Metacentricities

I know that some historians think that she doesn’t do history properly, but I have always liked Karen Armstrong’s books. She seems to have a breadth of view that is expansive, and incorporates a lot of different ideas and perspectives.

The Guardian (UK Newspaper and Website) has a column by her just about every week. (They even have a Karen Armstrong RSS feed. How cool is that?) This week, her column is about the contradictory narratives of global politics. It’s really good.

We must, therefore, make a concerted attempt to listen critically to
all the stories out there in order to gain a more panoptic vision. This
includes our own cultural narrative. Our modernity has liberated many
of us, but it has disenfranchised others. Counter-narratives that
question the myth of western freedom must also be heard, because they
represent a crucial element in the conflicted, tragic whole.

Well, life changes, things change, so, well, my blogs will change. I’ve had three blogs since I’ve been blogging, this main blog, which I’ve basically had for three years, the technology desk, which I had for about 3 months, which I killed because I realized I couldn’t maintain it in seminary, and my ministry blog (The Contemplative and the Mystic), which has been going for more than a year.

So what’s the next blog configuration? My main blog has always reflected the broad range of issues I’m interested in. The ancillary blogs have been specific, for specific purposes. I think that will continue. I’ll have a main blog, and I’ll spin off a couple of blogs that reflect specific interests that I want to delve into more deeply. I’ll be doing a lot of writing in the next year or so, as that, I think, for now, will be a major focus for me. I will leave alive, but not maintain, the ministry blog (I have found, over the past couple of months, I’ve had less and less to say, although that may well change.)

I am resurrecting the technology blog, and calling it Zen and the Art of Nonprofit Technology. The subtitle is "Conscious, minimalist, neo-luddite perspectives on nonprofit technology." The first post will give you some ideas on what it’s going to be about.

Stay tuned for other updates.

I’ve had some interesting things that I wanted to blog about over the past few days. Intriguing events have happened, useful thoughts have arisen, compelling ideas have come, and gone.

And I have had to mostly either put up with slow silly windows machines in a computer lab, or truck my laptop to one or another cybercafe.

OK, yes, I’m spoiled. I’m used to being able to sit at my desk, at will, and write an email, or blog, or search for something. I will maintain (along with the hundred or so other students who have come to depend on it) that having campus wireless down for three weeks, especially now, during a week when you are expected to register online, is, well, inexcusable. Really. This is an academic institution where necessary business is transacted online. This is just not acceptable. A day? Sh*t happens. A few days? OK, once in a long while, that’s handleable. Three weeks? Where was the backup? Why is this being allowed to happen?

One of the nice things about being a "knowledgeable techie" is that when I complain about technology not working, I know what I’m talking about. It is true, I did only pay a $15 IT fee. I’d be happy to make it $50 if the campus wireless would work reliably.

OK, I’m done. It’s funny to notice the places that I am able to surrender to the inevitable. I got stuck in rush hour traffic this morning on the way to an important appointment, making me late. I surrendered. Somehow, I can’t seem to let go that spinning ball that indicates my computer searching for an internet connection that doesn’t exist.

The PSR campus wireless has been down for  three #!$*ing weeks now. And because I could get wireless in my room, about a month ago, I cancelled my DSL. So I am borrowing bandwidth from cafes, the computer lab, or, much more happily, my SO’s wireless. But, it has put a major crimp in my online style.

So much for that. The much more interesting part is that I am noticing a whole lot of Macintoshes in the world. Just about every cafe I go to, there is at least 50% Macs, usually more. There are less at the cafe right near campus - more in the cafes down the hill. Today, I was at this little cafe on the border of Oakland, and there were 2 macs to every PC.

Yes, this is a college town, and full of creative people. Yes, we are a stone’s throw (in the broad geographic sense of the phrase) from Cupertino. But it’s pretty interesting information. Lots of the Macs are new (I’ve been spying quite a number of the new black MacBooks.)

Not so long ago, I said that changes were afoot. I feel finally ready to blog about the most recent results of a process that I’ve been going through for the past few weeks or so. This is just another leg of the journey I started over two years ago, in my decision to go to seminary. Which, of course, is part of my lifelong journey of creating a life that is fulfilling, of service, and full of spirit.

A few weeks ago, on my other blog, I posted something about discernment. I was, at the time, in this place of not knowing, which I have become quite familiar with over the past couple of years. Knowing I wanted to center my life more on the spiritual journey, but not knowing how. Knowing I wanted to go to seminary, but not knowing where to go. Not knowing what kind of ministry I felt called to do.

One of the things that’s true about really sitting with that feeling of not knowing, getting comfortable with it, really letting it sink in, is that, actually, knowing comes, slowly, surprisingly, and unexpectedly. I have learned that I have a somewhat unusual process of discernment. Things kind of bubble under the surface, percolating, marinating, processing, then, in a bit of a rush, it all comes out, somewhat fully formed. Feels like a birth, in some ways, because it can be painful.

What I gave birth to this month was the knowing that my path has taken a turn in another direction. I came to realize that the kind of vocational life I would be preparing myself for here, in seminary, was a vocational life I didn’t want to pursue. Which, in a practical sense, meant it didn’t make sense to continue to go to seminary.

The result is that this will be my last semester in seminary. I’ll be taking some courses that combine some old and new interests of mine (more on those later) instead of the MDiv curriculum. I’ll emerge from PSR with a Certificate in Theological Studies, which is something I can hang on a wall, I guess.

