Thomas Merton Awesomeness

This part of the epilogue to "Sign of Jonas" can speak for itself.

The Voice of God is heard in Paradise:

“What was vile has become precious. What is now precious was never vile. I have always known the vile as precious: for what is vile I know not at all.”

“What was cruel has become merciful. What is now merciful was never cruel. I have always overshadowed Jonas with My mercy, and cruelty I know not at all. Have you had sight of Me, Jonas My child? Mercy within mercy within mercy. I have forgiven the universe without end, because I have never known sin.”

“What was poor has become infinite. What is infinite was never poor. I have always known poverty as infinite: riches I love not at all. Prisons within prisons within prisons. Do not lay up for yourselves ecstasies upon earth, where time and space corrupt, where the minutes break in and steal. No more lay hold on time, Jonas My son, lest the rivers bear you away.”

“What was fragile has become powerful. I loved what was most frail. I looked upon what was nothing. I touched what was without substance, and within what was not, I am.”

Book Review: Atheist Delusions

I first encountered David Bentley Hart via his contributions to First Things, a journal focusing on religion and public life. I enjoyed both his perspective and his writing style, and when I had some spare money, I decided his treatise on the “New Atheists” would make a good read. I was not disappointed. Atheist Delusions is an erudite and enjoyable corrective to thinkers like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, etc.

Those unacquainted with David Bentley Hart, however, should receive a few warnings before they rush off to buy his books. First, Atheist Delusions is a polemic. Particularly in the first half of the book, Hart has some strong (and often snarky) words for the New Atheists. As a result, he can come off as extremely condescending to his opponents. Some of this is due to the nature of the work, and some of it is due to Hart’s natural pugnacity. I suspect that a large part of it is due to Hart’s frustration at the intellectual shallowness of the New Atheists. Since I agree with Hart, I am pretty sympathetic to his rhetoric. Those who are not would be well-advised to have patience, as there is enough important historical data in the first half of the book to merit a read. Second, despite the blurb on the cover, Atheist Delusions is not a “spirited brief on behalf of Christian truth.” Hart does not attempt to argue that Christianity is true; his concern is to set the record straight regarding the historical track record of institutional Christianity, particularly the Catholic Church. Readers expecting a typical apologia for Christian dogma will be disappointed.

That being said, Atheist Delusions is a worthy read for anyone interested in understanding the role of Christianity in culture. The book can be broadly divided into two parts. The first deals with a modern understanding of Christian history. The common belief of modernity, Hart argues, is that when religious institutions wield political power, they oppose rational progress and commit heinous acts of violence to punish those who challenge their authority. Thus, religion is inherently dangerous and irrational; it must be contained by the secular state in order to preserve its integrity. While acknowledging the failures of the church, Hart also tells the other side of the story, reminding us that the institutional church is not the villain it is so often made out to be. In the end, he does a wonderful job of challenging our collective suspicion of institutional religion.

The second part focuses on what Hart refers to as the “Christian Revolution.” Here, Hart’s thesis is that ancient Christianity introduced the Western world to an ethos of compassion and equality that was unknown to pagan traditions. The pagan world, Hart argues, had no concept of the equality of every human being; the superiority of master to slave, civilized to uncivilized, and male to female was axiomatic. It was Christianity, with its radical assertion that all people are created in the image of God, that introduced the idea that everyone was ultimately equal in the sight of God. His ultimate argument is that, in a post-Christian society, these moral statements are no longer intelligible. To be sure, many non-religious people will espouse the ultimate equality of all people, but Hart argues that they can only do so because they retain vestigial elements of Christian thought. Without a commitment to God or any moral standard higher than the autonomous self, however, Hart argues this commitment to equality ultimately has no justification, and we cannot assume it will command universal assent in the future.

Overall, Atheist Delusions is a well-written, enjoyable rejoinder to the New Atheists. Those interested in polemic will find Hart a master; those looking for a cogent reading of history more accommodating to Christian faith will find an important perspective here. The potential reader is advised to keep a dictionary nearby while reading, as Hart’s erudition is on full display.

