For the Joy of the Journey

Empathy

George October 2, 2021 Empathy 0 Comments

This post has lots of twists and turns. Be patient with me.

Recently, I asked my closest critic what she thought about my latest post. Her unvarnished reply was: “you think too much. You always seem to be discontent.” Although not a critique of the post’s content, her observation is correct. Some serious introspection is required before I respond. Are my thinking and discontent liabilities or assets? I am still pondering the question, I found some insights by Richard Beck helpful as I ponder.

Thinking
There are a lot of people who struggle with God simply because they are tenacious in following the theological thread to the logical and bitter end. A lot of us think our way into faith problems. It’s not that we think too much, just that we insist that people face up to the logical assumptions and consequences of their beliefs.
The empathic side is easy to see. When we see others suffer our hearts go out to them. We suffer with them. Thus, if you have a soft, compassionate heart you’ll likely struggle more with theodicy issues. Many of us can put images of suffering out of our minds. Others can’t. And that creates a heavy theological burden.
But theodicy has an analytical side as well. There are a lot of people who struggle with God simply because they are tenacious in following the theological thread to the logical and bitter end. A lot of us think our way into faith problems. It’s not that we think too much, just that we insist that people face up to the logical assumptions and consequences of their beliefs.
Generally speaking, because for the most part people specialize in one of these two areas, you can find solace in the area you aren’t so good at. Emotional types, who don’t really want to reason through theological puzzles, often settle for mystery. They don’t mind “not knowing.” Here their disinterest in analysis gives them a place to run when the emotional burden gets too heavy. When the emotional weight starts to crush they can fall back on “God is in control.”
Conversely, analytical types can find shelter on the emotional side. That is, in demanding logical consistency these people might reach a conclusion that demands a certain level of hardheartedness. A lot of Calvinists fit this description in how they handle the problem of evil. As a system Calvinism has a sort of cold, implacable logic to it. But tender-hearted people simply recoil in the face of it. We get the logic of the system but are too softhearted to stomach the conclusions. That’s what I’m trying to point out. You can work the logic but you have to hedge on the empathy. And by reducing empathy you can wiggle out of the theodicy trap your theology is creating.
So we see people doing one of two things to run from theodicy problems. Hedge on the empathy or hedge on the logical consistency.
Richard Beck
http://experimentaltheology.blogspot.com/2012/01/wired-to-suffer-on-theodicy-and.html

So we see people doing one of two things to run from theodicy problems. Hedge on the empathy or hedge on the logical consistency.

At the core of my problem with thinking and discontent is theodicy’s problems.

A theodicy is an attempt to justify or defend God in the face of evil by answering the following problem, which in its most basic form involves these assumptions:
God is all good and all powerful (and, therefore, all knowing).
The universe/creation was made by God and/or exists in a contingent relationship to God.
Evil exists in the world. Why?
https://www3.dbu.edu/mitchell/theodicy_brief_overview.htm

As Beck correctly points out, faced with theodicy problems, we avoid God’s answer to Job and opt for empathy or logical consistency. ( I told you there would be twists and turns.) . Ironically, ideological conflicts we are experiencing directly relate to a choice between empathy and logical consistency ( liberal vs conservative).

The subject of empathy recently caught my attention. As a Christ follower, I have held an unexamined assumption that empathy is a virtue. So I was surprised when I read“Have you heard the one about empathy being a Sin”.

Iis my opinion that “empathy as a sin” is an illustration of what happening when Evangelical Christianity’s historic beliefs are co-opted by the opposition. Rather than an opportunity for agreement, sadly, what is virtuous becomes sin.

Subsequently, I have begun to examine empathy and found it worthy of more thoughtful examination (at the risk of thinking too much and increasing my discontent). For that reason, I am going to write a series of posts on empathy. If you are so inclined, here are some readings to whet your appetite:

Richard Beck has written extensively on empathy. You read his 14 posts HERE . Anyone who reads all 14 is eligible for a special award.

NYT’s David Brooks “The Limits of Empathy”

Against Empathy

Still on the Journey

Our Fundamental Spiritual Struggle

George September 22, 2021 Faith Challenges 0 Comments

If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.
A.I. Solzhenitsyn

The previous post provided a glimpse into my fundamental spiritual conflict as exemplified by schadenfreude — the relentless struggle with my heart. After writing on a subject, often an article or post will appear that illuminates the topic much better than my attempts. That was the case today. My favorite Orthodox blogger, Fr Stephen Freeman posted “Healing the Heart” . Here are a couple of quotes to encourage you read the entire post.

