Translate

Showing posts with label Golden Rule. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Golden Rule. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 17, 2025

In Lak’Ech and the Good Samaritan: Texas State Rep. James Talarico and the Redemptive Politics of Radical Neighborliness, by Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

In Lak’Ech and the Good Samaritan: Texas State Rep. James Talarico and the Redemptive Politics of Radical Neighborliness 

by 

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

September 17, 2025

With tens of millions of views on TikTok and a steady stream of national coverage, State Rep. James Talarico (D–Round Rock) is being talked about as “the next big thing” in Texas politics. In a July 1, 2025 special edition of Austin InSight/Austin PBS, host Laura Laughead sits down with Talarico for a wide-ranging conversation about what’s happening at the Capitol, how his openly professed Christian faith shapes his politics, and where he’s headed next.

What makes this interview worth watching isn’t just Talarico’s rising profile; it’s the way he frames public service through a moral vocabulary—love of neighbor, dignity, and the common good—while pushing for policies that address material needs here and now. That juxtaposition, rare in our polarized climate, comes through clearly in the full, unabridged conversation now available through PBS.

Talarico also speaks openly about his calling beyond politics. He’s an aspiring preacher studying at Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and he treats faith not as a weapon but as a compass. For Texans who are weary of performative culture wars, that posture offers something different—an appeal to shared values, even when his policy positions may not be your own.

I find myself in strong agreement with his view that the separation of church and state protects both. It not only prevents the state from privileging one faith tradition over another, but also safeguards the integrity of the church by ruling out the possibility of political co-optation. It’s no wonder that the Austin Seminary has publicly expressed support for his journey.

As we know and have ourselves heard, Texas politics is often narrated as a clash of ideologies. Talarico reframes it as a contest of imaginations: What kind of neighbor will we be to one another? What do love, safety, and opportunity look like when translated into law and budget—not just rhetoric? Agree or not, he is modeling a style of leadership that could broaden rather than narrow the public conversation, especially among younger voters who may first encounter him on TikTok before meeting him at the ballot box.

Watching this episode also stirred something personal. I realized that Talarico and I share a spiritual inheritance—our grandfathers were both Baptist preachers. My granddad was my pastor throughout my entire youth. My own father—my late grandfather's son-in-law—continues in ministry today as a missionary in Peru. Incidentally, my grandfather was also a minister, for a time, in the Mexican Presbyterian church in my hometown of San Angelo, Texas, which he viewed as theologically similar to that of the Baptist Church.

I am deeply grateful for having grown up in my grandfather’s Mexican Baptist church where we believed deeply in the Golden Rule: to treat others as we ourselves wish to be treated. I've previously mentioned on this blog how this ethic is practically universal in faith traditions across cultures, including the Mayan philosophy of In Lak’Ech, rooted in empathy, reciprocity, and the recognition of our interdependence and the responsibilities we hold toward one another in a community and in society.

The parable of the Good Samaritan is fully about the Golden Rule and In Lak’Ech, speaking to a deeper principle of radical neighborliness. It teaches that compassion requires crossing boundaries of identity, tribe, and nation to see the humanity in the other—and to act on that recognition. These traditions remind us that true faith and true justice are not abstract ideals, but lived commitments to care for those around us, especially the vulnerable and marginalized.

Abundant thanks to Rep. Talarico for modeling a politics rooted in faith, imagination, and radical neighborliness—neighborliness that is not so radical after all, considering it echoes the Golden Rule, In Lak’Ech, and the shared moral teachings at the heart of nearly every faith tradition. His example reminds us that compassion and justice, far from being fringe ideals, are the foundations of the democratic society we aspire to build.

Austin InSight/PBS, July 1, 2025

Monday, May 05, 2025

Testimony Before the 1836 Project Advisory Committee, Laredo, Texas by Emilio Zamora, Ph.D. May 2, 2025

Emilio Zamora, Professor of History at the University of Texas at Austin,
delivered invited testimony before the 1836 Project Advisory Committee on May 2, 2025, at Texas A&M International University in Laredo, Texas. Established by the Texas Legislature in 2021, the Committee was charged with advising the governor on teaching patriotism and values in Texas history.

