"Truly I tell you..."

It’s been a long time since I’ve written. There’s no real excuse except the grindstone of life, school, relationships, and other extracurricular obligations. Oh, and the failure of technology...

I am writing because of truth. I’ve noticed that a lot of people get hung up on that word, as well as other related issues. Philosophers argue, for example that there is no truth. There can be no absolute or objective truth – all truth is therefore subjective or relative. Some argue that there are definitely certain things in this life that are in fact true, and therefore are worth fighting for – dying for – possibly killing for.

Academia, the current juices in which I wallow, is full of varying understandings of truth. Most recently I’ve become interested in the liberal machine and how it moves, or doesn’t towards truth. I think Gandhi had it right when he said that both sides of an issue may have varying levels of truth and through conversation, debate, and dialogue we are able to come to a solution which incorporates the most truth we can.

The university, often a bastion of liberal thinking, in many departments has forgotten this very key thing. Different perspectives can hold different levels of truth. Despite being right or wrong, true or false, they are valid and important because opposing perspectives further fortify our convictions. They help us because they cause us to struggle and to question. It is essential that our positions be re-evaluated, if only to make them stronger. However it is okay if we throw them out. It is okay to be wrong, because, as said earlier, this can only help us along our way to something more helpful – more truthful.

A problem in many liberal minded departments is the total disregard for opposing perspectives. We say, oh yes, we are ‘open-minded’ but we really aren’t. We imply, through various turns of phrase, that we mean to be inclusive, but put up walls that alienate and infuriate. No. This is NOT the way to go about doing things. It is not effective. It is not helpful. Why? Because these walls are erected, we remove the possibility of dialogue. Because we close ourselves off, we cannot reconsider and re-evaluate.

It comes out in destructive and upsetting ways in classes. Partially because so many of our cold logically trained minds will react to things in emotionally charged ways which leave no room for opposition. Yes, be passionate. Yes, have an opinion. However, be strong enough to notice your emotional responses and why you have these responses to a particular comment or question. Is it the phrasing? Is it the person? Is it the fact you didn’t eat that day? Did you not sleep the night before? To let those kinds of things rule your day, your responses to intellectual conversation is dangerous. To let preconceptions prevent further consideration is dangerous. By allowing yourself to be angered by a potential ally’s careless phrase is not helpful. Rather, suggest alternative constructions or clarifications.

So, to sum up: Strong emotions and preconceived notions which blind are the enemies of dialoguing and truth-seeking. Truth may not be absolute, but there is something that feels right or feels true can be present in two opposing perspectives. Dialoguing between opposing perspectives is the most effective way towards truth. So, stick it to your professors or your friends – take up an opposing perspective, or even one that is wrong. Get into a debate. It’s fun. It’s invigorating. It helps send us on our way…

Alexis By Any Other Name

I am on the Facebook. It is one of these online communities which seeks to connect people to other people through already established real-world networks (i.e. colleges, jobs, clubs etc). Anyone on one of these networks can search for people through a variety of categories (names, schools, jobs - you get the idea). So recently I received a message with a guy who probably searched for people with names that started with "Don." He found my last name and sent me a friend request which stated how much he liked my last name. As I have gotten older, I have become decreasingly attached to this name. The following is the message I sent to him.

"I know you saw my name and thought something to the effect of "Wow! That's cool!" However, every name has a story and mine is no exception. "Donkin" is an anglicized version of the Scottish "Duncan." If you know anything about British imperialism and Scottish disdain for the English crown, you know this is an eye-sore for Scots. For even more fun, 'Donkin' is not really my family name. My grandfather died when my father was a baby, and my grandmother remarried. When she married a man with the name 'Donkin' this man adopted my father. My father's name then changed from 'Stewart' to 'Donkin.' The only reason I have kept my last name as it is, is because I like the way my full name sounds and Donkin is a rare last name in the US. It also reminds me how the choices in our lives affect the outcomes, and our heritage is as much choice as accident."

