Vol. 5 Iss. 2: a stock-taking

EDITORS' NOTE

   In the time since the last issue and the national election, we at The Turning House have been brainstorming how to put together something interesting and relevant without harping on subjects much belabored in the past few months. We came up with the idea that this issue of The Turning House should be a sort of stock-taking of current events in the United States and at Union. While there is much to process both in national politics and life at Union this year, this issue offers a sort of snapshot; we can look at it, read it, step back and think, and then return to engage our community anew.

CONTENTS:

Willie Baptist, "Will the Real Amoses Stand Up?!"

Beyond Defeat: Post-11/2 Responses

Justin Latterell, "Know Thyself. Then Hug a Conservative."

Colleen Birchett, "What REALLY Happened with the Black Vote?"

John Wessel-McCoy, "The Crisis"

Michelle Wiltshire-Clement, "The Elephant, the Donkey, and the Lamb"

Jeremy D. Posadas, "From the 'Jesus Question' to 'Evangelical' 'Safe Space'"

Reflections on a First Semester at Union

Hannah Giffin, "Union: The Few. The Proud. The Liberal?"

Lidya Tandirerung, "Adjustments!"

Lizzie Berne, "'Four More Years!'"

Miguel Angel Escobar, "Psalm of Joshua"

Reviews

Andrea E. Davis, "Caesar on His Head"

Marisol Caballero, "Just Like a Prayer, Let Esther Take You There!"

Vol. 5 Iss. 2: Will the Real Amoses Stand Up?!

   By Willie Baptist

   I have been asked to sum up my experiences this semester with the Poverty Initiative at Union Theological Seminary – and we have accomplished much, from the Screen on the Green, to day-long seminars, to participation in classes, to a well-attended workshop at the “New Testament and Roman Empire” conference. We sponsored an exhibit of art works by formerly homeless organizer Ron Casanova, held a Poverty Initiative chapel service, and influenced sermons, prayers, and projects throughout the semester.

   One of the most moving things for me was the sermon given by second-year MDiv student Antone Melton-Meaux. To me, it captured the spirit of our new Poverty Initiative exactly. He spoke about a period in Israel, similar to today, when society was polarized into extreme poverty in the midst of extreme wealth. The prophet Amos spoke out against this immorality and injustice with the battle cry, “But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.” Antone’s sermon ended with the call for today’s Amoses to stand up and speak out against the inhumane inequality in the US.

   The Economic Policy Institute conducted a study recently about living above the poverty line. That study pointed out the income people needed in order to meet all their basic necessities. For example, a family with one adult and two children needs $14 an hour, which comes to about $30,000 a year to get by. Yet the study also concluded that over 60% of the country’s labor force makes less than that a year, in the world’s richest country. This is more starkly illustrated by five of the top ten richest people in the country (who happen to be five Waltons, holding the controlling interests of the world conglomerate Wal-Mart): their combined worth is over $100 billion, while five Wal-Mart workers’ combined wages are less than $100,000 a year. It would take the five Wal-Mart workers literally a million years to equal the combined wealth of this country’s five richest people. This is not only ridiculous, it is immoral and raises serious religious concerns.

   Today this economic inequality, given the tremendous technological developments of the past century, is not about scarcity or robbing Peter to pay Paul. It is about the outright abandonment of human life in the face of unprecedented abundance. The consequences are deadly, when you can have two parents with their children in the dead of winter living in their home with no heat, who get up everyday 6 am, go to work, and at the end of every pay day must still decide, “What can we pay for – rent, utilities, or food?

   This Thanksgiving the Kensington Welfare Rights Union, an organization of poor and homeless families, erected a tent city to bring attention to the consequences of indifference. As a member of this organization, I spent time talking to the homeless families of tent city. Although I am thankful for things like the Poverty Initiative, the Poor People’s Economic Human Rights Campaign, and the Kensington Welfare Rights Union for their efforts, for me ’tis not the season to be jolly. ’Tis the season to answer the call of Antone and Amos to break our silence and complacency.

   We must model ourselves after the outspoken leader and teacher the late Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who bravely and brilliantly embraced the call of Amos: “The dispossessed of this nation – the poor, both white and Negro – live in a cruelly unjust society. They must organize ... against injustice ... against the structures through which the society is refusing to take means ... which are at hand, to lift the load of poverty. ... There are millions of poor people in this country who have very little, or even nothing, to lose. If they can be helped to take actions together, they will do so with a freedom and a power that will be a new and unsettling force in our complacent national life.”