Dr. Zamora used the occasion to foreground the importance of Mexican American history by highlighting the lives and contributions of two key historical figures. His remarks underscored the urgent need for a fair and inclusive account of Texas history—one that acknowledges the foundational role of Mexicans and other historically marginalized communities in both the past and present civic life of the state.

Other presenters included Dr. Cynthia Orozco, Professor Emeritus at Eastern New Mexico University–Ruidoso, and Dr. Jerry Thompson, Professor of History at Texas A&M International University–Laredo.

It was a privilege to hear their testimonies—each grounded in deep scholarship and a commitment to historical truth. Together, they issued more than a critique; they offered a call to conscience. At a time when historical narratives are being narrowed and politicized, their words reminded us that telling the full story of Texas is not only an academic duty but a moral imperative.

—Angela Valenzuela


Testimony Before the 1836 Project Advisory Committee,


Laredo, Texas

Emilio Zamora, Ph.D.

May 2, 2025

On May 2, 2025, I had the opportunity to interrogate "old histories" with the historical narratives of marginalized communities in Texas, particularly those of Mexican origin. The occasion was a public hearing in Laredo, hosted by the Texas 1836 Project Advisory Committee. Established in 2022 by the 87th Texas Legislature. The Committee's mandate is to advise the Governor on promoting “patriotic education” and increasing awareness of "the Texas values that continue to stimulate boundless prosperity across this state.”

The Committee, chaired by Dr. Don Frazier, Director of The Texas Center at Schreiner University in Kerrville, Texas, heard from other invited scholars, including Jerry Thompson, Cynthia Orozco, and Roseann Backa Garza. The reception was positive, and we engaged in friendly and productive conversations following each presentation.

To establish my authority and underscore the importance of incorporating neglected or overlooked histories, I referenced my credentials as a professional historian and highlighted two historical figures: Sara Estela Ramirez (1881-1910) and José de la Luz Saenz (1888-1953), advocating for their inclusion in the conventional narrative. Furthermore, I urged the Committee to recommend that the Governor approach Texas history as an inclusive narrative, encompassing both its commendable and contentious aspects that he might envision.

As a scholar of nearly fifty years, I have had the privilege of contributing to the development of Texas and Mexican American history through my academic and public engagement work. I currently hold the position of Professor and Clyde Rabb Littlefield Chair in Texas History at the University of Texas at Austin. My contributions have been acknowledged by professional and community organizations in Texas and Mexican American history. Along the way, I have served in various academic departments and professional organizations, including the Texas State Historical Association (President, 2019-20).
The following two textbook publications should be of special interest to the committee: Zamora and Walter Buenger, Texas History (New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc., 2015); and Zamora and Andrés Tijerina, Eds., Mexican Americans of Texas, A History of Tradition and Struggle, Coauthors, Zamora, Tijerina, Amy Porter, Sonia Hernández, and Guadalupe San Miguel (New York: Kendall Hunt Publishers, 2024).

My work as a professional historian is deeply grounded in the rigorous training and ethical standards that define the discipline. As professional historians, we adhere to a strict commitment to evidence-based inquiry, ensuring that our interpretations are fair, accurate, and grounded in the careful study of primary sources. We engage with our work within a robust intellectual infrastructure, where it undergoes peer review and is disseminated through a wide array of scholarly and public venues. This process fosters a shared responsibility to our profession, colleagues, students, and society, ensuring that our findings contribute meaningfully to the broader and complex understanding of historical change.

One of the key aspects of studying history is the critical examination of historical events within their own contexts. This is particularly important when exploring patriotism and values in Texas history, themes that the 1836 Project Advisory Committee is particularly interested in discussing today.

In my work, I define values as the ethical guideposts used by individuals to navigate decisions and understand the world, while patriotism are expressions of profound affection for one’s country, its people, and its foundational ideals. To understand these themes, we must study and interpret them within the historical circumstances that shaped them, rather than imposing present-day or retrospective assessments onto the past.

