Showing posts with label community. Show all posts
Showing posts with label community. Show all posts
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Monday, September 21, 2009
Living without Electronics - Edited
This weekend I spent 24 hours without my laptop and only checking the time on my ipod once. Not a big deal you think? It was to me. It felt great. I read, I played a game that used only dice and no electricity, I talked and laughed with a friend, I went for walks and looked at the world around me.
Over on Front Porch Republic today there is a post about the environmental and personal costs of our dependence on electronics. It is pushing me to contemplate a regular sabbath from my electronics for the planet and for my own sanity.
You can read it here. Didn't notice the piece was by Patrick Deneen. Should have realized. I find his blog really challenging. So you can also read the piece here.
Over on Front Porch Republic today there is a post about the environmental and personal costs of our dependence on electronics. It is pushing me to contemplate a regular sabbath from my electronics for the planet and for my own sanity.
You can read it here. Didn't notice the piece was by Patrick Deneen. Should have realized. I find his blog really challenging. So you can also read the piece here.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
President Obama's eulogy for Ted Kennedy
Mrs. Kennedy, Kara, Edward, Patrick, Curran, Caroline, members of the Kennedy family, distinguished guests, and fellow citizens: Today we say goodbye to the youngest child of Rose and Joseph Kennedy. The world will long remember their son Edward as the heir to a weighty legacy; a champion for those who had none; the soul of the Democratic Party; and the lion of the U.S. Senate – a man whose name graces nearly one thousand laws, and who penned more than three hundred himself.
But those of us who loved him, and ache with his passing, know Ted Kennedy by the other titles he held: Father. Brother. Husband. Uncle Teddy, or as he was often known to his younger nieces and nephews, “The Grand Fromage,” or “The Big Cheese.” I, like so many others in the city where he worked for nearly half a century, knew him as a colleague, a mentor, and above all, a friend.
Ted Kennedy was the baby of the family who became its patriarch; the restless dreamer who became its rock. He was the sunny, joyful child, who bore the brunt of his brothers' teasing, but learned quickly how to brush it off. When they tossed him off a boat because he didn't know what a jib was, six-year-old Teddy got back in and learned to sail. When a photographer asked the newly elected Bobby to step back at a press conference because he was casting a shadow on his younger brother, Teddy quipped, “It'll be the same in Washington.”
This spirit of resilience and good humor would see Ted Kennedy through more pain and tragedy than most of us will ever know. He lost two siblings by the age of sixteen. He saw two more taken violently from the country that loved them. He said goodbye to his beloved sister, Eunice, in the final days of his own life. He narrowly survived a plane crash, watched two children struggle with cancer, buried three nephews, and experienced personal failings and setbacks in the most public way possible.
It is a string of events that would have broken a lesser man. And it would have been easy for Teddy to let himself become bitter and hardened; to surrender to self-pity and regret; to retreat from public life and live out his years in peaceful quiet. No one would have blamed him for that.
But that was not Ted Kennedy. As he told us, “(I)ndividual faults and frailties are no excuse to give in – and no exemption from the common obligation to give of ourselves.” Indeed, Ted was the “Happy Warrior” that the poet William Wordsworth spoke of when he wrote: As tempted more; more able to endure, As more exposed to suffering and distress; Thence, also, more alive to tenderness.
Through his own suffering, Ted Kennedy became more alive to the plight and suffering of others – the sick child who could not see a doctor; the young soldier sent to battle without armor; the citizen denied her rights because of what she looks like or who she loves or where she comes from. The landmark laws that he championed – the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, immigration reform, children's health care, the Family and Medical Leave Act – all have a running thread. Ted Kennedy's life's work was not to champion those with wealth or power or special connections. It was to give a voice to those who were not heard; to add a rung to the ladder of opportunity; to make real the dream of our founding. He was given the gift of time that his brothers were not, and he used that gift to touch as many lives and right as many wrongs as the years would allow.
We can still hear his voice bellowing through the Senate chamber, face reddened, fist pounding the podium, a veritable force of nature, in support of health care or workers' rights or civil rights. And yet, while his causes became deeply personal, his disagreements never did. While he was seen by his fiercest critics as a partisan lightning rod, that is not the prism through which Ted Kennedy saw the world, nor was it the prism through which his colleagues saw him. He was a product of an age when the joy and nobility of politics prevented differences of party and philosophy from becoming barriers to cooperation and mutual respect – a time when adversaries still saw each other as patriots.
And that's how Ted Kennedy became the greatest legislator of our time. He did it by hewing to principle, but also by seeking compromise and common cause – not through dealmaking and horse-trading alone, but through friendship, and kindness, and humor. There was the time he courted Orrin Hatch's support for the Children's Health Insurance Program by having his chief of staff serenade the senator with a song Orrin had written himself; the time he delivered shamrock cookies on a china plate to sweeten up a crusty Republican colleague; and the famous story of how he won the support of a Texas committee chairman on an immigration bill. Teddy walked into a meeting with a plain manila envelope, and showed only the chairman that it was filled with the Texan's favorite cigars. When the negotiations were going well, he would inch the envelope closer to the chairman. When they weren't, he would pull it back. Before long, the deal was done.
It was only a few years ago, on St. Patrick's Day, when Teddy buttonholed me on the floor of the Senate for my support on a certain piece of legislation that was coming up for vote. I gave him my pledge, but expressed my skepticism that it would pass. But when the roll call was over, the bill garnered the votes it needed, and then some. I looked at Teddy with astonishment and asked how he had pulled it off. He just patted me on the back, and said “Luck of the Irish!”
Of course, luck had little to do with Ted Kennedy's legislative success, and he knew that. A few years ago, his father-in-law told him that he and Daniel Webster just might be the two greatest senators of all time. Without missing a beat, Teddy replied, “What did Webster do?”
