social justice – Page 2 – Southwest Conference Blog

All Shall Be Well: “The Doctrine of Discovery: Hearing and Healing”

by Rev. Deb Church

I’m writing this reflection as I near the end of a travel study seminar offered by the Presbyterian (PCUSA) Peacemaking Program: “Native Lands of the Southwest: The Doctrine of Discovery and Its Legacy Today.”

Now if you find yourself thinking, “The doctrine of what?”, you’re not alone! Lots of people are in that boat, and I was, too, until somewhat recently. As I learn about it, however, I can’t not invite others into the conversation…

In a nutshell, the Doctrine of Discovery, whose roots can be found in a collection of 15th-century papal bulls (i.e., Pope-issued decrees), provided the theological and then legal justification used by European explorers, and later, American settlers, to claim lands that had been occupied by indigenous peoples for thousands of years, and additionally, to either convert or remove (which often meant, kill) those people as needed–or desired.

It’s a part of our country’s history that’s uncomfortable and painful–but true nonetheless. And we who have not learned about it (generally through no fault of our own) are left with an incomplete–and inaccurate–understanding of who we are and where we’ve come from as a nation. And even though none of us who’s alive now did any of those things, our lack of awareness and lack of acknowledgement of them contributes to the ongoing injustice and trauma experienced by Native people in our country. And it keeps all of us–not just our Native sisters and brothers, but all of us–from experiencing true healing and wholeness, as God desires for all of God’s creation!

So, fueled by a desire for greater healing within myself, as well as within our Native siblings, as well as within our country, I joined thirty-four others from fifteen states on the travel study seminar mentioned above. Gathering in Albuquerque last Friday [April 28], we boarded a bus, Phoenix-bound, and embarked on a journey of listening, learning, grappling, and growing.

As we’ve traveled hundreds of miles together through some of the Native Lands here in the Southwest, we’ve had the honor of meeting and hearing from quite a few Native Americans. They’ve shared stories of ancient ancestors and of grandparents, of lands lost and traditions preserved, of passed-down pain and passed-on lessons, of dances and foods and memories and faith, and so much more. Some stories have brought tears, and others, laughter; some generated shame and others, pride; some carried heartache and others, joy.

These Native folks have shared so much, and all they’ve asked was that we listen. That we bear witness. And so we’ve listened. And in listening, we’ve learned. In listening, we’ve been deeply moved. In listening, we’ve been changed. In their sharing and our listening, I hope and pray that we’ve all begun to be healed.

The pain is deep. The pain is old. The pain is real.

Hope and healing and transformation are also deep and old and real…

May what is Holy and Sacred within us and above us and below us and beside us and between us create a space among us where we can bear witness to each other’s pain, and in bearing witness, may hope be born and healing begin and transformation become possible…for all of us and all of God’s creation.

May it be so.

Love Letters From the Border

by Rev. Victoria S. Ubben

The Christian tradition has a long history of letter-writing. Parts of the Bible are letters written to others and these letters have been preserved. The epistles in the New Testament are great examples of letters written, delivered, read, and saved in the Bible. Besides those letters, the early Christians continued to send letters around as the church was gaining momentum and strength. There are many other examples of letter-writing in Christian history.

For example, according to tradition St. Valentine was a physician and priest in Rome in the third century. Valentine was arrested and imprisoned for his Christian faith in the One God. The emperor condemned him to death on February 14, 269 or 270 C.E. (That part is history, but there is more to this story.) My mother always told me the rest of this story when I was young. She told me that while he was imprisoned, Valentine converted his jailer to the Christian faith by restoring sight to the jailer’s daughter, Julia (who was born blind). On the eve of his death, Valentine wrote a note to Julia, reminding her to remain faithful to God. He signed it, “From your Valentine.” The story continues: in 496 C.E. Pope Gelasius set aside February 14 as a celebration of Valentine’s martyrdom.

