I'm grateful for a wonderful time in London with our son, and for safe travels back to the USA on two airlines I'd never heard of. Both airlines—Vueling and LEVEL—are owned by the same company that owns British Airways, Iberia, and Aer Lingus, and both serve Barcelona, Spain, through which we flew to get to our transatlantic destination, Boston. Although Vueling's A320 had the tiniest pitch of any airplane I've ever flown in, with my knees pressed into the seat in front of me, I was thankful for a reasonable fare for a one-way transatlantic trip.
I'm grateful for the wedding that was the occasion for coming back to the USA through Boston. Our nephew Ben Cabezas married Chris Rainville last Saturday, in Hampstead, New Hampshire. Among the many blessings resulting from the wedding was the biggest reunion of extended family that I've experienced for decades. Best wishes to Ben and Chris, and thanks for the wonderful occasion and reunion. On the most basic level, I'm incredibly grateful for family, wherever they may happen to be today.
Our next stage of travel is planned to start tomorrow: Amtrak trains from Boston to Chicago and then Chicago to Portland, Oregon. We made this trip several times during our Russia years, and are looking forward to those days of continental sightseeing through train windows and the Empire Builder's observation car, along with plenty of time to read and to do my daily Norwegian language homework.
One wintery wrinkle: significant snow predicted along our Amtrak route.
I'm grateful that this is a holiday post, and I can end this post a bit early, compared to my usual length! It's time to celebrate.
Diana Butler Bass: "This Thanksgiving, we do not give thanks. We choose it."
Becky Ankeny on having trust that is based on the character of God.
Micah Bales on adulting in the Kingdom. "This is really good news for us who are just trying to be adults in a world that feels like it’s flying apart."
A tribute to sweet potatoes (one of Judy's Thanksgiving specialties).
My first passport photo, with Oslo district police stamp.
My German grandparents and brand new me, at my Norwegian grandparents' home in Oslo.
It was a year ago, on November 21, 2024, that I began the process of regaining my Norwegian citizenship. Two days ago, I received a notice from the Norwegian government that began with the word "Congratulations." It was a notice that I'm once again a Norwegian citizen.
I was born a Norwegian citizen, but when my parents both became U.S. citizens and, later, had me naturalized as well at age 10, I became subject to the Norwegian rule that didn't permit dual citizenship. When that rule was changed, they set up a procedure for former citizens to apply for citizenship once again.
So I applied and paid the fee on that day in November last year, and on the same day I began the search for the necessary documentation of my or my parents' U.S. naturalizations. Most of the year was taken up looking for those documents, but we finally got them, thanks to the genealogy department of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. That was the most expensive part of the process, but ultimately successful.
It would have been easier if I had inherited my parents' own copies of their naturalization papers, but somewhere in all the drama of their lives after I left home, those papers were lost.
I also had to apply for a certificate of conduct from the Norwegian police. I left Norway before the age of two, and have been back for only brief periods since, so I haven't had an opportunity to be noticed by the police, but all the same I was glad to get it in writing. (I'm thankful for their patience with me; having optimistically—twice!—misjudged the time it would take to get naturalization records from the U.S. government, I ended up applying three times for that certificate, each of which was good for three months.)
Then I gathered up all these documents. and Judy and I took Amtrak to the Norwegian consulate in San Francisco to hand them in. About five weeks later, I received the good news.
Now that I'm a dual citizen, it's fair to ask why I went to all this trouble. After all, I'm already a resident of my favorite planet, and a grateful subject of the Prince of Peace. All I can say is, all my life I've had Norway in my heart, and I've always believed that one's public connections ought to reflect one's inner reality. (Furthermore, I never realized as a child that this particular outward connection would be cut. I just knew that my alien status delayed our family at the U.S. port of entry whenever we returned to the USA from abroad.)
Maurer family grave, Old Aker Church, Oslo.