But though it is Ted Kennedy's historic body of achievements we will remember, it is his giving heart that we will miss. It was the friend and colleague who was always the first to pick up the phone and say, “I'm sorry for your loss,” or “I hope you feel better,” or “What can I do to help?” It was the boss who was so adored by his staff that over five hundred spanning five decades showed up for his 75th birthday party. It was the man who sent birthday wishes and thank you notes and even his own paintings to so many who never imagined that a U.S. senator would take the time to think about someone like them. I have one of those paintings in my private study – a Cape Cod seascape that was a gift to a freshman legislator who happened to admire it when Ted Kennedy welcomed him into his office the first week he arrived in Washington; by the way, that's my second favorite gift from Teddy and Vicki after our dog Bo. And it seems like everyone has one of those stories – the ones that often start with “You wouldn't believe who called me today.”
Ted Kennedy was the father who looked after not only his own three children, but John's and Bobby's as well. He took them camping and taught them to sail. He laughed and danced with them at birthdays and weddings; cried and mourned with them through hardship and tragedy; and passed on that same sense of service and selflessness that his parents had instilled in him. Shortly after Ted walked Caroline down the aisle and gave her away at the altar, he received a note from Jackie that read, “On you the carefree youngest brother fell a burden a hero would have begged to be spared. We are all going to make it because you were always there with your love.”
Not only did the Kennedy family make it because of Ted's love – he made it because of theirs; and especially because of the love and the life he found in Vicki. After so much loss and so much sorrow, it could not have been easy for Ted Kennedy to risk his heart again. That he did is a testament to how deeply he loved this remarkable woman from Louisiana. And she didn't just love him back. As Ted would often acknowledge, Vicki saved him. She gave him strength and purpose; joy and friendship; and stood by him always, especially in those last, hardest days.
We cannot know for certain how long we have here. We cannot foresee the trials or misfortunes that will test us along the way. We cannot know God's plan for us.
What we can do is to live out our lives as best we can with purpose, and love, and joy. We can use each day to show those who are closest to us how much we care about them, and treat others with the kindness and respect that we wish for ourselves. We can learn from our mistakes and grow from our failures. And we can strive at all costs to make a better world, so that someday, if we are blessed with the chance to look back on our time here, we can know that we spent it well; that we made a difference; that our fleeting presence had a lasting impact on the lives of other human beings.
This is how Ted Kennedy lived. This is his legacy. He once said of his brother Bobby that he need not be idealized or enlarged in death beyond what he was in life, and I imagine he would say the same about himself. The greatest expectations were placed upon Ted Kennedy's shoulders because of who he was, but he surpassed them all because of who he became. We do not weep for him today because of the prestige attached to his name or his office. We weep because we loved this kind and tender hero who persevered through pain and tragedy – not for the sake of ambition or vanity; not for wealth or power; but only for the people and the country he loved.
In the days after September 11th, Teddy made it a point to personally call each one of the 177 families of this state who lost a loved one in the attack. But he didn't stop there. He kept calling and checking up on them. He fought through red tape to get them assistance and grief counseling. He invited them sailing, played with their children, and would write each family a letter whenever the anniversary of that terrible day came along. To one widow, he wrote the following: “As you know so well, the passage of time never really heals the tragic memory of such a great loss, but we carry on, because we have to, because our loved one would want us to, and because there is still light to guide us in the world from the love they gave us.”
We carry on.
Ted Kennedy has gone home now, guided by his faith and by the light of those he has loved and lost. At last he is with them once more, leaving those of us who grieve his passing with the memories he gave, the good he did, the dream he kept alive, and a single, enduring image – the image of a man on a boat; white mane tousled; smiling broadly as he sails into the wind, ready for what storms may come, carrying on toward some new and wondrous place just beyond the horizon. May God Bless Ted Kennedy, and may he rest in eternal peace.
Found here.
But those of us who loved him, and ache with his passing, know Ted Kennedy by the other titles he held: Father. Brother. Husband. Uncle Teddy, or as he was often known to his younger nieces and nephews, “The Grand Fromage,” or “The Big Cheese.” I, like so many others in the city where he worked for nearly half a century, knew him as a colleague, a mentor, and above all, a friend.
Ted Kennedy was the baby of the family who became its patriarch; the restless dreamer who became its rock. He was the sunny, joyful child, who bore the brunt of his brothers' teasing, but learned quickly how to brush it off. When they tossed him off a boat because he didn't know what a jib was, six-year-old Teddy got back in and learned to sail. When a photographer asked the newly elected Bobby to step back at a press conference because he was casting a shadow on his younger brother, Teddy quipped, “It'll be the same in Washington.”
This spirit of resilience and good humor would see Ted Kennedy through more pain and tragedy than most of us will ever know. He lost two siblings by the age of sixteen. He saw two more taken violently from the country that loved them. He said goodbye to his beloved sister, Eunice, in the final days of his own life. He narrowly survived a plane crash, watched two children struggle with cancer, buried three nephews, and experienced personal failings and setbacks in the most public way possible.
It is a string of events that would have broken a lesser man. And it would have been easy for Teddy to let himself become bitter and hardened; to surrender to self-pity and regret; to retreat from public life and live out his years in peaceful quiet. No one would have blamed him for that.
But that was not Ted Kennedy. As he told us, “(I)ndividual faults and frailties are no excuse to give in – and no exemption from the common obligation to give of ourselves.” Indeed, Ted was the “Happy Warrior” that the poet William Wordsworth spoke of when he wrote: As tempted more; more able to endure, As more exposed to suffering and distress; Thence, also, more alive to tenderness.
Through his own suffering, Ted Kennedy became more alive to the plight and suffering of others – the sick child who could not see a doctor; the young soldier sent to battle without armor; the citizen denied her rights because of what she looks like or who she loves or where she comes from. The landmark laws that he championed – the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, immigration reform, children's health care, the Family and Medical Leave Act – all have a running thread. Ted Kennedy's life's work was not to champion those with wealth or power or special connections. It was to give a voice to those who were not heard; to add a rung to the ladder of opportunity; to make real the dream of our founding. He was given the gift of time that his brothers were not, and he used that gift to touch as many lives and right as many wrongs as the years would allow.
