Keeanga-Yamattha Taylor asked two pivotal questions which serve as a useful frame when contemplating ministry through identity, power, and vocation in community:
What constitutes a good society?
What constitutes a good life?
Seminary is not just a degree, it is a calling to a life of service. To accomplish this, we must know ourselves and the systems which define our world. As bell hooks’ explains, “[u]ntil we are all able to accept the interlocking, interdependent nature of systems of domination and recognize specific ways each system is maintained, we will continue to act in ways that undermine our individual quest for freedom and collective liberation struggle.” (bell hooks) As stated in What It All Has to Do With Us?, “[i]f we want to understand what happens in the world, including patterns of privilege and oppression, we have to understand the dynamic relation between people and social systems.” (Johnson, p.78)
The concepts which have most impacted my understanding of power are centered on the realities of white supremacy culture, which is a system of oppression that includes racism, classism, misogyny, heteronormativism and ableism. Power in oppressive systems is based in domination, which Iris Marion Young defines as “structural or systemic phenomena which prevent people from participating in determining their actions and the conditions of their actions.” Dominant groups retain their self determination while also being able to stay ignorant of the struggles of subordinate groups (Tatum, Schulman, pp.22-23). However, subordinate groups must learn about the dominant groups as a matter of survival. (Schulman, p.22). This difference in visibility means that “those with the most power have the least information.” (Schulman, p.23) While dominant groups have the privilege to remain ignorant, they are essential for any social movement to be successful. (hooks) Thus, power lies with the groups that do not understand the issues, but are also mandatory to the solution. This begs the question, how can justice movements both educate and involve the dominant groups?
These power structures, according to Kirk and Okazawa-Rey, happen on three levels; the micro level of how we define ourselves, the meso level of interactions in social spaces like school or church and the macro/global level which is social categories, which require objectification and dehumanization. (Kirk & Okazawa-Rey). When we look at each of these together, they frame our social location (Kirk & Okazawa-Rey, p.14).
Exploring our social locations this quarter was very revealing. Social location is complicated, and contains contradictions. (Crass, p.15) My social location includes positions of privilege and oppression, which demonstrates that we can often identify with some dominant groups and some subordinate groups. This makes it essential to not only recognize that the intersectionalities of social locations are important, but that we also need to work both externally and internally to dismantle systemic oppression.
While it is easy to focus entirely on the changes needed within dominant groups, we must also remember Steven Biko’s idea that “[t]he most powerful tool of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed.” (Crass, p.15) Those who identify with a subordinate group can recognize the need to stop handing power over to others to fix things. (Taylor) Additionally, engaging in justice work without recognizing intersectionality is counterproductive. For example, as Kimberlé Crenshaw points out “when racism and misogyny don’t recognize each other, they actually reinforce each other.” (Crenshaw)
Another key element is that “oppression designates the disadvantage and injustice some people suffer not because of a tyrannical power coerces them, but because of the everyday practices of a well-intentioned liberal society.” (Young, p.41) While it may be tempting to take Jones’ suggestion to throw out, not just the syllabus, but the whole discipline, (Jones) we must understand what the systems are first, so when we tackle the work of restructuring and reinventing, we know what to keep and how not to repeat old patterns of oppression.
Through systems of domination, work that has been linked with being “feminine” has been diminished and devalued. This is no surprise since systems of oppression are “designed to make us feel inadequate, isolated and powerless.” (Crass, p.13) However, the implications are dire when that work is so instrumental in dismantling those same systems. As Mia Mingus explained, “the transforming love we need...to do our work is dependent on our relationships.” (Mingus) Plaskow and Christ explain, “our world is on the verge of self-destruction and death because the society as a whole has so deeply neglected that which is most human and most valuable and the most basic of all the works of love- the work of communication of caring and nurturance, of tending the personal bonds of community.” (Plaskow & Christ, p.217)
The concepts I found most important this quarter enabled me to shift perspectives on how to move forward with justice work. One mental shift came from examining the concepts of interdependence. My faith is grounded in the belief of the interconnected web of all existence, but even though I understand it intellectually, the shift to making it real in my life is still in process. Being fiercely independent remains a challenge for me. I had a mental shift when seeing the stark words, “[d]ependency should not be a reason to be deprived of a choice and respect.” (Young, p.55) Depending on others is still linked to trauma for me, so to reinforce the idea that dependence is linked to ableism has helped me to begin to disentangle my old coping mechanisms about avoiding that particular vulnerability. It was a reminder that this work requires a radical deconstruction of not just what it means to be human but will also require the deconstruction of everything we know about ourselves and the world. (Smith) Discomfort and uncertainty are needed to make such fundamental changes. I continue to try to lean into Kathryn Addelson's view that nothing is completely independent. (Lee, p.11).