And, the truth is, I feel clear and happy. I’m back in a place of not knowing, again, and things will be taking shape slowly. There are the usual practical realities to deal with, the new things to think about, and create. There are the dreams to try out, and maybe fail at.

I simply continue on the path. A spiritual teacher of mine said, "If you accept the challenge of your life, and embrace it – if you live it out fully, bringing yourself to the tasks at hand with all the depth of courage, wisdom, spirit and heart you can find within yourself — then you will serve life." That’s the path.

I didn’t watch the Emmys, well, because I don’t watch television. But due to the wonders of the web, I did see Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart do a hilarious skit at the Emmys.

I love the Pew Research Center. They provide such great data on people’s ideas and attitudes. They are a real reality check on what we think is going on in this country. So anyway, the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press just released a new study on the relationship between religion and politics.

There is a lot to chew on, here. First, as they say, the Democrats have a "God problem." 69% of the people in their study feel that liberals have gone too far to remove religion from schools and government. 62% of people think that the Democratic party is neutral or unfriendly to religion, whereas 41% think Republicans are neutral or unfriendly to religion.

Interestingly, 49% of people feel that conservative Christians have gone too far in imposing their moral views on the country. Also, 63% of the people think that the American people should have more influence over laws than the Bible. However, almost one third of people in this survey (32%) think that the Bible should have more influence over laws than the people of the country. This is a pretty large percentage of people. 67% of people surveyed think of the US as a Christian country.

Other interesting findings (especially to me): a small majority (51%) of people think that live evolved, and were not created, although 21% thought that evolution occured via divine guidance rather than natural selection. I will say, that question bothered the heck out of me. They aren’t mutually exclusive options, and to ask it that way oversimplifies the whole question about evolution and "divine guidance." But that’s my bias.

There is some interesting data on attitudes about global climate change, the second coming of Christ, and other issues. It’s really worth a read. There is, I think, both things that are worth looking at if one is, for instance, a Democrat wanting to win an election. And I am continually surprised, for some reason, at how different I, and the people I know, are from the mainstream. That’s what I get for being a pinko lesbian, I guess.

Interestingly enough, although I’ve read a fair bit about stem cells, and, even a long time ago, taught a section of a course on the possible use of stem cells for particular kinds of neurological problems, I haven’t blogged about them yet.

Why I’m writing about them today is that there was a new kind of technique that has been shown to work, which is using early blastocysts (at the eight-cell stage) and taking out one of the cells, and using that as a source for the totipotent or pluripotent (meaning can produce just about any kind of cell) stem cell lines that can be used for research and therapy. The rest of the cells continue to develop, and form a viable embryo. This technique had been used to test embryos generated by In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) for genetic defects.

Why this is significant is that it means that the embryo is not destroyed, which has been true for the creation of other kinds of stem cell lines. This should mean that those for whom stem cell production was problematic because of their pro-life stance, that this would be ending a life. And, thus, the idea is that this should change the administration’s stance on funding stem cell research. However, some groups, such as Catholics, reject IVF, and thus, would reject this as a valid solution to the stem cell debate.

Part of the reason that some groups reject IVF is that most embryos created with IVF don’t end up getting implanted, for a variety of reasons. So according to some, this means multiple lives lost. As someone who thinks that a reasonable perspective on when life begins might be when a fetus is viable outside the womb, this doesn’t especially bother me.

But there is, of course, an underlying set of questions and issues that really do interest me. That is, what kinds of technologies are we willing to use and try on human biological material in the service of healing and/or physical improvements? Already, the line between procedures that are considered therapeutic, and the procedures considered cosmetic are getting blurred. So where will we draw the line? Should we even draw a line? Does it matter at all?

One of the hallmark truths about human beings is that, for quite some time now, particularly since the first use of a nuclear bomb in 1945, our reach has far exceeded our grasp. One of the purposes of religious communities is to help us better grasp what we are doing, and why we are doing it. Do I agree with people who are against stem cell research because it destroys embryos? No. But I do think that we should start thinking fast, or, perhaps, slow down the pace, so we can catch up with ourselves. Otherwise, we are likely to be pretty sorry later.

I had a book as a kid which I think I read at least five times. It was called "Nine Planets" (probably this one.) It had a chapter on each planet, and lots of good information. Well, there are now only eight planets, Pluto was given the axe, and demoted from planethood. The proposal that I talked about in my earlier post didn’t fly.

I’ve always considered myself creative, even though I don’t consider myself an artist, per se. I spent a lot of my childhood creating worlds in my head, at the same time as I read countless creations of worlds done by many science fiction writers.

This summer, I became a world creator. I have created a new sci-fi universe, and finished a novel based in it. It was one of the most amazingly fun things I’ve done in a long time. I got to explore in depth a variety of issues that I think are important in the world, and have fun creating characters, plot, and new worlds. I have no idea what will come of it. But it was a lot of fun doing it. i don’t know if it’s worth publishing, but I have some friends who are giving me some advice about it.

One of the areas of creativity that I have is in making the active, outward manifestations of my life, including my work, more and more consonant with my highest self, what could, I guess, be described as an inner manifestation of God. I started a new stage in that process a couple of years ago, when I first decided to go to seminary. That process continues. I’ll have a lot more to say in the next few weeks about some new twists and turns in that process. There are some changes afoot.