I illustrate this approach by revisiting two historical figures from Texas: Sara Estela Ramírez (1881-1910), a teacher, journalist, feminist, and member of a Mexican exiled group called the “intellectual precursors of the Mexican Revolution,” and José de la Luz Sáenz (1888-1953), a teacher, World War I veteran, and a principal co-founder of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the leading civil rights organization in Mexican American history. Both figures provide insightful examples of how Mexicans navigated the complex issues of values and patriotism.

Sara Estela Ramírez & José de la Luz Sáenz

In The World of the Mexican Workers in Texas, I examine Ramírez's advocacy for the cultural values of mutuality, reciprocity, and altruism popular in Texas civic life during the early 1900s. At a time when modern infrastructure was sparse, communities across Texas Mexicans in Texas formed mutual aid societies, or benevolent organizations, that provided essential services, such as widow funds, unemployment insurance, and language training to their largely working-class members.

These self-help organizations were vital in offering support and fostering collective solidarity in families, communities, and other social groupings throughout the state. Other Black, Anglo, and immigrant communities also experiencing general distress associated with labor exploitation, poverty, disdain, and discrimination established benevolent organizations, including masonic orders, religious confraternities, immigrant societies, and unions. I identify four key features of these organizations:

1. They broadcast foundational collectivist values in their communities.

2. They sponsored mutualist activities like constructing churches and schools, and sponsoring community events.

3. They adhered to strict codes of moral conduct that created upstanding, and self-respecting leaders in their communities.

4. Their embrace of philosophical justifications offered by public intellectuals from Laredo like Ramírez mirrored similar observations by other working-class leaders like Thomas Hickey and E. O. Meitzen from Central Texas and the Reverend G. G. Hamilton in the northern part of the state.

Ramírez's 1909 keynote speech at the 20th anniversary of La Sociedad de Obreros, Igualdad y Progreso, one of the largest and popular binational organization from Laredo, offers a compelling example of the philosophical justifications behind the multi-ethnic self-help movement and the cultural values that sustained it. 

She framed the Golden Rule as a secular ethical framework for understanding mutuality, reciprocity, and altruism, arguing that nature (or God, if you prefer) compels us to recognize the equal worth in others and to commune with them for the sake of the whole. Free will, however, often diverts us from fulfilling our earthly and eternal purpose in life. Compassion and caring unity, however, will prevail in the end, when we realize that our inherently divine purpose always require adherence to the moral laws of nature which elevate the human condition, place us on the path to both moral and social progress (especially in time of need), and ennoble us as caring and compassionate human beings.
The moralistic values of these early organizations have been integral to the development of our society—as Mexicans, as Texans, and as a nation. 

Over time, they have converged with the almost purely rationalist principles embedded in the nation’s founding documents and manifest in the structure of modern institutional life. This convergence helps explain why union organizers have long proclaimed that “in unity there is strength,” why national leaders continue to call us to engage the ongoing project of perfecting the republic, and why religious leaders consistently advocate for a shared moral purpose grounded in the recognition that everyone has equal worth (under the law or in the eyes of God, whichever you prefer) and that we have the ethical obligation to pursue this idea. 

Mutuality, reciprocity, and altruism, which first emerged as moral guides within self-help organizations, the most popular form of organization in Texas during the latter part of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, have since permeated contemporary society—manifesting to varying degrees as genuine, even philanthropic, expressions of vital collective action.

I have also examined theme of patriotism in the life of José de la Luz Sáenz from Realitos and the author of a World War I diary entitled The Mexican Americans in the Great War (San Antonio: Artes Gráficas, 1933), the only war diary published by a Mexican veteran and possibly the only one of its kind published by a Texan. His wartime reflections provide a nuanced perspective on what we might now, from the comfort of our secure homes, celebrate as an exalted sense of duty and responsibility to the nation. Society, after all, often accords veterans the status of patriots because they have given so much to the nation, including their lives as sacrifices on the battlefields.