Now, I know the above conveys my dislike, and strange reasoning for keeping my last name, but it does not explain anything about my other names (for which I do have a great attachment). "Alexis," a derivative of "Alexander" means "defender of human-kind" (the baby name book has a more sexist version using the word 'man,' so I changed the wording to express the true sentiment of the name). "Tara" (my middle name) has several meanings as there are a number of ethnicities which have this name. My personal favorite connotation is it's the name of the Tibetan goddess of beginnings. My least favorite is the Irish, which means 'bitter.' However my first name is the name with which I most strongly identify. It is the reason for the name of my blog - 'protector's archetype.'

Some people don't care about their names. Their names mean nothing to them. They are merely a delineation - separating them from the other people surrounding them in the world. For me, my name is more than a category. It gives meaning. I own my name. Whenever a person is called a name, it shapes how they act and who they become. This is why our words are so important, why categories can be so damaging or empowering. My name, combined with my deep faith socialization has given be a profound sense of purpose - of destiny in this world. I may not receive standing ovations from large groups when I step out on stage (at this moment *grin*) from all the work I have done on the global stage, but every 'insignificant' act every day has an affect on the lives of millions of people, though I do not see these results. It is no coincidence, my name, my choices, my enrollment in the MAGIS program. All these things are interrelated.

Yes, Shakespeare is right that a rose will smell as sweet with another name. But a person's choices and actions, as Romeo and Juliet can attest, are shaped by names and categories. If I was named Jennifer or Caitlin, I would not be the same person. If I had my family name Stewart instead of Donkin, I would not be who I am. Names are important, and so are the words we use to describe situations in the world.

A new Magus

I've been hiding out relatively recently, and I've been anxiously anticipating a new beginning. Perhaps the hiding was due to a need to store energy up for my latest and most demanding new endeavor - the MAGIS program at UCSB.

Today was a TA orientation and a little departmental meeting - both of which shed more light than I expected. Of course, having no expectations helps the matter. Yet, still people surprise you. You're never quite sure where people will take you. Today was no exception.

The interests of my colleagues in the program seem bent on two general regions of the world (as far as I can tell) - the Middle East and Latin America.

As time continues I am less and less concerned about language requirements (as we're only required to translate 2 paragraphs in the language of our choice with the aid of a dictionary in order to demonstrate proficiency) and more concerned about the course load when combined with a TAship and my part time position. However, the graduate assistant completed her masters as a single mom with several teenagers while working a full time job. So, I shouldn't be too worried. I will be able to get through it. Yet the question remains, at what level, and to what cost?

The goal of the program, as the PR man Mark J. said, is to create some kind of global leadership in the way of non-profits in this changing world. I'm excited to be a part of such a high caliber group of people, while simultaneously nervous at the expectations (not only of the professors, but more problematically of myself). What will this leadership look like? How exactly are they seeing us? What dreams and aspirations do they have for us? My mind runs in multiple directions trying to close around the various possibilities.

My guess is the goal of foundation, with the combined effort of providing connections for our time after our 'short' program. I must admit, I feel I will miss my colleagues at the end of our time as they seem so interesting and interested. This breed of person is rare and difficult to discover in the world outside our academic bubble. I am sure the bonds formed in this program will hold fast, and prove invaluable in our work and lives after the program. I am sure it is divined as only such a creature can be.

A Minister

Here's how the conversation normally goes:

"So, are you going into the ministry?"
"Uh..."
"I think you would make a good minister."
"Well, I don't believe that the role of 'ministers' will look anything like it does now in 20 years. I just don't think the Church is going to look the same way."

"Hmmm. Well, I still think you would make a good minister."

At this point I just roll my eyes.

I am repeatedly confronted with the question,"Do you want to be a minister?" As I get older it comes at me with greater frequency. This doesn't entirely surprise me. There are a number of ministers in my family. Both of my parents (much to the distress of the Southern Baptist Conference) are ministers. In fact, my mother was ordained while she was in her third trimester of pregnancy. You decide the theological ramifications of that one.