I remain very loyal to the USA and its values. In the language of my parents' naturalization documents, I remain "... attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States." I see no conflict in gratefully claiming, at the same time and with equal loyalty, my deep roots in the place where I was born, and the joy and completeness I always feel when I return to that birthplace.
And finally, with a Norwegian father, and with a German mother who was born and grew up in Japan, and other relatives in Norway, Germany, Canada, and South America (at least!), I will always cherish all of my favorite planet.
We're about to be on the road on Thursday, so I'm posting this a day early. Hope to post again on (U.S.) Thanksgiving.
Journalist Elena Kostyuchenko loves her country, according to the title of her very moving, often distressing book, but it's a complicated love.... I recommend the book, but it's not fun material. Maybe this review will help explain. I'm not sure Kostyuchenko's book conforms to my foreign ideas of how to write about Russia, but then she has seen and endured many things I've not, and she's not on a mission to correct us.
Heather Cox Richardson: "Sugar dating," Epstein, and Abraham Lincoln's warnings about "the same old serpent."
On her blog, Life in an Old Growth Forest: Reflections on Aging, Nancy Thomas is exploring the dark part of the forest the way she knows how, by writing.
Marcelle Martin and Windy Cooler on the role of discernment in public ministry: an introduction to faithfulness groups on the Friends Incubator for Public Ministry Web site, and more information on their January 7, 2026, online conversation.
Reposted, with permission, from Kevin's post on the Facebook group Christian Quakers. The titles above are mine.
This past First Day I felt a leading, as I often do, to invoke the memory of Abraham Lincoln in my vocal ministry. Lincoln is a hero of mine, and he steered the United States through the worst crisis in its existence up until that point, and arguably its most dire state ever in our nearly 250 years of existence.
Christians find themselves increasingly divided into factions these days. I'm speaking primarily about American Friends in this post. Quakers on the right adhere to their own strongly held beliefs and the same is true with Quakers on the left.
Friends are called by different names. Some are Evangelicals. Some are conservative, in the Quaker sense, meaning they seek to conserve the old way of doing things. Some are Hicksite Friends, usually closely allied with FGC—and are by in large liberal unprogrammed Quakers, who may or may not consider themselves Christian.
And who can say which of us has the correct answer, the correct verse of Scripture to invoke in debate, the most accurate usage of the Quakerese we know so well and love so much. I adhere to my own interpretation, but so does someone else who, while we might share the moniker "Quaker", we don't share very much besides that.
Lincoln observed a similar dynamic in his own time, a country torn asunder by Civil War. And he was struck by the many ironies. Thinking of what North and South had in common, Lincoln spoke,
"Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other...The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. 'Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh.'"
The passage of Scripture with which Lincoln concludes the above passage with is pulled from the King James Version of the Bible. Put into more contemporary language, it states that suffering is inevitable. Some will always lead others astray. And though that suffering is inevitable, how terrible it will be for the person or persons who create it. They will experience harsh punishment.
We live in an era where many seek to lead others astray. Some through ignorance. Some through misguided zeal. Some with an agenda to advance. And I can't determine the complete truth in any source I consult. It all seems slanted to suit someone's self-interest.
Lincoln took a radical view about the American Civil War. A pox on both your houses! Both sides were equally at fault, in his reckoning. Though the South's plantation owners kept enslaved people, and maintained the system that kept it profitable, the North indirectly made money from the products produced by slave labor.
Maybe levying fault isn't as important as changing the status quo. I don't pretend that people with such wildly divergent views will ever come together under a common purpose. For example, the only thing an Evangelical Friend and I will likely ever have in common is the fact that we are a product of the hard work of George Fox. Beyond that, we are as different as chalk and cheese.
So rather than let this demoralize us, I suggest we work within the people who will hear our message and strive to push past the propaganda that passes for news, not just on the right and left, but everywhere. Provided that those who disagree with me don't deny my right to worship as I please and what I please, I have no grievance with them.
