Wesley, Logic, & Deism

"I could not study, to any degree of perfection, either mathematics, arithmetic, or algebra, without being a Deist, if not an Atheist. And yet others may study them all their lives without sustaining any inconvenience. None therefore can here determine for another; but every man must judge for himself, and abstain from whatever he in particular finds to be hurtful to his soul." - John Wesley, Sermon L, The Use of Money

I knew I liked that guy.

I was a mathematics major in college. Still not sure how that happened. I mean, I know the path that took me to math, but I'm not sure how I actually graduated with the degree. Regardless, I am a rather logical thinker. It's been a detriment to faith. But I have often overcome it. For instance, I have no quibbles with evolution, the notion that God doesn't know the exact details of the future, and no longer need the stories of scripture to be historical to have faith in them and live as though they are true. The distinction between "fact" and "truth" has become very important to me. I don't mind living according to things that are outside of my experience and ability to "figure out," because my faith rests in truth and not in fact. (This is a good thing considering how often I've been wrong!)

I don't think that I totally divorce faith from knowledge, but they certainly aren't the same thing for me. Knowledge and empiricalness inform my faith, but they don't hold it together.

It seems to me that a great number of professing theists (those who believe in God) are actually inadvertent deists - those who believe in God, but don't live as though God makes any difference in their lives. I can't really blame them. But where I am similar, I challenge myself to believe with a hope that goes beyond figuring it all out. Otherwise - for myself - I'm not sure I could call it "faith."

I know...I'm so ignorantly idealistic.

And I'm still learning.

Truth & the Facts

This has been sitting in my email for months. I'm not even sure where I first got it (might have been a Scott Daniels sermon). Anyway, I'm sharing:

 The chief priests’ and elders’ question has been repeated through the centuries of Christian history. Attempts to answer the question as posed inevitably result in diverse forms of Christian heresy, for the attempt to establish grounds more determinative than Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection for why we should believe in him results in idolatry. If one needs a standard of truth to insure that Jesus is the Messiah, then one ought to worship that standard of truth, not Jesus. There is no place one might go to know with certainty that Jesus is who he says he is. To know that Jesus is the Son of God requires that we take up his cross and follow him. Having taken up the cross, Christians discover they have no fear of the truth, no matter from where it might come.

 – Stanley Hauerwas

The Hunger Games Review

If you're reading this, I might imagine what you're thinking: "Jeremy is finally breaking his blogging absence by reviewing a teenaged-hyped movie?" Yes...yes, I am, actually.

-----------

I remember that when my wife was first reading the Hunger Games trilogy, she was slightly disturbed by the content. I think I recall her asking me something about them, but I just passed the books off as the next Twilight. Despite that I now reject the comparison of the two series for the most part (having read them all), the first movie went to pathetic lengths to imply similar themes. If the scenes that flash Gale's reaction to Peeta & Katniss' interactions were meant to bring forth the whimpers of teenage girls, the directors were successful (at least judging from the row of them that sat in front of me at the theater last night). And though I've not read the Twilight books and only suffered through one of the movies, even I can see the resemblance between the character cast as Gale and the one I think is the werewolf dude in Twilight.

I decided to read the books after a Mennonite pastor whose blog I read suggested that those drawn to the peaceable Kingdom (or the "nonviolence of Christ') would do well to interact with the themes. I read the first and was hooked. I couldn't wait for the movie. After initial reviews came out, including a not-so-good one from the afore-mentioned pastor, I was worried that what I valued in the series would be absent from the film.

While there were several things that I didn't like, overall, I thought the movie did very well with the story.

The casting and performance of Katniss was great. I've been sorely disappointed when characters formed in my mind while reading a book were drastically different when cast in a movie. The girl who played Katniss, while beautiful, was not "perfect" in the sense of today's magazine cover teenager. And she played the role of Katness wonderfully.

I had been warned that the effect of violence was not present in the movie in the ways it was in the book. However, I found Katniss' response to Rue's death wonderfully-depicted. The result and response to fear and violence in the books was what made them worthwhile to me. I believe we need to wrestle more with the agony of death and our role in it.

That said, Katniss was a bit too "innocent" for me. One of the things I valued in the series was the inner turmoil she had with the notion of killing. Short of a narrator-like over-voice in the movie (which would have had the potential to be horrible), much of this was probably impossible to portray. Hopefully, the forth-coming movies will not remove this important part of the story. I can envision a director making the final killing scene of the series one of revenge rather than the confused, conflicted, and impulsive action of a young woman devastated by the effects of violence.

