...do happen. In case anyone still hasn't seen this. And yes, I'm still here! I hope to get back to posting more regularly over summer break. Until then, hope you are all well!
Susan Boyle
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
More cute animal stuff...
...cause while I love theology and perfume, I also love elephants. And this couldn't possibly be cuter. Happy New Year!
Watch CBS Videos Online
Watch CBS Videos Online
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Love and Suffering
In October, the magazine Presbyterian Today published an article by the well-known theologian Stanley Hauerwas, on the politics embodied by Jesus. You can read it here.
I agree with much of what he was saying, and see much of his words as 'speaking truth to power', or at least 'truth to comfort', to try and shake people out of their complacency. And yet, of late, I have an increasingly hard time with a theology that focuses on sacrifice and suffering.
So I wrote a little response--which got published!--here. (They entitled the letter 'Where is the Love')
I understand that Jesus embodied self-sacrifice. But I truly do believe we must never de-couple that sacrifice from the Love that was core to who he was. Otherwise we start preaching behavior and ethics, as opposed to the liberating Love of God. To preach sacrifice and suffering to those who are already oppressed and abused is to deny them the fullness of life embodied in Christ, in the name of Christianity. It is to validate the oppression and abuse they experience and deny them the 'Yes' God offers to their lives, imposing instead a religiously justified 'No'. What a horror.
I am not saying that there is nothing of sacrifice or suffering Jesus life. What I am saying is that perhaps it is not his suffering alone that should be our model so much as his communion with God, his compassion, his steadfastness, his love and yes, his joy...his own life in sheer palpable overflowing abundance. I know that traditional atonement theories focus on his death as saving us, but as early as the 4th century, Church Fathers such as Athanasius proclaimed that the most important reason for the Incarnation was the defeat of death, through the Resurrection. I know it's hard sometimes to truly believe in the Resurrection, but even with my very limited theological understandings, I think it's unfair exegesis to focus on Jesus' suffering and death as a model of reality and then forego all the other parts of Scripture that focus on the Resurrection and triumph over death as being 'symbolic'. His death can not be considered apart from his resurrection.
I'm not a preacher, and I'm not trying to critique Hauerwas or anyone else. What I am trying to point out is that many people do not know that they are loved. They do not know that they have inherent worth. To insist that Christianity is more about their behavior than about their ontological identity in God is to fail to meet people in their hearts and souls, where their deepest needs and longings exist. It sets up principles instead of relatedness. It brings no healing, no liberation, no life where there was death.
I know Christians are called to 'speak truth to power'. And I know there are far too many of us who are comfortable in our lives and turn a blind eye to the suffering of others. But there are also many who daily suffer under the violence of domestic abuse, the oppression of addiction, the suffering of involuntary poverty. A theology that extols suffering as the 'way of Jesus' without first speaking into these situations, speaking to the inherent worth of these victims, empowering them to get out of the abuse, and yes, even to defend themselves if necessary, is very hard for me to accept. I know Jesus chose to die at the hands of his enemies. But I also believe it was a choice. It was a calling he accepted. That is very different than telling a woman who is attacked on the streets that she should not defend herself--even violently, if absolutely necessary. As my feminist colleagues have pointed out, a dogmatic non-violence can have violence embedded in it--violence against the self. This is a huge question in Christian ethics, and one I don't feel qualified to take on, but I worry that self-sacrifice is far too easy a concept for many people, especially those with incredibly low self-esteem, to grasp. I just don't believe that that these are the places from which God means us to come when acting 'sacrificially'. Without Love as the test of the spirits, how will we know the difference?
I agree with much of what he was saying, and see much of his words as 'speaking truth to power', or at least 'truth to comfort', to try and shake people out of their complacency. And yet, of late, I have an increasingly hard time with a theology that focuses on sacrifice and suffering.
So I wrote a little response--which got published!--here. (They entitled the letter 'Where is the Love')
I understand that Jesus embodied self-sacrifice. But I truly do believe we must never de-couple that sacrifice from the Love that was core to who he was. Otherwise we start preaching behavior and ethics, as opposed to the liberating Love of God. To preach sacrifice and suffering to those who are already oppressed and abused is to deny them the fullness of life embodied in Christ, in the name of Christianity. It is to validate the oppression and abuse they experience and deny them the 'Yes' God offers to their lives, imposing instead a religiously justified 'No'. What a horror.