But wouldn't it be wonderful if we ended up on the same page, eventually. That's an idealistic goal and one that seems increasingly unlikely the older I get, but it is a solution for us, not just as Friends, but also as Americans.
Kevin Camp (they/them), a member of Birmingham (Alabama) Friends Meeting and Camas (Washington) Friends Church, published an excellent book of short stories last year, Thanksgiving on Meth Mountain. Fuller biography on their Amazon page here.
Kevin's post gave me a lot to think about.
First of all, their quotation from Abraham Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address once again reminded me of how unusual it is for a politician not to refer to God as 100% WITH US. Elton Trueblood referred to Lincoln as the "theologian of American anguish," and this speech makes the case. In the U.S. Civil War, the North prevailed, as Trueblood pointed out, not "as a consequence of the supreme wisdom or righteousness of the citizens of the North." When Lincoln spoke of "all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil", the settler colonial beneficiaries of that toil were in both North and South.
In one of the most sublime passages in English-language political speech, Lincoln yearned and prayed for reconciliation:
With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.
What was always clear to some of us, and has now become glaringly obvious as racism makes a roaring comeback in today's USA: the nation's wounds have not been bound up, a just and lasting peace has not been achieved. All the more reason to recall Lincoln's words and remind ourselves of this vision, stubbornly not giving it up for lost.
We Quakers haven't exactly gone through a civil war, but we have had a number of severe divisions, as a result of which (as Kevin pointed out) we're often appealing to the same history and the same Quaker language and drawing very different conclusions. Kevin's post urges us not to let divisions demoralize us, and I agree.
In two periods of my service with international Friends organizations—ten years with Friends World Committee for Consultation and seven with Friends United Meeting—I visited hundreds of Friends communities, and I found among them many Friends who, with varying degrees of stubbornness, would fit Kevin's descriptions of people as different as chalk and cheese according to their preferred interpretations of core Quakerism. But over all those years, I caught glimpses of progress as well. Maybe we won't be reading from the exact same page anytime soon, but there are many Friends who are at least looking at each other's favorite pages....
Some of us in our tight categories simply haven't heard that there are other ways of being Quaker. Among other important accomplishments, Friends World Committee for Consultation consistently offers Quakers opportunities to meet and consult across the traditional lines that Kevin's post cited, but how many of us are even aware of these opportunities? Looking at our theological divisions from my home on the Christian side of things (dare I even say "evangelical"?), I've run into many so-called liberal or universalist Friends who haven't deliberately rejected a Christian Quaker testimony, but simply haven't even had a decent chance to encounter and consider it. (Let's face it: authoritarian religiosity, toxic biblical malpractice and Christian nationalist heresies have not helped.) If we get to know each other better, you might still not agree with my spiritual priorities, nor I with yours, but at least it won't be from ignorance...
... and there is no reason we can't work for peace and justice together along the priorities we do share, which is important in a world with so much pain and bondage. Friends in Portland, Oregon, for example, are crossing categories in advocating and acting for refugees, immigrants, and asylum seekers.
When I was at Friends United Meeting, I remember being startled at how often the occasions when liberal and evangelical Friends were irritating each other actually boiled down to differences between urban and rural communication styles, and not just theology. Learning to accommodate these differences in styles won't overcome every theological gap, but at least we can clear away some of the misunderstandings.
Few divisions are absolute. Some of us live in the overlaps. I began my life as a Friend in the unprogrammed side of the Quaker world, among predominantly liberal Friends (though my mentors in that community were deeply Christian), but now I've spent most of my fifty years as a Friend in pastoral, programmed meetings. I'm not alone in my dislike of being defined by conventional categories. Over the last 21 years I've been writing this blog, I've seen more and more bloggers, traveling Friends, retreat and workshop leaders, authors, and others helping expand opportunities for lively Quaker conversations and new understandings of leadership, community, and calling. (Emily Provance and Windy Cooler, just for starters, and, as always, Martin Kelley helping us stay up to date.)