   In the next phase of the Poverty Initiative we must continue to identify and inspire the newly emerging Amoses from both the growing ranks of the poor and the religious community. We must continue to answer this call to end poverty and injustice through curriculum development, sermons, ministry, prayers, and song. It is an honor to be at Union with you in order to do this as we build a massive social movement, led by the poor, to end poverty.

Vol. 5 Iss. 2: Union: The Few. The Proud. The Liberal?

   By Hannah Giffin

   One of the things that struck me during my first week at Union was the message from some faculty, administration, and students that we had finally arrived in a safe clubhouse of Christian liberalism. I don’t want to trivialize the painful experiences of many individuals in Christian settings. However, I was amazed that a place that seeks to affirm diversity could allow such assumptions to be made about the character of ‘conservative’ Christianity and the make-up of its incoming class.

   Unfortunately, due to the separation of first-years caused by the new curriculum, I’m afraid that few at Union have fully appreciated the theological diversity of the first-year class. Although I can be easily categorized as a ‘liberal’ Christian, I didn’t come to Union to be with a bunch of people who agree with me. I came to Union to be surrounded by a community of Christian witnesses who could push me towards a more comprehensive understanding of what our tradition calls us to do and be. I think theological diversity exists here to make that experience a reality – as long as voices aren’t silenced by assumptions of agreement.

   Our challenge as people of faith is to seek the truth beyond societal labels; to recognize our fundamental connectedness and respond thoughtfully to each situation. Different labels for Christian groups, used blindly and with prejudice, should become as distasteful to us as other forms of discrimination; they divide, exclude, generalize, and degrade. Despite the strength of ‘conservative’ Christian voices in the media, many students here know little about the differing standpoints and complexity of beliefs that are labeled in this way. We all need to listen deeply to our brothers and sisters of faith, keeping both ears open for a truth that lies beyond our current understanding. We need to start listening here, at home, in our own community.

Vol. 5 Iss. 2: Know Thyself. Then Hug a Conservative.

   By Justin Latterell

   After the sweeping Republican victories on November 2, 2004, the temptation for shell-shocked Democrats and progressive people of faith is to withdraw from public life and watch Karl Rove’s house of cards come falling down around him. In the face of a federal government that is increasingly unwilling and financially unable to address issues of social justice, however, it is more important than ever for progressives to engage in real efforts for social change and community development.

   These efforts must extend beyond politics. Too often, we have let the pursuit of a government oriented to social justice overcompensate for our own responsibility to pursue justice in our everyday lives. Even if it proves the neoconservatives in the White House right, progressive people of faith must tap into the huge potential for community development that exists within our nation’s churches, synagogues and mosques. Projects like the UTS Poverty Initiative are on the right track by moving beyond awareness and activism towards actual engagement within the community.

   Democrats should also respond to the recent elections introspectively. It is no longer sufficient to confront poverty, bigotry and injustice with amoral, relativistic language. Amid calls for the party to move more to the right or the left on the political spectrum, progressives must first push the party to evaluate what we believe, why we believe it, and how to communicate our message more effectively. Politicians can pander to individual issues like abortion and gay marriage, but without a clear and tangible message to counter the Republican motto of “Lower Taxes, Smaller Government, Less Regulation,” Democrats won’t win back the hearts and minds of the American public.

   Finally, at a moment in history that demands our strong voice of principled dissent, progressives must not forget our moral obligation to find common ground with our political adversaries. Former President Clinton recently stated that “America has two great dominant strands of political thought ... conservatism, which, at its very best, draws lines that should not be crossed; and progressivism, which, at its very best, breaks down barriers that are no longer needed or never should have been erected in the first place.” As the minority party in Congress, we must infuse our principles with pragmatism to ensure that the lines being drawn and the barriers being built by the majority party are just, or at the very least, easier to someday break down.

Vol. 5 Iss. 2: What REALLY Happened with the Black Vote?

Should Postmodern Theologians Probe Statistics?

   By Colleen Birchett

   In the days leading to the recent election, the press was buzzing with rumors that President George Bush had split the African American vote, mostly over the issue of gay marriage. The rumors were in part based on a Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies report suggesting that at least 18% of African American respondents were now pro-Bush. Moreover, the New York Times and the St. Petersburg Times both said that 17-19% of their own respondents were backing Bush. The rumors didn’t stop after the election. Within hours, Washington Post and CNN exit polls said that Bush indeed had captured 10-11% of the African American vote and, in Ohio alone, had gotten 16%. The question is, does this data reflect what really happened?