Final Rating: 4.0/5.0

Harry Chapin, Mr. Tanner, and Simplicity

If you don't know who Harry Chapin is, you are depriving yourself of some wonderful stories. I was fortunate enough to listen to an old Harry Chapin CD lying around the house, and I've really enjoyed listening to his songs. He's a folk rock singer, which means his songs are based around stories--stories that often provide great food for thought. If you've never heard the song "Mr. Tanner," take a listen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79fkir9alzA

I think the most striking thing about the song is Mr. Tanner's simplicity. As the lyrics say, "He did not know how well he sang, it just made him whole." He's not thinking about if his soft palate is high enough, or if he's taking low breaths. He doesn't try to sing, he just does. Does that come at the expense of technique? Sure. If he really wanted to puruse a career in singing, he could have. He could have worked with a voice teacher, and developed his passagio and larynx placement and feigned voice and resonance until he had the skill to sing professionally. But he doesn't need to, because he doesn't know or care how he sounds. He sings because it brings him joy.

This is funny to me, because in any type of performing art, the mantra is: "Be professional." That is, come to rehearsal on time (and rehearse A LOT), do your practice, be serious, and be comitted to making the show as good as possible. There's nothing wrong with that-- who'd want to see a show where none of the actors bothered to make it any good? More importantly, it keeps you from being selfish. If you're performing simply to strut on stage and enjoy yourself, you should'nt be performing. Being professional forces you to consider the audience's desires instead of your own. But that's not all there is. If you sing, act, or play an instrument, you do it (or should do it) because it brings you joy.

And the fact is, if all singing does is bring joy to the singer, that's ok. Mr. Tanner never sings in front of anyone else after his concert, and that's the way it should be. His voice sounds beautiful, but the wholeness music brings him is far more beautiful. Mr. Tanner is simple enough to understand that his voice is not a talent to be perfected, but a gift to be enjoyed. This simplicity is something we could all use a touch of. Everybody needs things that make them whole, but we don't always pursue our deep joys. We either get stuck pursuing shallow "fun" that distracts us from our true needs, or we take all our talents and ruthlessly maximize them instead of allowing ourselves to be happy. We don't need to be "as good as we can be." We don't need to "live," if by living you mean attempting to squeeze every last possible experience out of life before death claims us. That's a life lived in the shadow of death, and therefore no life at all. But we do need to take time to make ourselves whole--by painting or singing or playing sports or doing whatever you truly love without worrying about how good at it we are. When someone does do that, the result is truly beautiful.

Introductions

My first blog post...wow. I've toyed with the idea of blogging before, but I never actually took up the idea. This blog was pretty much created on a whim, and it still remains to be seen how often I'll update it. But hopefully it will be a place for some fruitful thoughts and discussion. If you're reading this, it's probably because you know me and I forced you read it. But on the rare occasion that I receive a visitor from that wondrous place referred to as the Internet, I figure you might as well know a little bit about me so you'll know where I'm coming from. So without getting into too much detail, here is a brief rundown of where I'm coming from intellectually:

Gender: Male
Age: College Student. Exact age is none of your business.
Majors: Physics and Religious Studies (Yes, it's an odd combination. Believe me, I know.)
Religion: Christian, specifically Episcopalian. I love studying/talking about religion, and my beliefs, while orthodox, are pretty eclectic.
Political Views: Paleolibertarian. For those of you who aren't politics nerds and are too lazy to wikipedia the term, it means that I'm a libertarian who is somewhat more open to government intervention in societal affairs (like abortion, stem cell research, euthanasia, etc.)
Favorite literature: I mostly read nonfiction, but I love pretty much anything. I have a special place in my heart for Victorian authors and Shakespeare.
Music: Anything and everything except rap and hip hop. I care more about a band's sound (particularly the lead singer's) than genre.

Anything else you want to know, ask. That's all I can think of for now, and it's getting late. Until next time...