Sáenz, however, reveals that the soldiers who served with him in the 20th Texas-Oklahoma Division rarely self-identified as patriots. They most often perceived themselves as victims of circumstances beyond their control and lamented their service as an everyday experience in the horrors of war. They seldom spoke of patriotism as a motivating force or engaged in self-adulation, despite the exhortations of many of their officers and politicians back home during and especially after the war. Instead, they conveyed a sense of disillusionment and resignation.

Sáenz clearly suggests that labeling servicemen as patriots without truly understanding their military service and how they wished to be remembered constitutes a disregard for their sacrifice and a misuse of the concept of patriotism.

Our discourse on patriotism, therefore, should encompass the full narrative, including the responsibility of a supposedly grateful nation to its idealized veterans. This is particularly pertinent for the Mexican doughboys in Sáenz’s diary, who served honorably in the 90th Texas-Oklahoma Division but saw no appreciable change in their lives as Mexicans at the homefront in Texas.

They enlisted in impressive numbers, contributed to the preservation of democracy in Europe, and shed their blood on the battlefields of France. Sáenz notes that many of the soldiers, including himself, had hoped that the experience of “foxhole democracy” and their demonstration of fidelity would improve their marginalized condition in Texas. They were profoundly disappointed. Despite their significant wartime contributions and LULAC’s emphasis on their sacrifices, which promoted an amplified form of patriotism in their twentieth-century social justice campaigns, society often failed to recognize them as patriots or accord them the respect they deserved.

As with Ramírez, Sáenz represents a distinct historical trajectory and intellectual perspective that coexisted alongside competing viewpoints; thus, neither figure should be seen as representing the entirety of Mexican American history. For example, some Mexican Americans—much like individuals in other ethnic and social groups—adopted more individualistic approaches to civic life or radical departures from the conventional approach to domestic politics. 

In contrast to Sáenz’s appeals for Americanization and the articulation of a collective ethnic identity, others responded to national calls for unity with skepticism, questioning the sincerity of American institutions and, in some cases, evading the military draft.

As suggested earlier, the textbooks that colleagues and I have published offer the committee and the governor an inclusive treatment of the past that they may want to use in their deliberations. The latter one, Mexican Americans of Texas: A History of Tradition and Struggle, is especially important. 

This pioneering work is the first textbook on Mexican American history published for our schools in accordance with the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), our state’s standard curriculum for our public schools. It spans from the Indigenous past to the present and includes a comprehensive learning system featuring timelines, periodization schemes, definitions, concepts, and classroom activities.

Organized around key themes, the book highlights the integral role of Mexican Americans in shaping both Texas and American history, reinforcing the idea that Mexican Americans are inextricably linked to broader narratives. Their contributions to the history and culture of the United States and Texas are undeniable and must be shared widely if we are to call ourselves a Democratic society.

Wednesday, September 11, 2024

End Time Beliefs, Dominionism, and President Benito Juarez' Timeless Words to Heal a Divided Nation

Friends:

Here is an important piece by Eric Lane on End Time believers (ETBs). What is important to consider is that ETBs are a mixed bag unto themselves. Back in the 1980s, as I recall, they were termed "Millennialists," referring to Christ's anticipated one-thousand-year reign. I remember focusing on the book of Revelation and end times when I was young and finding it fascinating although simultaneously distressing and ultimately exhausting psychically and emotionally.

I would have lasted longer as an ETB had this not been so draining. In retrospect, I'm glad it was because it took me to a place of redemption that opened my eyes to the vast beauty of life in the moment where individual and group differences became opportunities for me to be more compassionate, loving, and caring.

On a personal level, this meant truly embracing the notion that every way in which I am different is every way in which I am strong. This is an ethic of not just tolerance, but acceptance, that I take into each and every class I have ever taught, as well as into my work in the community.

Lane is correct in linking violence and threats of it to ETBs but what should really get named are "dominionists" who are actually pro-society (not democracy) albeit according to their narrow vision of so-called "Christian principles" as long as they're the ones who are also in charge.

The two go hand in hand. They must be in charge—and not just in the U.S., but globally. This is what makes Trump very dangerous as he is the means to dominionists' perverse agenda a cornerstone of which is indeed controlling women's bodies. It's already playing out in our country.