A more recent example of religious letter-writing is a letter dated August 29, 2022. The letter was written to the Rev. Dr. William Lyons, who was the Conference Minister of the Southwest Conference of the United Church of Christ at that time. Sister Lika who ministers to migrants sent a “cordial invitation” inviting a group of us from the Southwest Conference to visit Casa de la Misericordia y de Todas las Naciones (The House of Mercy and All Nations) which is a migrant shelter located in Nogales, Sonora, Mexico. Sister Lika wrote in her letter, “We currently have a population of 120 people, most of them under 18 years of age from different parts of the Mexican Republic and Central America. Your presence will be a living testimony of a God who listens and accompanies.” Wow! I wanted to be a “living testimony.” My bags were packed in a flash, and I could not wait to get to the shelter on the Mexican side of the border!

The people whom I met at the shelter were seeking asylum in the USA, and they all had remarkable (often heart-breaking and terrifying) stories of why they would leave behind their belongings, their homes, and even family members to find their way to northern Mexico and (hopefully) enter the U.S.A. legally. Through translators, I heard with my own ears real stories of real migrants.

One of the most striking things about my visit to border shelter is this: migrants spend time at this shelter waiting for legal entry into the U.S.A.; some migrants wait only four weeks, and some migrants wait up to a year. Migrants who wait have time for writing letters. Upon leaving the shelter some migrants take a bit of time to write “thank you” notes to those who had helped them along the way. The shelter has plenty of colored paper and markers and pens for writing. As migrants continue their journey, many of them leave behind colorful hand-written notes of thanks and gratitude to those who have helped them.

Besides the memories that I made and the stories that I heard while at the shelter, I have a handful of these letters written by those migrants who wait. Besides sharing part of my visit-to-the-border-story at an adult education forum at our church, I was able to engage some friends in the congregation to help me with translation. These are a few pieces of just two of those many letters:

“Esteemed ladies and gentlemen, I have the pleasure of thanking you for all your help… In these most difficult moments you demonstrate warmth, care, and affection. You offered your hand when we most needed it. With your help, you make us feel cared for. Many thanks, Cano Reyna Family”

(Translated by Sasha and shared with her permission. Sasha is a freshman in high school and attends the United Church of Santa Fe with her family.)

“Permit me with all respect to write to you in this way. I know that we don’t know each other, and that speaks to the great goodness you have in your hearts to help, no matter who it is. I ask you to continue with this great work… Thanks for helping us without knowing us and without expecting anything in return, other than sincere thanks. Thank you for what you [all] have done for my family. From The Ramos Barrera Family”

(Translated by Faith and shared with her permission. Faith is a member of our Immigration Task Force at the United Church of Santa Fe.)

Letter-writing, note-writing, and Valentine-sending has taken on a new meaning for me now that I have obtained and have read these letters from some migrants at the border shelter. We can all use Valentine’s Day as a reminder to send messages of love (or thanks or affirmation) to those who have been important to us or who have had an impact on our lives. Writing a note (or sending a text message or an email message or making a phone call) might be just the message that someone needs to read (or hear).

To learn more about the ministry and mission of Casa de la Misericordia y de Todas Las Naciones, watch this brief video:

The Gift of the Vote

by Rev. Lynne Hinton

I know it sounds crazy but I always weep when I vote. It’s not what you’re thinking. It’s not because of the polarization in our country or that my chosen candidate is not likely to win. It’s not because I feel sad or tired or weary, though voting seasons can leave me feeling those emotions.

I weep because I am always mindful of what was required from others for me to have the right to vote. I’ve seen the documentaries, read accounts of the women fighting for the right to vote. I know how they were jailed, force fed during their hunger strikes. I know they faced danger and harassment and suffered great losses for their commitment to pass the 19^th amendment in 1919. I know those stories of courage.

I weep because I remember in 1994 when South Africans stood in line for days to finally be able to cast their votes and elect Nelson Mandela as the nation’s president, finally putting an end to apartheid. I saw the news reports of the miles-long lines of people withstanding hunger, danger, and fatigue, refusing to give up and go home when they were forced to wait. I know those stories of perseverance.

I weep because I think of people like Fannie Mae Hamer who was beaten because of her work for voters rights in the 1960’s, of how many times and how many places people of color were turned away from the polls, how many of them lost their jobs, their livelihoods, their lives, to get to the polls, how so many died trying to register voters or cast their ballots. I know those stories of faith.

