Purpose of Religious Ritual

Sorcery: The attempt to control the supernatural through words and ritual

Religion: The (normally collective) attempt to interact with the supernatural through words and ritual

I don't think the line is fine, but I do think there is danger in treading it carelessly. Sometimes in the practise of religion there is a worrying tendency to think of ourselves as in control, to think of God as accountable to us, to forget, as C.S. Lewis put it, 'He's not a tame lion'. Religion should help us recognise our dependence on God, not fool us into thinking He can be won over to do our bidding, if only we say the right words with the right rituals.

My Choice

After a very long break from blogging...

The dogmas of the past are quite inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew.

So said Abraham Lincoln in his Second Annual Message to Congress, December 1, 1862. Last year, Al Gore recalled these words to express the need for greater clarity in thinking and greater urgency in acting on climate change.

I admit that I am feeling the need to think anew on the issue of climate change. I am relatively ignorant and passive at the moment, partly because I feel the science is too far over my head, but I see that that is not a worthy excuse. I am in two minds over whether I will try and read Al Gore's latest book, Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis. I am sure it will be based on good scientific research and I like that it is analysing various solutions rather than just describing the problem. That said, I didn't like the last Al Gore book I read, The Assault on Reason. Although I thought it had some really important things to say, it was so infuriatingly political and intolerably biased. As a 'call to action,' Our Choice promises to be more of the same. Also, since I probably won't be able to see where the science is weak, I will basically have to choose to trust it. And, as a general rule, I don't trust politicians too much.

I was very interested to read that the book incorporates 'the spiritual dimension of climate change, the idea that God gave man stewardship over the earth, and that preserving it for future generations is a sacred obligation'. In an interview, Gore said that he had 'trained 200 Christian ministers and lay leaders' in a presentation 'filled with scriptural references'. He said, 'It's probably my favorite version [of the presentation], but I don't use it much because it can come off as proselytizing'. (Imagine that! A politician hesitant in proselytizing. I would have thought his whole career, including this book, would be based on converting others to his own beliefs - certainly that has been the case in every word I have ever heard come out of his mouth. I know, I know, he means specifically religious proselytizing, but it's still pretty ironic.) Anyways, even if the spiritual is referred to only as a point of connection with the religious, I am impressed that Gore is trying to look at the issue holistically.

At least if I do get around to reading the book I can do so in good faith knowing that it 'will feature 100% recycled paper, locally produced and sourced editions, low VOC inks, and will be carbon neutral' (which should save 1,513 trees and 126,000 pounds of carbon dioxide) and all profits go to Gore's initiative, The Alliance for Climate Protection. What is there to lose...except for $15.78?

Mike Paget on Abortion

I was listening to a sermon Mike Paget gave on abortion earlier this year at my old church in Sydney, St Barnabas, Broadway. I feel he had some really good comments to make. He went through why he thought abortion was not compatible with biblical Christianity, and why it was socially detrimental, citing many frightening stats. He then concluded with how he wanted to see his church responding to the issue of abortion:

It is my hope and prayer that we will see in this community more babies born to unmarried women than in the world around us, because it is my prayer that they will not choose to abort those children out of fear of shame. Because, friends, we will celebrate the birth of every one of these children, and we will celebrate the courage of every one of these women, because where there is repentance and forgiveness there is no longer any shame, and woe betide the person who imputes shame where God has paid with his blood to make it go away.

Christian communities tend to be pretty good at stigmatizing those who sin's are outwardly visible, rather than rejoicing what sin reveals the glory of grace, the continual opportunity for forgiveness. We can be so afraid that people will use grace as an excuse for sin, that we fail to practise grace.

Youth Decide

At uni and around this week, there has been a fair bit of promotion for an event called Youth Decide, organised by Australian Youth Climate Coalition and World Vision. The AYCC website explains:

Youth Decide '09 is a national youth vote on climate change. It is our best chance to send the government a strong message that youth want a say in their future - before it's too late. This December, at the UN climate talks in Copenhagen, Australia has the opportunity to lead the way in a global action plan on climate change. A united youth voice will help comple the Australian government to lead the way in securing a strong global agreement.