Learning to open our eyes to the source of our actions and the absolute need for the grace of the Holy Spirit in order to change our hearts is the most fundamental understanding in our daily life before God.

...the truth of our problem is to be found in the very character of our existence: Is it being transformed into the image of Christ or is it falling deeper into corruption and death?

I continue to find Freeman’s insights into Orthodox faith and doctrine helpful in my spiritual journey. Here are some questions I am pondering after reading “Healing the Heart”:

To what extent does a view of my relationship with God through a lens of “legal standing” or “debts owed,” shape my understanding of the spiritual life?
What are implications of “Man, as a fallen creature, is better described as diseased or broken ?
…the truth of our problem is to be found in the very character of our existence: Is my character being transformed into the image of Christ or is it falling deeper into corruption and death?
Shouldn’t every Christ follower, like priests hearing confession listen intently for the state of the heart (if possible) rather than simply categorizing and subjecting to legal analysis what they hear? Always mindful, it is considered a sin to judge someone whose confession you are hearing. How that would impact Christ followers’ relationships ?
Are my prayers focused on other’s behavior or on the healing of their hearts?

There are a myriad of other things to think about in our faith, many of them serving as religious distractions from the essential work of repentance. It is easier to argue points of doctrine than to stand honestly before God in prayer or confession. Doctrine is important (what Orthodox priest would deny this?) but only as it makes Christ known to us. But the knowledge of Christ that saves is not the knowledge one gains as mere information – but rather the knowledge one gains inwardly as we repent, pray, forgive, and humble ourselves before God. The promise to us is that the “pure in heart shall see God.”

Still on the Journey

schadenfreude

George September 20, 2021 Faith Challenges 0 Comments

The German word “schadenfreude” means experiencing satisfaction from someone else’s misfortune.

During a year and a half pandemic coupled with an cultural environment in which differences of opinion morphed into hardened ideologies. Incapable of hearing other voices. and clothed in our respective rightness, we justify whatever means we chose to resist and combat the evils being foisted upon us. I cannot recall any period in my life (with the exception of Alabama- Auburn loyalties) that resulted in such division, even hatred.

As Thomas Paine famously said, “These are the times that try men’s souls.” In-deed that is the case, particularly for Christ followers. We are in living in a crucible that tests our faith to its depths.

The “trying ” of my soul has revealed a disturbing presence of “schadenfreude—”experiencing satisfaction from someone else’s misfortune.” Several have recently written about the prevalence of schadenfreude. You can read some –HERE , HERE , HERE.

My encounter with schadenfreude is not overt but subtle. It has occurred in reflection on circumstances of those experiencing misfortune as a result of decisions contrary to my opinions/beliefs. In moments of honest introspection, I realize that I experience pleasant satisfaction of others’ misfortune. The fact that I am restrained from expressing my satisfaction publicly is encouraging, but the truth is plain, there’s within me an undeniable schadenfreude impulse.

This realization is troubling. As a Christ follower, I believe “schadenfreude” is not a fruit of the Holy Spirit nor does it reflect the mind of Christ. Its presence reveals sin which thrives in the shadows of my soul. A sin which cannot be absolved by sin management i.e. restraint in speaking or acting out. Overcoming “schadenfreude” requires the transcendent power of God.

Celebration of other’s misfortune is not unusual, in fact, for most of us it comes easily and is consistent with our highly competitive and individualistic culture. Opponents’ demise is the desired outcome. Victory, even if it comes as result of our opponents bad luck, is always occasion for celebration, a fulfillment of our wishes (or prayers?) that they— “get what they deserve” et al. The opportunity to be proved right and to say, or, at a minimum, think “I told you so” is delicious. Dramatic polarization in our society has elevated “schadenfreude” to normal.

…yes, the environment in which Christians exist, never perfect, is much more hostile now than it was.
But it’s also the case that Christians are an equally dangerous adversary to ourselves. Far too many of us have little to no sense of our owt failings, and our own collaboration with the world.
Rod Dreher

When you start mocking instead of persuading, you signal that you now view someone as an enemy to be defeated, rather than a person to be persuaded…the key to all sin against another is to first dehumanize them…then label them…you have to convince yourself that the other no longer possesses the image of God and God wants them gone as well…we’re all getting too good at this…
Phoenix Preacher

The presence of Schadenfreude reveals sin that is deeper “than “missing the mark” —moral failure — a mistake. It isn’t a mistake. It is a power that can reign and rule my mind and body, forcing you me obey, having dominion over me; a false god to whom I give idolatrous allegiance. Defying sin management, schadenfreude’s antidote is found in Romans 6: “…present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness. For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.” [Adapted from Richard Beck’s post ]

If these thoughts haven’t caused you to rethink any impulse to celebrate the misfortune of others, and you are convinced that justice should prevail. then consider this passage from proverbs:

Do not gloat when your enemy falls; when they stumble do not let your heart rejoice, or the LORD will see and disapprove and turn his wrath away from them (Proverbs 24:17-18).

