04/18/06

This blog is a substitution for my absence from class on Thursday April 13. I will be talking about the article by Lugones – “On the Logic of Pluralist Feminism.”

Whenever I hear something about feminists or feminism, I always feel like I am in for some kind of controversial topic. However, this article had a different view than I had ever heard – it talked of women interacting with women; namely black women and white women. The article talks about what Lugones calls “Problems of Difference.” She says that the American stride for equality is not sufficient – we try to say that all women are the same, black and white. Though this is with good intentions, it is not acted out properly. And let’s face it – not all women are the same across races. The problems of difference need to first be recognized and then acted upon. An interactive step is missing. She suggests looking at black women not in boomerang perception, but in a mirror perception – to see them and see self. But, white women block this perception for many reasons. This in turn blocks identification with black women and the whole problem exists again.

This is all very interesting and a whole new way of looking at things for me. It brought many concerns and new thoughts to my mind.

04/04/06

In Improvisation, Chapter 11 is the first chapter in the third section: Reaping. This chapter discusses the evil of humans as a threatening offer. Wells quotes William Cavanaugh a lot from his book Torture and the Eucharist. He also talks of Cavanaugh’s detailed description of Chile in the 70s. He talks of the repression from the regime and the threat of evil upon the people.
It was interesting to see how this all tied in with the Eucharist – it sounded weird to me at first. That will come later. Wells also talks of the torture experienced by the people. One way is that 4 people would be put into a tiny box. Not only were they so smashed together, but they could hear torture outside the box as well. The only way that these people could defeat the regime was to participate in membership together – they had to work as a collective team and cooperate. They began programs and one such program included taking old tattered scraps and knitting them together to make tapestries. Wells then describes knitting as reincorporation – taking “diverse” pieces of cloth and bringing them all together for a useful, practical purpose.
Wells talks about the Eucharist and sacrifice. He talks of the requirements of participating in the Eucharist. One must sacrifice oneself and not have an unreconciled situation with another brother – that is unprepared. Wells also talks of tortue as perverse liturgy. He talked of one man who tortured himself in protest – many did so. It was very impactful, and the people even incorporated liturgy to make it more significant – the victims become martyrs through these acts of self-torture.

03/29/06

In Chapter 10, Wells brings back the idea of the five act play. He does this in part because he is summarizing part 2 of the book since Chapter 10 is the last chapter of part 2 (planting). He asks two main questions. The first addresses how overaccepting (a very important, overarching idea presented in chapter 9) can be utilized by the church (us) in everyday life and in everyday decisions, practically. The second question addresses the idea of dealing with evil and dealing with the past poor decisions made by the church. To answer these questions, Wells uses a road. This road represents the past and future church. When a road is dug, there is a lot of debris to the side of the road. Similarly, when a sculpture is carved, there is a lot of discarded marble. These are the marginalized in society – the losers (in the church and society as a whole) and oppressed minorities and races, to name a couple. Wells says that these are the people in the heart of God’s story – Act IV. In fact, Jesus mentions the meek as the ones who will inherit the earth. The last shall be first and the first shall be last. It all makes sense. It is almost like the debris cast to the side of the road becomes a road in itself. Wells says, “The church has got to get used to the faces of the poor, because it will see them on thrones in Act V.” This is all biblical. Enough said. Wells finishes that section talking about that same subject in different contexts.

Wells then brings about the idea of reincorporation. Reincorporation makes a story flow and not come to an abrupt end. If some part of a story is forgotten, that makes its reincorporation more significant. Likewise, if someone has fallen from God’s story, their reincorporation into the story is very significant. Wells points out the story of Joseph – his loss of status and eventual high placement – as significant reincorporation. He also exemplifies the calling of the disciples.

Wells ends the chapter with a very touching and inspirational story. Bill was a moderately successful man with a family and everything seemed to be going alright. Eventually, Bill lost his job and his wife was left to provide for the family. The family would have to sell the house. Bill was trying to fix up the house to look good for potential buyers, but messed some things up. His wife blew up at him. Bill just took each blow. Then came the turn of events. The daughter, who was 11 years old, came up and said, “He’s a good dad.” Such a small phrase changed everything. It put everything in perspective and reincorporated what was important. Wells abruptly ends the chapter here, leaving the reader with that final comment – very impactful.

03/20/06

I noticed that in the very first blog I wrote for this Christian Ethics class, I wrote about the introduction in Improvisation. I talked about a lofty word that Wells used in the introduction: overaccepting. That term is the basis for chapter 9.

Wells opens with an illustration of Christmas day. Many times, we receive gifts that we did not necessarily want or ask for. However, do we blame ourselves or the receiver? The answer is neither. We should not get upset at the receiver (blocking) and we should not just accept the gift for what it is (accepting). We should overaccept. We should take the gift as something useful and thoughtful – put more reason behind it all.

Wells also talks of two games: “Lantern Lecture” and “Presents.” These games practice overaccepting. Rather than just accepting or blocking each offer, each offer is accepted and another offer is made. Offers become potential gifts. I love the game examples that Wells proposes. They are such easy, tangible illustrations to relate to!

Wells extendedly defines overaccepting using many examples, people, and situations. Overaccepting retains one’s integrity. He uses examples of Princess Diana, The Full Monty, and Monty Python to provide relevant instances of overaccepting.