We can still hear his voice bellowing through the Senate chamber, face reddened, fist pounding the podium, a veritable force of nature, in support of health care or workers' rights or civil rights. And yet, while his causes became deeply personal, his disagreements never did. While he was seen by his fiercest critics as a partisan lightning rod, that is not the prism through which Ted Kennedy saw the world, nor was it the prism through which his colleagues saw him. He was a product of an age when the joy and nobility of politics prevented differences of party and philosophy from becoming barriers to cooperation and mutual respect – a time when adversaries still saw each other as patriots.
And that's how Ted Kennedy became the greatest legislator of our time. He did it by hewing to principle, but also by seeking compromise and common cause – not through dealmaking and horse-trading alone, but through friendship, and kindness, and humor. There was the time he courted Orrin Hatch's support for the Children's Health Insurance Program by having his chief of staff serenade the senator with a song Orrin had written himself; the time he delivered shamrock cookies on a china plate to sweeten up a crusty Republican colleague; and the famous story of how he won the support of a Texas committee chairman on an immigration bill. Teddy walked into a meeting with a plain manila envelope, and showed only the chairman that it was filled with the Texan's favorite cigars. When the negotiations were going well, he would inch the envelope closer to the chairman. When they weren't, he would pull it back. Before long, the deal was done.
It was only a few years ago, on St. Patrick's Day, when Teddy buttonholed me on the floor of the Senate for my support on a certain piece of legislation that was coming up for vote. I gave him my pledge, but expressed my skepticism that it would pass. But when the roll call was over, the bill garnered the votes it needed, and then some. I looked at Teddy with astonishment and asked how he had pulled it off. He just patted me on the back, and said “Luck of the Irish!”
Of course, luck had little to do with Ted Kennedy's legislative success, and he knew that. A few years ago, his father-in-law told him that he and Daniel Webster just might be the two greatest senators of all time. Without missing a beat, Teddy replied, “What did Webster do?”
But though it is Ted Kennedy's historic body of achievements we will remember, it is his giving heart that we will miss. It was the friend and colleague who was always the first to pick up the phone and say, “I'm sorry for your loss,” or “I hope you feel better,” or “What can I do to help?” It was the boss who was so adored by his staff that over five hundred spanning five decades showed up for his 75th birthday party. It was the man who sent birthday wishes and thank you notes and even his own paintings to so many who never imagined that a U.S. senator would take the time to think about someone like them. I have one of those paintings in my private study – a Cape Cod seascape that was a gift to a freshman legislator who happened to admire it when Ted Kennedy welcomed him into his office the first week he arrived in Washington; by the way, that's my second favorite gift from Teddy and Vicki after our dog Bo. And it seems like everyone has one of those stories – the ones that often start with “You wouldn't believe who called me today.”
Ted Kennedy was the father who looked after not only his own three children, but John's and Bobby's as well. He took them camping and taught them to sail. He laughed and danced with them at birthdays and weddings; cried and mourned with them through hardship and tragedy; and passed on that same sense of service and selflessness that his parents had instilled in him. Shortly after Ted walked Caroline down the aisle and gave her away at the altar, he received a note from Jackie that read, “On you the carefree youngest brother fell a burden a hero would have begged to be spared. We are all going to make it because you were always there with your love.”
Not only did the Kennedy family make it because of Ted's love – he made it because of theirs; and especially because of the love and the life he found in Vicki. After so much loss and so much sorrow, it could not have been easy for Ted Kennedy to risk his heart again. That he did is a testament to how deeply he loved this remarkable woman from Louisiana. And she didn't just love him back. As Ted would often acknowledge, Vicki saved him. She gave him strength and purpose; joy and friendship; and stood by him always, especially in those last, hardest days.
We cannot know for certain how long we have here. We cannot foresee the trials or misfortunes that will test us along the way. We cannot know God's plan for us.
What we can do is to live out our lives as best we can with purpose, and love, and joy. We can use each day to show those who are closest to us how much we care about them, and treat others with the kindness and respect that we wish for ourselves. We can learn from our mistakes and grow from our failures. And we can strive at all costs to make a better world, so that someday, if we are blessed with the chance to look back on our time here, we can know that we spent it well; that we made a difference; that our fleeting presence had a lasting impact on the lives of other human beings.
This is how Ted Kennedy lived. This is his legacy. He once said of his brother Bobby that he need not be idealized or enlarged in death beyond what he was in life, and I imagine he would say the same about himself. The greatest expectations were placed upon Ted Kennedy's shoulders because of who he was, but he surpassed them all because of who he became. We do not weep for him today because of the prestige attached to his name or his office. We weep because we loved this kind and tender hero who persevered through pain and tragedy – not for the sake of ambition or vanity; not for wealth or power; but only for the people and the country he loved.
In the days after September 11th, Teddy made it a point to personally call each one of the 177 families of this state who lost a loved one in the attack. But he didn't stop there. He kept calling and checking up on them. He fought through red tape to get them assistance and grief counseling. He invited them sailing, played with their children, and would write each family a letter whenever the anniversary of that terrible day came along. To one widow, he wrote the following: “As you know so well, the passage of time never really heals the tragic memory of such a great loss, but we carry on, because we have to, because our loved one would want us to, and because there is still light to guide us in the world from the love they gave us.”
We carry on.
Ted Kennedy has gone home now, guided by his faith and by the light of those he has loved and lost. At last he is with them once more, leaving those of us who grieve his passing with the memories he gave, the good he did, the dream he kept alive, and a single, enduring image – the image of a man on a boat; white mane tousled; smiling broadly as he sails into the wind, ready for what storms may come, carrying on toward some new and wondrous place just beyond the horizon. May God Bless Ted Kennedy, and may he rest in eternal peace.
Found here.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Not sure how this is going to go over
July 30, 2009
Loving your Neighbor as you love Yourself: Responding to H1N1
When the Synod of the Province of Rupert’s Land met in Calgary in June a Motion was passed expressing concern for the communities affected by the current flu pandemic. The H1N1 flu has seriously afflicted many First Nations communities in the northern parts of our country, and is beginning to appear in more southern towns and cities. I am sure that you are aware of this concern and are remembering our brothers and sisters in Christ in the Prayers of the People each time you gather to express your love for the Lord our God.