Look no further than Texas where anti-abortion activists are not happy with families traveling to New Mexico for abortions and women's health care because Texas doctors fear performing certain procedures for which they could get sanctioned. These activists are pushing for restrictions in New Mexico and with some success in some counties. Read"Texas anti-abortion activists pushed abortion restrictions in New Mexico, records show."

Consider, as well, Governor Greg Abbott's pro-voucher legislation as caught up with dominionism and theocracy. Learn about this from an earlier post, "Texas: Two Billionaires Want to Destroy Public Education and Replace It With Christian Schools by Diane Ravitch." And do take time to see CNN documentary, "Deep in the Pockets of Texas," which explores this toxic agenda.

I've already referred readers to a great source on the dominionist agenda via an earlier blog titled, "BOOK RECOMMENDATION: Alberta, Tim (2023). The kingdom, the power, and the glory: American evangelicals in an age of extremism." Relatedly, if you haven't seen The Handmaid's Tale, I encourage you to do so it as it captures through fiction what an extremist dystopian society of their making would look like. It is based on Margaret Atwood's book by this name. You can see all five seasons on Hulu, Prime Video, or Apple TV right now. I also highly recommend listening to Dr. Kevin Kumashiro's keen exposition of dominionism on Bill Ayers' podcast, Under the Tree: A Seminar on Freedom, with Bill Ayers Episode #105, "Project 2025 with Kevin Kumashiro."

Dominionists are the more serious group as far as I'm concerned because they are perhaps witting or unwitting white supremacists who see themselves as having a God-given mandate to establish a theocracy—that is, a system of government led by those that these theists see as "divinely guided." The antithesis is, as Lane mentions, "democratic pluralism," which is a foundation for peace for which many, if not most, of us advocate—to which I might add the hope and promise of a multi-ethnic and multi-racial democracy.

One might argue that as opposed to ETBs, neoliberals, or global capitalists, are ultimately in control. I wouldn't disagree with that as they profit from the divisions that extremist agendas enable. They are playing with fire, however, a potential runaway train that is combustible and dangerous.

The irony in all of this is a lack of Christ's love, caring, and compassion which are so central to the gospel that it's crazy—yet understandable—that this gets overlooked.


View Informative Link
Yet here is where we find truth. The Golden Rule of doing unto others as wewould have them do to us could not be a more urgent ethic. This is, moreover, a foundational principle of this continent as conveyed in the Mayan concept of In Lak'Ech (You are my other me) and as expressed by Mexico's beloved Indigenous president, Benito Juarez, of Zapotec origin, serving between 1858 and 1872, “Entre los individuos, como entre las naciones, el respeto al derecho ajeno es la paz.” ("As between individuals, as well as nations, respect for the rights of others is peace.")

Pin this to your refrigerator door. Have no fear. Trust the power in these words.

As we embark on the celebration of Mexico's September 16th Independence celebration, how appropriate to reflect on Juarez' timeless words to heal a divided nation.

Feliz Diez y Seis de Septiembre! Happy September 16th! 💗

-Angela Valenzuela

How End Time Beliefs Undermine Democracy
by Eric Lane | September 8, 2024

Photo by Shubham Dhage on Unsplash

The rhetoric employed by End Time believers is not just forceful language but an expression of an extreme apocalyptic worldview. This way of thinking perceives the world as embroiled in a cosmic battle between good and evil. In the End Time narrative, political and cultural opponents are not merely individuals with differing opinions but enemies of God, often viewed as agents of Satan or participants in a divine showdown.

Framing Opponents as Evil or Godless

End Time believers operate within a stark black-and-white world. In this dichotomy, they and their allies are seen as the forces of God, while their political or ideological opponents—be they secularists, liberals, progressives, or members of other religions—are depicted as being aligned with evil.

This rhetoric transforms political disagreements into moral and spiritual battles, demonstrating the profound impact of End Time believers' conviction on their perception of reality.

Leaders in this movement use demonizing language to describe their adversaries. Terms like “godless,” “anti-Christian,” “Satanic,” or even “demonic” are common. Political opponents are painted not as people with different viewpoints but as existential threats to the survival of Christian values and, by extension, to God's plan for the world.