I weep because I know there are countless places in our world where religion and politics disallow women to vote, where the voting doesn’t matter because of corruption, and places where voting just simply doesn’t happen for anyone.

Voting is not to be taken lightly.

This election will not bring us closer together. This election will not cure the ills of our nation or usher in some new world order of peace and unity. In many aspects, we have lost our way in knowing how to build bridges, how to work together, how to put aside our hatred and resentment and create a government and society that allows for differences, where leaders from all sides sit down at the table and are willing to listen to one another. I doubt the state of affairs will somehow become better no matter the election outcomes. Still, the right to vote was a costly one for our ancestors. The right to go and stand in line and cast a ballot is a great privilege that has been given to us on the backs of those who fought before us.

So, make sure to vote; and while you wait to be handed the long white sheet of paper; when you enter your private queue, take the pen and color in the circle of your choice; when you hand over your completed ballot and walk out the door, take a minute and remember this privilege that is ours today. Take a breath and be grateful.

You might just shed a tear too.

Bad law, bad logic, and bad interpretation philosophy

by Brendan Mahoney

Many are rightly shocked by the Supreme Court’s repudiating the constitutional right to reproductive choice. Less surprising is the Supreme Court’s recent history of saying anything, however contradictory, to get to a desired result. Because issues of constitutional law are not always easily understood, some explanation is helpful, but it is also likely to cause further shock over the Supreme Court’s disingenuous philosophies of legal interpretation called “originalism” and “textualism.”

The Bill of Rights, adopted in 1791, applies to the federal government, not the states. That means that the US Constitution, when written, prohibited the federal government from infringing free speech, for example, but the states were free to do otherwise (and they often did, depending on their own constitutions).

After the Civil War in 1868, the US adopted the 14th Amendment, and the critical portion insofar as rights go is in Section 1:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. (emphasis added)

The “due process” clause of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, over time, came to be understood as incorporating, selectively, the original Bill of Rights to be made applicable to the states, meaning, states cannot infringe free speech, religion, search and seizure, etc. Notably, the Second Amendment right to bear arms was not incorporated into 14th Amendment jurisprudence until 2010. This is an example of the Supreme Court continuing new rights in the 14th Amendment while it rejects the concept of other rights such as reproductive choice in the 14th Amendment as being “non-textual.” The 14th Amendment, however, does not mention guns either, so that non-textual right is just fine. Justice Clarence Thomas further believes that the rights to contraception, freedom of consensual same-sex activities, and same sex marriage also should go because they are non-textual. He conveniently omitted from that list the right to non-textual interracial marriage (his own marriage is interracial).

The willingness of the current Supreme Court to say anything in support of a favored result under the guise of textualism and original intent is flabbergasting. Last Thursday, the Court declared unconstitutional a 100-year-old New York law concerning licensing for firearms. The Court insisted it must look to the laws in 1791 for original intent (few restrictions on gun ownership) rather than 1868 where gun restrictions were common in order to clairvoyantly divine the intention of the drafters. One day later, in the case overturning Roe v. Wade, the same court did just the opposite. It insisted that for reproductive rights, we must look to 1868 for original intent, where restrictions on abortion were common, rather than to 1791 where abortion restrictions were nearly unheard of.

Originalism and textualism are just sophistry – the Supreme Court’s willingness to dodge and weave in methods of analysis shows that clearly. It’s no different than Biblical literalism, which allows a person to declare an interpretation literal and any other views non-Biblical. One of the most famous conservative Supreme Court Chief Justices, Oliver Wendell Holmes, had this to say in 1920 about original intent in interpreting the text of the Constitution:

“[W]e must realize that [the Framers] have called into life a being[,] the development of which could not have been foreseen completely by the most gifted of its begetters. … The [Constitution] must be considered in the light of our whole experience and not merely in that of what was said a hundred years ago.” Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416 (1920).

The Supreme Court’s decision to repudiate the constitutional right to reproductive choice is more than just morally wrong. It is bad law, bad logic, and bad interpretation philosophy. Worse, they know that too.

Our Trip to the Border

by Jane McNamara, Chair, Immigration Task Force, First Church UCC Phoenix

Hidden along the edge of the concrete ramp were 20 or 25 coins. I carefully picked them out of the sand and put them in the back pocket of my jeans. Nearby were torn pieces of paper money from Cuba – and strewn everywhere were shoelaces, belts, clothing items of all kinds, backpacks and shoes. Lots of shoes.