I am not saying that there is nothing of sacrifice or suffering Jesus life. What I am saying is that perhaps it is not his suffering alone that should be our model so much as his communion with God, his compassion, his steadfastness, his love and yes, his joy...his own life in sheer palpable overflowing abundance. I know that traditional atonement theories focus on his death as saving us, but as early as the 4th century, Church Fathers such as Athanasius proclaimed that the most important reason for the Incarnation was the defeat of death, through the Resurrection. I know it's hard sometimes to truly believe in the Resurrection, but even with my very limited theological understandings, I think it's unfair exegesis to focus on Jesus' suffering and death as a model of reality and then forego all the other parts of Scripture that focus on the Resurrection and triumph over death as being 'symbolic'. His death can not be considered apart from his resurrection.
I'm not a preacher, and I'm not trying to critique Hauerwas or anyone else. What I am trying to point out is that many people do not know that they are loved. They do not know that they have inherent worth. To insist that Christianity is more about their behavior than about their ontological identity in God is to fail to meet people in their hearts and souls, where their deepest needs and longings exist. It sets up principles instead of relatedness. It brings no healing, no liberation, no life where there was death.
I know Christians are called to 'speak truth to power'. And I know there are far too many of us who are comfortable in our lives and turn a blind eye to the suffering of others. But there are also many who daily suffer under the violence of domestic abuse, the oppression of addiction, the suffering of involuntary poverty. A theology that extols suffering as the 'way of Jesus' without first speaking into these situations, speaking to the inherent worth of these victims, empowering them to get out of the abuse, and yes, even to defend themselves if necessary, is very hard for me to accept. I know Jesus chose to die at the hands of his enemies. But I also believe it was a choice. It was a calling he accepted. That is very different than telling a woman who is attacked on the streets that she should not defend herself--even violently, if absolutely necessary. As my feminist colleagues have pointed out, a dogmatic non-violence can have violence embedded in it--violence against the self. This is a huge question in Christian ethics, and one I don't feel qualified to take on, but I worry that self-sacrifice is far too easy a concept for many people, especially those with incredibly low self-esteem, to grasp. I just don't believe that that these are the places from which God means us to come when acting 'sacrificially'. Without Love as the test of the spirits, how will we know the difference?
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Random Music Moment
It's Wednesday, and time for a little break. Thanks to my friend "Ufo" for sharing this!
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Bloggers in the Middle East...
..weigh in on the elections. Apparently hope is contagious. Excerpt below:
Esra’a, Bahrain (mideastyouth.com)
I can honestly say that we can finally wave goodbye to the overwhelming anti-Muslim and anti-Arab bigotry that we have suffered with for the past eight years under the Bush administration. We can expect less wars, less corruption, less political abuse. It won’t be perfect, but it will get better. I am so happy and proud of all the Americans who worked extremely hard for Obama, understanding fully well the importance of change in every sense of the word. This moment is not just historical but crucial to us here in the Middle East.
This is a win for all of us, not just America.
This is a win for civil rights and justice.
For all the pessimists out there, allow us to enjoy this moment. If you learned anything from this campaign, you would learn that it starts with hope — not cynicism. And hope is what I have right now, for America and the Middle East.
We can do it, and this time, we can be sure that we can do it together.
I haven’t said this in a really long time, but I am loving America right now.
Esra’a, Bahrain (mideastyouth.com)
I can honestly say that we can finally wave goodbye to the overwhelming anti-Muslim and anti-Arab bigotry that we have suffered with for the past eight years under the Bush administration. We can expect less wars, less corruption, less political abuse. It won’t be perfect, but it will get better. I am so happy and proud of all the Americans who worked extremely hard for Obama, understanding fully well the importance of change in every sense of the word. This moment is not just historical but crucial to us here in the Middle East.
This is a win for all of us, not just America.
This is a win for civil rights and justice.
For all the pessimists out there, allow us to enjoy this moment. If you learned anything from this campaign, you would learn that it starts with hope — not cynicism. And hope is what I have right now, for America and the Middle East.
We can do it, and this time, we can be sure that we can do it together.
I haven’t said this in a really long time, but I am loving America right now.
