Dr. Forbush Thinks

Treating Superstition


Since I am a Catholic I only recently understood the issue of basing Protestant Christianity only on the Bible. This was a response to having huge numbers of superstitious people basing their beliefs on tradition. They would pray to saints using rituals that were not described in the Bible hoping for miracles. Martin Luther and others objected to religion that was not based on facts. And, facts in the eyes of these leaders could only come from the Bible.

Of course there is quite a bit of ritual in Catholic services that is not explicitly from the Bible and these things were created in a response to a need to build a relationship with God. They are passed down by tradition. I don't know if any protestant Christians pray the Rosary or the Stations of the Cross. Of course you don't need these things to be part of your faith, but they are just another way to build a closer relationship with God.

Jesus went out to the Mount of Olives to pray when he needed strength. He didn’t go into the Synagogue or the Temple to find this strength. Some people today go to quite natural places to find peace and tranquility, but it would be highly unusual for most people to pray on a mountain today when they needed strength. Most people choose to go to a place of worship. Going to a place of worship on days other than the Sabbath is also a tradition that is not demonstrated in the Bible, but it helps build a relationship with God. Catholics could attend church every day of the year if they choose to. This could be used as a superstitious crutch to assure unsure people in times when they are seeking strength. But maybe this is exactly the medicine that these people need.

If we worry about superstition, then we should worry that a place of worship is given more importance than a mountain. But, believing that a mountain is a more important place than a place of worship would also reflect a superstition. The truth must be that no place is more important than any other place, so we should just find the time to pray and not worry about the place.

However, if we worry about superstition we need to examine the whole idea of placing complete faith in a book that does not agree completely with the observations of the world in which we live. The Bible tells us that the world is surrounded completely by water. The firmament above us prevents the water from spilling down on us. Obviously this is wrong and NASA has proven it wrong on every space fight. Even if we were to say that the firmament was billions of light years away I believe that there is no water on the outside of the Universe.

The point is that God gave us the world around us as well as the senses to observe this world. Based on these gifts of God we can determine quite a bit about the Earth and the Universe that we inhabit. If we want to understand the moral lessons of the Bible then we must understand that the Bible gives us clues to how we should live, but the world around us gives us the clues to how the world was created and how it has changed over time. Jumping to the conclusion that the Bible tells us everything puts us back into the pre-reformation basis of faith by superstition.



religion

Shock and Awe

Yesterday I received my issue of the New Yorker. Then I lost it. Actually I set it on the kitchen table and the kids moved it to the coffee table. After dinner I couldn’t find it until I saw the bright orange cover of this weeks issue peeking out from under the coffee table.

I really like the New Yorker, because the quality of the writing is what I aspire to. Obviously if you have read my blog you know that there is no way that you will be reading what I write in the New Yorker any time soon.

This week there were several articles that left me satisfied after reading them. But the most impressive was a little bit of satire from Ian Frazier. You can read it yourself here:

Here to Tell You

Ian Frazier begins with a quote from Jerry Falwell from his autobiography. He tells us about Falwell’s father who “plays a prank” on a guy, he doesn’t like by cooking the guy’s cat and serving it to him. My thoughts continuously went to disgust over and over again before I could even get to the satire. How could a Christian preacher even think about publishing such a disgusting story? Wouldn’t publishing the sexual antics of his mother be just about as disgusting? Somehow I can imagine that they would draw the line there. When so-called Christians talk about what should and should not be published how could they come to the conclusion that this was acceptable?

Obviously I haven’t read the autobiography, and I don’t plan to. I don’t have the need to know how to get rich quick by preaching the word of God. Maybe Jerry has a reasonable reason to include this disgusting story in his autobiography. Maybe he tells us how he came to God after being raised by this evil father of his. But, the description in the quote suggests that Jerry found the story amusing.

My point here is that Ian Frazier does a wonderful job in this short satire and I hope you enjoy it as well.

politics

Good Art?

How does anyone know what art is “good” and what art is “bad?”

The general public has the idea that a painting is “good” when the painting represents the object that is being painted. But painting is more than just the subject in the painting. We know that by considering photography. Everything in a photograph is reproduced exactly as the lens sees the world. So, with photography there is also the composition of the picture, the lighting and the choice of subject itself. But, what makes a photograph “good?”

I have written on this subject before. Art is about observing the world and creating something to communicate an observation back to the world. The best photographs capture emotions and transfer them back to the world. Similarly the best paintings don’t always capture only the reality of the world, but the reality of the world in light of the emotions of the observer. But emotions are not the only things that influence our observation of the world around us. In fact, the reduction of emotions in art is also studied.