You can be part of this historic moment, when young people around the nation will vote on our future. We need YOU to hold a voting event in your school, uni, TAFE or community. Together we can solve climate change!

I decided to check out the Youth Decide website and was really frustrated by it. Here is why:

1. The vote asks you to choose between three possible worlds: the first is a completely devestated world (where emissions are reduced from 1990 levels by 4-24%), the second is another crappy world (emissions reduced by 25-40%), and a beautifully preserved world (emissions reduced by >40%). Statistic provided show that the more emission are reduced the more perfect the world would be.
   Naturally, everyone, including myself, would prefer a beautiful world, but there is a massive problem in what is present by the Youth Decide figures. It shows the costs of not acting, but only dismissively mentions the costs of acting ("the short term economic costs would be higher [for World 3] than form World 1 and 2, however, much of the economic costs associated with climate change will be avoided").
   Imagine you go shopping and find a beautiful dress you would like to buy. Would you like to pay (a) $10, (b) $50, or (c) $300 to buy the dress? Well, obviously, $10 is the best option, and you would be senseless to opt for anything else. But what you are not told is that if you choose to pay only $10 then the dress you buy will have been made from cotton produced by Pakistani farmers who were paid a pittance, manufactured by child labour in the Philippines, and sold to you by a Sudanese refugee getting paid far below the minimum wage. Does knowing these social costs influence your decision? Well, I certainly hope so!
   The Youth Decide vote it fails to show a balanced view by dismissing many negative externalities of drastically reducing emssions. There would be huge social costs to changing our economy and way of life, but the website makes them sound neglible.
   
   
2. The webiste claims, 'Each world is based on the target that Australia sets as part of a global limit on greenhouse gases,' but this causal link between Australian policies and global outcomes is almost entirely fictional. I am not a climate change denier, but I am a skeptic in that I don't understand it enough to fully agree or disagree with the claim that human activity is the primary cause of change in climate patterns. But, even if we do accept that theory as true, not even the most extreme voices on climate change would suggest that global climate patterns are as dependant upon Australian government policies as Youth Decide implies. Perhaps, when combined with all other developed nations there is an argument to be made, but Australia unilaterally changed its policies without similar action by other major polluters is no means to the third world presented by Youth Decide.
   
   
3. The vote shifts ALL responsibility onto the government without acknowledging that the choices of individuals are also important. The kind of transport we use, the food we eat, the way we heat our homes etc. is all affecting emission levels to small degrees. I desperately hope the Australian government does not consider basing its policies on the preferences of 12-year-olds - particularly those basing their decisions on the evidence presented by Youth Decide - but a positive difference that youth could be encouraged to make is in their own personal ethics.
   
   
4. The developing world is completely ignored, in a horrendously paternalistic manner. The poor developing world is excluded from any role in the process of combating climate change - apparently they are too poor and weak to do anything. If this is a global issue, then it should be a global effort, not purely the directives of the first. The developing world, particularly China, makes a massive contribution to emissions and there needs to be consideration fof the part they may play in the solution.
   
   
5. The Youth decide website claims to have referenced 'the most credible science available,' by which they seem to mean the Stern Review and the Garnaut Review (the two sources chiefly cited). Again, I don't know enough science to really make adequate comment, but there is a lot of literature out there that suggests they may not be the 'most credible science'. It may or may not be significant that neither Nicholas Stern nor Ross Garnaut are scientists either. But, as a brief aside, a saw one criticism which was fairly interesting, addressing the claim that higher carbon dioxide levels would reduce food supply and plant life. Apparently, higher carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere has been shown to lead to much higher crop yields and faster reforestation. Cutting carbon dioxide levels plant growth, pasture yields, and livestock productivity, contrary to the picture presented by Youth Decide. But I wouldn't trust myself as a critic of science, so you probably shouldn't either.

