Social Media Missionaries?!

"No matter what your vocation is, no matter what your role is as a Media Missionary, we are all called to live, pray, and spread the Gospel! Being part of the EWTN Media Missionaries is a perfect way to help us fulfill our calling from Christ to "make disciples of all nations" (Mt. 28:19) by use of the media. You'll find a wealth of resources to build you up spiritually as a modern day missionary!" - from  http://ewtnmissionaries.com/#sthash.9GkfmvHa.dpuf

It makes perfect sense that a media outlet that ascribes its mores to core values of the roamin catholic church and papacy would want to arrogantly assume....still....in this late date of 2016 C.E.....that their ideas and actions are necessarily big and bad enough to be universalized all over the world, in "all nations".  The only reason that it might make sense, though, is that the level of arrogance in the above statement is actually a normalized value within the larger conceptions of roamin catholicism and worse so in the values of christian organizations the world over and how they resonate with the larger conceptions and actions of European colonialism and exploitation.

Junipero Serra, genocidal predatory missionary who established and strengthened the anti-human mission system in what is now known as California.  Interestingly enough, the roamin catholic church considers him a valued missionary.  We must question the effects and outcomes of the arrogant, anti-cultural nature of christian missionary work in the world.

There Must Be Something in the Holy Water.

I have had the experience of meeting numerous "born-again" christians who were all predominantly socially awkward, though not as dangerously so as the folk I met at a Boston Church of Christ retreat.  How does one explain that, particularly given the added evidence of the multiplicitous thrubbings of those erstwhile dynamic mormon duos in YouTube videos? And have you seen the post-religious-event exit interviews in the insightful documentary, "The God Who Wasn't There"?

There must be something in the holy water.

The bible Is A Book.

It is absolutely ludicrous to think that the "bible" is THEE gold standard of spiritual and cultural thought when so many cultures observed and experienced functional and transformative Spiritual realities that guided them to such integrative and meaningful cultural perspectives, so much so that the modern, christo-secular world thirsts and hungers for the sustenance of these traditions and is tragically faltering in absence of these indigenous, grounded  traditions of human authenticity and intelligently informed mythological power.

"G-O-D", the Incomparable One

"G-O-D" is not merely a simple statement of some sort of spiritual neutrality or a term to be used interchangeably with other expressions of collectivized divinity.  "G-O-D" is a particularized and exclusive energetic that, as far as I know and intuit, has no resonance with other non-european and non-colonial conceptions and co-creations of divinity or deity.  It is often suggested in the explanation of American, African, Asian or other indigenous spirit entities, deities or divinities that we can understand the presence, importance or nature of these indigenous energetics by comparing them to "G-O-D", if only parenthetically.  Not only is this seemingly simple reflex misleading and confusing, but it pulls the reader/observer of this comparison into a default dismissal of the tremendously differentiated experiences that exist between the binaries of "G-O-D" and so many other grounded, indigenous and non-colonial conceptions of Spirit and divinity.  In addition, the history of how "G-O-D" has been used as a tool, a technology of oppression, confusion, co-optation and distraction cannot be divorced from what or whom (?) "G-O-D" may actually be.  It is reckless and possibly even dangerous to assume that there is any kind of equality, equanimity or even parity between the Dagara Mwin, the Zulu Unkulunkulu, the Mayan Quetzalcoatl, the Lakota Wakantanka and the conception of "G-O-D" as we think we know it. Clearly, so many rightly shy away from drawing direct equations between even the indigenous experiences of divinity and Spirit, unitary or multiplicitous as they may be. Given that respectful practice, why would we even entertain that the idea of "G-O-D" is even remotely instructive to understanding Mwin or Wakantanka, let alone be even less remotely instructive to understanding how the adherents or cultural carriers of those indigenous Spirits or divinities walk in the world or conceive their relationships with humanity and Nature.

