Reflecting on My Fiftieth High School Reunion

I am sad . . . so very sad.  With the end of my Fiftieth High School Reunion my Brigadoon has once again vanished into the morning mist and I am left wondering if I shall see her once again reappear in the evening mist of some future date. I can only hope.

I have spent a good amount of time and thought just trying to figure out why I absolutely love my High School Reunions. One reason it is so hard to explain is because historically I have not been a big reunion attendee.  In fact, I didn't attend a single reunion until I had been out of high school for 25 years, married for almost 24 years and had four children. I suppose the main reason was that it just never occurred to me that we actually had reunions to attend in the first place.

You see I don't recall ever knowing that the Pasadena High School Class of 1965 even had reunions. I never received a phone call, don't remember any post cards or recall anyone I knew mentioning it to me. Now that is not to say efforts were not made . . . I am sure they were. It simply means I did not know we were having reunions.  Besides I was busy working and going to school. During those first 25 years I was focused on making a place for myself as a husband, a father and in Baptist life as a Baptist Minister.

Then it happened. Someone found my address and mailed an invitation that found its way to my mailbox. I read it, showed it to my wife Susan and then put it on my desk in my home office. I don't recall when that invitation arrived but I know I picked it up just about every day and reread it and then replaced it on the desk. For some inexplicable reason I just could file thirteen it. Sometime during my pick it up...put down and pick up again period, Susan knowing said, "Why don't you just go ahead and register  . . . . you know you want to go and besides I think it might be a good opportunity to just get away for a while." Every time we discussed it I had a reason why I didn't want to go. I used all the excuses I talked about in another piece I wrote a few years ago.  Truth be told, she was right. I did want to come and we did need to get away for a while. So, I wrote the check, filled out the form placed them both in an envelope and dropped my reservation in the mail.

So, on the appointed day we drove to Pasadena, dropped the children of at Grandma's house and headed out to the Houstonian. We arrived at the hotel, checked into our room and made our way to the Reunion registration table. There I was greeted by a bunch of people I recognized as my High School classmates but as my Aussie friends might say, "were note really my 'Mates,'" i.e. best friends. I remember being nervous and thinking. "No one would know who I am." However,  if the didn't they sure did a good job making me think they did. Unfortunately for me none, not one of the guys I used to hang out with were there. We had a great time but when it was all said and done I sort of filed it away in the "Been there, done that and bought the T-Shirt" category.

It would be another 20 years before I attended another Reunion of my High School graduating class. This time it was different. This time I was looking for them. For some reason, maybe social media, I was beginning to reconnect with people with whom I had gone to high school. For me however, Social Media was not enough.  At any rate, somehow through that interaction it was decided that we would have a 45th Reunion. I think the people who had usually taken the lead in this were a bit weary of the task but none-the-less somewhere along the way someone "pulled the trigger" and we began the planning. That was really the beginning of the reunion for me. The planning meetings were like mini reunions.

I'll skip the meetings, conversations, planning, calling, and promoting but we had the reunion and I have to tell you the twenty years between my reunions changed the way I saw my High School Reunion. What before had been disappointing was now essential. My classmates many may not have needed me to be there but I needed them to be there. Something inside of me that needed them.

One of the most disappointing things in my life is that I lost contact with the guy I spent most of my Junior High and High School years "hanging with." I don't think there is anywhere in Pasadena that we didn't go and not much we didn't get into. I haven't seen or spoken with him since he dropped out of school our last semester and as I have been told, join the Navy. I suppose that was one of the things that drove me back to our reunions . . . . the off chance that he might show up at one. Alas, it was not to happen but in the process I came to feel bonded with a lot of wonderful people.

I need to say that we may not measure up to the Greatest Generation as Tom Brokaw has defined it but I believe the members of the Greatest Generation, our parents, would see a lot of what made them who they were in us. Oh, I don't mean us as in the Boomer generation. I mean us as the members of the Pasadena High School class 1965. I came to this conclusion at my 50th. high school reunion. As I listened to my classmates' stories I was literally blown away by what some have accomplished; I am humbled by what others have endured; I am impressed by the personal growth and maturity most had achieved; and as a Minister I was especially pleased to discover the overall spirituality we had reached.