I am glad that the Australian Youth Climate Coalition and World Vision want young people to be thinking about the issue fo climate change, but Youth Decide is a disgrace to these organizations.

dub-ya

The other day I watched W., Oliver Stone’s biographical film on the rise and fall of President George W. Bush. It has some good acting, and great comedy, but I found it hard to get around the politics of the film. It is completely patronizing in its attitude towards Bush, and pretty unforgiving.

The film cuts between a young Bush, wild, alcoholic and aimless, and Bush during his presidency, with repeated suggestions that – even though he appears to have changed, sobering up and finding a drive – at his core he is the same weak, reckless boy looking for his father’s approval.

Stone’s Bush is very emotionally vulnerable – always searching for reassurance. And this is his motivation for the presidency – he needs to earn his father’s recognition, he needs to hear the crowds cheering him, he needs to be recognized as the boss. Other than problems with insecurity and his ego, Bush is also presented as pretty dim-witted, reckless, irresponsible and, worst of all, religious. I don’t know if it was intentional, but Josh Brolin’s depiction of Bush is also really annoying. His one redeeming feature is his sincerity.

Others in the Bush administration are equally repulsive in the film: Condoleezza Rice is a spineless suck-up, whose only role in the administration is to feed Bush’s ego; Dick Cheney is completely unethical and spiteful; Donald Rumsfeld is a blind idealist. The exception is the sympathy given to Colin Powell, who, though perceptive and honorable, eventually compromises his beliefs in supporting of the hapless Bush.

I wasn’t hoping for something even-handed, and I certainly didn't want a story of glory and triumph invented for Bush, but I do tire at what seem like cheap shots at the guy. Okay, so maybe he wasn’t cut out for presidency, but he did have his moments.

I don’t think he was as self-serving as Oliver Stone makes out – I think he really cared about freedom, justice, America, and God. Frankly, the guy could be inspiring in his vision. Like in his speech at Goree Island (a place infamously associated with the American slave trade):

In America, enslaved Africans learned the story of the exodus from Egypt and set their own hearts on a promised land of freedom. Enslaved Africans discovered a suffering Savior and found he was more like themselves than their masters. Enslaved Africans heard the ringing promises of the Declaration of Independence and asked the self-evident question, then why not me?

In the year of America's founding, a man named Olaudah Equiano was taken in bondage to the New World. He witnessed all of slavery's cruelties, the ruthless and the petty. He also saw beyond the slave-holding piety of the time to a higher standard of humanity. "God tells us," wrote Equiano, "that the oppressor and the oppressed are both in His hands. And if these are not the poor, the broken-hearted, the blind, the captive, the bruised which our Savior speaks of, who are they?"

Down through the years, African Americans have upheld the ideals of America by exposing laws and habits contradicting those ideals. The rights of African Americans were not the gift of those in authority. Those rights were granted by the Author of Life, and regained by the persistence and courage of African Americans, themselves.

Now in Obama era, it seems Bush’s sole legacy is the failed Iraq War and all those old Bushisms, and as important it is to learn from the former and enjoy the latter, surely there is cause for balance.

For example, consider this:

Many people saw the 2004 presidential election as pitting Americans who are religious against those who are not. An article by Steven Waldman in the online magazine Slate provides some perspective on the divide:

"As you may already know, one of America's two political parties is extremely religious. Sixty-one percent of this party's voters say they pray daily or more often. An astounding 92 percent of them believe in life after death. And there's a hard-core subgroup in this party of super-religious Christian zealots. Very conservative on gay marriage, half of the members of this subgroup believe Bush uses too little religious rhetoric, and 51 percent of them believe God gave Israel to the Jews and that its existence fulfills the prophecy about the second coming of Jesus."

The group that Waldman is talking about is Democrats; the hard-core subgroup is African-American Democrats.

Bush wasn’t elected by political or religious extremists – post-9/11 he had an unprecedented approval rating of 90%. Obama has his work cut out patching up the holes Bush left behind, but let’s keep some perspective.

I wish I understood economics

Studying International Politics and Development Studies, I quite often have to interact with economics. Most of the time it’s very basic, so I quite enjoy it. But then I will be doing some reading, as I was just the other day, and I’ll come across something like this….…and I thank God I am an Arts student. In case you are interested, that equation is meant to show something about how the domestic policies of country i effect inflation over time period t.