However I am writing to you at this time to bring to your attention steps which you can take to physically protect yourself and all who come to our church buildings for worship and fellowship. To undertake these simple acts will be an expression of your love for your neighbor even as you love yourself.
1. Hand-washing
There should be signage with clear instructions in church washrooms and kitchens instructing people to wash their hands with soap and hot water. Kitchen users should develop the habit of first washing their hands before they begin handling food and beverage. Altar Guild members should wash their hands before they begin the work of preparing the altar. Is there soap, water, and paper towels available in these areas in the church building?
2. Hand-cleanser
Our churches and halls are open to the Public. Making an antiseptic hand-sanitizer available at the entrances to the building, washrooms, meeting rooms with a Sign asking people to make use of it is a positive preventive act.
3. Distributing Holy Communion
Everyone who will be touching the bread and wine in the preparation of the altar during the service and in the distribution of the consecrated elements should use a hand-sanitizer immediately prior to assisting with the preparation and distribution.
4. Receiving Holy Communion
It is recommended that hand-sanitizer be available for people to use as they come forward to receive Holy Communion.
Intinction (dipping the bread into the chalice) is not to be practiced. In concert with other dioceses intinction is no longer an acceptable practice in the Diocese of Calgary since it is a significant health hazard. Research, though limited, has indicated the use of the common cup generally poses less risk of transferring bacteria than the practice of intinction.
If a person is concerned about receiving the common cup they are to be assured that communion in one kind, receiving the bread only, is an acceptable tradition within the Anglican Church. They could be instructed to simple touch the base of the chalice as the words of administration are said.
The use of a silver chalice, wine with an alcohol content of at least 12% or higher, and a clean purificator provide some protection to the less virulent bacteria that are constantly with us; however, H1N1 is an uncommon strain and therefore extra precautions must be taken.
5. Exchange of the Peace
As one diocese has announced, “social distancing is NOT to be discouraged”. Much as we may desire to greet each other with a hug it is best to refrain from doing so. Although a hand-shake is still an acceptable form of greeting, if H1N1 becomes more active we will have to curtail even a hand-shake and simply greet each other with eye-contact, a smile, a bow, or some such peace greeting sign.
6. Church Attendance
If you are not feeling well, have flu-like symptoms, or think that you might be coming down with something, the loving act is to stay home and take care of yourself. Be sure to let your minister know so that your church family can be supportive.
7. Pastoral Visits
Clergy and laity who make home visits on behalf of the parish should carry a hand-sanitizer with them and use it at the beginning and at the end of a visit. If you are visiting a person who is under the care of a health practitioner, you will of course follow their instructions in order to protect both the patient and yourself.
During the month of August the Diocese will be developing a pandemic response policy and this will be circulated to all parishes.
Much of what I have written is common sense and you are already doing it. Some of the items may be new and I ask that you begin to put them into practice. We are indeed commanded to love our neighbor as ourselves and taking precautions to guard against the spread of H1N1 is one way in which we can honor our Lord’s Summary of the Law.
God be with you,
+Derek
The Rt. Rev. Derek Hoskin
Bishop of Calgary
180, 1209 59 Avenue SE
Calgary AB T2H 2P6
Loving your Neighbor as you love Yourself: Responding to H1N1
When the Synod of the Province of Rupert’s Land met in Calgary in June a Motion was passed expressing concern for the communities affected by the current flu pandemic. The H1N1 flu has seriously afflicted many First Nations communities in the northern parts of our country, and is beginning to appear in more southern towns and cities. I am sure that you are aware of this concern and are remembering our brothers and sisters in Christ in the Prayers of the People each time you gather to express your love for the Lord our God.
However I am writing to you at this time to bring to your attention steps which you can take to physically protect yourself and all who come to our church buildings for worship and fellowship. To undertake these simple acts will be an expression of your love for your neighbor even as you love yourself.
1. Hand-washing
There should be signage with clear instructions in church washrooms and kitchens instructing people to wash their hands with soap and hot water. Kitchen users should develop the habit of first washing their hands before they begin handling food and beverage. Altar Guild members should wash their hands before they begin the work of preparing the altar. Is there soap, water, and paper towels available in these areas in the church building?
2. Hand-cleanser
Our churches and halls are open to the Public. Making an antiseptic hand-sanitizer available at the entrances to the building, washrooms, meeting rooms with a Sign asking people to make use of it is a positive preventive act.
3. Distributing Holy Communion
Everyone who will be touching the bread and wine in the preparation of the altar during the service and in the distribution of the consecrated elements should use a hand-sanitizer immediately prior to assisting with the preparation and distribution.
4. Receiving Holy Communion
It is recommended that hand-sanitizer be available for people to use as they come forward to receive Holy Communion.
Intinction (dipping the bread into the chalice) is not to be practiced. In concert with other dioceses intinction is no longer an acceptable practice in the Diocese of Calgary since it is a significant health hazard. Research, though limited, has indicated the use of the common cup generally poses less risk of transferring bacteria than the practice of intinction.
If a person is concerned about receiving the common cup they are to be assured that communion in one kind, receiving the bread only, is an acceptable tradition within the Anglican Church. They could be instructed to simple touch the base of the chalice as the words of administration are said.
The use of a silver chalice, wine with an alcohol content of at least 12% or higher, and a clean purificator provide some protection to the less virulent bacteria that are constantly with us; however, H1N1 is an uncommon strain and therefore extra precautions must be taken.
5. Exchange of the Peace
As one diocese has announced, “social distancing is NOT to be discouraged”. Much as we may desire to greet each other with a hug it is best to refrain from doing so. Although a hand-shake is still an acceptable form of greeting, if H1N1 becomes more active we will have to curtail even a hand-shake and simply greet each other with eye-contact, a smile, a bow, or some such peace greeting sign.
6. Church Attendance
If you are not feeling well, have flu-like symptoms, or think that you might be coming down with something, the loving act is to stay home and take care of yourself. Be sure to let your minister know so that your church family can be supportive.
7. Pastoral Visits
Clergy and laity who make home visits on behalf of the parish should carry a hand-sanitizer with them and use it at the beginning and at the end of a visit. If you are visiting a person who is under the care of a health practitioner, you will of course follow their instructions in order to protect both the patient and yourself.