Last night I attended a performance of the Trisha Brown Dance Troop. Trisha Brown has been exploring dance since the 1970s and has presented some extraordinary work in those 30 some years. Since her exploration of dance has been pushing the boundary of what is understood to be “dance” and there are people who find her work difficult. Typical questions asked about her work might be - What is the point? What is she trying to say? Why did she choose the music she chose? What was I supposed to get out of that?

All of those questions need to be asked. While I sat there watching her work I thought about what I was seeing. The first piece was meant to be ethereal. The music was like the wind being blown through a collection of objects. A flute sporadically punctuated the wind. It was a very slow piece with dancers interacting with each other in powerful ways. The piece not only demonstrated the strength of the dancers, but the power in their dependence on each other. I don’t know if the dance was meant to be a metaphor, maybe it was only a vision in Trisha Brown’s mind when she created it. The power in art is that it sometimes communicates in ways that are not direct. The work was certainly intellectual in that one should think about the interactions of the dancers and the repetition of certain movements that were used like a refrain in a song. However, one could just sit there and enjoy the fluid motion of the dancers without thinking about the meaning. But, if one were to view the dance in this way it may be less satisfactory.

So, was this piece “good?” Of course that depends on quite a bit. It depends on what the observer expects to get out of watching a performance. Someone who has been a dancer would know the difficulty of some of the moves and appreciate them. Someone educated in the history of dance would understand how Trisha was pushing the limits and appreciate her effort. Someone who expected that they should put thought into understanding the piece might feel satisfied with their internal discovering of her work. However, someone who attended the performance in order to be entertained may have been less satisfied. So, was this piece “good?”

There were actually three different dances at this performance. The casual performance attendee may find their “easy to appreciate” dance in the last piece. This piece was performed to a “cool jazz” number. The dance was a study in counterpoint which is much easier understood by the casual observer. A group of dancers move in synchronicity, while seemingly random dancers dance against this unison movement.

So, was this piece “good?” The casual observer would find this piece more accessible, while the person looking for something new may not find it as satisfying as the first piece. A dancer who has attempted the difficult moves could appreciate many elements of this dance. However, if someone were searching for some deeper meaning in this piece it may be more difficult to find. So, was this piece “good?”

What I tried to illustrate with my observation of this performance was the difficulty in accessing whether art can actually be graded. There are so many things that determine whether one finds satisfaction with a work of art. The question that really needs to be asked isn't – Was the work “good?” Instead, the question that needs to be asked is – Did the artist communicate effectively to the intended observer? Perhaps the intended observer for Trisha Brown’s first piece was different than the intended observer in her last piece. Maybe she chose the three pieces in order to appeal to three different typical audiences. Maybe the diversity of the material offered is the secret to her success as a long lasting as well as refreshing choreographer.

Free Speech and Privacy

While listening to all the tributes to Hunter Thompson recently an interesting side note came up. During the 1970s Ken Kesey held a meeting in Oregon where he was trying to find common ground between Conservatives, Liberals and Moderates. It seems to me that the results of this meeting should be noted in the light of our national polarization. The results basically found that the only thing they could agree on were the virtues of Free Speech and Privacy.

This may not seem to be very surprising, but we should recall that Free Speech was a major issue in the Vietnam era. Conservatives generally wanted to control where people could exercise Free Speech. Similarly, conservatives in the name of national security compromised privacy as well. The FBI tapped phones and collected information on protest organizers. FBI agents sought information on all the organized protest movements in the hopes of disrupting these movements before they got too powerful.

Now, I don't know what such a conference of this type would produce today. I would guess that American values haven't changed that much in the last thirty years. Perhaps the Liberal vs. Conservative arguments should keep this small bit of common ground in mind if we want these arguments to be productive.

Iraq War Preemption

The reasons for the US invasion and occupation of Iraq have changed over time, but most of us can recite them as if they were stated yesterday. So, I thought if we looked at the reasons the administration put forth for the invasion of Iraq we could see how the administration feels about Syria and Iran. We should remember that what people say and what they mean are not always the same. So, going through this exercise of comparing the reasons for attacking, and occupying Iraq and the administration’s action against Iran or Syria may also prove to highlight the truthfulness of the administration as well.

During the build up for the invasion of Iraq the administration told us how dangerous the Iraqi regime was because they possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). Does Iran have WMD? Yes, Iran is know to have stockpiles of chemical weapons. Does Syria have WMD? Yes, Syria is known to have stockpiles of chemical weapons.