Friday, November 7, 2008
The View
Not my normal source of political opinion, but these two clips say a lot from different perspectives...(warning: get a tissue)
Shock and Awe
I've been wanting to post some reflections on this election for a few days now, but haven't had any time until now....
When I went to sleep on Monday night, I felt a vague sense of anxiety. I wasn't sure what it was all about, but I dreamt about the elections, and woke up in the middle of the night with this eery sense that I finally understood what Carl Jung meant when he talked about the power of archetypes. Archetypes (as I understand them) are those facets of the 'collective unconscious' that all humans can resonate with, because they exist at a level that goes beyond the personal or even cultural. The 'hero' is an archetype. The 'lover' is another archetype. These are personal symbols. But I would guess that racism is a type of archetype--at the very least oppression is. And democracy (literally the power of the people) is another archetype. Change, and resistance to change, both have deep archetypal senses to them. And archetypes play extremely powerful roles in our subconscious, often directing our behavior in ways we can barely fathom. And so it struck me at 2am, that this election had a lot of archetypes going on. The symbolism underlying this election was, to me, as strong if not stronger than the actual policies at stake. And this made me hugely nervous. Historically, and personally, archetypal shifts generate a lot of upheaval. And the history of non-violent democratic change is still relatively young. When emotions run this deep and broad, humans become capable of their best and worst actions. So yes, I was nervous.
But Tuesday went off gloriously. Not because the candidate I favored won, but because there does not seem to have been any sense of undue complications or aggression. This alone, to me, is a miracle. When the results started to come in, and the networks called it at 11pm, John McCain gave a gracious speech with the powerful words "the people have spoken clearly." With that, he blessed the incoming President.
And then it began to sink in for me. I realised the world had just shifted cataclysmically. I'm still trying to understand why. I'm not sure I ever will. I know it has to do with the breaking of the bondage of racism on this country. I know it has to do with the tears of joy and heads held higher that my African and African-American friends have experienced. I think it has to do with the children across the world who see in Obama some resonance to their own multi-culturalism and embrace of a global identity over simply national identity. I suspect it has to do with the hopes many of us have for wisdom and maturity and reality to be reinstated at the highest levels of leadership in this country. But whatever it is, it resonated around the world. It showed how much people other countries still want to look to America to lead and inspire. And how the world held it's breath while waiting to see what America would do.
The fact that we as a country created this movement for change, and did it non-violently, speaks volumes louder of the power of freedom and democracy than any 'shock and awe' tactic we would ever be able to contrive.
And while it's true that most people I know supported Obama, I have seen those who supported McCain share equally in the joy that is watching a country deal a death blow to the chains that bound it, for we are not more free than our brothers and sisters are bound. Their liberation is our own liberation.
This election doesn't just give hope for the overturning of deeply entrenched racism, but of the overall ability of America, as a democratic system, to wrestle, struggle and grapple with its call to 'mend its every flaw'. There is still bondage, but we have seen how change can happen, and in the past few days I have seen, heard and felt hope break into the dreams of blacks, whites, males, females, Christians, Muslims, adults and children. For this I am truly grateful, and to be an American at this time, I am truly glad.
When I went to sleep on Monday night, I felt a vague sense of anxiety. I wasn't sure what it was all about, but I dreamt about the elections, and woke up in the middle of the night with this eery sense that I finally understood what Carl Jung meant when he talked about the power of archetypes. Archetypes (as I understand them) are those facets of the 'collective unconscious' that all humans can resonate with, because they exist at a level that goes beyond the personal or even cultural. The 'hero' is an archetype. The 'lover' is another archetype. These are personal symbols. But I would guess that racism is a type of archetype--at the very least oppression is. And democracy (literally the power of the people) is another archetype. Change, and resistance to change, both have deep archetypal senses to them. And archetypes play extremely powerful roles in our subconscious, often directing our behavior in ways we can barely fathom. And so it struck me at 2am, that this election had a lot of archetypes going on. The symbolism underlying this election was, to me, as strong if not stronger than the actual policies at stake. And this made me hugely nervous. Historically, and personally, archetypal shifts generate a lot of upheaval. And the history of non-violent democratic change is still relatively young. When emotions run this deep and broad, humans become capable of their best and worst actions. So yes, I was nervous.
