So I was talking to a friend the other day, who happened to have spent Christmas with people rather well-placed in the music department at St. Olaf. And these good folks mentioned over dinner that Olaf had received some complaints about the Christmas Festival this year. These complainers were all folks who had watched the Festival on TV (so, likely have no other affiliation to or knowledge of the college), and they made it clear that the music was fantastic, but they didn't think it was appropriate for the choirs to be decked in red, white, and blue - that is a violation of the separation of church and state.
Now, I'll be the first to admit that the current administration is blurring the lines between church and state in many instances, AND that there are a number of private, church-affiliated institutions of higher learning that would intentionally paint themselves patriotic for an event like that. So, there is good reason to be sensitive to and vigilant about abuses of the First Amendment.
But Olaf is not such a place. And anybody with an inkling of knowledge about the school would know that. If nothing else, you'd think the big PURPLE mass of the St. Olaf Choir right up front would cause the complainers to second-guess their theory. Yes, other choirs involved have red (actually, cranberry) and white or blue and white robes (Cantorei's can be green and white, but they set their reversible stole to blue because that is the liturgically appropriate color for Advent) - but not to give some wink-wink, nudge-nudge nod to patriotism - those have been the colors and styles of robe for those choirs for as long as I can remember, long before the "you're either with us or against us" mentality took hold of the nation, long before color-coded threat levels made us all wary of our neighbors.
I mean, I get it - there's a lot of subtle meaning-making and symbolism that goes on in the world, and some of the most subtle and unquestioned stuff is what entrenches some of our worst systemic evils. So I don't begrudge folks for raising the issue and asking the questions.
I do get annoyed, however, when people presume that their worldview is 100% correct and untainted, and all they are really interested in is letting people they disagree with know why and how, exactly, they are wrong. Such folks tend to lob reactionary judgments and then run away, refusing to engage in actual dialogue that might lead to better understanding on all sides.
Because sometimes, a robe is just a robe.
But you won't know that if you presume to know what the wearing of robes and their various colors mean. You won't know that if you don't bother to talk with the robe-wearer, but instead choose to talk at them, only telling them why they are wrong to wear the color of robe that they do.
The whole situation reminds me of a few years ago, when I was verbally accosted by a man at the corner of Hendon and Fulham (the heart of Luther Seminary's campus). He was a middle-aged white man, presumably a resident of the neighborhood. He asked me if I was a student at Luther, and when I said yes, launched into this tirade against us for being anti-Islamic. He came to this conclusion thanks to the banners for the new "Called and Sent" development campaign, which depicted a stylized triptych of fire, a cross inside a heart, and a hand. In his mind, these images were clearly invoking the crusades (he saw the heart and cross as a shield, and the hand as a reference to Islamic law allowing the chopping off of a hand for punishment), and the banners slyly indicating we were called and sent to destroy Islam.
Again, if he'd had an inkling of knowledge about the school, he would've known Luther offers a Master of Arts in Islamic Studies, and even has a few Islamic students enrolled. As it was, I patiently tried to explain to him that the campaign was about calling and sending ministers out into a needy world - that fire is a symbol of Pentecost, of being called and anointed by the Holy Spirit, that the "shield" was actually a heart, meant to be an intense close-up of Luther's seal, the symbolism of which was sin redeemed by love, and that the hand represented service to the world.
But he would hear none of it, just kept going on and on about the crusades and the whole institution and every individual associated therewith being anti-Islamic. Exasperated, I finally suggested he provide this feedback to the development office and pointed him in the right direction, but of course, he didn't have time for that. He was satisfied to have told me what for, having assumed he knew all about me and my worldview based on his interpretation of a banner hanging on my school's property.
You know, that old adage about what happens when one assumes is an old adage for a reason. And right here you've got two cases that prove it.
And now for something completely different: how cool is it that over 300,000 people turned out to caucus in Iowa last night? That's not just show up to a poll and cast a ballot - that's democracy in action, that's 300,000 people engaging each other, discussing and discerning who will best lead us through the next four years. Oh, be still my populist heart!
Peace,
Catrina
No comments:
Post a Comment