After the invasion of Iraq and no stockpiles of WMD were found the administration changed their public statement to the search for Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs. Does Iran have Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs? Yes, Iran is working on developing both nuclear and biological weapons. Does Syria weapons of mass destruction programs? Here experts are not sure if the programs exist, and if they do how far along they are.

However, since the UN weapons inspections worked so well the programs that existed were mainly on paper. Perhaps if the UN inspections and pressure from other countries was reduced Iraq could have restarted these programs. At this point the administration claimed that Saddam Hussein was an evil leader and many people suffered under his rule. Therefore the US was justified in removing him from power. Does Iran have a Democratic government? No. Is the Iranian government repressive? Yes, women are not treated as equals and secular ideas are rejected from all laws. Is Syria a Democratic government? No. Is the Syrian government repressive? Yes, the people of Syria feel repressed by the current regime.

So, what sets Iraq apart from these two countries? Some people suggest that Saddam Hussein demonstrated that he was a danger when he invaded and occupied Kuwait. It turns out that Syria is currently occupying Lebanon.

Another argument for the invasion of Iraq was that Saddam Hussein was sponsoring terrorism. Saddam Hussein did contribute to the payments to families of suicide bombers, but no link to any terrorist organization has been proven. On the other hand Iran and Syria formed an alliance in 1982 to support Hesbola, a known terrorist organization.

So, based on the evidence it seems that Iran and Syria actually qualify as targets of US aggression under the same standards that the administration used to justify it’s invasion of Iraq. Since the Bush administration is not gearing up for invasion of these countries the deeper questions need to be asked. Either the administration lied about its reasons for the Iraq invasion, or there are additional deterrents in regard to Iran and Syria. Either way, the truth should be exposed.

Be Not Afraid

Jim Wallis points out in his book “God’s Politics: How the Right Gets it Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It” that Jesus tells us not to be afraid not once but many times through out his book. Mr. Wallis uses Jesus’ teachings to show us how Christians should respond to Terrorism. In fact, the point of terror is to inflict fear on large countries by making their citizens fearful. If we are afraid, then the terrorists have succeeded.

Mr. Wallis continues to tell us how the Bush administration fell right into the trap of the terrorists. The fear inflicted by the 9/11 attacks caused the Bush administration to over react by attacking not only al Qaeda and Afghanistan which could be justified response to the attacks, but also Iraq which everyone knows for certain now had no connection to al Qaeda. Jim Wallis goes into great detail about how the majority of churches throughout the country pleaded with President Bush not to attack Iraq before the invasion. All of the major Churches in the US except the Southern Baptists were against the Iraq invasion before the invasion based on the information known at the time. I suggest that people interested in how right these religious people opposed the war should read Mr. Wallis’ book.

However, today I wanted to write about fear and the so-called Christians on the right have used fear in the very non-Christian way. Jesus told us of the power of fear. But, like Jesus’ teachings on Love that we need to realize that Jesus’ teachings apply to everyone, Christians and non-Christians alike. If only the Christians live their lives by way of the Law of Love, then non-Christians will take advantage of this predictable response to hate. So, Christians need to teach Christian values in regard to caring for each other to non-Christians in order to allow Christians to follow their own teachings without being taken advantage of. This is also true of teaching Jesus’ commandment to not be afraid. If your neighbors are acting in fair they will respond in irrational ways when they are attacked.

Even without Jim Wallis telling us not to be afraid I already knew the dangers of a fearful society. Fear has been used as an instrument of coercion through out history. Nazis used fear to control the German population. The Soviets used fear to control the Communist Satellite States of Eastern Block. Fear can make even rational people choose irrational responses. Fear was obviously responsible for the US invasion of Iraq. Fear was also responsible for the re-election of George W Bush.

After 9/11 the price of airplane tickets dropped to all time lows. This was because of fear. And, this was fear inflicted on our country by terrorists. I wasn’t afraid, because I knew the probability of another attack would be small, and even if there was another attack the probability of it being on my plane was small. And, finally, I wasn’t afraid because I knew that if an attack were to happen on my plane it would be God’s Will. So, out of a combination of patriotism and a need to be with family our family took a trip back east to visit family during the Christmas of 2001.

The price of air travel remained low throughout 2002, so our family took another trip back east at spring break. This time we took the entire family to Washington DC. What a better way to teach the children what it means to be an American than to take them to the memorials and places like Jamestown, Williamsburg and Yorktown to show them what our forefathers believed in.