During the month of August the Diocese will be developing a pandemic response policy and this will be circulated to all parishes.
Much of what I have written is common sense and you are already doing it. Some of the items may be new and I ask that you begin to put them into practice. We are indeed commanded to love our neighbor as ourselves and taking precautions to guard against the spread of H1N1 is one way in which we can honor our Lord’s Summary of the Law.
God be with you,
+Derek
The Rt. Rev. Derek Hoskin
Bishop of Calgary
180, 1209 59 Avenue SE
Calgary AB T2H 2P6
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Sunday, March 29, 2009
The Witness of St. Francis
Friday, March 20, 2009
Words to make us uncomfortable
Lamenting that the great, flowing milk of divine beneficence had all but dried up in the hands of the church, Hildegaard said, "Woe to those who are given a voice and will not shout, woe to those who have breasts and will not nurse God's children!"
Kathleen Norris, Amazing Grace
Monday, March 2, 2009
New Blog
Front Porch Republic, a new blog by a group of writers is going to look at how we might rethink ourselves in the midst of this economic crisis. It has just started but already I'm interested. This posting reflecting on Lent really grabbed me.
Read the rest here.
In the end, we are all exiles here below held captive by our fallen state and desires, and we are remembering that state of exile during this Lenten season and calling to mind our true home in the Heavenly City. Yet in our earthly existence we have accomplished another very strange thing, which is to exile ourselves voluntarily from the places we have called home and to condition ourselves to think of this cycle of repeated exiling as normal and even desirable. Not only do I suspect that most Americans would find this hymn strange, but for a great many of us there is no longer a Jerusalem for us to forget, for it has already been forgotten if it was ever there at all. In this, we have not renounced our own wills, as monastics do, but have increasingly cut ourselves off from others for our own sakes in almost inverse proportion to our ability to communicate with them.
Read the rest here.
Friday, January 30, 2009
I know I haven't been writing my own stuff
I'm really buried in a project right now and have a hard time taking time away from it. But I am still reading blogs and this posting from Caught a Glimpse of Jesus really blew me away.
This especially choked me up:
This especially choked me up:
Very often the difference between solitude and loneliness is whether or not you have someone who is thinking of you while you are alone.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Charity
Years ago I found an old book plate in a used book store that both disturbed and amused me. It was a depiction of charity and it showed a well dressed woman delivering something to some obviously impoverished people. She towered over them and looked more self-satisfied than compassionate. I kept the picture for several years until it got ruined by a leaking pipe while in storage. It wasn't something that I really wanted hanging on my walls and yet my ambivalence about the depiction of charity made me keep it.
In my work I am often engaged in 'acts of charity' especially around Christmas. We hand out bags of food to students at the university at the end of each term and we help do Christmas hampers at the college. I love doing this stuff - it makes my Christmas actually. Yet there are also times when I worry about becoming the self-satisfied woman in the picture, grateful to the poor for giving me the opportunity to feel good about myself for my generosity. Jim Tagg has an interesting post on the problems of charity at home that speaks to some of my own experience. Read it here.
In my work I am often engaged in 'acts of charity' especially around Christmas. We hand out bags of food to students at the university at the end of each term and we help do Christmas hampers at the college. I love doing this stuff - it makes my Christmas actually. Yet there are also times when I worry about becoming the self-satisfied woman in the picture, grateful to the poor for giving me the opportunity to feel good about myself for my generosity. Jim Tagg has an interesting post on the problems of charity at home that speaks to some of my own experience. Read it here.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Economics - The Dismal Science
I've been thinking about my Dad today, how he served for five years in the Air Force despite being a pacifist. And then I read Patrick Deneen's great post on economics over at What I saw in America and heard echoes of my father speaking. Dad shared many of these criticisms of the discipline of economics and rarely went to meetings of economists. He thought it was a mistake to think economics was all about manipulating models as if it could be divorced from political life in the broadest sense. He would be one of those heterodox economists Deneen mentions.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Today was a great day
I was impressed by how gracious McCain was and blown away by Obama. And Roger Ebert nailed it. Read him here.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
More on the Closure of Extendicare
Ms Pastoor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Health and Wellness stated on May 20 of ’08 in this Legislature that “obviously, we need more long-term care facilities,” which gave me great hope. However, two days ago in Lethbridge families were told that the long-term care facility operated by Extendicare would be closed by July 1 of 2009.
To the Minister of Health and Wellness: why is the minister allowing this situation in Lethbridge, where Extendicare is closing 120 long-term care facility beds in spite of his statement that long-term care facilities are needed in the province?
Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member is correct that the facility in Lethbridge, which is quite aged, is going to close. However, what the hon. member did not mention is the fact that there is a replacement centre going up. It’s a designated assisted living centre. As a matter of fact, the former Chinook health region has one of the leading models on how we can have seniors live in facilities that are not always long-term care.
Ms Pastoor: Definitions are clearly needed to be understood in this province. DAL is not long-term care. Is this what the minister was referring to on May 20 in ’08, when he said that “we need to look at removing barriers that exist today for private operators to also participate in the delivery of long-term care?”
Does the minister want to shut down the pre-existing facilities in order to create more demand for profit long-term care?
Mr. Liepert: Mr. Speaker, I know where this member is coming from. This member believes in a philosophy that as soon as you can, you stick a senior citizen into long-term care in an area that they don’t necessary feel the most comfortable in. It’s a philosophical difference. What we are going to do in this province is provide facilities, a variety of facilities, where our seniors can live in dignity where they want to live, not where the opposition wants them to be.
Ms Pastoor: Absolutely, totally wrong. You’re not getting it.
When long-term care was deregulated – housing and care are two different things. I’m talking about care. What is the minister’s response to the residents of the current long-term care facility who were assessed as needing care beyond the level that can be delivered by a designated assisted living facility that won’t even be completed by the time the long-term care facility closes?
Mr. Liepert: Mr. Speaker, this member can get all worked up into a sweat about it, but there are other long-term care facilities in
Lethbridge, so the health region has said that they will ensure that these particular patients are looked after. There are many facilities in southern Alberta that can accommodate the needs of these citizens.