   In a quest for truth, I examined Ohio election results and Census demographics. I discovered that Ohio African Americans live primarily in six counties and comprise 13-27% of those populations. In such counties, collectively, votes went to Kerry over Bush, by an average margin of 20%. In Cuyahoga County, with the heaviest concentration of African Americans (27%, 665,334 votes cast) the margin was 33% in favor of Kerry! Moreover, in one of these counties that supported Bush over Kerry, the margin was only 8%. These figures run counter to those projected by media exit polls. Perhaps this indicates the need to begin challenging the long-held notion of the African American voting bloc as unequivocally homophobic and to suggest that we have a greater understanding of the connectedness of issues such as racism and heterosexism than these elections polls portrayed.

Vol. 5 Iss. 2: The Crisis

   By John Wessel-McCoy

   In Rules for Radicals, Saul Alinsky wrote, “When written in Chinese, the word ‘crisis’ is composed of two characters – one represents danger, and the other represents opportunity.” The current political situation facing progressives in the United States is indeed a crisis. Pick your poison: trampled civil liberties, the neocon quest for a Pax Americana, and all the while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

   With the advent of four more years of Bush, there will be times when progressives will feel powerless, furious, and may want to give up on America. I urge you not to fall into despair. Self-righteous self-pity breeds cynicism and arrogance. Worst of all, it achieves nothing. Get involved with something – anything. Now more than ever it’s time to commit yourself to systemic change. Know that the politics of city council and Albany have a hell of a lot more impact on your everyday life than the White House. You can do more by getting engaged in Harlem and Morningside Heights than playing armchair pundit on Washington politics. The Poverty Initiative right here at Union is a great place to start.

   By the same token, progressives have some exciting organizing tools at their disposal that can link communities together on a national level. Now is the time to start building coalitions, communicating with each other, and coordinating efforts. We’ve got to set goals beyond these next four years. Organizations like MoveOn have a lot of potential as vehicles for this dialogue and strategic action. I know many of us are busy with our studies and disenchanted with our current state of affairs, but can we afford to give up? Take stock of the dangers and the opportunities, and then act. In the words of Joe Hill, “Don’t mourn – organize!”

Vol. 5 Iss. 2: "The Elephant, the Donkey, and the Lamb"

   By Michelle Wiltshire-Clement

                           Living at the junction of both worlds, I cry. The elephant and the donkey sleep not with the lamb but with the beast of public opinion, pacing back and forth, force-fed to believe scraps of truths by whichever hand that feeds it.

                           The beast of opinion’s teeth rents a decision into the front legs of a donkey, which curls its tail between its legs in submission from the elephant’s elevation. Are we awake with one eye shut and walking with a fractured leg, pain paralyzed by our own cousin’s decision by choosing Republican over Democrat?

                           While the first 100 Days of a mandate written by the winner churns like moldy bread on the eastern border beast’s side, the claws that made the beast dangerous still drip with the blood of innocent children born on a land designated our prey until democracy reigns. I cry, living at the junction of peace where I live and war where designated families lay face-down dead.

                           I cry for peace, but tears are not enough; nor may apathy or anger, but being a part of the beast’s body and learning new ways to roar is a start. We are public opinion and the president chosen is to act on our behalf. Stand. Sit. Write. March on. Do. Be you: alive. Be alive to educate the offspring believers of the five point’s moral conscience. Educate the religious offspring of the beast so that we can all be human and reveal that the perception of evil in their midst has been a cruel hoax. God is: the God who is for the people, by the people, and evil lurks when people fail to hear that we are all God’s people.

                           “Love thy neighbor as thyself ” does not translate to “Kill thy neighbor as thy humanity.” Can there be love without liking? Can there be peace without war? Can there be religion without evil? Can there be people without killing. Can there be lifestyles of loving without god-like judgment? Can we all come to the table and be heard? Can we all be moved into action for inclusion in the Senate, Congress, Executive, and Public Opinion Branch to try and work together where the mediator Lamb opens our heart to understand with respect for others as God respects creation? “For God saw the creation and it was good.”

Vol. 5 Iss. 2: From the 'Jesus Question' to 'Evangelical' 'Safe Space'

A Commentary

   By Jeremy D. Posadas

   In classrooms, on Blackboard, in loud Pit conversations or silent eye-rolls, it’s clear that a current defining the community’s life has subtly but significantly changed. Last year, the ‘Jesus Question’ loomed in many forms among many people at the seminary; in discussions surrounding this question, some invoked ‘evangelical’ to express their frustration at having to leave Jesus outside the classroom. ‘Evangelical’ helped engage questions of spiritual and intellectual modes of learning, as well as the relationship of Christianity and other faiths in a Christian seminary. And for many students of color, ‘evangelical’ was, and continues to be, one of the only ways to address painful issues of race that abound unspoken and unhealed.