Are genuine seekers, waiting on the Holy Spirit (whether in quiet receptivity or in total desperation!), ever all that far from God and each other, regardless of their worship styles? When we resort to faking it for the sake of conformity, and either start hiding in the silence or retreating behind our Sunday routines, the differences in style and language are most obvious—and matter the least.
We share other significant challenges. Liberals and evangelicals alike suffer from widespread ignorance about our spiritual and intellectual roots in the "hard work of George Fox" mentioned by Kevin. Sometimes we prefer to stick with a few selected sound bites if we know even that much. We allow our internal conceits and conflicts to obscure our most important audience: those who have never heard of us. We sometimes tolerate lazy mediocrity in our administrative systems and communications, a mediocrity we would not accept in our secular lives. Sometimes our Quaker exceptionalism makes us unaware of other faith communities that have pulled ahead of us in addressing our signature concerns. Saddest of all, too often we can describe Quaker ideals eloquently but can't point to a church or meeting nearby that actually lives them out.
What do you think? Will we continue to drift apart, or will the overlaps increase? Tell us about meetings and churches where newcomers and long-timers say "I'm so glad I'm here!"
Here's an item that takes me back fifteen years, to the summer of 2010. That was the year I stayed in Elektrostal, Russia, the whole summer, not attending the Northwest Yearly Meeting sessions in the USA, and thereby able to experience the smog caused by that summer's fires in the region's neglected peat fields. The item: "How Peat Elektrified the USSR."
"By far the greatest Cafe the world has ever seen."
I was walking past a familiar storefront this afternoon, the Classic Football Shirts London shop, and happened to notice this claim in huge letters (how could I not?) on the front glass.
The cafe at this store is indeed nice, as Judy and I have experienced more than once. Does it live up to that claim? (Is it even in the same class as Chapters in Newberg, Oregon?)
I'd rather ask, does it matter?
My theme this evening is manipulative exaggeration. The "greatest Cafe the world has ever seen" may be exaggerated, but it's not manipulative. It's so over the top that nobody is likely to argue the point.
"Communist, not socialist. Communist." Screenshot from source.
A few days ago, I watched a video clip of the USA's president say straight into the camera that New York City mayoral candidate is a "... communist, not socialist. Communist. He's far, he's far worse than a socialist."
I realize that as a rule the current U.S. president is not a reliable source of facts nor a defender of the biblical commandment against false witness, but I want to stick with this one case for a moment. Trump's assertion is an exaggeration (yes, Mamdani is on the left end of the USA's political spectrum, but not that far!) but also an outright falsehood (Mamdani is not a Communist either politically or philosophically, and this is a matter of public record).
The leader of what we used to call the Free World is guilty of manipulative exaggeration.
I realize that he's not the first U.S. politician to engage in this variation of false witness. As just one case study, I've just spend some time in a mixed experience of fascination and horror, reading about the 1884 presidential campaigns of Grover Cleveland and James Blaine. As American Heritage summarized it, "Grover Cleveland had seduced a widow; James G. Blaine had peddled influence [and] lied about it. In 1884, voters had to choose between two tarnished champions."
(My favorite line from Cleveland supporters: "We should elect Mr. Cleveland to the public office he is so admirably qualified to fill and remand Mr. Blaine to the private life he is so eminently fitted to adorn.")
Compared to the raging MAGA bulls in the china shop of democracy, it may seem like indulging in trivialities to point to the cesspool of manipulative exaggeration that makes up much of the Internet. But is this wider context just making it harder to raise a red flag when the president himself indulges? Might we become so cynical that we give up on seeking truth and unmasking manipulation even when it's conducted by our chief executive? And ... when it's conducted by "our own side" as well?
I'm sad to see that people on the left, where I generally find myself, are now constantly using these techniques of manipulative exaggeration, often in the form of "clickbait," in the supposed service of getting our attention for their message. My e-mails and my phone's text messages feature such lines as...