It is simple and also gravely necessary to say that "G-O-D" has been an integral and functional part of the colonial idea, endeavor and outcome.  And as the dangerous presence and practice of colonialism and imperialism are rightly being challenged and fought (as they have always been), it makes the now reflexive use (and abuse) of the word, concept, energetic and mission of "G-O-D" highly problematic and misleading when trying to even simply explain the presence, nature and importance of Spirit, spirits and divinity, particularly in the indigenous context.  This same unholy union of "G-O-D" and colonial systemic cultural oppression also makes it extremely tricky, if not impossible to apply "G-O-D" in any liberatory or redemptive attempts. We would be remiss if we did not only identify the energetic and conceptual differentiations between the multiplicitous observations of divinity and Spirit, but also if we do not identify that the colonial, imperialist and oppressive carriage of "G-O-D" and assumption of what "G-O-D" is brings with it a presumptive arrogance and mistaken idea of "G-O-D"'s utility and effect in the world.

It would seem that to try to divorce the concept and use/abuse of "G-O-D" in the world from the dominant behaviors and abuses of its adherents would be just as problematic as trying to explain indigenous spiritual experiences by comparison and juxtaposition to "G-O-D".

Monotheism and other colonial and oppressive systems are correctly under question.  Neither their generality nor their universality can be safely or simply assumed.  It seems that we feel we owe "G-O-D" the nod of acknowledgement as we try to explain our spiritual experiences in the world almost as we similarly feel we must acknowledge other colonial contexts as being viable in some de facto iteration of Life.  If we are not adherents of "G-O-D", why do we feel that reference to "G-O-D" is in any way helpful to understanding any other conception of divinity, especially when we acknowledge that the use/abuse of "G-O-D" is wholly and grossly different in the grand and even recent historical and experiential sense.  This deference to some equation of indigenous spiritual ideas and "G-O-D" may come out at times due to the remarkable beauty, traditions of respect and deep expansive cosmovisions of indigenous and oppressed peoples, but that equation of historical and energetic binaries may be at the core of on-going default complicity with the intentions of colonialism, which even the adherents of the reportedly very intensely exclusive "G-O-D" of all goddesses/gods (interestingly enough) have a distinctly difficult time extracting themselves from, if there is even a dominant intention within that gigantic human faction to do so.

At the very least, juxtaposing, equating or attempting to explain any indigenous conception of divinity, deity, spirit, Spirit or spirituality with "G-O-D" is just not helpful.  At the most, it may be persistently destructive to the continuing presence and cultural function of indigenous spiritual systems, experiences, observations  and conceptions and the multiplicity of efforts to revitalize so many of those traditions that were initially and still continually targeted and attacked by the most voluminous and arrogant adherents of "G-O-D" and by "G-O-D" himself/itself. 

There Was More Than One Crucifixion

With all due respect, maybe Jesus wasn't the only one ever crucified.  On one level, we know that crucifixion was a state pathology of the Roman empire. On another level, and this may be the most important one, people have been getting "crucified" ever since the modern euro-christian (un)ethic has gained a choke-hold on the natural development of the world of indigenous cultures.

