negative through defensiveness, which, as I said before, prevents us from achieving our potential.

Pearce’s opinions about such things are not just theory, but are evidenced in the brain. You may have heard the expression, "the body keeps the score." I think Pearce is showing us that the brain has been keeping score for millions of years. He describes the brain as a field, meaning that it exists only within an environment. It becomes what it is because of its context, and could become something completely different within a different environment. Pearce suggests that transcendence is possible when we distance ourselves from violent culture and create one that allows for positive experience both internally and externally, within us and between us.