My mother's brother is also a minister. My father's cousin is a minister. A couple generations back on my father's side there was a missionary who actually died in the mission field (from some sort of tropical disease).

Of course, my family also has its share of entrepreneurs and stock brokers, but no one's asking me if I'll be starting a business or begin brokering any time soon.

So what makes a minister? Or perhaps I should say, what makes a good minister? Or even more important, what qualities in a person prompt others to ask the question "do you want to be a minister?"?

Of course there is the encyclopedic definition. But that doesn't really answer the last question. It doesn't really tell me why people think this would be a good idea. I can of course, espouse a list of reasons why people might think it would be a good idea for me to become a minister.

Let me first list the qualities I think (as only a PK can) are necessary in order to be a good minister:

1- The person must feel the need to lead - but more importantly, they must be a person others are willing to follow. By this I mean, there must be some sort of visionary quality, some sort of charisma present. There are different kinds of charisma, but ultimately there must be something in the person that draws others to them. If there is not, how are they to influence their flock?
2- They must be compassionate. They must be able to feel how other people feel, and to express concern and caring for them. This is key in any leader, as they must understand the seat of conflicts, and thereby be able to help generate solutions.
3 -They must have a fire for their fellow humans and a need to see them safe and fulfilled having all their basic needs met. This is of course the way it must be, if the person is to be a Christian leader. There must be a desire for social justice, otherwise, the person is not following the message of Jesus.
4- They must be able to admit their mistakes.
5- They must be able to delegate tasks, so as to both a)not become overburdened and b)give tasks to those who are the best suited for a task's completion.
6-They must be willing to re-evaluate.
7- They must be passionate.
8- They must be willing to struggle with their faith, and lay that struggle (at least in part) out to be seen by the congregation.
9- They must be imperfect, and they must know it is so and admit it as such.

BUT the MOST IMPORTANT quality is that they are CALLED to ministry.

Some of the characteristics which I numbered overlap. That's okay. I know they do. But there are different elements emphasized in each, which is why I separated them the way I did. Perhaps there are other characteristics which are also important in a minister but these are the ones which speak to my heart and my experience.

I said that is what it would take to make a good minister, not a great minister. To be great, I am sure there are nuances in each of these aspects which must be achieved, and of those nuances, I think books must be written and yet none can cover. Ultimately, there is something in a person that cannot be pin-pointed that makes them right for the role they will play. It is divine. They are meant for that part - the part was written FOR THEM at that point in their lives.

This of course, speaks of calling. To be called is the biggest and most important thing about a position. And while your specific calling changes as your life situation changes, there are certainly general roles that you are meant to fill in no matter what location you find yourself. Ministry is one of those which requires such a thing. Often times, I feel some people enter the ministry because they are so lost themselves, or they enter by process of default, as opposed to a genuine calling to the position.

That said, ministry is not confined to the occupation of 'pastor' or 'priest' or 'rabbi' etc. Just because you feel called to ministry doesn't mean you need to pastor a church. Ministry is what you make of it. Any occupation can become a ministry, and indeed is, when you view your work through that set of lenses. I think, this is something everyone should use to color their perspective on their job.

Life is sacred. Living is a worshipful act. Live life to the fullest and you are infact bringing glory to God. It is a beautiful thing.

So let's revist that wretched conversation and let me give a better answer to the dreaded question posed and re-posed by so many acquaintances.

Yes I will be going into the ministry.

Am I going to pastor a church? Not if I can help it.

Then how am I ministering? I will be living for God and I hope to make every act a kind of worship bringing glory to God's creation and helping to bring about his will in this world.

Every person I advise, comfort, or just spend time with sitting and being quiet is a kind of ministry and a kind of worship all at once. So too is the other person ministering to me. Am I ordained? You'll have to figure that one out. Will I go through the rigorous exercises required of seminary? Probably never.

I say all these things knowing that I do not know what the future holds and that I tread each step as it is revealed to me. This is all I can do. I can plan, but often my plan is foiled by a greater plan - God's.

All I can say to any definite end is that ministry runs in the family, and no doubt I minister on a daily basis.