“Led by the Nose”

Offered by Edward Scott Michael,

Ministerial Intern, February 18, 2007,

at the Unitarian Society of Ridgewood

 

“Nixon is thru in ’72.”  So read the slogan on the pen my dad gave me.  My dad was a loyal Union man, and he was handing out pens for the Electrical Union’s unsuccessful campaign to defeat Richard Nixon.

            Four years earlier, June 1968, I was five years old. For the first time I saw my dad cry.  We were standing by railroad tracks near Chase, Maryland, waiting for the train carrying the slain body of Robert Kennedy.  I didn’t know then who Bobby Kennedy was, but I knew my dad was sadder than I had ever seen him.  For the next twenty years I thought my father was a big Kennedy supporter, but he wasn’t.  He was just mourning a tragic loss, another death in a season of killing.  He recognized Kennedy was a great leader, even if he did not agree with his political philosophy.  Too many times, when a leader speaks, that leader dies.[1]  Too many times we are left wondering – “What if…?”

            And maybe it is true that we are susceptible to this cult of personality - the belief that we need a great leader to move our government and culture in new directions.  Indeed this is the belief behind President’s day – the day we celebrate two leaders, George Washington and Abraham Lincoln – leaders many claim were founders and sustainers of our nation and its promise of liberty.  Maybe it is truer than I would like to admit.  Maybe we do need great leaders, people of courage and vision to stand up and take us where we ought to go.  History can be read that way.

            Consider George Washington, a man of great complexity.  He was ambitious, stirred by deep emotions, conscious of his power and legacy from an early age.  A man not born into High society, Washington did all he could to gain acceptance into circles of power – as a soldier, as a businessman, and then by marrying the wealthy Martha Custis.

            Yet Washington always remained suspicious of elites.  He detested the pomposity of the British upper classes even though he admired their lifestyle.  He despised unmerited rank and privilege.  As General, he refused to promote officers solely because they came from prominent families, despite strong pressure to do just that.  His closest advisors - Henry Knox and Nathaniel Greene - he chose based on merit, not pedigree.  And at the end of the Revolutionary War, when he could have easily assumed the mantle of “King,” Washington resigned his military post, assuring the peaceful succession of civilian rule.  For this action, King George the third of Britain called him - “The Greatest Man in the World.”

            Abraham Lincoln is another hailed as a great leader.  Lincoln had a resolve hard as steel and a gift for saying the most sublime truths using simple language and compelling images.  Here are words from his Second Inaugural Address:

“With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”

Lincoln provides an example of the vision that makes a great leader:  Know thyself, know thy foe, speak plainly and inspire devotion to justice.

            This brings me to my present concern.  How can we understand our current leadership compared to what we have come to admire and expect?  Is our current president authoritative like FDR?  Perhaps.  Is he plain-spoken and tough like Harry Truman?  I believe so.  Yet there are other parallels.

            I believe George W. Bush has much in Common with John F Kennedy.

            John F. Kennedy and George W. Bush were each empowered by a rich father who wanted his son to be president.  We heard throughout the 2000 campaign that George Bush senior had originally been preparing his second son, Jeb, for the White House.  But it fell to his second choice, eldest son George W. Bush, to fulfill his father’s dreams.  Joe Kennedy, Jack’s father, made it no secret that he wanted his eldest son, Joe Jr., to be president.  Sadly Joe Kennedy Junior was killed in WWII.  So Joe Kennedy Senior did everything in his power get his second son, Jack, elected.

            Recently declassified reports reveal disturbing facts about Kennedy.  Virtually every election JFK won his father had a hand in rigging.  Whether ballot boxes were stuffed, or newspaper editors paid off, or candidates with substantial leads lured to drop out by Father Joe’s deep pockets – Kennedy’s political success was bought and paid for by his father’s money and not the will of the people.

            And this is where they differ.  George W. Bush did not have his elections bought for him - John F. Kennedy did.

            Yet who and how – these are not the real questions for me.  I wonder, - no matter what we think of Bush and Kennedy – is this how we want to select our leaders?  Should someone be anointed president simply because he or she comes from a rich and powerful family?  I am not declaring that this is wrong – it may be a reality of politics – but let’s admit it.  But what does it say about us and our “republic” that we continue to choose our leaders from circles that grow smaller, creating dynasties?

            The tough questions of who should govern us - and why - get obscured, and politics played like a game - the game of the horse race, the game of the sound bite, the game of “us versus them,” the game of “we’ll stick it to them this time.”  This is not a roadmap for good citizenship or effective leadership.

            This unreflective anger-filled competition drove me out of political activism 20 years ago.  Too many activists were smug, self-righteous pit bulls.  Their focus on the game distanced them from concerns of humanity, community and fairness.  They ignored the lessons of Martin Luther King, who always retained his love for his opponents and his belief that he could awaken their humanity in return.

            You see I have this goofy romantic notion that our leaders should challenge us to be greater than we are, greater than we think we can be.  Like the ancient Israelites in today’s reading there is something either holy or unholy about how we govern or choose to be governed.