No, I am not living in a "make believe" world and I don't think I represent some kind of "old age" induced Utopianism. First, more members of the class of 1965 have not attended a reunion than have. I am also aware that individually many of us have done some really "dumb" things. I also know that the only reason we laugh at some of the things we did is because we actually survived them. I know that every life represented in our class has had its share, and in some cases more than its share, of trauma, heartache and pain. But we have also had more than our share of good experiences . . . far more than we deserved.

Because I see many of you regularly on Social Media I know that we are not bound together by our politics. In fact I sometimes worry that one or two of our class is about to run off in to a political ditch and I'm pretty sure a couple already have. No, it isn't our politics or our accomplishments or our failures or even our personality types that have bound this class together. It is something much stronger and much deeper. It is something strong enough and deep enough so that had some one who had not attended a single reunion could have walked in and they would have been embraced as though they had attended every single reunion.

I am still trying to understand what it is that that binds me to this group of people. I know so many things that it is not. Many of those things it is not enhance the tie that binds but don't secure it. However, I think I am on the verge of understanding it. My Dad and I could sit in a room together not say much and when one or the other had to leave we would say something like, "I have really enjoyed our time together." Clearly it was not enjoyed because of the words that we spoke . . . we just didn't speak many. It was simply the fact that he was "with me." 

The weekend prior to my 50th high school reunion I participated in what was my First Cousin's Reunion. All of my first cousins gathered at the Drury in San Antonio. For the first time since childhood we were all present in the same place at the same time. Our ages ranged from mid 60's to early eighties and each represented all sorts of life experiences.  Some of us had not been together in more than 30 years but when we met in the lobby of that hotel we took up right where we had left off all those many years ago. It was as if no time had passed between then and now.

What we cousins concluded as we met and shared (I likened many of our sessions together as an IPR Group) is that what bound us together was our shared heritage and common values. In short, as my Mom would often say, "Blood is thicker than water. Our lives as cousins had taken a wide variety of pathways filled with all sorts of unique to each one experiences. I thought as I sat at the table and looked into faces that reflect a life long journey, "We are each one so different and yet the same; we have all dreamed our dreams, achieved many of our life goals, and as Paul would have said are nearing the end of our race but none of that binds us. As I drove out of the parking garage I thought to myself, "Lord, I love those people!"

I overheard a conversation in the hospitality room during that 50th. year reunion in which someone said, "It is so amazing, it as if we had never been apart." Indeed it did seem that way.

As drove away from the South Shore Harbor Resort and reflected on what I had just experienced and I thought to myself, "Lord I love these people!"  I really do. Now some bright psychologist or skilled psychoanalyst  might be able to delve into that and dredge up something buried in my psyche. But I think I'll just say, "We are family and I love the members of the PHS Class of 1965." You can make of it what you will but I think I am drawn to you because we are Family and as family we share a common heritage and value system.

I could say a lot about that but I think it is pretty well said in that last phrase. The whys and wherefores don't really matter . . . . they don't matter because we are family.I think I understand why I feel drawn to the members of the PHS Class of 1965. It is summed up in the words of from the song "We Are Family." . . . . . "Ev'ryone can see we're together as we walk on by and we fly just like birds of a feather. I won't tell no lie, all of the people around us they say, "Can they be that close." Just let me state for the record, "We're giving love in a family dose."  Yep that's it . . . . in our own unique way as a part of the PHS Class of 1965 WE ARE FAMILY!

If you are a member of the PHS Class of 1965 and want to see photos you'll have to go to the class Facebook Page.

Constitution and the Baptist Principle of Religious Freedom

Marv Knox longtime editor of the Baptist Standard recently wrote an editorial in response to Ben Carson's statement on Meet the Press and again on CNN's State of the Union, insisting, “you have to reject the tenets of Islam” in order to be president.  

In the article Knox appeals to Article VI paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution to insist that Ben Caron's views are in error and inconsistent with the both the Constitution and the Baptist principle of Religious freedom. 

I want to respond to his argument by essentially saying that Knox errs at several points.  First, just what does the Constitution say, "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." 

It is clear that the intent of the Constitution in this Article and clause is doing two things. First, it is affirming that all persons elected to public office must take an oath or make an affirmation that they will support the Constitution. Second that there will be no religious test applied to determine whether or not a person may or may not hold political office. 