This is called taking a tragedy and turning it into a positive experience. This was how our family personally fought our own battle against the terrorists. Terror means fear. If you become fearful as a result of a terrorist attack, the terrorist has succeeded. Terrorists are very small groups, and they would have a very small impact if they were to take on our military or police. But, if they are able to create fear, then that fear will do more damage to our society than the actual damage inflicted. If everyone were not afraid, as Jesus taught, then the terrorist attack would not have the effect desired by the terrorists.

But, fear does not only have to do with terror. Both the religious leaders and the politicians seed fear in our society. Some conservative religious leaders seed the idea of a society falling into moral decay. Making this statement must be interpreted as seeding fear among the congregation. These leaders sow fear and the congregation responds in non-Christian ways. In the early twentieth century religious groups used fear to pass prohibition. In the south fear was used to keep the races segregated. Civil Rights have been fought continuously by putting fear on the opposite side. Fear is being used today to fight the idea of Gay Marriage. Fear is being used today to take away our liberty through the Patriot Act. Fear was used to persuade congress to vote for the invasion of Iraq. Fear is being used today to persuade people to support the immoral actions in Iraq. Fear is being used today scare people into believing the lies of President Bush. Obviously not all of this fear is caused by the terrorists, but we should realize that ALL FEAR weakens our country.

Be Not Afraid!

National Service

I just received a letter from our friends living in Israel. They told me that their daughter is about to graduate from High School and she is trying to decide what she will do with her two years of National Service. This got me to thinking about the idea of National Service. Other countries have similar programs where a student graduates and is then obligated to contribute to the welfare of the country by serving the country. Unlike the idea of a draft, every student, male or female must choose some service. There are other options beside the military, but of course women can volunteer in the military. Another friend from Israel served part of her two years as a tank commander.

What would a National Service program in the United States be like? Obviously many students would volunteer to serve in the military. But, there are other worthwhile programs that would do very well with an increase in manpower. National Parks could use beefing up. Programs like Head Start could also use a few interested people. The Peace Corp and Americorp could use manpower to increase its effectiveness and spread American good will.

Of course the climate isn’t ripe for selflessness. The current administration is more concerned with greed and self-interest. The idea that our youth should give up two years between high school and college to be productive for our society would be looked upon as a Communist idea. The free market will determine if these things are required. If companies don’t pop up to do these things in the private sector, then they must not be worth doing.

But, if anyone out there is still reading I am saying that a program like this could actually be a good thing for the students as well as the country as a whole. The students would have a “quick” two-year lesson on the real world. It may give them insight into what they may want to do with the rest of their lives. They could see a bit of the real world and then go to the university with those real world problems in mind. When problems are in mind, the solutions are not far behind.

Culture

American culture must be one of the least defined cultures in the world. The problem is that there really isn’t one American culture and there never has been. This is because America has always been a land of immigrants. Immigrants always bring their own culture with them when they come to their new land. It is never clear to the immigrants why they can’t continue to propagate their own culture to the next generation. Immigrants will teach their children about their culture and command them to propagate their culture to the next generation.

Children are not always receptive to the idea of propagating their culture. Add to that the question of intermarriage among different cultures. Who’s culture is passed down, the husband’s or the wife’s? Some cultures place more emphasis on continuing their culture while other cultures place less value on the idea of passing traditions down to the next generation. Each interaction requires the parents to want to teach their children and it also requires the children to want to learn.

In reality American culture becomes a mix of stories and songs and advice that vary across the country. People that have a long history in one place may also have stories about that place that find themselves in the mix of their culture. Families that have lived in California for over one hundred and fifty years certainly have stories from the Gold Rush and Earthquakes that have found their way into their personal culture. Families that survived the Civil War have passed down cultural ideas and feelings that stretch back over the same one hundred and fifty years.

So, is their any such thing as American culture? We certainly have very few universal traditions, songs or stories that can be claimed as American culture. However, many people see their own personal culture as “American culture.” But this would be wrong, and anyone who has moved away from the place they grew up certainly knows this first hand. The idea that Christianity is part of American culture can be seen as true for regions of the South and Great Plains by the people who live there, but it does not span the country as those people would have you believe.