   Now, however, in this election year ‘evangelical’ is championed or challenged as a decidedly (if often implicitly) political identity. This year, largely following the patterns set by media portrayals, the lines drawn around ‘evangelical’ by most people at Union have not been in the shapes of head and heart – with some shading in black and white (but the barest brown and rainbow) – but brightly in the colors of red and blue. Moreover, ‘evangelical’ this year has been largely, limitedly contested as a category of white identity, again following much of the public representation. In this shift a specter has arisen that, at its best, repeats Union’s own worst failings at good intentions and, at its worst, threatens the very purposes for which a place such as Union should exist at all.

   Rather than choosing a name for this specter, I want instead to relate some of the phrases by which it has manifested itself. I do not mean to represent or criticize specific individuals, groups, or events; at the same time, each of the following has been fully present in conversations throughout the semester. At base is the claim, both by some who identify as evangelicals and some who don’t, that “Union is not a safe space for evangelicals” or “At Union, it’s evangelicals who are oppressed / discriminated against.” A frequent add-on is “I’m not an evangelical myself, but I think that....”  Translated into institutional terms, we hear that “Assumptions are made here,” either about Union’s progressive identity or about the politics or faiths of evangelicals. And turned towards advocacy for the oppressed is the appeal “If this is supposed to be a diverse place...” or its cliché cousin, “Religion should not be so polarized / politicized...”; again, these are offered (though of course with different nuance) by people across the theo-political spectrum.

   In whatever guises this specter appears, to my mind it has three causes, each of which has consequences that harm Union’s integrity for its mission. The first cause is misguided or incomplete power-analyses, by which ideas of privilege and marginality are simplistically applied within the boundaries of the seminary while wholly divorced from the socio-political realities of all the worlds beyond the seminary. Thus, the language of ‘safe space’ or oppression is appropriated mostly by or for white evangelicals, without accountability for the broader, real structures of evangelical power.

   Such structures include, for instance, an electoral evangelical base that expressed its power in the US election; or an ecclesiastical evangelical base that colludes with fundamentalist church leaders across the world to continue to oppress queer people and women and non-Christians. Whether individual students at Union are personally involved with these efforts is secondary; what is primary and ignored is that naming oneself as evangelical relates one to structures that, implicitly or explicitly, identify as evangelical. Any claim about ‘evangelical oppression’ at Union must recognize the power structures at work both inside and outside of Union. Evangelical Christianities do not have political and social power in the United States and world simply on account of numbers, but networks of power-relationships. And such relationships, deeply entrenched in our current social matrix, do not become less powerful within Union through some magic of numerical reversal.

   The second cause is a misrepresentation of this seminary’s mission, which imposes a knee-jerk inclusivity to strangle the seminary’s progressive, transformational commitments – a mistake corrected in the new mission statement for a ‘progressive’ Union, not a ‘liberal’ one. Again, personal and structural roles are confused: the ‘safe space’ for professions of personal faith and commitment is different from the ‘safe space’ Union also seeks to be, where unjust power structures can be overturned. Too often, criticism of the political and social power of evangelicals is taken – and allowed to be taken – as a personal attack against evangelicals at Union. Yes, Union must be a ‘safe space,’ if ‘unsafe’ means being systemically disallowed from participation or directly attacked with regard to one’s humanity. Yes, Union must be a ‘safe space,’ if ‘safe’ means safety for those whose experiences of oppression have been theologically undergirded by some (admittedly not all) of the same worldviews that define evangelical faith. But Union should not be a ‘safe space’ for all political perspectives: precisely because it seeks transformation in the world, it challenges the powered assumptions of that many Christian theologies make, particularly evangelical theologies. In this sense, Union cannot be a safe space – it must be a transformational space.

   This leads to the third cause: misidentification of what a seminary is for. A seminary, as distinct from a religious studies department or divinity school, seeks in part to transform its students and enable them, in turn, to transform the world. The particular values of Union in its teaching and living include preparing students for the fight – in churches, academies, and societies – against unjust uses and structures of power, the fight to end poverty in all its dimensions, and the fight for a Gospel that does or sanctions no violence against the humanity of each and all.