Alberta Hansard, October 22, page #1473
To the Minister of Health and Wellness: why is the minister allowing this situation in Lethbridge, where Extendicare is closing 120 long-term care facility beds in spite of his statement that long-term care facilities are needed in the province?
Mr. Liepert: Well, Mr. Speaker, the member is correct that the facility in Lethbridge, which is quite aged, is going to close. However, what the hon. member did not mention is the fact that there is a replacement centre going up. It’s a designated assisted living centre. As a matter of fact, the former Chinook health region has one of the leading models on how we can have seniors live in facilities that are not always long-term care.
Ms Pastoor: Definitions are clearly needed to be understood in this province. DAL is not long-term care. Is this what the minister was referring to on May 20 in ’08, when he said that “we need to look at removing barriers that exist today for private operators to also participate in the delivery of long-term care?”
Does the minister want to shut down the pre-existing facilities in order to create more demand for profit long-term care?
Mr. Liepert: Mr. Speaker, I know where this member is coming from. This member believes in a philosophy that as soon as you can, you stick a senior citizen into long-term care in an area that they don’t necessary feel the most comfortable in. It’s a philosophical difference. What we are going to do in this province is provide facilities, a variety of facilities, where our seniors can live in dignity where they want to live, not where the opposition wants them to be.
Ms Pastoor: Absolutely, totally wrong. You’re not getting it.
When long-term care was deregulated – housing and care are two different things. I’m talking about care. What is the minister’s response to the residents of the current long-term care facility who were assessed as needing care beyond the level that can be delivered by a designated assisted living facility that won’t even be completed by the time the long-term care facility closes?
Mr. Liepert: Mr. Speaker, this member can get all worked up into a sweat about it, but there are other long-term care facilities in
Lethbridge, so the health region has said that they will ensure that these particular patients are looked after. There are many facilities in southern Alberta that can accommodate the needs of these citizens.
Alberta Hansard, October 22, page #1473
Long Term Plans for Long Term Care
For the past few years the regional health authorities have been pursuing a policy of converting Long Term Care (LTC) facilities into Designated Assisted Living (DAL) facilities in our region. The latest measure is the announced closing of Extendicare's LTC facility on the northside of Lethbridge and the building of a new DAL facility on the southside, down by Superstore.
What are the implications of this policy?
1. LTC facilities have RNs, LPNs, a Director of Care, social workers, dieticians, physical/occupational therapists, rec therapists, and Personal Care Aides (PCAs) - DALs have PCAs and may have an LPN.
2. In LTC residents meds, incontinence products etc are covered. In DAL the resident or their family pay for them.
The rationale offered for the policy is that not all seniors need a nursing home level of care so the building of DAL facilities offers a medium step between a lodge and LTC. Fine. But once Extendicare closes its LTC the only nursing home left in the city will be Edith Cavell. I've spent a lot of time in nursing homes and I don't believe that there is any way that one 80 bed facility can handle the nursing care needs of seniors in our community. This isn't about creating more options. This is about slashing the cost of caring for seniors with significant nursing needs and transferring those costs onto the families. This is about warehousing seniors. I find it an appalling policy.
The more immediate issue is the decision to close Extendicare in July and farm 120 residents out to the existing DALs in the region until a new DAL facility is built. So people will not only lose their home they will be separated from the other residents and from the staff who are like their family. They may find themselves placed in Taber or the Pass and their families will not be able to visit as often. It may mean they will see much less of their husbands or wives. It is a horrible decision with grave implications. My letter to the editor appeared in the paper this morning. You can read it here.
What are the implications of this policy?
1. LTC facilities have RNs, LPNs, a Director of Care, social workers, dieticians, physical/occupational therapists, rec therapists, and Personal Care Aides (PCAs) - DALs have PCAs and may have an LPN.
2. In LTC residents meds, incontinence products etc are covered. In DAL the resident or their family pay for them.
The rationale offered for the policy is that not all seniors need a nursing home level of care so the building of DAL facilities offers a medium step between a lodge and LTC. Fine. But once Extendicare closes its LTC the only nursing home left in the city will be Edith Cavell. I've spent a lot of time in nursing homes and I don't believe that there is any way that one 80 bed facility can handle the nursing care needs of seniors in our community. This isn't about creating more options. This is about slashing the cost of caring for seniors with significant nursing needs and transferring those costs onto the families. This is about warehousing seniors. I find it an appalling policy.
The more immediate issue is the decision to close Extendicare in July and farm 120 residents out to the existing DALs in the region until a new DAL facility is built. So people will not only lose their home they will be separated from the other residents and from the staff who are like their family. They may find themselves placed in Taber or the Pass and their families will not be able to visit as often. It may mean they will see much less of their husbands or wives. It is a horrible decision with grave implications. My letter to the editor appeared in the paper this morning. You can read it here.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Great News
Last Monday was a brutal day. Families were told at Extendicare that the Lethbridge facility would be closed next July although they haven't even started building the new facility. This means residents will be separated not only from their home but also from their friends to be farmed out across the health region.
Then a hearing was held concerning the rezoning necessary to move the Native Women's Transition Home into the old Netherlands Reformed Church. It was tough to sit and listen to people raising their concerns about the home moving into their neighbourhood and then have one of the women from the Transition board cry asking the neighbours to please just accept them.
But today was a good day. The City Council voted unanimously to approve the rezoning so the Transition Home now has a new permanent site!
Now we have to do what we can to convince the powers that be to postpone the closing of Extendicare until the new facility is built.
Then a hearing was held concerning the rezoning necessary to move the Native Women's Transition Home into the old Netherlands Reformed Church. It was tough to sit and listen to people raising their concerns about the home moving into their neighbourhood and then have one of the women from the Transition board cry asking the neighbours to please just accept them.
But today was a good day. The City Council voted unanimously to approve the rezoning so the Transition Home now has a new permanent site!