Instead, American culture is truly a small bag of goodies. There are the relatively small number of universal patriotic songs like the National Anthem and God Bless America. The sad truth is that the remaining parts of American culture are due to the widespread marketing campaigns of large corporations. The Coca-Cola ads of the early twentieth century created the universal idea of Santa Claus. The mass marketing of the NFL and the NBA have created the nearly universal appeal of football and basketball. The mass marketing of Hollywood has created the American cultural appeal of American movies and Video games. The overall marketing of all of corporate America has created the American cultural ideal that “buying things makes you happy.”

What are the parts of American culture that deserve to be passed on to the next generation? What will you teach your children?

Anna has become outraged at a post by a Conservative Christian who goes by the name Cao. His post claims that Islam is a religion of hate and the murder of a family in Jersey City, New Jersey is proof that they have brought the war to the United States.

Its funny how the Right has had such an enormous appeal to the Christians when they post things like this. Apparently either Christians won’t stand up for what Jesus taught, or they don’t know what Jesus taught. I’ll include a bit of the Bible below to remind them.

Cao, a right wing conservative that appeals to Christians by including links on their sites to prayer sites and the like are hypocritical. Obviously this post was intended to inflame hatred toward Islam in general. Someone should keep their thinking cap on and remember that all Muslims are not terrorists and implying this insights hatred which is certainly not Christian. Add to that the fact that no one actually knows for certain who committed these crimes. He is certainly jumping the gun and judging before any of the facts are known.

Matthew 7:1-6

1“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

6 “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.

It’s quite interesting how Jesus warned his followers in Mathew about the temptation to scold and chastise those who may be deemed unworthy. But, we should recall that only God judges. We should be concerned with our own affairs. It is interesting that the Christian Right can’t stop judging. But maybe James can say it better than Jesus can.

James 4:10-12
10 Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up.

11 Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against his brother or judges him speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. 12 There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you–who are you to judge your neighbor?

So, when a self-proclaimed homosexual tells you that he was created by God with an attraction to people of the same sex, then who are you to judge. Let these people love one another. Be tolerant of Islam, because God will judge them if he deems there to be an issue. The right is always so concerned about people sinning, even though they advertise a policy of keeping the Government small. Keep religion out of Government, because all religions don’t have the same sins.


politics

Fairness and Christianity

God never promised us that life on earth would be fair. However, how does a Christian deal with the fact that the world is unfair? Some Christian groups believe that spreading their form of Christianity is the most important task they are endowed with. But the poor often have problems that theology doesn’t address immediately. Like, where can they sleep each night? Abused wives need to be saved from their husband before they can be saved from eternal damnation. In other countries some people live in squalor because they have no choice. Opportunity is not presented to every person equally.

Obviously there are Christians who address these problems by organizing groups who work hard to make lives better. Sometimes people don’t want to make their lives better because they fear the loss of freedom, or restrictions, or the unknown. The poor don’t just need a hand out every day, but they also need information and a nudge to motivate them. Abused women and children need a place to stay for the night, but they also need a way to break out of an abusive relationship and build the confidence they need to stay out of these relationships in the future. Christians who read Jesus’ words will understand that this work is not just an option, but an obligation.

Fairness goes beyond the everyday needs of people that find themselves in hard times. If this weren’t true, then these social issues would be spread around the country uniformly. Instead we find pockets of poor, homeless, and abused people clustered in inner cities or remote rural areas. If everyone had equal opportunities we could imagine that 80% of the children who grew up in poor areas would have good jobs and raise healthy happy families. Not only that, but the net income of people around the world would not depend on the country you live in. But, the world is not fair. People who grow up in the inner city get poor education and don’t get good jobs. Many of them can’t even get a job and many get jobs that pay low wages. Whose fault is this, and what can be done to change it? Should Christians be concerned with education?

Why should spreading the Gospel be a priority? The Gospel tells us to take care of the sick, feed the hungry, clothe the poor; the more people who know and understand this will lighten the burden on those of us who do this already. Taking these actions will lessen human suffering in a global context. But, if Christianity is spread while ignoring the obligations that all Christians must acknowledge, then Christianity is faith without works.

Christian groups are a small and disorganized lot. We know that larger and more organized groups can often be more effective when addressing widespread and understood problems. We also know that small groups can more quickly adjust to unforeseen changes. We can imagine that a mixture of these two different organization types would be the ideal solution to most problems. As a Christian it is hard to imagine not supporting efforts to address the inherent issue of unfairness present in our world today.

Finally, as Americans we are often reminded that the US is a rich country. The per capita income of Americans is among the highest of all large countries in the world. So, even if you find yourself a middle class American you are most likely in the top 10% of all people on earth. Being in the top 10% and being a Christian brings forth a serious obligation that everyone should consider.