What I'm saying is this: the main reason I even "enjoyed" the series were the implications of "power by fear" and "fear by [the threat of] violence". While the state and situation of Panem might seem far-removed from 21st century America, the notion of out-sourcing violence isn't so much. Do we ever really wonder just how it is that America is so "peaceful" while we every so often hear rumors of war, trial, violence, and death throughout much of the rest of the world?

Just how and why is it that we eat enough to get so fat that we spend billions in fat remedies while other parts of the world starve in hunger?

How and why would a bunch of human beings decide to board airplanes and exterminate themselves by kamikaze-ing them into our centers of commerce and government? Just what exactly breeds that passion and willingness to kill?

I don't think these are questions to leave to those who lead and who oversee power. In fact...the thought is rather scary.

But back to the movie: the interplay between scenes in the arena and in the control room (which was remarkably similar to one of my favorite movies: The Truman Show) or dialogue between President Snow/Seneca Crane/Haymitch was probably necessary, but it sure was a departure from the book. It seemed to blatantly tell the "progression" of power, rather than the guessed implications of what was going on through Katniss' thought processes in the book.

Movies like Wall-E and The Lorax are okay in that they demonstrate the effect of human ravaging upon all of nature. But the story of The Hunger Games does me better in showing the effects of humans ravaging one another.

While the arena and the idea of an annual event like the Hunger Games (a death-match to instill fear and maintain the "pax of Panem" disguised as entertainment's value) is again far-removed from our society, there are plenty of ways in which power is enacted or abused for entertainment's sake or one's own pleasure. These include the sex-trafficking trade, massive pornography industry, food over-consumption, sports industries, and certainly the whacko bi-partisan political scene which is little more than a spectator's sport at the moment.

Perhaps The Hunger Games will go beyond a teenaged romance triangle for some people.

In the end, I enjoyed the movie very much and look forward to the next. But as almost always...the book was better. :-)

Why I Don't Gamble

Last night, I had made eight not-so-serious predictions prior to the Super Bowl on Twitter. After, I jokingly tweeted: "Only two of my eight predictions for the #SuperBowl were correct. #fessingup #whyidontbet". An old friend responded via private message asking why it is that I don't gamble. I thought I'd share some of what I responded:

First of all, as with most things these days, I claim the spirit of Romans 14 in this. You asked my thoughts, so if you hear any legalism or forced piety directed at you within my response, check your filter. In other words, my conclusion on this is a non-essential and I'd be happy to sit at the table of Communion with someone despite our disagreement on this (and an ever-increasing list of other things).

There have been very brief times in my life when I've toyed with the notion of gambling. I've had some success with Blackjack and variant forms of online Poker. I believe that with patience and the proper amount of time spent, I could be a decent gambler and bring in more money than I'd lose. I can imagine myself being able to do that and while it may sound cocky, I generally believe it to be true.

But in the end, I see gambling as just another form of taking other people's money. 

I'm less concerned about becoming addicted myself (I do believe that is a possibility for anyone, though not a certainty for everyone). I'm more concerned that if I did indeed win, I'd simply be profiting from the impulsivity and addiction of others. That doesn't jive with my understanding of Christ. Even (and especially) when I win, I'm just contributing to the system. Put differently, gambling is just another way to confess my faith in power, specifically, the power of money (but also "winning" and "thrill"). That's something I'm trying to avoid as I try and understand the self-emptying of Christ.

Most people waste money in one form or another, and I am no exception. Sometimes I take my kids on the carousel. It costs $2.50 or so. I'm basically paying for the brief thrilling experience and - if I'm lucky - a small memory, because the money and the moment are both gone almost as quickly as a round of Blackjack. I could see how some say the same of gambling - they enjoy the thrill. I can understand that. But the overall picture I describe in the previous paragraph is enough for me to avoid this as a whole.

After the Yellow Ribbon

"In any war, at least one side loses; in some wars, no side wins." - John Howard Yoder

Back in November, I flew down to North Carolina for a very short conference called "After the Yellow Ribbon" put on by the students of Duke Divinity School on their campus. It was my first time at Duke: impressive all around, as expected. Quite a stately campus. I've been on my share of campuses, but I'm not sure that I've been more in awe than at Duke. Of course, the fact that my favorite theologian (Hauerwas) walks those halls might have been a factor (though not for long, this is his last semester, I'm told). And there was indeed a Duke men's basketball game that weekend, making for a crazy campus. Anyway, the conference was bringing together three parties: the Church, the Academy, and the Military to talk about our response to soldiers who have come home from war. Some of my notes and reflections are below.