There is an explanation for what we saw at the border last week. Our guides, Fernie and Nathalie with the non-profit AZCA Humanitarian Coalition, said that Border Patrol agents require all migrants to leave their possessions behind. Agents say they don’t have the personnel to do the needed security checks. So, when they process migrants seeking asylum after they’ve crossed the border into the United States, migrants are given a clear plastic bag for their papers and perhaps a phone – and that is what they bring with them to the Welcome Center in Phoenix.

And the shoes? Since many cross water, they leave their muddy, wet shoes and wear someone else’s that have dried in the sun. An explanation, perhaps, for why so many guests at the Welcome Center are wearing shoes that fit them so poorly.

It was clear from our visit that Fernie and Nathalie would like to find ways to reuse more belongings but there isn’t the volunteer network that would be needed to undertake such a project. Instead, the AZCA Humanitarian Coalition organizes border aid trips, leaving water and fruit for asylum-seekers and, importantly, “restoring” the land. Five of us helped them one morning last week, following them along the dirt road by the border from Yuma to San Luis, making six stops and encountering migrants in many places along the way. And yes there are gaps in the wall near Yuma – and the wall will never be “finished.” Farmers demand access to water and the federal wall ends where the Cocopah Reservation begins.

We did not see Border Patrol process any asylum-seekers while we were there, but the evidence that they do indeed require everyone to throw away their personal possessions is everywhere. We filled bags and bags of “trash” and left them in the dumpsters parked along the border. In a few places, migrants picked up bags and helped us.

And afterwards, some of us brought items we found on the border to the Welcome Center. I washed hundreds of shoelaces in hopes our visitors to the Ropa (clothing) Room might be able to use them. My sister brought in the white confirmation dress she found and pinned it on a wall in the Ropa Room, thinking the mother who left it behind might visit us and see it, just waiting for her to reclaim it.

And I kept the coins I had found in my pocket.

Late last Saturday afternoon, four women who had chosen some clothing items from the Ropa Room were sitting on benches in the hallway, and one of the women was crying. I gave her a small stuffed dog and asked if she missed her family. One of the other women said she had been talking to her mother in Peru. Peru? I had never met anyone at the Welcome Center from Peru, but the coins in my pocket were Peruvian. I gave them to her and she placed them in her hand and stroked them ever so gently.

It was surely another one of the “God things” we witness so often at the Welcome Center.

We are truly blessed to be able to help welcome our newest immigrants to this country, and assist them as they pass through Phoenix on their way to sponsors throughout the country. And everyone who has donated clothing or shoes or tote bags or who has contributed to our meal fund is part of our First Church team. We are making a difference in people’s lives. Thank you.

Will the Minority Rule Again?

by Rev. Dr. Richard Einerson

There is a strong majority in this country that is pro-choice for women. Yet the minority can rule on this issue if we allow it. I have some background in medical ethics and from that background I feel compelled to make some comments. I was co-chair of the Medical Ethics Committee at Meritcare Medical Center in Fargo, ND where I was a chaplain for 18 years. In that role I attended weeklong seminars in medical ethics at the University of Washington as well as the “Managing Mortality” conference at the University of Minnesota. I heard the families of two major medical ethics cases, Karen Ann Quinlan and Nancy Cruzan. The first had to do with disconnecting a ventilator, the latter with discontinuing feeding tubes. Ever since the religious right has fought to have the government enforce quasi-religious values in families and personal life which continues today. (Comas: Karen Quinlan, Nancy Cruzan, and Terry Schiavo, Chapter 2). We are in the middle of that fight over women’s health and pro-choice issues now.

The battle has been going a while. I had an annual lecture in medicine and religions and invited Kristie Cruzan White, Nancy’s sister to tell their story to our physicians and community. Shortly thereafter (around 1991} I invited Dr. Daniel Maguire to lecture. His topic was going to be on grief in families who lose young children to incurable diseases as he and his wife had experienced. Maguire was a Jesuit teaching at Marquette but had become in the top ten on the hit list of his Catholic Church by an article he published in the Christian Century describing a visit he and his wife had made to a Planned Parent Center in Milwaukie. Contrary to the Republican notion that it is primarily “loose women” who get abortions, they found it was often women such as a schizophrenic whose medications would malform the fetus; other women whose pregnancies were not proceeding normally.

