When Sanctuary Isn't

The current deportation of undocumented (and some documented) immigrants crisis is reaching a crescendo, soon to be a human crisis never experienced in this country (if one overlooks the February 19, 1942 executive order 9066 ordering the internment in concentration camps for Japanese Americans, or the earlier ongoing slavery of African Americans over the past centuries).

Cruel scenes of a Latino woman, awaiting brain surgery, bound hand and foot and taken from a hospital; young men and women who thought they had protection as Dreamers arrested as “drug lords and really bad dudes” for having no less than a traffic violation; others who have pending charges but arrested and deported before they are even tried and found; and children afraid to go home from school lest their parents be arrested and gone.

And now ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is being ramped up, as the White House explained, the president wants to “take the shackles off” of agents, an expression the officers themselves used time and again in interviews to describe their newfound freedom. With a 10,000 agent increase to the already 40,000 agents (even now the largest law enforcement agency in the country) risking an influx of quickly trained and inexperienced agents, and joining ICS with what sort of motivation?

National Catholic Reporter published a good piece on this whole issue. One of the points they raise is that “sanctuary” has no standing today in civil law.

A second point raised is, that from a legal standpoint, a church is not a generally a “living space” which requires a warrant to enter. Granted, churches, hospitals, and some other institutions are classed by ICE as “sensitive locations”, not to be entered, and ICE agents are not likely invade a church, because it’s bad PR for them. But they could. Already there are reported incidents of ICE agents laying in wait outside churches operating homeless shelters.

Reading of such reminds me of an incident, actually more than just an incident, that took place in San Francisco in the 60’s. Protesting against the Viet Nam war was at it’s height when the president of South Vietnam visited that city. He was to speak at one of the hotels atop Nob Hill and his arrival there was greeted by hundreds of protestors. Also situated atop Nob Hill is Grace Cathedral, the cathedral of the Episcopal diocese of California, just a block away from the hotels. The San Francisco Police Department deployed their mounted officers, using batons, to disperse the large crowds of protesters, many of whom ran to seek sanctuary within in that

great cathedral. As the protesters fled into the building the officers on horses rode right in behind them, chasing and striking the protestors with their batons. With only three major doors into the building, the scene became one of carnage, what the San Francisco Chronicle later described as like shooting fish in a barrel. On the scene was Fr. Stan Rogers, the cathedral’s canon chancellor and vice dean. In order not to give the protestors a sense of false security, or sanctuary, he ordered that the doors be closed while cathedral staff escorted the protesters out through less obvious exits. Grace Cathedral took a lot of flack for closing its doors. Stan, a good friend, told me later that it was the hardest decision he ever had to make. But it was the right decision.

Stan died in December 1977, collapsing in his chair immediately after preaching at the cathedral’s major service.

Last Wednesday, Henry Rousso, one of France’s preeminent scholars landed at Houston's George Bush International Airport after an 11-hour flight, en route to Texas A & M University in College Station. There, he was to speak Friday afternoon at the Hagler Institute

for Advanced Study. As the historian attempted to enter the United States, he was detained for more than 10 hours -- for no clear reason, and almost deported. Rousso is an Egyptian-born French citizen (France is a beneficiary of the U.S. visa waiver program which permits French citizens to enter the United States without a visa). Rousso described the arresting agent as “inexperienced.”

Last Sunday Rousso wrote in the French edition of the Huffington Post:

"What I know, in loving this country forever, is that the United States is no longer quite the United States."

IMPORTANT. To continue receiving this blog, which we hope you will, please click on the "Follow by Email" icon in the upper right hand corner, above. We are having difficulty managing a mailing list, the result of new rules imposed by carriers. Many thankls for your continued interest in this blog!

An Apologia

An Apologia

To those friends, relatives, and others who might have discomfort with my Facebook and blog postings before, during, and following the election, an Apologia.

During my adult life I have been on the wining side as well as the losing side of many elections here in the US and earlier in Canada. OK, mostly the winning side. Some losses were not serious, or at least not too serious and we moved through them with no significant scars. Others were rough. They were painful. They had cost, such as Regan’s dismantling of the mental health system when he was governor of California. Or more recently, but still ongoing, Bush’s invasion of Iraq on trumped-up charges. Yet in all cases there was generally a civility and a trust of some sort that the ultimate system and the ultimate values of the country would prevail. Prime ministers were defeated. Presidents were not re-elected. Checks and balances, for the most part, kept power in check. And while there might have been discord in Ottawa or Washington, back home we griped and moaned and wrote letters to editors and turned out for protesting rallies and marches. But, on the whole, we stayed pretty balanced, and we got over it.

November 8^th changed all that.