   Union sits in the nexus of many institutions – religious, social, political, academic – and each of us comes to Union out of the power-relations that dominate those institutions. But Union’s duty, at times utterly derelicted, is to transform those same power-relations, first within its walls, then outside. If such work of transformation is to continue in a New Union, then we all must resist the specter of easy claims for ‘evangelical’ ‘safe space.’

Vol. 5 Iss. 2: Adjustments!

   By Lydia Tandirerung

   The diversity that is integral to the Union community has provided an inclusive atmosphere that I believe all international students can appreciate. The diversity forum held during Orientation was a helpful space wherein I could voice some concerns regarding language and cultural adjustments.

   The main cultural adjustment I have had to make is to call older people simply by their names. In Indonesia we must address our elders with the general prefix kak, older women with bu, and older men with pak. The adjustment from formal to casual is particularly hard to make with professors who allow students to call them simply by their first names. Regarding my use of the English language, I have been blessed with patient and understanding friends and faculty. As I come from a country where English has never been a daily language, it can be difficult to express complicated theological and philosophical concepts. Also, I love jokes, but I seem to lose some of my ability to be humorous because of my lack of familiarity with English colloquial language and slang.

   Regarding my future at Union, as a WCC student, I expect that Union’s commitment to including social action concerns in theological discussions will continue to enrich my understanding of the ecumenical call to justice. And as a person from Indonesia, a country having the largest Muslim community in the world, I also encourage myself to be a contributor to our interfaith and cross-cultural concerns.

Vol. 5 Iss. 2: "Four More Years!"

   By Lizzie Berne

   For the first few weeks I was ‘at’ Union, but something happened recently and now I’m really here. It was November 3, the day after the election, and I was carrying Kerry’s loss around with me in a visceral way. I guess most of it was shock, but there was a strong sense of hopelessness in it too. I stumbled into OT101 and then into several moments of grace. First, a conversation with a classmate I hadn’t spoken with before; the grace appeared in her words of comfort and in a button she offered with an open hand, declaring the fuerza poderosa, the powerful force, of woman. Another much-needed blessing came with the opening prayer led by another classmate. He started with song and the sound of his voice released a sob from me that was embarrassing at first. But I knew that the sacred space he had invoked was a safe place for release. After class, in the Pit, two other students reached out, offering their perspectives on what our responsibilities were – as Americans, as ministers, as students at Union – in response to the unfolding national reality.

   When I headed back to the subway that afternoon I felt different. Not just about the election, but about being here. It was as if these moments had baptized me into the Union community. Community has been the most essential aspect of my Christian experience, so I know how life-giving, transformative, and powerful it can be. It’s too early to say how being a part of Union will change me, but already it’s given me hope. Even on November 3 I was looking forward to the next four years.

Vol 5. Iss. 2: "Psalm of Joshua"

Give thanks to God with all your heart,
for Moses has died, we are freed from his tyranny!
There’ll be no more starving in this wilderness.
Our lands await us.

God has heard our people’s prayers,
murmured as softly as incense in the night—
Darkness protected us from the sight
of Moses and Aaron’s men.

For forty years, we’ve practiced burying,
our children in sands as white as snow.
Even rocks, when struck by Moses
go on weeping until they can no more.

Silenced is the voice that could only say “No!”
Moses denied Egypt, but conquest also—
and now my eyes gaze hungrily
on the lands of Gilead, Dan, Naphtali
Ephraim, Manasseh, the land of Judah—
as far as the Western Sea,
the Negeb
and the plain…*

Miguel Angel Escobar
December 1, 2004

* Cf. Deuteronomy 34:1-4.

Vol 5. Iss. 2: Caesar on His Head

   By Andrea E. Davis

   The cool air was charged with anticipation and excitement this October morning. Hundreds of experts, professors, and students of New Testament studies eagerly convened at Union Theological Seminary to participate in the recent conference “New Testament and Roman Empire: Shifting Paradigms for Interpretation.” Over the next two days, October 29-30, these great minds focused on innovative methods of reinterpreting the Christian text in light of the political climate out of which it emerged.

   As the conference began and each presenter took the stage to introduce their theory on the true significance of the New Testament texts, it became clear that the common theme would be revolutionary change. John Dominic Crossan called for a redefining of civilization that is not inherently imperial. He was followed by Brigitte Kahl and Richard Horsley, who addressed the subverting of the Roman Empire by the historical Jesus and his followers. Perhaps the highlight of that first day was the dance piece choreographed by one of Union’s third-year MDiv students, Eboni Marshall. Her composition incorporated Black femininity into the music and movements in order to depict an interpretation of the Revelation to John that counters the historically Eurocentric and masculine reading that is typically favored. The second day of the conference was equally challenging to traditional New Testament scholarship, with diverse presentations ranging from Davina Lopez’ challenge of conventional gender paradigms to Heidi Neumark’s call for an urban ministry that is serviceable in the midst of poverty.