But I really do wish I could understand economics, then, perhaps, I could grasp the true significance of the following:

• The estimated cost of the US War in Afghanistan: $225,502,000,000
• The estimated cost of the US War in Iraq: $677,805,000,000
• Total cost of US wars since 2001: $903,307,000,000 [1]
• The US budget for Iraq in the 2007 financial year: $4,988/Iraqi. This is triple Iraq's per-person GDP. [2]
  
  
• In 2009, the US government will:
  icrease spending by 22%
  spend $30,958 per household
  tax $17,576 per household
  borrow $13,392 per household
• More than 43 cents of every dollar Washington spends in 2009 will have been borrowed
• President Obama would permanently keep annual spending between $5,000 and $8,000 per household higher than it had been under President George W. Bush
• The Obama Administration has been predicted to accumulate more government debt than every President in American history from George Washington to George W. Bush combined.
• By 2019, the US government will spend almost $800 billion as net interest on debts [3]
  
  
• The US has the widest gap between rich and poor of any industrialized nation. [4]
  
  
• Total debts of the developing world in 2006: $2.7 trillion
• Total official development assistance in 2006: $106 billion [5]

[1]

http://costofwar.com/
[2] http://zfacts.com/p/447.html
[3] http://www.heritage.org/research/budget/wm2595.cfm
[4] http://web.archive.org/web/20020604053519/http:/www.observer.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,706484,00.html
[5] http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats

Holiday Reading

Here are some mini-reviews of what I have been reading over my holidays.

The Old Curiosity Shop by Charles Dickens
At the end of semester I was reading masses of Dickens for an essay on his views on childhood, and I enjoyed him enough that I couldn’t put him aside altogether when the holidays came around. The Old Curiosity Shop is the tragic tale of Nell Trent, an orphan who lives in poverty with her foolish but loving grandfather. She is the victim both of a negligent guardian, an apathetic society and the sinister Quilp.

Nell, ultimately, is unconvincing as a character; she is simply too innocent and pure to have emerged from the corrupt world of the London slums. The novel is too long and the last third is predictable and fairly superfluous to the whole. That said, Dickens is always a pleasure, and the novel offers some wonderful characters.

The Red Badge of Courage by Stephen Crane
I really enjoy Crane’s poetry, so I had wanted to read his prose for some time. And he didn’t disappoint. The Red Badge of Courage follows the experiences of a youthful recruit to the American Civil War. In his first battle the boy takes flight and wanders aimlessly coming to terms with his own cowardice and the ugliness of war. When he returns to his regiment he lies about having bravely fought at the other end of the battle. The title refers to the war wounds that attest to the heroics of a man, and the young recruits lack of wounds reminds him of his failure. Over the course of the novel we see him both grow into manhood and fall beneath humanity in the horrors and glory of war.

This is a fantastic discussion of youth and war and probably the most worthwhile read of my holidays.

The Old Man and the Sea by Ernest Hemingway
I had never read Hemingway and I came to the novella with pretty high expectations (it did win both a Pulitzer and Nobel Prize). It wasn’t what I expected.

It is very simple, reading like a child’s story. It only has two real characters, Santiago, an old Cuban fisherman, both honourable and skilful, but facing the realities of age, and Manolin, Santiago’s devoted protégé. Perhaps the third character would be the great marlin, with whom Santiago is determined to battle to the death. The old man has the highest respect for both the marlin and the sea, but these also serve as his fierce opponents throughout.
The story is essentially about Santiago – his relationship with the environment, his endurance, his triumph and his loss. The novella is endearing, but in the end I think I was hoping for a little bit more. Still, I would recommend it.

The Power and the Glory by Graham Green
Graham Greene is one of my favorite authors; his novels are beautifully written and always leave me thinking for weeks after I read them. Although I enjoyed it less then some of his other novels, The Power and the Glory was no exception in this regard. It is the story of a ‘whisky priest’ in Mexico at a time when Catholicism was outlawed. The priest travels around performing the Catholic rites and evading the government officials, who have placed a bounty on his head. Because of the bounty, he must also mistrust all others he comes into contact with.