Re: Taylor Smith...Donald Trump's DISGUSTING rant.
re: Portland's polling location [Johan won’t respond??] (Portland, Oregon, doesn't have polling locations! Only drop-off points for our ballots, which can also be mailed in.)
We can't believe you're a Republican!!!
NOT asking for money, just your signature. (For the record, they did ask for money, too.)
Impeachment COMING SOON [MUST READ >>]>
And in addition, there are those frequent "surveys" and "polls" which both major parties send out constantly, with questions worded to make it obvious how we should answer.
He is starting to worry about me.
If there's anything unique about the text messages and e-mails from the Republicans, it's how stupid they think their audience is. A frequent theme: the president has been checking with his staff to hear how I've personally responded to their latest plea.
If there's any blessing in this Internet/phone blizzard of manipulative exaggeration, it might be that the formulas (including senders' addresses, CAPITAL LETTERS, shocking headlines, etc) are so absurd that we're probably all learning how to filter them out. The sheer volume of such traffic may also reduce my patience with even using these devices as much as I've done in the past. SHOCKING! It's WIN-WIN. GAME OVER!
Four years ago, I posted the following essay on clickbait. I find my YouTube feed to be slightly calmer these days. Is it because I've somehow trained it to reduce this kind of traffic, or are content providers themselves realizing we're burning out on manipulative exaggeration?
Youtube has figured out that I like videos about space travel, so they serve me up with lots of suggestions about the latest rockets and their builders.
Many of those videos have calm, interesting titles and descriptions, and the day is not long enough to view even a small portion of those. That's especially true for a video like this, modestly entitled "Crew-3 Mission | Approach and Docking," that takes more than six hours to watch from beginning to end.
Six hours may seem like a long time, but it's a lot shorter than the preceding video, "Crew-3 Mission | Coast and Rendezvous," which clocks in at nine hours. Strangely enough, that title completely omits the dramatic centerpiece of the video -- the launch!
Many of the videos I'm invited to watch are exactly the opposite: the titles are far more dramatic than the content. Often the titles reflect today's equivalents of the overused superlative "extreme" of a couple of decades ago.
These overly dramatic titles and descriptions are sometimes called "clickbait." This word entered the Oxford English Dictionary in 1999, longer ago than I realized. (According to the OED, clickbait is "Internet content whose main purpose is to encourage users to follow a link to a web page, esp. where that web page is considered to be of low quality or value.")
In our classes at the New Humanities Institute in Elektrostal, Russia, we occasionally presented our students with carefully curated cutting-edge lists of buzzwords and jargon (and sometimes asked them to predict whether those words and phrases would still be in use in five years), but I don't remember "clickbait" being in those lists. I think one of the last classes we did on this topic included the word "binge-watch" ... in case that helps you deduce what years I'm talking about.
Far from exciting my interest, clickbait titles and descriptions of videos relating to space travel usually repel me. Here are the top five words and phrases practically guaranteed to prevent my click:
game over! (which it never is!)
insane! (meaning, as far as I can tell, audacious)
humiliated! (usually comparing one tech entrepreneur/celebrity's success to another)
this is huge! (probably not)
it's happening! (and so is everything else)
I watched one of these videos, out of sheer curiosity and to maintain a shred of integrity for this screed. (What if it really was "game over" and my protests were just ill-informed?)
The video on the "insane" partnership of Elon Musk and Google was underwhelming. The commentator simply described the Starlink/Google collaboration, which was already public news five months earlier, using video clips that were only vaguely related to the narrative, not a single voice other than his own, and no analysis that could not be found in corporate press releases. Youtube doesn't mind, of course -- the video was preceded by two ads.
More samples from one evening's Youtube browsing:
Original post and links for that day, November 11, 2021, are here.