   But what is the true value of such an event as this conference? What ultimate good is attained by the gathering together of professionals to share with each other their views on biblical interpretation? These biblical scholars, including ourselves, return from these conferences to their broader communities, and as these revolutionary interpretations come to our churches and congregations, we move much closer to living out our professed faith in biblical truth and liberation.

Vol 5. Iss. 2: Just Like a Prayer, Let Esther Take You There

The Book of Esther, by God(?), 10 chapters, published ca. 300s BCE

   Reviewed by Marisol Caballero

   This summer, in an effort to catch up on some leisurely reading, I searched for a novel that would be a genuine page-turner. I wanted something with tons of shocking sex and violent scenes to keep me interested, as well as a read that would not occupy the entirety of my summer vacation. I had a few ideas: something by Toni Morrison, a good Nancy Drew ... but a June episode of 20/20 set me in the right direction. My life-long fascination with the Material Girl, the artist formerly known as Madonna, made me wonder about the Persian-but-Jewish Queen Esther for whom she has recently ‘re-invented’ herself.

   Already into the first few chapters, I could definitely see how America’s biological and England’s adopted daughter, Esther Ciccone-Ritchie, could identify with this ancient Biblical figure. (I mean, aside from the possible simple desire to eventually be named after every prominent biblical woman!) Here’s a woman, Esther, who takes fair advantage of the angry, hot feminist Queen Vashti’s loss of position due to refusing to obey her husband’s every humiliating whim. She happily becomes King Xerxes’ concubine and ultimately his queen, although she uses this position to bat her eyes a few times and realize her own agenda while crushing her enemies.

   I was struck by the similarities, in fact, between Mrs. Kabbalah’s portrayal of Argentina’s beloved Eva Peron and Esther: neither one of them was at all afraid to use her good looks to make the men who loved her give her anything she wished, neither one of them was afraid of a little selling out and donning the heavy ‘bling,’ and both of them, in doing so, actually did make things better for the communities from which they came. Can we say this about Esther Ritchie – the one who sang, “ ’cause the boy with the cold hard cash / Is always Mr. Right”? Is she singing a different tune in her life or is this historical figure really speaking to her? I guess these questions remain to be answered: after all, “life is a mystery / everyone must stand alone...”

   I did enjoy reading Esther and would recommend it to anyone, especially while listening to Madonna albums and then watching Evita!

Vol 5. Iss. 2: Contributors

Willie Baptist is the Scholar-in-Residence for the Poverty Initiative. He is also Education Director for the Kensington Welfare Rights Union.

Currently a first-year PhD student in Psychiatry and Religion, Lizzie Berne was a chaplain at a trauma center in Jamaica, Queens, before coming to Union.

Colleen Birchett is a first-year MDiv student. Her major interest and background is in curriculum writing.

Marisol (Mari) Caballero is a secondyear MDiv student on the ordination track for Unitarian Universalist ministry. She enjoys long walks on the beach with the wind in her hair and dolphins laughing at her heels.

Second-year MDiv Andrea Davis has interests in arts and ministry. She is hoping, more than anything, for some sort of employment after graduation.

Miguel Angel Escobar is a first-year MDiv student from San Antonio, Texas. He’s the one with curly hair.

Hannah Giffin is a first-year MDiv student interested in biblical studies, religious dialogue, and worship. She likes to read long 19th-century novels for fun, particularly those by George Eliot.

Justin Latterell, originally from Colorado, is a first-year MDiv.

Jeremy D. Posadas is a second-year MDiv student. He was raised in one evangelical tradition, and now practices in another.

Regina Shin is a second-year MA student concentrating in Theology and the Arts.

Lidya Tandirerung, STM student, is an ordained minister of the Toraja Church, a Reformed church in Indonesia. She holds the principle that “a smile is a therapeutic action for social illness” (whether people respond or not!).

John Wessel-McCoy, a country boy from Illinois, wouldn’t be here at Union if he hadn’t met and married Colleen Wessel-McCoy. He’s co-founder of the YPTCIPTG caucus and proud father of Marx the Cat.

Michelle Wiltshire-Clement is a parttime MDiv student, and one of the few people who combines scientific and poetic vocations.