Since this kind of deconstruction is daunting, we need to find ways to motivate us to continue the process. The concept that most appealed to me this quarter was Andrea Smith’s question, “What if we made the revolution fun?” (Smith) Hearing that question brought about an epiphany connected to so many different parts of my life and beliefs. I have always stated that I believe that life must have both purpose and joy. My parenting style, love of games, and connection to theater have always been grounded in a deep sense of playfulness. To be able to incorporate that same joyful playfulness into ministry struck a deep chord in my soul.
While engaging in the content has been deeply satisfying, figuring out how to engage in the process was a bit more challenging. Coming into this class I had come off of a year of doing extensive anti-oppression training within a church. My patience and tolerance were frayed. The microaggressions from this self-proclaimed progressive church seemed vast, from misusing pronouns to telling racist jokes at the Congregational meeting. If this was the state of a liberal, social justice focussed congregation, then I was fearful of what challenges a Christian seminary may present. Would it be more denial and acceptance of domination as normal? (Smith) It was so helpful to be reminded, as Levins-Morales states, that “shaming, shunning, and punishing are not tools of liberation.” (p.100) The openness and compassion of my fellow students helped me wrestle with my impatience with those in a different place in their learning. This heart opening has been so valuable, particularly during the contentious election.
While I miss having in-person conversations, I am beginning to really value asynchronous discussions. I love going back to conversations, having time to think about my responses, and to digest all the information. However, I find myself concerned about the nonverbal signals of responses. Do I respond too much to the same people? Will my meaning be obvious without hearing my tone of voice or seeing my facial expressions? Why do some people’s comments rarely get responses? What is the etiquette of responding to something that is obviously very vulnerable? Fortunately, this learning community is very inspirational, patient, and kind.
I find that exploring grounding practices is also part of grappling with the course material. For example, using Davis’ framework of care of the body, care for the body, and care about the body, can remind us that our grounding practices need to also be part of dismantling systems of oppression. For example, looking at yoga and meditation through the lens of cultural appropriation or how they play into ableism. I find I am more aware that “[t]he body is never a single physical thing so much as a series of attitudes toward it.” (Davis) I took to heart the idea that “ [i]f feeling is damaged or cutoff, our power to imagine the world and act into it is destroyed and our rationality is imparied.” (Plaskow & Christ, p.218-219) Therefore, I determined to find grounding practices that focus on shedding the ways I was reinforcing systems of oppression. I designated my grounding practices this quarter as The Great Un-Grind.
One of the tenets of theater is that the way you rehearse is the way you perform. As I began seminary, this kept popping into my head. I have always been an overfunctioner. I am no stranger to 80 hour work weeks, intense family caregiving, and single parenting. Activism and volunteering have also filled my calendar. If I go into seminary with that same frantic energy I have always had, then that would carry through to my ministry. It was time to practice what I wanted to preach, so in the first weeks of the quarter, when faced with a complicated situation at work, I made the decision to leave my job. This provided me the gift of focusing on seminary. It is not enough for me to be an activist, I need to also leave behind the parts of my own life that are seeped in oppressive systems. It was time to shed perfectionism, grind culture, and a sense of worth that is tied to productivity, wealth, and status. Diversity, inclusion, and contemplation require space. It is work grounded in relationship, which takes time and energy. Becoming the minister I want to be would also require me to deeply engage in the material. I did not want to rush or skim this educational opportunity.