Overall, I was greatly challenged by the conference, as I knew I would be. I'm not really sure how to be proactive in response. I don't know any recent veterans (in my area, at least). My path to and on nonviolence basically led me to understand that despite my contrarian feelings about the US's military actions, my responsibility as a follower of Christ is to be directed to those who are hurting and those who are ignored. Veterans often to fit both of those demographics.

I was a bit out of place - it was mostly Duke Divinity students (academics) and a few in the military. It only kindled the fire in me to be back in school, but this is to come. There might have been a few other pastors, but I didn't perceive that anyone else really flew in for it.

A lot of this is a sporadism of notes, but glean what you can.

----- Friday Evening: Lieut. Colonel Pete Kilner -----

Lt. Col. Kilner teaches at West Point.

"There are elements of heaven that are only in war." - This is related this to a "band of brothers"-type camaraderie/community. I've actually considered this in relation to the Church and koinonia and have a sermon series on the very back burner along these lines. Good relationship generally cannot be manufactured. Something happens to people when they sweat and bleed together. I've not experienced war, but I've known the sweat and tears of serving for a couple of weeks in an impoverished area. The people I was with and I have bonds that cannot be explained nor recreated.

I was made to consider the notion of selective conscientious objection. Generally, a conscientious objector must object to ALL war...not just the current one. (i.e.: "Would you fight in WWII?") I have had my paperwork to sign and file to my denomination for my conscientious objection sitting on my desk for over half a year. I'm not sure why I haven't sent it in yet. Part of me wonders that if a situation like WWII did come about, I might actually want to participate. Anyway, Lt. Col. and others at the conference talked about "selective conscientious objection." I forget Kilner's feelings about it, but others would lobby for it. And I think I would too.

[paraphrasing] The people are not doing their job in doing a good public debate concerning the just-ness of war.

One take-away was just the notion of creating some kind of a "Soldiers Anonymous" group in our community. I would need a leader(s) though, and it certainly can't be me. But we need to create safe places where veterans can come and talk of their experience together...or at least just be together.

----- Saturday morning, Exploring the Moral Landscape: Military, Theological, and Academic Intersections (Elyse Gustafson, Herman Keizer, Warren Kinghorn) -----

(Kinghorn) PTSD - not just anxiety, traumatic events in the past act determinatively in the course of life in the present; generally considered a medical condition/diagnosis, responded to with medicine and therapy; But Kinghorn, while acknowledging the reality of PTSD, believes it can be an oversimplification for those coming back from combat, as PTSD is a general "explanation". But unlike other physical diagnoses, PTSD is in and of itself the symptoms. (Other diagnoses come about because of symptoms, which point to the diagnosis.) He might consider PTSD as coming about due to the _moral_ effects of war. He notes the difference between recipient trauma and agentive trauma ("done unto" and "done to others"). His belief is that these are the majoritive causes for PTSD in combat-related PTSD.

"moral injury" - perpetrating or failing to prevent the occurrence of moral events. problem: moral injury can hardly be classified simply as a medical term. As such, the issues and thus, the responses, are as diverse as the number of soldiers coming home. Again: create spaces for personal narrative-sharing 

(Gustafson) First Liut. Gustafson's presentation was probably the most moving of the conference for me. She told us of her experience in receiving soldiers home as a chaplain.

One such: "Dan" - combat soldier, on going to Church: "I'm treated either as a hero or a monster. Neither is a person." She wrote a prayer for "Dan."

When she read it to him, he cried, and she describes the experience as "the closest she'd ever felt to God." To me, she is describing Matthew 25.

Reconciliation for the penitent: confession; examination of conscience - Yes, confession. Growing up, like so many other Protestant boys and girls, confession was this crazy-idea to control people invented by the Roman Catholic Church (Forgive me, please). And even still, I have to remember that confession is only sometimes about culpability. But confession and incarnational ministry is as of Christ - "Taking the sin of the world upon oneself." This sharing in the RESULT of sin is our ministry. Soldiers (like all those who have injuries) need spaces of confession. The complexity of issues, responses, etc. is astounding.

"It's true confession if it brings people into community."