What about the lives of the Saami, the Druids, the Celts, the multiplicity of indigenous peoples in western Asia...um....Europe?  What of the horror of their oppression, torture and cultural destruction?  What of the rape and pillage of the European indigenous soul so deeply that the children of those so terrorized would then spread around the earth doing just the same crime to all other peoples?

~~~~~~~~

One must then ask,"what is the depth and breadth of the energetic debt owed - and who is going to pay it...and when?"

Letter to EWTN EVP Doug Keck re: Doug Barry's "savages" comment on international television

Doug Keck

Executive Vice President

EWTN

5817 Old Leeds Rd.

Irondale, Al. 35210-2164

Dear Mr. Keck,

On August 18th, EWTN’s Doug Barry made an impassioned and inflammatory statement about the targets of roman catholic evangelism on the live “Life On the Rock” broadcast from Spain, referring to these targets of missionary work as “savages”. Only seconds before this antiquated, reprehensible and patently racist statement, Barry rhetorically queried a guest on the World Youth Day show, “We have a whole world to conquer for Christ. Don’t we?”. This sort of language is clearly a throwback to the pathologically criminal acts of Christopher Columbus’ 1492, not that of an enlightened and professionally informed and progressive 2011.

Barry’s statement, though brief, was highly insulting and unbecoming of a supposedly educated and responsible telecaster. It was immature at best. One could expect nothing less than a formal apology and public retraction for daring to utter such a horrific statement about non-roman catholic peoples in a world still struggling for pluralism, tolerance, justice, understanding and compassion.

In 2010, a report was made to the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues concerning the christian “Doctrine of Discovery” that validated the voyages and crimes of Columbus and other conquerors and their historical and current repercussions. That indigenous peoples were the object of those crimes brings clarity to the insensitivity and arrogance of Barry’s comments of August 18th. His statements come out of a history of oppression, privilege and violent coercion that are appalling and repulsive to an enlightened mind and loving and compassionate heart. His words are even more horrendous as they were uttered in front of thousands of young people, let alone the whole EWTN audience at that time. Because of the presence of the pope, the eyes and ears of the world were upon Madrid and sadly, possibly more so on your cable channel.

What is said in the confines of your rectories, churches, sacristies and board rooms is one thing, but the blatant disrespect and disparaging of huge swaths of humanity in front of EWTN’s audience is quite another.

Doug Barry’s comments are highly unethical, immoral and carry the verbal resonance of historical crimes against humanity. Clearly this is exactly the language that accompanied some of the most heinous of these kinds of crimes, many initiated by the works and likes of Christopher Columbus.

I am calling for a public and mediated apology for and retraction of his comments. Considering the deep insensitivity and lack of professionalism magnified by the international reach of EWTN’s broadcast, anything less would simply add modern insult to historical insult to colonial injury. If the vatican is to be considered a respectable member of the United Nations, its official and unofficial communicative functionaries must treat their international colleagues and other world citizens as though they are also due a substantive level of respect and consideration.

Additionally, the “Doctrine of Discovery”, from which Barry’s comments find firm foundation must be illuminated, engaged in media discourse and beyond and must be recanted and brought to reconciliation as was respectfully asked for by the International Council of Thirteen Indigenous Grandmothers in 2008 (who were, by the way, summarily dismissed by the same papal office from which EWTN implicitly derives its ideological, theological and moral mandate).

Women and men of deep, functional religious virtue and insight should normally need no external barometer outside of their connection to their own spiritual source and community to inform them of the error of their own ways. This letter is to serve as a reminder of the transgression that Doug Barry, the “Life On the Rock” production crew and EWTN already know was committed. Righteousness cannot be claimed where empathy and compassion and the possibility of genuine acts of contrition are not in evidence.

I look forward to your timely reply given the grave nature of the offense and to the quick and substantive engagement and resolution of these clear areas of conflict. Thank you for your time and principled consideration.

Yours in the quest for justice,

Ukumbwa Sauti, M.Ed.

Adjunct Professor, Cultural Media Studies

Initiated Dagara Elder

ukumbwa@gmail.com

cc:

Bay State Banner

Boston Globe

Boston Phoenix

Huffington Post

"Secret History of the Jesuits"

"Secrets the Jesuits don't want Christians to know

Out of Europe, a voice is heard from the secular world that documents historically the same information told by ex-priests. The author exposes the Vatican's involvement in world politics, intrigues, and the fomenting of wars throughout history. It appears, beyond any doubt, that the Roman Catholic institution is not a Christian church and never was. The poor Roman Catholic people have been betrayed by her and are facing spiritual disaster. Paris shows that Rome is responsible for the two great world wars."

http://www.chick.com/catalog/books/0191.asp