A History of Rock and Roll in 500 Songs. Many thanks to Steven Davison for writing about this podcast. I've been sampling it. It lives up to Steven's praise. And if you think that rock music is a bit of a trivial subject for our difficult times, I can point out how multidimensional the podcast's coverage is, taking into account racial politics, business ethics, technical innovations, generational influences, in short, all the ways that music reflects life. What's more, we may need a thoughtful podcast on rock music while we're in detox from all that manipulative exaggeration.
While I'm at Steven's blog, here's a more typical post: a new look at "that of God" through the eyes of George Fox (of course), Lewis Benson, Rufus Jones, and Michael Langford.
What's going on in Richmond, Indiana? Two institutions closely related to Friends report troubling financial news. Here's an item on Earlham College and another on Friends United Meeting. (Part two of the FUM document is here.)
According to FUM's Weekly E-news, FUM has scheduled an online information session on the financial situation and the 2026 budget on Thursday, November 13, at 7:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Register here. Lloyd Stangeland, FUM’s Acting Chief Financial Officer; Shawn McConaughey, Clerk of the Finance Committee; and Emily Provance, Clerk of the Advancement Committee, will facilitate the session.
"Responding to the calls of Palestinian Christians": a statement and petition campaign arising from the 2025 Church at the Crossroads campaign. Thanks to Kristin Du Mez for the link.
Blues from Brazil: Little Walter's "Sad Hours" performed by Sacha Gamarra. Below: From Dnipro, Ukraine, Kostiantyn Kolisnychenko with the same instrumental.
I've been seeing and hearing a lot about the theme of hope recently. Sometimes the message is "hang on to hope!" Sometimes it's more like "I've given up hope." It's made me think about how hope relates to reality and to faith.
The USA has been through some rough times in its nearly 250 years as a country, but in my lifetime, this may be the scariest. In previous crises, the danger may have been high (my first memory of national danger was the Cuban Missile Crisis) but at least there seemed to be competent people in charge. Now the people in those top posts seem to have a lot more fun generating crises than managing them. And some of them presume to bless this scene in the name of the Prince of Peace.
In fairness, neither corruption nor crises are anything new. The genocide in the Gaza Strip and in Al-Fashir, Sudan, are just the latest examples of what God already knew in this scene after Noah and the animals disembarked from the ark:
Genesis 8:20-21(My emphasis) Then Noah built an altar to the Lord and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird and offered burnt offerings on the altar. And when the Lord smelled the pleasing odor, the Lord said in his heart, “I will never again curse the ground because of humans, for the inclination of the human heart is evil from youth; nor will I ever again destroy every living creature as I have done.
Kristin Kobes Du Mez really brought this biblical realism home to me last summer, as I described in this post, The long defeat, part one. She was listening to a sermon by Len Vander Zee. As she tells it,
Len was quoting Celeborn and Galadriel in Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, saying: “together through the ages of the world we have fought the long defeat.” Tolkien expanded on this in a letter to a friend: “I am a Christian….so I do not expect history to be anything but a long defeat, though it contains…… some glimpse of final victory.”
In 2 Corinthians, Paul talks about the contrast between hope and reality in his own experience, shortly before charging his audience with the ministry of reconciliation:
2 Corinthians 4:8-12, 16-18 We are afflicted in every way but not crushed, perplexed but not driven to despair, persecuted but not forsaken, struck down but not destroyed, always carrying around in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be made visible in our bodies. For we who are living are always being handed over to death for Jesus’s sake, so that the life of Jesus may also be made visible in our mortal flesh. So death is at work in us but life in you.
...
So we do not lose heart. Even though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed day by day. For our slight, momentary affliction is producing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all measure, because we look not at what can be seen but at what cannot be seen, for what can be seen is temporary, but what cannot be seen is eternal.
Death continues to roam the globe, among guilty and innocent alike, shredding credibility from those preaching too glib a picture of hope. I remember a blunt statement by T. Canby Jones: (paraphrasing from memory): Genuine Christian pacifism requires coming to terms with one's own death.