I found that it took a long time for the novel to gain momentum as it jumps around a lot. The characters are, for the most part, very unpleasant. The ‘whisky priest’ is an alcoholic, who gambles, fornicates, lies, takes from the poor and lets the innocent die in his place. And he is fully aware of his own depravity, and someone he must reconcile this with his position of respect, which he refuses to surrender. The other main character is the lieutenant who pursues the ‘whisky priest’ and aims to eliminate Catholicism, which he perceives as a source of the poverty and ignorance of the populace. The lieutenant is devoted to his people, yet is willing to sacrifice individuals if it leads to the capture of the priest. His idealism, though admirable on one level, is dangerous in much the same way that the priest’s religion is considered to be dangerous – it acts as a justification for horrendous acts.

Power and the Glory is one of those novels where the author wants to feel to monotony of the characters’ lives. Often when this occurs you also start feeling that the book itself is monotonous. It was a worthwhile, if not a particularly gripping read.

Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck
Short but dramatic. I read it in one sitting on the train, and then sat back for an hour trying to absorb the shock.
Lennie and George are drifters. They go from ranch to ranch trying to work up a stake, but are repeatedly forced to move on when the lumbering, dim-witted Lennie falls into trouble. Yet, George remains with Lennie as an alternative to the abject loneliness of those around them.

Life for those in the novel is an essentially lonely and disappointing experience. Many hold hopes of a better life – a life of fame, or of independence, or of respect. But, reality inevitably crushes these hopes and the individual is forced to settle for the cards fate has dealt them.

Steinbeck’s writing is simple, raw, and real. Almost every character is initially despised for their obvious flaws, but as the readers learns of their experiences they understand that all are simply victims of a harsh and corrupting world. I loved it.

The Rise of Christianity by Rodney Stark
After a series of novels, I felt I really needed some good non-fiction holiday reading. I generally read fairly little non-fiction just because I get so much in my course and prefer to relax with fiction. But I can only go so long before I need both.

The Rise of Christianity: How the Obscure, Marginal Jesus Movement Became the Dominant Religious Force in the Western World in a Few Centuries is impressive in the clarity and with which it answers a complex question of history. Stark is a professor of sociology and comparative religion at the University of Washington and he masterfully applies contemporary historical research and modern sociological and psychological principles to and age-old mystery. He shows how religious development in the first century essentially operated in much the same ways as it does in the twenty-first, and how the culture of the time suited the growth of a religion like Christianity.
It worth reading just for what it shows about life in the Roman Empire, whilst also enabling one to critically look at religious movements as a universal phenomenon. Highly recommended.

The Victory of Reason by Rodney Stark
Having enjoyed The Rise of Christianity so much, I was eager to hear Stark’s perspective on another of fascinating period of history – the Dark Ages. Starks sets out to prove that “Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success”, and he ruthless against suggestions that the religion did anything but. His writing is far more assertive, far less humble and, for me, less enjoyable.

Whereas The Rise of Christianity was structured around answering a few specific questions, The Victory of Reason sweeps through the centuries between the fall of Rome and the French Revolution showing how each and every development in industry, economics, technology and philosophy came from Christianity or the Catholic Church. He makes some huge claims without the evidence that he painstakingly put together in The Rise of Christianity. Yet, I do not question the validity of much of what he said, and it great learning experience for some so ill-versed in Medieval history as myself. A very worthwhile read, and inspiring enough that I may seek out another of Stark’s works in the future.

The novel ends with a quote from “one of China’s leading scholars”:

One of the things we [the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences] were asked to look into was what accounted for the success, in fact, the pre-eminence of the West all over the world. We studied everything we could from the historical, political, economic, and cultural perspective. At first, we thought it was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity. That is why the West has been so powerful. The Christian moral foundation of social and cultural life was what made possible the emergence of capitalism and then the successful transition to democratic politics. We don’t have any doubt about this.