Still on the journey.

So Much to Think About

George September 4, 2021 Notes Anthology 13 Comments

Perhaps you noticed I have not written any blog posts recently. Without any warning the evening of July 29 I experienced excruciating pain in my chest and abdomen. A 911 call and subsequent trip to the emergency room was the beginning of a perilous journey that included a real possibly of not surviving, miraculous surgical intervention, multiple days in ICU on a ventilator. After ups and downs of recovery, discharge and re-admission, six days in rehab, I returned home on August 28, to continue my recovery.

What I am thinking about at this time is gratitude. Gratitude for God’s providential care. Except for inexplicable circumstances, I would not be alive. I am grateful for the enumerable prayers that were offered and answered. Ann’s constant presence and care sustained me. Though memories are scant, I was aware of the presence and voices of family encouraging and assisting.

This experience has given me much to think about, but I struggle to write. Hopefully, as recovery continues my motivation and thinking will improve. I’m not sure what what normal will be for me as I recover, but there is much to be grateful for.

Still on the journey.

THE CHURCH (10)

George July 27, 2021 THE CHURCH 0 Comments

This post is a break from Hans Kung and Real Church to share a post by Richard Beck in which he suggest transitions he would like to see in the church.

Transitions for Church

I would like the church to begin making the following transitions:

Choice to Character
Rhetoric to Behavior Change
Trying to Training
Evangelism to Moral Formation
Missions to Social Justice
Moral Blame to Moral Luck

Choice to Character: I think the church makes mistakes when she is overly confident in her appeals to choice. The church should rather focus on the formation of character and the acquisition of virtue.

Rhetoric to Behavior Change: Elaborating further, character is not formed by persuasive rhetoric (i.e., a weekly appeal from the pulpit to be a good person). Rhetoric is excellent for changing opinions and, thus, an excellent tool for improving doctrine. But it is a poor tool for transforming the lives in the pew. That is, we are NOT volitionally nimble. We possess characterological inertia and causal forces will need to be brought to bear upon us to form us into the image of Christ. The word form (as in mold or shape) nicely captures the idea. We don’t choose. We are formed.

Trying to Training: Thus, the focus of Kingdom living is less about “trying to be a better person” (via what William James called a “slow heave of the will”) than about “training to be a better person.” Church should be a kind of boot camp for Kingdom living.

Evangelism to Moral Formation: What I mean here is an evangelism that is volitionally-based, the traditional “Do you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior? Yes or no?.” The move should be to what Jesus asked for in the Great Commission: “Make disciples.” Again, the word make gets at the idea very well.

Missions to Social Justice: These last two go together. Mission work should move away from “persuasion models” to actually changing the world. The question for missionaries should shift from “How many souls were saved?” to “How have you transformed that community into the Kingdom of God?”

Moral blame to Moral Luck: We shift from seeing the moral landscape as populated by the “righteous” and the “blameworthy” to seeing the “fortunate” and the “unfortunate.” As Immanuel Kant said: “And how many there are who may have lead a long blameless life, who are only fortunate in have escaped so many temptations.”

If we make this shift, from strong volitional to weak volitional models, what gets lost? Actually very little. And the gains are enormous. By embracing causality and the contingent nature of will–by focusing on Character over Choice–the church might actually start being more effective (a nice causal word) in this world. We will rely less and less on God Talk and more and more on, well, actually doing things. You know, make a difference.

But what does get lost in this shift away from strong volitional models is a robust sense of moral blame or praise. In the contingent picture I paint you can’t take credit for your good character and neither can we “blame” others for poor character. Yet much of Christian theology seems to hinge on notions of moral praise and blame. Particularly soteriological visions of Heaven and Hell.

Of course, Beck is not the final word on THE CHURCH, but I believe he provides some thoughtful and important insights into the nature and character of the church today. His suggested transitions are worthy of serious consideration.

Still on the Journey