So: does hope have anything to do with today's reality? Yes, I believe it does. If we hope for good outcomes, and work toward them, we're not required to seek a guarantee that everything will change for the better. Hope doesn't require denying reality or concealing failure. Somehow I'm sure that in God's economy, no act of kindness goes to waste, but we may not see the fruits ourselves.
I love this quotation from Evelyn Underhill, via the Daily Quaker Message for October 24, "Love cannot be stopped."
One of the holy miracles of love is that once it is really started on its path, it cannot stop: it spreads and spreads in ever-widening circles till it embraces the whole world in God. We begin by loving those nearest to us, end by loving those who seem farthest. And as our love expands, so our whole personality will grow, slowly but truly. Every fresh soul we touch in love is going to teach us something fresh about God.”
Maybe what I'm really asking for is the borderline between earth and heaven to begin melting, as in Revelation.
In the meantime, I gain hope just by reading the list of heroes of faith in the beginning of the eleventh chapter of the letter to the Hebrews. Today I saw something new to me in one of those heroes... Hebrews 11:11: And by faith even Sarah, who was past childbearing age, was enabled to bear children because she considered him faithful who had made the promise. Sarah and Abraham had faith that literally bore fruit as God had promised. I believe Jesus' promise to me that he is trustworthy; therefore I take him at his word and trust him.
The traditional interpretation is that the only sure hope is for eternity, but I am impatient, and I believe that the more we hope, the more we'll get "some glimpse of final victory" even in this present age.
Philip Gulley, If America Were Great (1). "Do you know what it means to be a Christian? I don’t need to tell you this because you already know. But I’m worked up, so I’m going to say it anyway." ...
Klamath Falls. This shirt is available here. Photo by Judy Maurer.
No Kings Day v.2, October 18, found us in Klamath Falls, Oregon. For some reason, I didn't expect much No Kings Day participation in Klamath Falls, maybe because in 2024 Klamath County voted for the current U.S. president by a margin of 41 percent over Kamala Harris.
As it turned out, participants made an impressive showing in Klamath Falls, lining along both streets, both sides, of a major intersection, and garnering lots of car-horn (and truck horn) approval.
The evening before, in a segment entitled "Older, Wiser," Rachel Maddow spoke on her television show with environmental activist and journalist Bill McKibben concerning the impressive proportions of older people in public actions such as No Kings Day. Back in 2021, McKibben launched an organizing campaign, Third Act, to mobilize people over the age of 60 for climate change activism. Among other things, McKibben said,
I think one reason that older people have been turning out in such large numbers, and they have been heavily overrepresented in these demonstrations, is because everybody can tell, with the heart, can tell that the Trump regime is bad news. But if you have 15 presidents, in your experience, you know that it's not just bad news. You know that it's utterly different from every president that we've ever lived through before, good or bad; that this is a complete rupture with the America that we knew. And I think that may strike old people harder. We've certainly noticed at Third Act that there's a huge willingness of people to be out in the street over and over again, and not just at these demonstrations.
I didn't do a count, but I'm fairly sure well over half of the participants in Klamath Falls were in the demographic group McKibben described.
While in Klamath Falls, we enjoyed a reunion with Klamath Falls Friends Church. We stayed with the pastors, Leigh and Joe Tolton, and enjoyed the incredible view of Upper Klamath Lake from their home.
This was our seventh visit to Klamath Falls Friends over the years, and we felt very much at home. Joe gave a sermon on simplicity (and how it differs from plainness), based on Matthew 10:7-14, and with illustrations from the life of Diogenes the Cynic. It evoked a number of fruitful reflections from attenders during the open worship.
The leader as builder is an ancient idea, older than the Egyptian pyramids, older than the great public monuments of Rome, older than Emperor Constantine’s clumsy effort to eradicate memories of his predecessors by repurposing and rebranding their works as his own. Photography reanimated this ancient idea for a mass modern audience, rendering the leader as a colossus relative to the toy-sized representations of his architectural legacy. For democracies and authoritarian regimes alike, the image projected competence, the power and skill to serve the people with public works and leave a lasting legacy.