As a result of his unorthodox notions on abortion, I received a phone call on a Monday morning from the Chairman of the Bank which funded our lecture and who was more than nervous about our choice of lecture. I inquired who was objecting. It was the Bishop’s office and at least one of our conservative physicians. I said: “Norman, would you give me 24 hours to speak with them.” He reluctantly agreed. But in mid-afternoon I got a call from the President. After several statements I said: “Are you suggesting we pay his honorarium and have him stay home?” Of course, the answer was yes. Fortunately, we had friends in the philosophy department at Moorhead State University across the river who paid his airfare, and we had the largest turnout ever in their huge auditorium. Then Maguire did talk about abortion, quoting a Catholic Bishop in the 16^th century. With his Irish humor he said: “He didn’t lose his job, and his lectures weren’t cancelled!” Let’s be clear: This was an attempt of overruled FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

In another article, A Question of Catholic Honesty, Maguire takes on his church’s absolute stance on abortion: wrong all the time. He says: “As a Catholic theology I find this situation abhorrent and unworthy of the richness of the Roman Catholic traditions that have nourished me. I indict not only the bishops, but also the ‘petulant silence’ (Beverly Harrison’s phrase) or indifference of many Catholic Theologians who recognize the morality of certain abortions, but still will not address the subject publicly. I also indict the male dominated liberal Catholic press which does too little to dissipate the myth of a Catholic monolith on abortion.”

To me this is clearly an issue of women’s healthcare. It is an issue to be dealt with honestly in the privacy of a doctor’s office. I personally, as a man, cannot imagine the agony a woman goes through who may need an abortion. But I know that many of those who have FREEDOM as bumper stickers are all for LIMITING FREEDOM OF CHOICE FOR WOMEN. l It is amazing the me that the Supreme Court may be seriously nullifying Roe v Wade, established precedent. It says more about this court than it does about law. But if it does so, it is up to Congress. Our question as a society is: will be allow the minority to rule? Is the filibuster more important than a woman’s civil liberties? It is time for the majority to work at claiming its power. We should query and pressure our congressional representatives and senators. We should show up in the streets. The minority and their religious dogmatism should not prevail! It is time that the most strident voices be put down. I am not talking about their freedom of speech, but their trying to impose their will on the majority.

An unfortunate concomitant of the extreme right is the downright viciousness of their attacks. I mention the Nancy Cruzan case. The right consistently demonstrated where Nancy was lying in a persistent vegetative state. One of the signs on that Christmas eve read: LOOK WHAT NANCY GOT FOR CHRISTMAS: DEATH! I would hope that kind of viciousness might cease but I doubt that will ever be the case. Religion always has its zealots. They must not win this battle. We need to demonstrate that there are other Christians who are not zealots, who are champions of women’s rights, and who believe in the constitutional rights of all Americans!

Life AND Choice Are United

by Rev. Dr. Barb Doerrer-Peacock

I wasn’t sure whether this writing wanted to be a poem or an essay. So, I just wrote. This is the result: my thoughts/feelings about the current threat to women’s reproductive rights.

They would like us to think it’s about
Sanctity vs. sacrilege
Life vs. death
Federal vs state
Truth vs. lies
Constitution vs. changeable laws
Protection of one vs. another
A woman’s issue, and not a man’s
A womb and not a penis
A fetus and not a whole human life
A private decision and not
a whole human culture.

They would like us to think it’s about
when life begins and when it ends,
and whether it is a God
or a human decision.
whether it is male or female
conservative or liberal
Biblical or profane
pro-choice or pro-life.

They would like us to think…
but not really.
They would like us to react.

The tyranny of the binary
creates knee-jerk reactions,
reactions create polarizing gulfs,
gulfs create intractable division:
Us or Them
Other or Self
Win or Lose.