Now we have to do what we can to convince the powers that be to postpone the closing of Extendicare until the new facility is built.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
The Lord's Prayer
I love the Speaking to the Soul site over at Episcopal Cafe and read it most mornings as part of my morning prayer. Today's was really delightful:
Daily Reading for October 16 • Hugh Latimer and Nicholas Ridley, Bishops, 1555, and Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1556
But one word is left, which we must needs consider; Noster, ‘our.’ He saith not ‘my,’ but ‘our.’ Wherefore saith he ‘our’? This word ‘our’ teacheth us to consider that the Father of heaven is a common Father; as well my neighbour’s Father as mine; as well the poor man’s Father as the rich: so that he is not a peculiar Father, but a Father to the whole church and congregation, to all the faithful. Be they never so poor, so vile, so foul and despised, yet he is their Father as well as mine: and therefore I should not despise them, but consider that God is their Father as well as mine. Here may we perceive what communion is between us; so that when I pray, I pray not for myself alone, but for all the rest: again, when they pray, they pray not for themselves only, but for me: for Christ hath so framed this prayer, that I must needs include my neighbour in it. Therefore all those which pray this prayer, they pray as well for me as for themselves; which is a great comfort to every faithful heart, when he considereth that all the church prayeth for him. For amongst such a great number there be some which be good, and whose prayer God will hear. . . . So that it is a great comfort unto us to know that all good and faithful persons pray for us.
From Hugh Latimer’s “First Sermon on the Lord’s Prayer,” in The Works of Hugh Latimer, ed. G. E. Corrie (Parker Society, 1844).
Monday, October 6, 2008
Disparities in the Family
Yesterday I spoke at the ACW regional meeting at St. Paul and St. Thomas parish in Cardston. Well, the church is actually on the Blood reserve on the edge of town. Driving back yesterday I thought about what I had said in my talk. I spoke about the picture of the church in the Book of Acts and how the wealthy sold property to care for the poor of the community. My main point was that the church is a family and in passing said that in families some members don't eat steak while others eat hamburger.
Nice idea but as I was driving home I realized that in our church some of us are eating steak while others are eating worse than hamburger. Some of our parishes have beautiful buildings, resident clergy, and resources for music and children's programmes. Many of our rural parishes and especially our aboriginal parishes struggle without regular clergy, have old buildings they can't afford to maintain, and have few resources.
Worldly economic theory says that these parishes should close, that their members are few, that they aren't self-supporting or anything like self-supporting, and that the resources of the church would be better spent on building or expanding churches in the booming suburbs of our cities or their satellite communities. But what of the people in these communities?
I have spoken to people working in our rural communities, people aware of the rural crisis, the closing of post offices, schools and community centres. They speak of the pain in many rural communities as people lose family farms, as they see their children leave the community never to return except for a visit. I was preaching in one small church where there are about 20 people on a Sunday morning but where the church is used almost every day by community groups who couldn't afford to meet anywhere else. I spoke with one young woman after the service about the future of this little church. Where will these people go if the church closes their doors she asked. Good question.
And what about our reserves. There are four reserves in our diocese, each with a long history of Anglican presence, each still with functioning Anglican parishes. Yet we have one full time priest to serve these four communities. And these are hurting communities. They need help, they need support, they need the church.
This isn't just an Anglican problem. As a chaplain for four denominations I get to visit many of the churches in South Alberta and I know it is a problem for other denominations as well. So what are we going to do? Are we going to continue to eat steak while our brothers and sisters struggle to put something, anything on the table?
Nice idea but as I was driving home I realized that in our church some of us are eating steak while others are eating worse than hamburger. Some of our parishes have beautiful buildings, resident clergy, and resources for music and children's programmes. Many of our rural parishes and especially our aboriginal parishes struggle without regular clergy, have old buildings they can't afford to maintain, and have few resources.
Worldly economic theory says that these parishes should close, that their members are few, that they aren't self-supporting or anything like self-supporting, and that the resources of the church would be better spent on building or expanding churches in the booming suburbs of our cities or their satellite communities. But what of the people in these communities?
I have spoken to people working in our rural communities, people aware of the rural crisis, the closing of post offices, schools and community centres. They speak of the pain in many rural communities as people lose family farms, as they see their children leave the community never to return except for a visit. I was preaching in one small church where there are about 20 people on a Sunday morning but where the church is used almost every day by community groups who couldn't afford to meet anywhere else. I spoke with one young woman after the service about the future of this little church. Where will these people go if the church closes their doors she asked. Good question.
And what about our reserves. There are four reserves in our diocese, each with a long history of Anglican presence, each still with functioning Anglican parishes. Yet we have one full time priest to serve these four communities. And these are hurting communities. They need help, they need support, they need the church.
This isn't just an Anglican problem. As a chaplain for four denominations I get to visit many of the churches in South Alberta and I know it is a problem for other denominations as well. So what are we going to do? Are we going to continue to eat steak while our brothers and sisters struggle to put something, anything on the table?
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
AIDS Orphans
On October 5th the local Grandmothers organization, a part of the Stephen Lewis Foundation, will be holding a scrabble tournament to raise money for the grandmothers of Africa who are raising their grandchildren. I have a lot of respect for Stephen Lewis, and for the women in our community who have a heart for the people of Africa suffering because of AIDS so I'm happy to play scrabble to support them.
The latest issue of Christian Century just arrived and there is an article on AIDS orphans in Zambia. These statistics broke my heart:
The latest issue of Christian Century just arrived and there is an article on AIDS orphans in Zambia. These statistics broke my heart:
These Grandmothers groups have formed in communities across the country - maybe there is a scrabble tournament in your community you can support.THE AIDS epidemic in Zambia is expected to leave 1 million orphans in its wake--almost 10 percent of the country's population. If one adds to this figure the number of children who have lost one parent to AIDS, the total number of grieving children in the country is staggering.
Like most nations in southern Africa, Zambia (formerly Northern Rhodesia) is mired in poverty. The average family survives--barely--on $300 per year. Most Zambians are undernourished. The HIV infection rate is still high--16 percent, down from a high of 26 percent thanks to massive education efforts undertaken by the government and an array of nongovernmental organizations, including churches.