But Tuesday went off gloriously. Not because the candidate I favored won, but because there does not seem to have been any sense of undue complications or aggression. This alone, to me, is a miracle. When the results started to come in, and the networks called it at 11pm, John McCain gave a gracious speech with the powerful words "the people have spoken clearly." With that, he blessed the incoming President.
And then it began to sink in for me. I realised the world had just shifted cataclysmically. I'm still trying to understand why. I'm not sure I ever will. I know it has to do with the breaking of the bondage of racism on this country. I know it has to do with the tears of joy and heads held higher that my African and African-American friends have experienced. I think it has to do with the children across the world who see in Obama some resonance to their own multi-culturalism and embrace of a global identity over simply national identity. I suspect it has to do with the hopes many of us have for wisdom and maturity and reality to be reinstated at the highest levels of leadership in this country. But whatever it is, it resonated around the world. It showed how much people other countries still want to look to America to lead and inspire. And how the world held it's breath while waiting to see what America would do.
The fact that we as a country created this movement for change, and did it non-violently, speaks volumes louder of the power of freedom and democracy than any 'shock and awe' tactic we would ever be able to contrive.
And while it's true that most people I know supported Obama, I have seen those who supported McCain share equally in the joy that is watching a country deal a death blow to the chains that bound it, for we are not more free than our brothers and sisters are bound. Their liberation is our own liberation.
This election doesn't just give hope for the overturning of deeply entrenched racism, but of the overall ability of America, as a democratic system, to wrestle, struggle and grapple with its call to 'mend its every flaw'. There is still bondage, but we have seen how change can happen, and in the past few days I have seen, heard and felt hope break into the dreams of blacks, whites, males, females, Christians, Muslims, adults and children. For this I am truly grateful, and to be an American at this time, I am truly glad.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Monday, November 3, 2008
You Can Vote However You Like
I first saw this on Andrew Sullivan's blog, and it was later aired on the evening news. It was put together by a middle school debate team. These kids did a smashing job, and what a reminder that whatever our differences may be politically, in the United States of America, we still get to vote however we like. It reminds me that not everyone else, and not everywhere else, has that same right. So on this final day of campaigning in what feels like the most intense Presidential campaign ever, a sense of gratitude arises to all those throughout the centuries, and in our modern world, who have done what they could to guarantee us this amazing, blessed, freedom that I--most of the time at least--take completely for granted. Thank you.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Palin Goes Too Far
Gov. Sarah Palin. I've tried to stay away from that topic because I've doubted, and seen my own continuous failure, to (as Greg Boyd would say) ascribe unsurpassable worth to her even as I am critical of the things she says. So I've tried to just shut up.
But tonight I read an article about how she is now going after Obama's ties to an 'ex-PLO spokesman'. For a moment I was startled. But I almost fell off my chair when I saw who, in fact, she was referring to. Professor Rashid Khalidi is the Chair of Middle Eastern Studies at Columbia University (undoubtedly known to Gov. Palin as that wacky liberal Ivy league that has no ROTC program and allowed Ahmadinejad on campus for a forum). Whatever one might think of Columbia's political leanings, it is an Ivy league school with a stellar reputation, not least through their School of International and Political Affairs. But fine. Whatever. He could still be a radical. So why am I up in arms about this?
Whatever his political leanings have been, and I truly don't know what they have been or are, Prof. Khalidi (whose book Resurrecting Empire I mentioned some time back) is one of the most informed, succinct and impassioned historians I have ever read. Read his book, Resurrecting Empire. Take yourself out of a purely American mindset and allow his book to show you what our actions abroad have looked like to millions of others. What our complicity has allowed to blossom in the form of poverty and oppression, death and dismay. Allow thousands of years of rich Middle Eastern history to enter into your mind and spirit...that land of Mesopotamia and Babylon...the very lands that Sarah Palin, and others of us, read about in the Old Testament of the Bible. And then allow him to at least make the point of how our country's actions, with a fairly myopic historical perspective, have been viewed. It's hard not to be struck by how naive, at best, some of our policies have been and how arrogantly belligerent at worst. And this is not just from Khalidi's viewpoint, but countless others who share a keen interest in both the wellbeing of the United States, and the human rights of all individuals throughout the world.