The Great Un-Grind has been a complete revamping of my life. Every day I have unstructured time, a concept that is still a bit foreign to me. I am making space to take naps, sleep in, take baths, and do simple things like eating by candlelight. I have cut back on attending multiple volunteer and activism events and meetings, choosing instead to deeply engage in my own internal work. I began therapy and have consistently attended the Iliff Meditation Group led by William Jeavons. Each week I try the spiritual practice suggestion sent by Rev. Dr. Cathie Kelsey to the student body. My whole body seems to be vibrating on a lower frequency and by making space for quiet, I am better able to think, write, and just be.
I have also begun to practice courage as a grounding practice. I fear being unemployed since so much of my identity and self worth were tied into the title and paycheck. What happens when I live the value that humans are more than their productivity? (Smith) What happens when I do the terrifying work of looking internally in therapy? What happens if I allow myself to be happy? Be content? What happens when I look at my own perfectionism? Examining these questions has me feeling fear, but still having the courage to grow.
In week two, I mentioned a new idea I was trying.
Before classes started this quarter, I took to heart an idea mentioned in Orientation about the Quaker tradition of a Clarity Council. I asked a group of people who love me, but would also provide true and needed "calling in" to stand with me throughout seminary. Our covenant is that they will be part of my supportive community and will also speak truth to me about areas that are challenging me. It includes my mentor and some elders, but also my kids, and those closest to my heart who are most marginalized.
This group, called Imagine, is meeting to help me develop some of my more outlandish ideas about my future ministry. It is developing into an innovative approach that combines Radical Unschooling, dismantling oppressive systems, atheist and agnostic spirituality, and the creative collaboration of multiple mediums of arts. While it is still a long way from clear or comprehensive, it is thrilling to be working with a community of diverse voices to reinvent the very way we relate to philosophy, epistemology, metaphysics, and ethics.
In this process, I feel the reality that “[f]or better or worse, women have had to face the reality that we have the power not only to create personal bonds between people but, more basically, to build up and deepen personhood itself.” (Plaskow & Christ, p.217) This resonates with so much of my life’s work, and I keenly feel the weight of it in my future ministry. This eclectic community forming in the Imagine group is so excited about collectively creating a world that we can’t yet understand or imagine. (Tilson) Going into seminary, I was overwhelmed and frightened about the scope and need of this work. I feared I could not do it. Now I know that I cannot do this work, but I can make space for a community that can.
Much of the Imagine community’s work is founded in the concepts from Nick Tilson’s TED Talk. We are committed to coming “not from a place of fear, but of hope” and using one lens that includes people, planet, and true prosperity. We are also honoring the Pine Ridge collectives’ idea that “the vision needs to be as least as big as the problem.” (Tilson)
My excitement about these Imagine group meetings demonstrates how “involvement is something that comes with being alive in the world as a human being” (Johnson, p.124) and feeds my soul in ways that more traditional activism has not been able to do. I think it is because rather than being in opposition to something it is focused on how we can “understand love as the power to act-each-other-into-well-being.” (Plaskow & Christ, p.217) I continue to dismantle systems of domination within myself and work with my community to reimagine new ways forward.
Looking towards the work of next quarter, I still hold some confusion about the concepts in Lee’s Individualism, Collectivism, and Communalism: What Do We Mean by Community? I know this comes from my struggle with hyper-individualism. I am reconciling the positive side of having a focus on individualism. For example, Kirk and Okazawa-Rey’s macro/global concept that demonstrates the importance of honoring individuals so that society cannot strip individuals of humanity and Iris Marion Young’s argument that systems and institutions which encourage people to be autonomous participants in determining their actions are essential for their participatory inclusion. Preferred pronouns are not just about gender identity or expression, but “me” and “us” are important in framing how we view our place in the world. Yet, the value and engagement in a more communal way of being has been a highlight of this quarter. (Lee) I will continue to leverage the polarities of Lee’s “balance between communal culture’s worldview and individualistic culture’s stress on each person’s novelty is an ideal pursuit.” (p.17)
While my explorations of identity, power, and vocation in community are still in initial formation, I can already sense progress and shifts in thinking that are serving me well. Going forward, I will continue to explore the relationships of individualism and community along with balancing external and internal work. I can already see glimmers of ideas that answer Taylors questions about what makes a good society and good life. I look forward to continuing to engage with the content, refine my process, and find creative and inclusive action.
Comentários