It wasn’t a win by one party and the defeat of another. November 8^th went far deeper than partisanship. Parenthetically, although he ran on the GOP ticket, I do not see Donald Trump a Republican, an opinion also held by many long time Republicans. To say that some of us are winners and some of us are losers (“get over it; stop-wining-losers”) is simplistic and misses the deeper issues at stake here. It is far more than winning and loosing.

Also, the plea to give Donald Trump a chance is, for me, a desperate plea for validation of a vote cast. The too long presidential campaign exposed much, too much of Donald Trump’s values and views, all which seem to be re-surfacing in one way or another since November 8^th and into his young presidency - - bathroom bullying of opponents; white supremacy, blaming news coverage; desperately needing affirmation; lying about the obvious; arrogant lack of transparency, both personal and business; and much more. To plead giving a chance is simply naïve and ignoring the record. (Campaign “promises” are always suspect, no matter by whom; values expressed are not.)

No, the deeper issues for me are the unspoken agenda of this new administration.

The selection of the cabinet reflects some of the most polarized and polarizing choices ever  imaginable: anti-public education, climate change deniers, fiscal manipulators, disgraced military leaders (the big exception being Defense), bigoted attorneys, incompetent administrators, questionable diplomatic representatives, plus a sorry administration spokesperson. Why is this, and how can it be, the core leadership of the country?

Perhaps even deeper is the inclusion of a publicly avowed racist and fascist, a man who embodies bigotry and violence, as the senior consultant, an appointment that gave the white supremacists great joy and a wonderful and powerful sense of empowerment.

Right now we have a dismantling of the Affordable Care Act which affects close to 24 – 30 million people, and ending coverage for preexisting conditions, veterans’ medical benefits, and aid to rural hospitals. It affects my family, and will certainly effect yours. We read of over 700 hate crimes since the election, most commonly occurring in K-12 schools and universities. We read of Latino children afraid to go to school, fearing that their parents will not be there when they get home. We read of mosques being torched. We witness the cruel and evil religious discrimination of Muslims with the immigration executive order (yes, the immigration order is religion driven, and, no, it is not a carry over from that of the Obama administration, a reading of the facts simply don’t allow that read), a order that also puts the lives of all US troops serving in the Middle East in serious jeopardy. We hear of the leaders of other nations, close allies, being insulted and international cooperative relationships threatened.

Somehow, those who initially supported Donald Trump need to wonder what it is about this new administration that has birthed such horrifying ethnic and racial discrimination and violence throughout the land.

Somehow, those initial supporters need to wonder what has caused such a vast outpouring and concern for human rights and freedom and dignity: The Womxn’s marches across the country, the largest ever in this nation’s history, as well as those overseas on every continent, including Antarctica; the protests at airports; the numerous legal challenges; the criticism by the United Nations, members of the British and Irish parliaments, as well as many other nations’ leaders; major corporation executives distancing themselves; the condemnation by the Christian community, including the Roman Catholic Church, the United Methodist Church, the Episcopal Church, and many, many other denominations and faith communities.  

My deep concern is where will this all lead us? I cannot ignore the history of 1930s Europe. I cannot ignore the emerging directions of administration policy that seem to parallel that time.

None of this is partisan politics. To excuse this as such is to do oneself a great injustice. This goes far deeper, into the very soul of this nation. It is these issues that, as a citizen and as one who tries to be obedient to my faith to do justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with God, impels me

I do not write, post, or blog lightly. I do not wish to cause division. I say what I say out of deep concern for my family, for my children’s and my grandchildren’s and their children’s future, for my neighbor known and unknown, and for all those who I will never meet or know who are vulnerable, but who like me, inhabit this island home we call our earth.

I do this for the life of the world.

Yes We Can!

It was eight years ago this past November, driving home from a gathering of friends in Seattle's Pioneer Square, as June and I drove up 1st Avenue very near Pike Street Market, that we saw crowds spilling out into the streets celebrating the presidential election results. The crowd was mainly young, exuberant, loud, joyful, perhaps even heady wild. As we snaked our way up the street, we were high-fives  and June, window down, returned every gesture. The world was excited with promise!

Tonight I heard a farewell address. No, far more than an address. I heard a call, a call to everyone of us, reminding us who we are and for what we as a people stand.

And again, the promise "Yes, We Can!" rang out as it did eight years ago, not only clear, not only as just a slogan, but now as almost a national mantra. "Yes, We Can" - - a call to the best of this nation.

I for one want to rehear this address every year, every year at least for the next four years, on every January 20th, to recall who and what we are and what this nation is and yet can be. And, yes, I want my children and their children and their children's children to hear and respond, "Yes, We Can!"

Thank you, Barack Obama, for calling out the best of this country and its people tonight. Thank you for bidding us farewell, at least as our current leader, for giving us a presidency of grace, a presidency of principle, a presidency of strength, and a presidency of right-ness.

Thank you.