Zambia's orphans must rely on the good will of their extended family or the charity of well-meaning people in their villages. Forty-six percent of Zambian families are caring for orphans. That means that people who are already barely surviving must add another mouth to feed. It's a heroic act for families to take in these children. Families often have to decide between feeding the orphans and paying the fees for their schooling. As hard as life is for these orphans, they are better off than the many who live in the streets and steal food to survive.
From Shattered hearts. By: Matteson, Richard E., Christian Century, 9/9/2008, Vol. 125, Issue 18
Friday, September 12, 2008
Suburbia
Some of my best friends live in suburbia....but it ain't for me.
Kevin Little has a piece on life in suburbia and it contains some of the reasons why I've always rather live downtown. Read it here. Thanks to Kevin Powell.
Kevin Little has a piece on life in suburbia and it contains some of the reasons why I've always rather live downtown. Read it here. Thanks to Kevin Powell.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Hunting and Soccer
I've been reading blogs all week talking about Palin as VP. Some of them have been favourable, some of them have been terrified. Some of them have been mocking. Personally I don't understand why McCain chose her. There seem to be more qualified, stronger, experienced conservative women to chose from. I don't follow American politics enough to know whether she's going to be a liability to him or an asset. But I do find elements of the liberal attack on her disturbing. There is a mocking tone of dismissal in many of the comments because she likes to hunt and she's a soccer mom and I find that really irritating. I also think that it confirms for some people, who might be critical of much of her economic policies, that they can not trust the values of those who criticize her.
An example of this is comments left on the blog What I Saw in America. John writes:
He is echoing comments by Eric who raises concerns that Palin represents small-town values he holds and yet Republican economic policies undermine those very small-town economies:
Here are good reasons for criticizing McCain, Palin and the Republican party. So why not stop there instead of going on to mock her for being part of a culture that hunts and cheers kids on at soccer games. My sister is a soccer mom. Some of my best friends are soccer moms, or hockey dads, or judo parents, or dance moms. In other words, my friends and members of my family love and value their children and make an effort to support them in activities that encourage them to be physically and emotionally healthy. And what about hunting. Unless the people making the snide comments are vegetarians they have no business attacking people who hunt. Some of my family and many of my friends hunt and fish. And they eat what they shoot or catch. In my neck of the woods having a freezer full of moose and venison is common and I know that those animals usually died cleaner better deaths than a lot of the cattle whose carcasses fill our freezers.
Years ago I was at a chaplains conference where a number of the chaplains made snide comments about 'conservatives' much like those being made about Palin. I finally got fed up with cracks about 'red neck' culture and started talking about what it was like working at a college where there was a gun locker in residence so that students could keep their rifles safely and still have access to them if they wanted to go out hunting after class. (I don't know if we still have the locker but it makes sense in a college where one of the big programmes is fish and wildlife). I got irritated at the assumption that right thinking on a host of social and theological issues also involved rejecting anything that smacked of 'traditional' values.
It is frustrating that this also plays into the Republican hands. McCain and his team can pursue policies which undermine small towns, families, and the hunting and fishing grounds of Alaska all they want if they can continue to represent themselves as the icon of traditional values. And the more liberals attack those values instead of attacking those economic and social policies the more successful they will be.
An example of this is comments left on the blog What I Saw in America. John writes:
I have real problems with some of the reasons that McCain nominated Palin (her inexperience, the loose ends that she has in Alaska, her lifelong membership in the NRA), but when those who identified themselves as liberal commentators mocked her family size, her pro-life stance, her faith, and her small-town origins, it touched a nerve. So much so that I will probably be voting for John McCain in the fall, despite the fact that I share most of Patrick's concerns about the McCain/Palin ticket.
He is echoing comments by Eric who raises concerns that Palin represents small-town values he holds and yet Republican economic policies undermine those very small-town economies:
The specific policies mentioned here (restrictive zoning, gas taxes, public transportation) are all Democratic territory, are they not? I work for local government and, at least at that level, they are. When we try to restrict land use to encourage infill development and prevent suburban sprawl, it's the republican land rights absolutists that are against us. When we try to move the county farmers' market to local, sustainable produce, our supporters are democrats. When we try to force the local Wal-Mart to stay in its existing building, rather than move two miles further out and leave another deserted strip mall behind, the local Chamber of Commerce republicans wear us out. When we complete a public transportation center to get people to work, the disgruntled residents are republican tax hawks. And so on, on things from afterschool mentoring to sidewalks to green space in low-income neighborhoods. The point is that whenever we take action to create a uniquely local, self-sustaining, pedestrian accessible community, it's Palin's party that obstructs us. And I didn't hear anything in her speech to make me think she is different.
Here are good reasons for criticizing McCain, Palin and the Republican party. So why not stop there instead of going on to mock her for being part of a culture that hunts and cheers kids on at soccer games. My sister is a soccer mom. Some of my best friends are soccer moms, or hockey dads, or judo parents, or dance moms. In other words, my friends and members of my family love and value their children and make an effort to support them in activities that encourage them to be physically and emotionally healthy. And what about hunting. Unless the people making the snide comments are vegetarians they have no business attacking people who hunt. Some of my family and many of my friends hunt and fish. And they eat what they shoot or catch. In my neck of the woods having a freezer full of moose and venison is common and I know that those animals usually died cleaner better deaths than a lot of the cattle whose carcasses fill our freezers.
Years ago I was at a chaplains conference where a number of the chaplains made snide comments about 'conservatives' much like those being made about Palin. I finally got fed up with cracks about 'red neck' culture and started talking about what it was like working at a college where there was a gun locker in residence so that students could keep their rifles safely and still have access to them if they wanted to go out hunting after class. (I don't know if we still have the locker but it makes sense in a college where one of the big programmes is fish and wildlife). I got irritated at the assumption that right thinking on a host of social and theological issues also involved rejecting anything that smacked of 'traditional' values.
It is frustrating that this also plays into the Republican hands. McCain and his team can pursue policies which undermine small towns, families, and the hunting and fishing grounds of Alaska all they want if they can continue to represent themselves as the icon of traditional values. And the more liberals attack those values instead of attacking those economic and social policies the more successful they will be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)