Heavens. It's been a while. I have every intention of keeping this thing fresh, but with the school and the work, things can get a little overwhelming sometimes. I haven't read anything on Aldaily.com for nearly a month, for pete's sake. Even friends' blogs have gone by the wayside.
Currently, the business of theological inquiry is becoming more and more a sociological analysis of right-wing knucklehead conservative Christianity. I find the assigned material fascinating, as always, but it's the ways in which the theocrats and chauvanists have emerged in my classes that has caught my attention lately. For instance, consider the recent discussion in my ethics class:
Student (in a question directed to the Professor): "Are there any societies on earth that are more ethical than the United States...... or Canada?"
Professor: *flabbergasted* "I'm not sure how to answer that question."
My inner monologue: "Anyone who has eyes that aren't made of wood should be able to see that such a question is ridiculous. "Societies" cannot have moral character, considering their existence is solely in the mind. Abstract ideas have no agency, and therefore can't behave in an ethical fashion. Ethics concerns the actions and character of the individual, not an imagined community or socio-political abstraction. Perhaps that makes me a nominalist, which is fine with me. In addition, moving away from abstract theoretical concerns, how in the hell does one evaluate the actions of nearly 300 million people, and determine their ethical quality? Such an ordeal is impossible, given the complexity."
Student next to me (turning to his neighbor): "Personally, I don't think Canada is all that moral of a society."
My inner monologue (fighting mental convulsions of stupefaction): "What the hell do you know about Canada?!"
Don't get me wrong - I find the brand of Canadian jingoism that emerges south of the border (let's call it "little man syndrome") to be as odious as any thinking person would. Still, it chaps my ass to hear some Falwell-fed punter claim to know anything about the place where I'm from.
My teeth. How they grind.
I've taken to carrying a Schuler bookmark in my back pocket, upon which I've scribbled this great Bonhoeffer quote:
"... my resistance to everything 'religious' grows. Often it amounts to an instinctive revulsion, which is certainly not good. I am not religious by nature. But I have to think continually of God and Christ; authenticity, life, freedom and compassion mean a great deal to me. It is just their religious manifestations which are so unattractive."
I pull that out as a theological asthma puffer from time to time; it helps with the hyperventilation. Bonhoeffer was the greatest pastor of the 20th century. If he can do it, so can I.
It's not all bad though. I've taken to reading poetry to counteract such stinkin' thinkin'. This week, Donne and Yeats (and Berry, of course) have made it easier to get up in the morning. I like to think that poets, by definition, cannot be bigots. Sure, they can be crazy, cantankerous, and unpredictable. Himalayas of the mind? Surely. But bigots? Not a chance.
Also, I've been reading pieces of Christopher Hitchens' latest collection of essays. I'm not much of a fan of Hitchens, especially since he became such a hysterical hawk. But his prose makes my knees wobbly, and he's got a wit that could split an atom. My favorite part so far has been the anecdote he tells about how he and Salmon Rushdie pass the time when they're together. They rename Shakespeare plays as if they were Robert Ludlum novels. Thus, "MacBeth" becomes "The Dunsinane Reforestation." I've been laughing about that one for nearly two weeks.
Currently, the business of theological inquiry is becoming more and more a sociological analysis of right-wing knucklehead conservative Christianity. I find the assigned material fascinating, as always, but it's the ways in which the theocrats and chauvanists have emerged in my classes that has caught my attention lately. For instance, consider the recent discussion in my ethics class:
Student (in a question directed to the Professor): "Are there any societies on earth that are more ethical than the United States...... or Canada?"
Professor: *flabbergasted* "I'm not sure how to answer that question."
My inner monologue: "Anyone who has eyes that aren't made of wood should be able to see that such a question is ridiculous. "Societies" cannot have moral character, considering their existence is solely in the mind. Abstract ideas have no agency, and therefore can't behave in an ethical fashion. Ethics concerns the actions and character of the individual, not an imagined community or socio-political abstraction. Perhaps that makes me a nominalist, which is fine with me. In addition, moving away from abstract theoretical concerns, how in the hell does one evaluate the actions of nearly 300 million people, and determine their ethical quality? Such an ordeal is impossible, given the complexity."
Student next to me (turning to his neighbor): "Personally, I don't think Canada is all that moral of a society."
My inner monologue (fighting mental convulsions of stupefaction): "What the hell do you know about Canada?!"
Don't get me wrong - I find the brand of Canadian jingoism that emerges south of the border (let's call it "little man syndrome") to be as odious as any thinking person would. Still, it chaps my ass to hear some Falwell-fed punter claim to know anything about the place where I'm from.
My teeth. How they grind.
I've taken to carrying a Schuler bookmark in my back pocket, upon which I've scribbled this great Bonhoeffer quote:
"... my resistance to everything 'religious' grows. Often it amounts to an instinctive revulsion, which is certainly not good. I am not religious by nature. But I have to think continually of God and Christ; authenticity, life, freedom and compassion mean a great deal to me. It is just their religious manifestations which are so unattractive."
I pull that out as a theological asthma puffer from time to time; it helps with the hyperventilation. Bonhoeffer was the greatest pastor of the 20th century. If he can do it, so can I.
It's not all bad though. I've taken to reading poetry to counteract such stinkin' thinkin'. This week, Donne and Yeats (and Berry, of course) have made it easier to get up in the morning. I like to think that poets, by definition, cannot be bigots. Sure, they can be crazy, cantankerous, and unpredictable. Himalayas of the mind? Surely. But bigots? Not a chance.
Also, I've been reading pieces of Christopher Hitchens' latest collection of essays. I'm not much of a fan of Hitchens, especially since he became such a hysterical hawk. But his prose makes my knees wobbly, and he's got a wit that could split an atom. My favorite part so far has been the anecdote he tells about how he and Salmon Rushdie pass the time when they're together. They rename Shakespeare plays as if they were Robert Ludlum novels. Thus, "MacBeth" becomes "The Dunsinane Reforestation." I've been laughing about that one for nearly two weeks.
Yeah I know what you mean. My favorite is when some these said students tell me what Jews believe as if they were Jewish like me to know for certain.
Posted by
Carlos |
12:10 AM