Religious Warfare Rhetoric

For End Timers, the Culture war is Spiritual warfare. Many End Time believers see contemporary political struggles, such as the battles over abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, or secular education, as part of a larger spiritual war. These issues are framed not as policy disputes but as clashes between the forces of God and the forces of Satan.

By placing current events within the framework of the apocalypse, End Time believers heighten the stakes, portraying each political confrontation as a precursor to Christ’s return or the arrival of the Antichrist. This sense of urgency makes compromise or negotiation a betrayal, as they see themselves fighting for God’s ultimate plan.

The "Enemy Within"

End-Time believers target secular and liberal politicians. Their rhetoric frequently focuses on politicians who advocate for policies that contradict their perceived Christian values. These figures are often painted as either unwitting pawns of evil forces or as consciously working against God's will, leading to the vilification of the Left.

Progressive movements, particularly those advocating for social justice, LGBTQ+ rights, or reproductive freedom, are often depicted as prompting the charge in a moral and spiritual decline. For example, political leaders who support abortion rights are commonly framed as agents of evil, facilitating a modern-day ‘holocaust’ or acting under the influence of Satan.

Christian Nationalism and Divine Authority

End Time believers claim they defend their political preferences and act under a divine mandate. They believe their political actions align with God’s will, while their opponents oppose both them and God. This gives their movement a theocratic and authoritarian edge as they seek to implement what they believe are God’s laws in place of democratic laws.

By asserting that God's law should take precedence over human-made laws, Christian nationalism inherently undermines democratic pluralism, which depends on the coexistence of diverse viewpoints and the peaceful negotiation of differences.

In this worldview, dissent is not seen as part of healthy democratic debate but as opposition to divine authority, fostering an environment that erodes democratic values in favor of authoritarian control.

They believe God chooses leaders. Thus, certain political figures are often characterized as chosen by God to lead during this critical period before Christ’s return. For example, End Time believers frame figures like Donald Trump as divinely appointed leaders, despite his conduct, because he is advancing a Christian nationalist agenda.

Hostility and the Threat of Violence

When political opponents are cast as enemies of God, it becomes easier for believers to justify extreme action. This rhetoric inspires hostility and, in some cases, violence. For example, the rhetoric surrounding abortion, often framed as "murder sanctioned by the state," has led individuals to justify violent acts against abortion providers, as seen in numerous attacks on clinics and the murder of providers.

Some End Time believers have connections with militia movements and paramilitary groups that prepare for literal battles. They interpret Biblical prophecies about war and persecution as mandates to prepare for armed conflict, especially against what they see as a corrupt or evil government. This is particularly dangerous when combined with contemporary political polarization.

Biblical Justifications for Hostility

In an earlier writing, I described two Jesuses: the Peaceful Jesus and the Warrior Jesus. While many Christians focus on Jesus's peaceful teachings (e.g., the Sermon on the Mount), End Time believers emphasize apocalyptic depictions of Christ, particularly from the Book of Revelation, wherein a militant Christ returns to lead armies. This violent, retributive image of Jesus is used to justify a more aggressive stance against perceived enemies.

By prioritizing this militant Christ in political discourse, believers frame modern political struggles as literal spiritual warfare, escalating rhetoric and fueling conflict. This not only intensifies polarization but also promotes a mindset in which violence is seen as a divinely sanctioned means to achieve political ends. When faith is tied to the belief that physical battles must be fought for divine purposes, it diminishes the possibility of compromise and undermines the democratic process.

End Time rhetoric invokes divine judgment and punishment, implying that those who oppose the End Time worldview will face not just political defeat but eternal damnation. This sense of cosmic justice encourages hostility towards anyone who thinks or believes differently. They are depicted as working against God’s plan.

Consequences of this Rhetoric

By framing every political battle as a holy war, End Time believers not only contribute to the intense polarization in U.S. politics but are also the primary instigators. This makes civil discourse and compromise impossible, as their opponents are wrong and evil.