The authority of the binary
creates warring clans and tribes
Us vs. Them
Loyalty vs Disloyalty
Good vs Evil
Right vs. Wrong
Security vs. Fear.

The power of the binary is
dominance of definition
over ambiguity
privilege of power
over powerlessness,
control of cultural commonality
over difference and diversity.

They would like us to think that
this is what it’s all about.
It is not.
It is only yet another mask of
Either/Or
the binary.

A continuing incarnation of something
rather small and insidious,
like a worm that burrows unnoticed
into an orifice and lays its eggs
waiting, growing in the dark
to ultimately take over its host
with fear and madness.

But Life AND Choice are united.
The two entwining, eternal lovers of
God’s Good Creation.
Holiest Gifts
out of which everything is born.

Without Choice – there is no Life.
All is dead.
Without Life – Choice ceases to exist,
All is inanimate.

I refuse the binary trap.
Instead, I CHOOSE LIFE
Together, both, whole.

I choose to believe
life has no beginning
or end – all is in the presence of God
who was, and is,
and forever will be.

I choose to believe
sanctity can be manifest
In all soul-wrestling,
anguished decisions:
to end a pregnancy, AND
to continue a pregnancy
despite all odds, AND
a myriad of other
LIFE CHOOSE-INGS.
All are in the presence of God.

Sanctity evaporates
and the presence of God dims
when
our capacity to
CHOOSE LIFE
Is stolen.

So today,
I CHOOSE LIFE.
And I denounce
those who would be its
thieves.

The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice put together this stunning video of Barb’s poem.

Ron and Stacey

by Rev. Dr. Kristina “Tina” Campbell

My friend, Ron, registers people to vote in Arizona. He approaches this patriotic task with humility and a sense of determination. The ravages of COVID did not deter him from making sure that people were equipped to exercise their fundamental American right to have a voice. Ron registers people to vote.

Ron’s efforts won both my respect and admiration, and prompted me to recall that when I was a child my family would make a ritual of the act of casting one’s vote. My parents, my brother, and I would dress up and walk to the polling place with the same reverence one might approach an altar for holy communion. My brother and I would stand outside of the booth as my parents pulled the curtain to cast their votes.

Politics were part of my family history. My grandfather and most of my paternal uncles were in the state legislature, and at the time of my birth, my father served as Secretary of State of Iowa. Voting was considered part of living, part of being part of a community, part of being a citizen.

However, not everyone in our country has always been afforded the opportunity to vote, and some have been prevented from voting by unfair laws and unjust interference. Some people need an advocate like Ron to assist them in casting their vote.

Last night I went to see Stacey Abrams at the Mesa Arts Center. Stacey is big on voting. Stacey is also a woman after my own heart. She has lived life on a broad canvas, dipping her toe into everything from acting to writing romance novels to running for public office. She has won elections, and she has lost elections, but she keeps going with justice as her north star.

Instead of adopting a defeatist attitude in our current social and political climate, Stacey challenges us to imagine we can do something, to try to fix things, to do the work. She challenges us to focus on what we can do, and to write it down. Stacey learned early on in her career that she was going to lose at times, and this keeps her centered in a forward momentum.

Stacey would applaud the efforts of my friend, Ron, and says that voting is a continuum of people knowing their rights, being registered and educated, and then becoming part of a coalition where they are repeatedly reminded of the process. People need to hear the message “You matter and we want to hear your voice.” At times Stacey becomes theological, and suggests we need to build relationships by doing for others what we would want them to do for us.

Stacey warns us that the biggest myth is that the political system is magic, and with a poof can fix our societal woes. She suggests that politics is more like medicine. We have social diseases, and voting is our medicine. The medicine does not always cure, but can stave off the symptoms, and provide containment. Stacey advises us to temper our expectations, and realize that we are not always going to get a neurosurgeon. Progress is never permanent, and people who disagree with us will always win elections. Stacey keeps her own equilibrium by voracious reading and watching lots of tv. She feels no guilt about her pleasures!

I am grateful to my friend Ron who quietly performs what I consider to be a profound ministry. As he registers people to vote, I surround him with light and utter many prayers on his behalf. He equips people to exclaim “I get to have a say in who we become.” Many thanks to Ron and Stacey for encouraging us to claim our voice.