(Keizer) Chaplain Col. Keizer spoke freely and from the heart, obviously from decades of experience. 

Reported that 52% of Veterans are reserves, meaning they do not go back to people that understand them. There apparently is a much different debriefing process for reservists. (parenthetical comment by me: so far, my respect for the military has increased and for politicians and citizens has decreased)

"Reflexive" versus "reflective" in making decision to kill.

Again: the opportunity of selective conscientious objection

"If we're no longer able to be critical of our country, then we are unable to be good citizens of our country."

Keizer spoke of two things I need to read: Matterhorn (novel on Vietnam) and his own article: "I'll be home for Christmas"

He encouraged us to use the psalms to help veterans speak and heal.

----- Seminar: Caring for Veterans After War (Chaplains Bill Cantrell & John Oliver) -----

Bill is a Navy Chaplain, working for the VA here in Durham

Trauma:
Often challenges the integrity of our body and our sense of ourselves
Challenges our beliefs about: life, death, meaning, our sense of mastery and potency in the world
Can challenge the very foundations upon which we build our lives
Affects our identity and identification

Moral Injury: Causes & Consequences
[persistent threats to assumptions of right & wrong]
Altered assumptions/changed humanity
Affects decision-making & behavior
Actings out, revenge, retribution

The Emotional Toll 
Fear, Anxiety, Stress (Guerilla warfare, civilian threat)
Guilt, Shame (killing, abusiveness, destruction)
Anger, Rage (Helplessness, betrayal/violation)
Sadness, Dysphoria (Loss, hopelessness, witnessing grave suffering) 

Spiritual Fitness Guide
Fit-->Stressed-->Depleted-->Drained

The journey home marks the beginning of an internal war for the [soldiers].

Spiritual Aids to Recovery 
Group exercises
Community Involvement
Spiritual Practices
Existential Topics
Forgiveness
Values for Living
Finding Meaning and Purpose
Ritual

George Washington, November 10, 1781: "The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive how the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their nation." (parenthetical: I'm not sure if this is good or bad...)

John Oliver - Pastoral Care

6308 US fatalities
4017 wounded  (as of Wednesday of last week)
...in comparison...
Vietnam - over 60,000
WWII - hundreds of thousands

So we've kept the casualties down, but this means more wounded coming home. What are the implications of this?

Four Issues:
Life Threat (you could die)
Wear & Tear on Body/Spirit/Soul
Ongoing loss of friends and family
Inner conflict of moral dilemmas

Of those interviewed coming home:
92% knew of someone killed
81% attacked or ambushed
75% seen dead bodies

30% of combat soldiers have some kind of diagnosis
So this means that there are 70% who are "resilient" - they are strong people

As pastors, the language of "disorder" is difficult in what it does as a label or even as a self-fulfilling prophecy

There are three people types in regard to trauma:
Been through a trauma
Those who are going through a trauma
Those who will go through trauma

Pattern of Lament:
Life is good.
Life is disrupted.
...yet...
Trust. Hope.

We can see this in the progression of Psalm 22 - 23 - 24
Let this be a pattern of how we serve as pastor to people through trauma

The removal from the community of the "band of brothers" is so difficult.
Can we bring them "home" into the community of the Church?
...this will not be easy, particularly because of the facade of community in the Church.

Spiritual reactions to trauma:
Confusion about God
Discounting community
Alters one sense of meaning in life
Loss of previously sustained and sustaining beliefs (especially superficial ones)
Guilt
Anger
Self-blaming
Questions of theodicy
Questions of God's love ("God can't love me..." I'd rather die than bring this stuff home to my family)

Three stages of recovery:
1. Safety (people need to know that they are safe)
2. Remembrance & Mourning
3. Reconnection

Sometimes remembering is difficult not simply because they don't want to, but because they can't

----- Mapping the Moral Landscape Discovering Resources for Recovery with Stephen Xenakis, David Miller, Peter Bowen -----

(Miller) Should the first place soldiers return to be a rally or the confessional? Because when they return, they are returning from having done things that no human should ever have to do (Again...confession isn't always about culpability, but about the opportunity of releasing the effects of sin.)

I really appreciated Miller's talk. It again left me wondering if I might be a better fit in an anabaptist tradition.

 The Church needs to focus on nurturing the baptized in priority to speaking in the public square. 

Trauma results in a disconnection from others.

I love this quote: "May the next generation create no veterans." - David Miller