This is not intended to be a constraint upon the voter. It, like the First Amendment, is intended to restrain the Government. In short, any person who meets the Constitutionally defined requirement for who may run or hold an office is considered qualified under the Constitution to hold that office. In the case of elected offices it means "to be elected and hold the office" should the voters so elect them. It is not intended to deprive religiously minded people from voting their conscience. It is designed to not disqualify a citizen from holding an office or governmental position simply because of his religion or lack thereof. This is to preserve the Constitutional form of our government from being over thrown by its leadership (hence the oath) or dominated by a given religion so that the population as a whole has its religious prerogatives preserved. 

I might note here that those who see the First Amendment as a freedom from religion do err. The founding fathers would see the movement to do away with all religious representation in government as a treading on the rights of the citizens who are religious. Hence the many religious references in  not only their writings but also carved into the buildings housing that Government that is protect everyone's right to whatever degree of religion they fancy 

If Ben Carson had said, and he did not, that a person who is Muslim but meets all the qualifications set for in the Constitution is not qualified for the office of President he'd be wrong.  However, having said that, I need to also point out that there are no restraints placed upon how a voter determines how he will cast his vote.   

The voter may use whatever reasons he chooses to vote for or against any candidate in any election in which he is entitled to vote. If, he believes, as apparently Ben Carson does, that Muslims are bound by their religion (which they are entitled to freely engage) to honor Islamic sharia law then he is entitled to vote against and further to campaign against their election.  Sharia law is the Islamic legal system derived from the religious precepts of Islam, particularly the Quran. It is the equivalent for Muslims of the religious rules and commandments in Christianity drawn from the Bible are for the Jew and the Christian.  Devote Muslims, Jews and Christian's have one thing in common and that is they owe their first and highest allegiance to their God. 

 This does not mean, as Knox explains so well, that a Catholic (JFK) or a Muslim of the same ilk as JFK could not run for President and if elected serve.  Indeed he could.  

However, as Knox reminds us through his predecessor it is one of the things a voter will want to weight as he evaluates whether or not the oath or affirmation to uphold the Constitution will be inordinately influenced by his religion. If a voter decides that is likely to be the case then the candidate's religion becomes for that voter a legitimate and legal reason for voting against that particular candidate. BTW - make a note: this also applies to the non-religious candidate since it possible he is so anti-religion that he might seek to undermine the rights of those who are religious. 

Kennedy understood this and set out to mitigate it by addressing the Baptist Pastor's  Conference. He, being a Catholic understood that the Ballot Booth is like a national Confessional Booth. It is where the individual closes out the rest of the world and alone with his own conscious guided by whatever religious and non-religious views he hold and then votes accordingly. 

Incidentally, in the event I haven't already said it, there are those among us who would have us deny our First Amendment rights or be disenfranchised if we want to participate in government as citizens. In fact there are those who work tirelessly to bring that very thing about. Ron Reagan, the son of former President Ronald Reagan, who  has recorded a radio ad promoting the atheistic Freedom From Religion Foundation says we must bring an end to what he refers to as the “intrusions of religion into our secular government.” He the goes on to ask them to join FFRF in the organization's efforts against religion in politics. 

Incidentally, while Baptist believe in  Religious Freedom it is not foundational or distinctive. Baptist believe in, what we call religiously, "Soul Competency." Philosophically that means freedom of conscious. A third thought that is often overlooked is that if conditions are placed upon how a person arrives at a decision to vote or not vote; vote for a particular candidate; or for or against a proposition his vote is not a vote at all . . . . it is coercion.  When a person steps into the voting booth his only obligation is to vote his conscious. We can only hope that among the many questions the voter will ask himself is, "Is this good for the Country?" 

Unfortunately, for Christians, Jews and Muslims our society is moving in directions that violate fundamental moral and ethic standards that these religions hold as absolutely essential for a health community. This coupled with the trend of the federal courts to not uphold the rights of the religious in preference for those who are non-religious and/or who hold social view that are contrary to most if not all religions.  It may well be we are moving close to the place our founding fathers found themselves and elicited the following response: " . . . when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." (Declaration of Independence).