            And this reminds me of my brother Dan, who was here last weekend.  Dan is writing a Rock Opera, a show about justice, transformation and the yearning for liberty.  Dan believes we have a moral duty to demand and secure our liberty.  He describes it in religious language.  “I … asked God what to do/” one song says,  “And God says, ‘I sent help, that’s why I sent you.’”

            That’s why I sent you.  We are all called to compose liberty and midwife justice, to be the change we wish to see in the world.  That is why it’s so important to listen to those we oppose, to walk a mile in their shoes, to forge connections where none may exist, and to pray for peace with our whole selves.  As Thich Nhat Hahn says, if you want peace, be peaceful.  Be the change you want to see.

            Discerning whom to follow seems so difficult.  We often feel led by the nose.  We place our trust in this politician or that one.  We too often “get fooled again.”  But we have no real alternative – we must stay engaged or risk tyranny.  I no longer have those Red, White and Blue platform shoes, and Nixon was not thru in ’72, yet still I wonder - What makes a great leader?  People lead by example, by command, by ideas.  General George Washington felt duty-bound to secure an independent United States.  Almost by the sheer force of his will General Washington won a war of attrition and established the first Republic the Western world witnessed since Roman times, imperfect as that Republic remains.  Yes, Washington was a severe, ambitious man.  Like many in 1776, he was a slaveholder demanding to be made free.  Yet the words of the founders were blessedly greater than their examples.  And they left us a document – the Constitution – which has been used to secure more liberties over time, liberties the founders themselves never intended, but which our moral evolution has deemed right in the spirit of humanity and the Republic in which we live.

            The words of the Constitution have liberated when supported by people of courage and vision.  Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black appeared in an unprecedented television interview in 1968, not long after writing the Miranda decision assuring the rights of suspects in police custody.  In that program Eric Sevareid asked Justice Black, “Some say you have made it difficult for the courts to obtain convictions.  How would you respond to that?”  “It is not I,” declared Justice Black, “but this,” he said, waving his pocket-sized Constitution.  “The injunction against illegal search and seizures, the right to not accuse oneself, the right to a fair and speedy trial, the right against cruel and unusual punishment, innocent until proven guilty – these are right here in this sacred document.  I only do what I can to see these words live on the streets of America, for every last one of us.”

            Justice Black shows how one can lead using ideas.  Yet how do we interpret those words written down 230 years ago and secure their blessings?

            That is where we come in.  We are a collection of well-informed and engaged individuals.  We are in community; we support one another in our search for truth and meaning.  We covenant to encounter, discuss, agree and disagree, remaining in right relationship, nurturing our bonds of sacred connection.  And in that way we are a model for the world.  We are an example of the most lasting and stable form of leadership – the leadership of an engaged and devoted group of citizens.

            Perhaps one of the best models of leadership is Rosa Parks during the Montgomery Bus Boycott.  The myth is that Rosa Parks decided on December 1 1955 that she had had enough and refused to go to the back of the bus.  That’s not the whole truth.  Rosa Parks was a wise woman who had studied civil disobedience with Rev King at Miles Orton’s Highlander School, that famous training ground for Justice in Glen Eagle, Tennessee.  Back in Montgomery, organizers from all the black churches had been meeting to discuss action for months.  They chose early December deliberately for maximum economic impact – both on the buses and on the businesses downtown during the Christmas season.  The women’s alliances at the black churches were ready to print flyers.  The preachers were preaching about non-violence and civil disobedience.  People with automobiles had been identified to help folks get to work during the boycott.  The Montgomery Bus Boycott was a community effort with Rosa Parks as the public face.  This was a deliberate, calculated, planned effort requiring an engaged community, sophisticated networking and thorough training.  It was no accident.

            One vital aspect of their work was that their meetings were held at church; the setting reflected the sacredness of their task.  They knew their foes would be reluctant to storm the churches.  So they held prayer services, where they prayed, and preached, and sang hymns between planning sessions.  They were reminded every step of the way that social justice action is HOLY work.  They held fast to their faith that by remaining together, united for a transcending sacred purpose, they would be hard to defeat.  And they were correct.

            By staying informed, speaking up when we can, not letting our leaders off the hook, we enter that holy place where faith and civic duty merge.  Our vigilance insures that our leaders are the best we can find, whether or not they ride on daddy’s dime.  By showing where we will not go, we tell our leaders where they must stop.  By staying in right relationship with those we oppose, we learn more about ourselves and become the change we wish to see.

            We are led best by thoughtful reflection, divining what is right in conversation and openness.  We are led best in a spirit of humility, recalling that justice-making is HOLY work, that we materialize a bit more of the sacred when we bring justice into the world.  We are led best when we nurture our community of faith that fuels us for the duration of the struggle.  We are led best when we listen more than speak, think more than move, pray more than protest.

 

So May it Be

 

Unison Closing

 

“Whatever we can do, or dream we can do, let us begin it today.  Boldness has genius, and power, and magic in it.  May we be bold in our living and in our loving.”

 

May all our blessings bless the world in return, and may the world embrace you in sweet affection.



[1] From the 1980’s metal band Living Colour, the song “Cult of Personality.”