...
Trump made speedy demolition his priority, and speedy construction of the new ballroom is essential to his symbolic purpose, to offer a stark contrast to the dysfunction of Congress and, by extension, the torpid rhythms of democratic self-governance. He is the master builder, the developer who can cut through red tape. That image, whether deserved or not, is why many people voted for him. But to shred precedent is simply to set new precedents. And the precedent he is setting is that history doesn’t matter; laws, procedures and customs are irrelevant; and there is no role for collaboration, transparency and review in the construction of new buildings. Buildings are gifts to the people from leaders who are infallible, not the organic expression of civic values and ideals.
I can't tell whether the visceral shock of seeing FDR's East Wing utterly destroyed helped distract us from an arguably more important story: the U.S. military strikes on boats in South American waters. Another instance of making "speedy demolition" a priority?—and again we see striking passivity among the representatives and senators whom we pay to behave as coequal participants in governing the country.
Julia Steinberg entered Stanford University as a progressive. Her path to conservatism began her first year. Her story, "The Appeal of the Campus Right: It's Not About Trump," interests me because I have a friend in England who has undergone a similar transformation.
Steinberg arrived at Stanford expecting to participate in the progressive community there.
As the school year got under way, however, I began to notice something that grated on me. Debates in the classroom, whether about socialism or Plato or the Quran, felt highly delicate, as if everyone was afraid of offending everyone else. Rather than “I disagree with so-and-so,” it was more socially acceptable to say “piggybacking on so-and-so’s point,” even if there was a disagreement. When I finally found someone willing to have an extended intellectual debate with me—my problem-set partner for a logic course—I was interested to learn that he was a staff writer at the Stanford Review, the conservative publication on campus. He invited me to a meeting during winter quarter, and, mostly out of curiosity, I decided to attend.
What I saw there was the opposite of what I’d found in my classes: Students were encouraged to disagree with one another. At each meeting, students had to present—and defend—the articles they were working on; then the group would debate three topics, such as how the U.S. should respond to the war in Ukraine and whether Silicon Valley’s relevance was waning. I kept going back to Review meetings, but I didn’t tell many of my friends—I didn’t want to be judged.
Why the eggshell-walking among progressives? (Yes, I've noticed this, too.) I think it is partly because of the compulsive need to be right, and consequently to one-up everyone who differs. Deviations on issues of effective anti-racism, for example, cannot be tolerated. I hunger for the arenas where differences can be argued on their own alleged merits and defects, rather than as reflections of your or my obvious and intolerable defects.
These tendencies have made their way into a number of progressive Quaker communities. If these tendencies toward monopoly-style rightness are not challenged, I see a real danger of decline and an eventual future as small clubs of Quaker specialness rather than genuine churches. If I'm worrying needlessly, please tell me!
As Britain Yearly Meeting's Advices and Queries advise us (under no. 17), "Think it possible that you may be mistaken."
I'm not asserting that these kinds of personalizing of arguments and threats of shunning don't happen among conservatives as well. I particularly think of the theobros.... But I hate to see it among those who claim to defend freedom of speech and thought, and trustworthiness of process, as crucial values for an interdependent community.
Much of MAGA is not conservative in any classical sense.
What can we learn from these beatitudes and the Old Testament sources they derive from? We learn that centering our hearts on God’s character and God’s faithfulness is the place to start. (I’m trying contemplative prayer for this purpose.) It is always right to pray. It is not the last resort; it is the only resort in hopeless times. Prayer is the expression of hope when there is no basis for hope.
Death Bloom: a message of hope for times of transition. Amy Straub prepares to leave Zambia, not knowing what comes next. She reminded me of what it was like to realize we were approaching the end of our time in Russia.
More on powerlessness and prayer from Tricia Gates Brown. Her post reminded me of Anthony Bloom's words here (scroll down to the second quotation).
.png)