I'm not saying that reading Khalidi will cause you to give up your views, for or against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as they may be, but just listen to the informed viewpoint of someone who has brought a great deal of thought, caring and expertise to this discussion.
And then ask yourself if you think Sarah Palin should even go near him in her squawking about Obama's ties to alleged radicals. It seems to me that to critique the thoughts and actions of another, one ought to have at least a modicum of understanding about the issue involved. She has shown, repeatedly, that she has none. (She might have actually done better on her foreign policy interviews if someone had allowed her to read Khalidi's book. At the very least she would have understood what the Bush doctrine was!) It breaks my heart that she is even allowed to drag his name through the mud in such a shallow, superficial, righteous way. Perhaps it's not a kind or charitable thing to say, but I think she shouldn't be allowed to speak to this issue at all without being fully exposed to the horrors of which she knows nothing. The issue she is stepping on is highly complex and has caused untold suffering for thousands--Jews and Palestinians both. And she knows, and seems to care, nothing about it. Nothing other than a last ditch attempt to take Obama (and now Khalidi) down into the mud with her. The McCain camp must be getting very, very desperate.
But tonight I read an article about how she is now going after Obama's ties to an 'ex-PLO spokesman'. For a moment I was startled. But I almost fell off my chair when I saw who, in fact, she was referring to. Professor Rashid Khalidi is the Chair of Middle Eastern Studies at Columbia University (undoubtedly known to Gov. Palin as that wacky liberal Ivy league that has no ROTC program and allowed Ahmadinejad on campus for a forum). Whatever one might think of Columbia's political leanings, it is an Ivy league school with a stellar reputation, not least through their School of International and Political Affairs. But fine. Whatever. He could still be a radical. So why am I up in arms about this?
Whatever his political leanings have been, and I truly don't know what they have been or are, Prof. Khalidi (whose book Resurrecting Empire I mentioned some time back) is one of the most informed, succinct and impassioned historians I have ever read. Read his book, Resurrecting Empire. Take yourself out of a purely American mindset and allow his book to show you what our actions abroad have looked like to millions of others. What our complicity has allowed to blossom in the form of poverty and oppression, death and dismay. Allow thousands of years of rich Middle Eastern history to enter into your mind and spirit...that land of Mesopotamia and Babylon...the very lands that Sarah Palin, and others of us, read about in the Old Testament of the Bible. And then allow him to at least make the point of how our country's actions, with a fairly myopic historical perspective, have been viewed. It's hard not to be struck by how naive, at best, some of our policies have been and how arrogantly belligerent at worst. And this is not just from Khalidi's viewpoint, but countless others who share a keen interest in both the wellbeing of the United States, and the human rights of all individuals throughout the world.
I'm not saying that reading Khalidi will cause you to give up your views, for or against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as they may be, but just listen to the informed viewpoint of someone who has brought a great deal of thought, caring and expertise to this discussion.
And then ask yourself if you think Sarah Palin should even go near him in her squawking about Obama's ties to alleged radicals. It seems to me that to critique the thoughts and actions of another, one ought to have at least a modicum of understanding about the issue involved. She has shown, repeatedly, that she has none. (She might have actually done better on her foreign policy interviews if someone had allowed her to read Khalidi's book. At the very least she would have understood what the Bush doctrine was!) It breaks my heart that she is even allowed to drag his name through the mud in such a shallow, superficial, righteous way. Perhaps it's not a kind or charitable thing to say, but I think she shouldn't be allowed to speak to this issue at all without being fully exposed to the horrors of which she knows nothing. The issue she is stepping on is highly complex and has caused untold suffering for thousands--Jews and Palestinians both. And she knows, and seems to care, nothing about it. Nothing other than a last ditch attempt to take Obama (and now Khalidi) down into the mud with her. The McCain camp must be getting very, very desperate.
Friday, October 17, 2008
My new favorite blog...
Check it out sisters!
Beauty Tips for Ministers
She combines heart, sass, wit and style and a happy refutation that to be 'Godly' means somehow not cherishing yourself as well as others. Fabulous! (Now if I can just get her to start weighing in on perfume....)
Beauty Tips for Ministers
She combines heart, sass, wit and style and a happy refutation that to be 'Godly' means somehow not cherishing yourself as well as others. Fabulous! (Now if I can just get her to start weighing in on perfume....)