God used overaccepting. An example from Jeremiah is stated. Jeremiah saw a potter working with a pot that spoiled. The potter brought it back and made it whole and beautiful again. God has done the same with us. “While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” He did not block our sin and send us to hell. He did not accept our sin and give us immoral eternal life. He overaccepted and became an example in human form to all humankind. Wells uses many examples of Jesus overaccepting. They include his temptation, the Sermon on the Mount (turning the other cheek), His lesson on paying taxes, His mercy to the prostitute, the calling of the twelve, and the last supper. These are all amazing examples that not only completely define overacceptance, but also they are done by Jesus, the big man himself!

The two stories at the end of the chapter were amazing. I find no need to summarize them here, but they were truly touching. Overacceptance is an idea that I will not soon forget.

03/13/06

Wells is now beginning to develop his points and bring details into his writings. He talks about givens and gifts – the similarities, differences, and implications of each. He suggests the idea of not blocking (as opposed to accepting) and seeing what happens when one accepts all offers. The main purpose of this chapter is to discern whether offers are gifts or givens.

Wells says that the sum of the givens found in life can be considered the natural law. We all need to accept these givens and not try to counteract them. One would be the given of death. There is absolutely no purpose in trying to ignore or evade death. It cannot happen. Wells then cites multiple sources and scholars to develop his argument – people such as Milbank, Niebuhr, and Hauerwas. Wells makes a profound statement at the end of this section, saying that Christians should not and do not need to compare their convictions with that of the real world since those convictions of the Christian are basic and final, not entirely different. This is an interesting perspective to understand since we as Christians often refer to the separate entities of being “in” or “of” the world.

Jesus used parables to put lessons in an easily understandable context. Wells used the parables to make things easier to understand for the reader. He talks of the unforgiving servant and the laborers in the vineyard, and then turns to the Old Testament stories of the four lepers and of Joseph and his brothers. Wells uses these stories as examples of when the given of human sin did not prevent betterment of self, prosperity, or possibility. The given of sin does not need to be a total hindrance. It needs to be accepted.

Another main point in Wells’ argument is that ethics is often based on givens while it should be based on gifts. The important aspects of a gift are that it is free and that it is present, as noted by Horner.

Wells needs to be quoted from the end of Chapter 8 in order to best understand his overall argument. “Givens are things that are simply there and the community must simply adapt to, if it is to remain the real world, whereas gifts are largely what one chooses to make of them.” Wells suggests that the only true given is God’s story, and this is because God is the only true giver. We are here to develop the ethics – we are on the receiving end. One example given by Wells is the transformation in our minds from fate to destiny. The first is seen as a given, while the latter is a gift from God. To put everything in this perspective would make life entirely easier to live and to deal with. It all makes more sense – it all seems to have a purpose.

02/27/06

Wells talks about accepting and blocking in chapter 7. This is in reference to a game in which each person in a group says one word at a time to make a story. Accepting would be taking what the last person said and adding a word to keep the story going – making an offer. Blocking would be saying a word that puts an end or leads toward an end to the story. Wells then compares this to Christian Ethics, as usual. This block may be done out of fear of what is unknown and a desire for security. The three main terms in this chapter are offer, accept, and block. I have already mentioned some aspects of these terms. An offer made can be a block or an acceptance. It is the action that proposes the next move to the next person. To accept is to take what is given and keep it going in the same or similar manner. To block is to take what is given and attempt to slow it or put an end to it. To accept all the time or block all the time is not right. Each can be a defense mechanism. A balance is needed. Wells then goes on to explain blocking in more detail. It can be both passive and active. If one puts a block up as a guard then it is passive. If one does it to act against what was said or done, it is active, which is often violence.

As a church, we need to learn to accept and not be so closed-minded. Wells says that we need to learn to use the word “And…” This would show that we are not always attempting to put up a guard or an end to a story. There are times when we need to be vulnerable. I believe that it would help us all to be more appealing, human, and accepting of others. Christ used “And…” He used this when it came to His death. His death was not the end. He rose from the dead and kept the story going. When we feel bogged down by confusion, stress, persecution, or a number of other things, we need to say “And…” and make the story go on to bigger and better things. For instance, there are many times that I have been confronted on religious issues by someone trying to sway me from my beliefs. I had to take what they dealt me and learn from it. It was important not to be defeated but rather to learn from every situation. This is something that the church needs to work on on both ends – conservative and liberal. We all think we are the right ones. Is there always an end to the story?

02/20/06

Wells talks of status in Chapter 6. Some of it made sense, and some of it was very hard to follow.

Wells talked about how people have inherent status, and also have a status that they try to imply to others. He also compared status to a seesaw. If I were to build and bring myself up, it would only be at the expense of someone else. I have experienced this much in life. If I remain selfish and try to speak of my accomplishments and well-being, then I would have to be doing one of two things. Either I would be building myself up, making the other person seem much lower in status, or I would be putting them down to make myself seem much higher in status.

Wells talks about how status is present in every interaction between people and is chosen by oneself rather than the other. I have felt this occurrence many times as well. As a Christian, I feel that I need to be aware of my projection of status. I need to remain approachable and selfless. The first things I say and the way I give myself off can make or break an interaction with someone.

The comparison of the church with status is Wells’ general argument and conclusion for chapter 6. First, it needs to be recognized that status is very apparent in the church. I believe that the church needs to step away from the idea of status and concentrate on its purposes and people – not focusing on the building or the politics. People need to be attracted to the church, but people also need to feel impacted by the church in a positive way.