The dehumanization of political opponents and the apocalyptic urgency surrounding End Time beliefs can lead to acts of violence. The January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol is a prime example. Many participants carried Christian symbols and saw their actions as part of a divine mission.

When political opponents are framed as enemies of God, End Time believers justify rejecting democratic norms, such as free elections and the peaceful transfer of power. They claim that following democratic processes is less important than ensuring that "God’s will" is carried out, even if that means undermining democratic institutions. This puts End Time believers at war with the U.S. Constitution as it undermines democracy.

End Time believers' rhetoric of framing opponents as enemies of God creates a highly toxic environment that threatens democratic principles like compromise and peaceful governance alongside social stability.

By dehumanizing their opponents and viewing politics through the lens of divine warfare, they create an atmosphere of hostility, leading to radicalization and violence. This is not just a spiritual or religious issue—it’s a political one that poses a direct challenge to the foundations of secular democracy.

Sunday, April 16, 2017

My Easter Sunday Reflection

Here is a powerful, Easter blog post by Michael Seifert from Brownsville, Texas titled, "Hallowed be Thy Name,"with ideas that are perfect for a day like today, Easter Sunday, 2017.  It has so many important insights that you really need to read it yourself.  
Quote from within:
"As this Holy Week turns toward the celebrations of the death and resurrection of Jesus the Christ, I believe it appropriate to recognize the holiness of those who have suffered the damning theft of a child by the state. In their own, specific way, they are God-like, having suffered what God knew on Good Friday—the theft of one’s own flesh, the kidnapping of the most-loved one, the loss of a reason to live.

Some of us hope for that day when there is no need for a term for parents who have lost their children. We wait for the day when such an unthinkable moment no longer occurs, when this impossible idea begging for wings to take flight, to pass over and protect so many who yet remain at risk for this tragedy in need of a name
."

My heart felt crushed as I read Seifert's mention of the unfathomable thought of ever losing one's child or grandchild to violence at the same time that the author calls upon us to acknowledge that this very thing is happening at this very moment across the world at alarming, unconscionable levels.

Contemplating the level of agony, pain, and suffering that accompanies this violence is to peer into a fearful and foreboding abyss, this heart of darkness to the point that we seem incapable of either hitting, much less finding, the "re-set" button to turn this cascading flow of violence of epic proportions around.

To avoid falling into this abyss where but for God's grace, any one of us might find ourselves in a "passover situation," or crisis, as Seifert suggests, "begging for wings to take flight, to pass over and protect"—we must get close to the ground to find the truth in the stuff of our everyday, ethical relations and relationships in our families, communities, and work—and how these connect to policies, priorities, practices, and ways of knowing and being in the world.

The trick for me has also been to accept that the dark and evil forces that threaten to engulf are never more powerful than the goodness, magic, and greatness that motivates, heals, and inspires.  A rich, full life of the body, mind, and spirit, in and with community and all our relations, is ours to have, if we can only be open to it.

This requires self-examination, however, as we all have to decide that we want to be among those that promote positive, democratic, social justice values and nurture these sensibilities—not ever for the purpose of numbing ourselves to others' suffering, but rather to advocate for ways of knowing and being in the world that reject the forces of death, violence, destruction, and despair.

These are ways of knowing and being that are so radical, they begin today, in this very moment.  This is a world that we—both individually and collectively—decide on.  It is a place where peace, caring, healing, hope, humility, love of community, and a good spirit abide.  It is one that is in complete observance of other's right to similarly live lives in peace and dignity.

This ethos is conveyed by the Mayan concept of "In Lak'Ech"—which for us is the Golden Rule.  "You are my other me." "Whatever I do to you, I do to me."  "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." These are universal, redemptive values that when practiced, lead to personal liberation and transformation—both for ourselves personally and the world.

I recommend reading this post in its entirety.  Regardless of our different faiths, religions, or creeds, may we all experience and express that sense of the resurrection, that spirit of renewal and re-birth that is not reducible to a day or an event, but rather to a praxis or practice, a lived, everyday aspect of being in the world—and with policies and priorities to match.



Paz/Peace. And blessings to all. 



Angela Valenzuela
c/s