Thursday, October 16, 2008
What would Jesus think?
This morning I came across this video clip, about a young woman in Texas who has Down Syndrome, and was crowned homecoming queen of her high school. It's very moving. When I was growing up, as I am sure was the case for some of you, the role of homecoming queen seemed like it was reserved for the coolest, most beautiful, most popular girl in the class (and the one most likely to be dating the cutest football star). In other words, the one girl who would represent all our ideals about 'fitting in'. That stereotype may have moved on since then, but seeing this just made me wonder about the changes in the upcoming generation. They chose a young woman of heart, and no small amount of spirit, to receive the crown. They looked for beauty of a different kind. Is it too much to say that, in addition to being moved by the young woman who received the crown, I am also moved by the recognition of those who grew out of societal stereotypes enough to recognize a different and, I would venture, truer beauty in front of their eyes?
I'm reminded of Greg Boyd's recent sermons on how Jesus always extended the invitation to the kingdom of Heaven to those on the margins--those who are overlooked and underestimated, diminished and rebuked for not fitting in with our ideals. Of course, the psychoanalyst in me says that in ostracizing or avoiding them, we are also projecting on to them the parts of ourselves that we cannot, or will not, deal with. From that perspective, seeing a community embody a spirit of inclusion of that which is different from the mainstream, still sadly lacking in far too many parts of the world, gives me great hope not only for those who have suffered with disabilities or conditions that have made them invisible, and the enormous pain of that invisiblity, but also for those whose eyes and hearts have become whole enough to move beyond such division into a community of equality.
I'm reminded of Greg Boyd's recent sermons on how Jesus always extended the invitation to the kingdom of Heaven to those on the margins--those who are overlooked and underestimated, diminished and rebuked for not fitting in with our ideals. Of course, the psychoanalyst in me says that in ostracizing or avoiding them, we are also projecting on to them the parts of ourselves that we cannot, or will not, deal with. From that perspective, seeing a community embody a spirit of inclusion of that which is different from the mainstream, still sadly lacking in far too many parts of the world, gives me great hope not only for those who have suffered with disabilities or conditions that have made them invisible, and the enormous pain of that invisiblity, but also for those whose eyes and hearts have become whole enough to move beyond such division into a community of equality.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
We're Going Forward...
Check out this video clip of some remarks given by Donna Brazile, in response to a discussion on race in the Presidential election. It's the best thing I've regarding this election in the past few months (yes, it even trumps SNL)!
(Hat tip: Andrew Sullivan)
(Hat tip: Andrew Sullivan)
Monday, September 29, 2008
Keeping Sane
Between watching the market news, the campaign, and reading on average 300 pages of Freud a week, this is the resulting post....
(Hat tip: Andrew Sullivan)
(Hat tip: Andrew Sullivan)
Friday, September 19, 2008
Calling all New Yorkers...
I was very glad to learn of this initiative, and thought to share it here....
September 19, 2008
Dear New Yorker,
I am writing today in hopes that you might join me in spreading the word about efforts currently underway to provide badly-needed relief to hurricane victims in Haiti.
As you know, this past month, three deadly hurricanes left more than 100 dead and tens of thousands homeless in Haiti before barreling into the U.S. and wreaking havoc and destruction along the Gulf Coast.
On Thursday, following similar relief efforts to our neighbors in the South, Governor Paterson directed the opening of the New York Army National Guard Armory in Brooklyn to allow for the collection of donated relief supplies for the hurricane-stricken island nation of Haiti.
Items in high demand for shipment to Haiti include:
Bottled water (packed in cases or six packs at a minimum). Single bottles are inappropriate donations since they would have to be repackaged.
Rice (dried in bags)
Beans (dried cans only)
Sterno canisters
Tarpaulin (of any size, preferably 10 ft. x 10 ft. or larger) - to be used for both roofing and flooring
Nylon cord (100 ft. rolls)
Hygiene items limited to toothbrushes, toothpaste, mild soaps
New underclothes (children sizes)
New hand towels
Soldiers from the New York National Guard will be on hand to receive, sort and prepare donations at the following locations:
Bedford Armory
1579 Bedford Avenue at Union Street, Brooklyn
Sept. 18 - Sept. 26, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Adam Clayton Powell State Office Building
163 West 125th at Adam Clayton Powell Jr. Blvd., Harlem
Sept. 18 - Sept. 26, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
As the aftermath of these hurricanes continues to unfold, it's important that we do what we can to help alleviate some of the pain and suffering in Haiti.
The Council and I have already begun reaching out to our constituents to encourage them to collect and donate. If you could please pass this information along to the members of your community and encourage them to do the same, we'd deeply appreciate it. Working together, we can help make a difference in the lives of the Haitian people.
In closing, I would like to thank all of our state and city elected officials, especially Governor Paterson, Council Members Mathieu Eugene and Larry Seabrook, and the members of the Council's Black, Latino and Asian Caucus, for heading up this important relief effort.
I would also like to thank our brave men and women of the New York National Guard for once again stepping in during a time of crisis to help those in need.
For more information about the Haitian relief effort, please call (212) 681-4010 or e-mail relief@chamber.state.ny.us.
Best wishes.
Sincerely,
Christine C. Quinn
Speaker
New York City Council
September 19, 2008
Dear New Yorker,
I am writing today in hopes that you might join me in spreading the word about efforts currently underway to provide badly-needed relief to hurricane victims in Haiti.
As you know, this past month, three deadly hurricanes left more than 100 dead and tens of thousands homeless in Haiti before barreling into the U.S. and wreaking havoc and destruction along the Gulf Coast.
On Thursday, following similar relief efforts to our neighbors in the South, Governor Paterson directed the opening of the New York Army National Guard Armory in Brooklyn to allow for the collection of donated relief supplies for the hurricane-stricken island nation of Haiti.
Items in high demand for shipment to Haiti include:
Bottled water (packed in cases or six packs at a minimum). Single bottles are inappropriate donations since they would have to be repackaged.
Rice (dried in bags)
Beans (dried cans only)
Sterno canisters
Tarpaulin (of any size, preferably 10 ft. x 10 ft. or larger) - to be used for both roofing and flooring
Nylon cord (100 ft. rolls)
Hygiene items limited to toothbrushes, toothpaste, mild soaps
New underclothes (children sizes)
New hand towels
Soldiers from the New York National Guard will be on hand to receive, sort and prepare donations at the following locations:
Bedford Armory
1579 Bedford Avenue at Union Street, Brooklyn
Sept. 18 - Sept. 26, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Adam Clayton Powell State Office Building
163 West 125th at Adam Clayton Powell Jr. Blvd., Harlem
Sept. 18 - Sept. 26, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
As the aftermath of these hurricanes continues to unfold, it's important that we do what we can to help alleviate some of the pain and suffering in Haiti.
The Council and I have already begun reaching out to our constituents to encourage them to collect and donate. If you could please pass this information along to the members of your community and encourage them to do the same, we'd deeply appreciate it. Working together, we can help make a difference in the lives of the Haitian people.
In closing, I would like to thank all of our state and city elected officials, especially Governor Paterson, Council Members Mathieu Eugene and Larry Seabrook, and the members of the Council's Black, Latino and Asian Caucus, for heading up this important relief effort.
I would also like to thank our brave men and women of the New York National Guard for once again stepping in during a time of crisis to help those in need.
For more information about the Haitian relief effort, please call (212) 681-4010 or e-mail relief@chamber.state.ny.us.
Best wishes.
Sincerely,
Christine C. Quinn
Speaker
New York City Council
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Ideology
This past week or so has been a whirlwind of new ideas, tons of reading (300 pages of Freud in one week!?!), and of course, meeting new people.
Out of all of this, one phrase, made as an offhand comment by a professor well versed in church history, has stayed with me as perhaps one of the most profound commentaries on theology as well as society I have ever heard...He said (without being able to remember his exact wording, unfortunately) that 'whenever people are unable to discern between that which is life-giving, and that which is not, they cling to ideology'.
Your thoughts?
Out of all of this, one phrase, made as an offhand comment by a professor well versed in church history, has stayed with me as perhaps one of the most profound commentaries on theology as well as society I have ever heard...He said (without being able to remember his exact wording, unfortunately) that 'whenever people are unable to discern between that which is life-giving, and that which is not, they cling to ideology'.
Your thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
