Hauerwas the Sectarian

…after September 11 Hauerwas was one of the very few well-
known public voices in America calling for a nonviolent response.
Hauerwas spoke and wrote, argued and debated the reasons for his
pacifist stance up and down the East Coast, in magazines, journals,
books, lectures,  and on the internet. The idea that a theologian who
goes to so much trouble to put in the public domain a set of extremely
unpopular arguments for the legitimacy of pacifism is a sectarian, or
is commending a withdrawal from the world, is laughable.

Michael Northcott, An Angel Directs the Storm: Apocalyptic Religion and American Empire, 132.

At last…

I’m finally and officially a professional photographer.  I just made $0.28 from selling a photo through a stock photography website.  $0.28 is the lowest amount you can possibly make selling a stock photo.  It means that whoever wanted my photo only wanted to use it online in an ‘extra small’ format.  But it can only go up from here, right?!

The Religious Sphere

The ethical decision, however, is not the last word.  It leads necessarily to a crisis in which man will either despair again or turn to God.  Up to this point God has been considered too exclusively as a complement of man’s ethical life; he ordinarily recalls Him only in examination of conscience.  By admitting his faults the ethical man expresses his essential limitation before God’s transcendency and avoids falling into despair.  Religious contrition thus belongs to the essence of ethical life, since it indicates that although evil is a part of one’s self, one detaches himself from it in his ultimate choice, and asserts his fundamental ability to observe the ethical law.

At a certain point, however, my conscience will conclude that it is impossible to observe faithfully the claims of ethics, and I will be forced to abandon belief in my own basic righteousness.  My conscience accuses me of being guilty before God not only in certain respect, but in every respect.  A new decision becomes necessary, in which I will either abandon myself to despair, or throw myself entirely on God’s mercy.  Only in this moment can my commitment be called absolute, because only here do I choose my self completely, including the true relation to its Origin, guilt…This means that the choice of myself, by which I escaped from the aesthetic stage, is only fully accomplished on the religious level, where I cast myself as totally guilty before God.  The ethical stage was a transition.  My decision becomes absolute only when it is completed in absolute despair or in absolute faith.

If the essence of spirit is subjectivity, it follows that man becomes fully spirit only in the religious stage.  For in the ethical stage the subjective choice was still aimed at an objective realization of ethical values, whereas in the religious choice subjectivity abandons every hope of realizing itself objectively.  Man accepts himself as nonobjective, as an individual, completely isolated from the universal.  He is alone with his guilt before God, and finds no place in an objective universe. But in choosing himself as guilty before God he finally chooses himself and his relation to the Origin of his self.

Louis Dupré, Kierkegaard as Theologian, 47-48.

The Ethical Sphere

In the choice of himself as an absolute, one leaves the aesthetic stage.  Kierkegaard calls the new sphere, into which freedom has introduced man, the ethical.  As soon as  a person takes possession of himself and becomes free there arises an absolute distinction between good and evil.  For the speculative attitude (which is included in the aesthetic, because of its lack of commitment), this distinction is only relative: good and evil can be integrated in a single system.  The distinction becomes absolute when we make it so by a personal commitment.  This means that good and evil are absolute only insofar as we will them.  Such a statement does not reduce them to mere subjective determinations – they are objective and universal in themselves – but they become themselves only in the free decision of absolute choice.  Nothing but a conscious, personal acceptance can make objective standard into absolute values.

Even in their subjective acceptance, however, the objective ethical standards are a limitation of the spirit….The absolute of the ethical man is expressed as an existence which is extremely limited and, as such, relative.  Although the synthesis of the ethical personality is more balanced than the aesthetic, which refuses to bind itself to the finite, the question remains whether the ethical man will ever be conscious of the absolute as such, which is the primary condition for becoming spirit.  The very self-assurance of the ethical man makes his whole attitude somewhat suspect.  “He feels no want of the eternal, for it is with him in time.”

Louis Dupré, Kierkegaard as Theologian, 45-46.

The Aesthetic Sphere

The aesthetic sphere bears within itself the germ of its own destruction: the frustrated attempts of the spirit to affirmt itself cause a strange anxiety, eventually leading to despair…Only a free decision can break through the aesthetic attitude.  At this point it does not matter to what one commits onself, since the dilemma here is not between good and evil, but between choosing and not choosing.  If the aesthete has followed his attitude to its ultimate consequences, there is nothing left for him to choose other than the despair into which he has brought himself.  If he accepts it resolutely, he chooses himself and thus brings an absolute element into his existence: in his commitment to despair he constitutes a relationship to himself.

One does not fall into despair; one chooses it voluntarily.  And in choosing despair man also chooses the object of despair, himself. This is an absolute, not subordinate to anything else.  The unique character of this absolute is that it becomes real only through choice, and, on the other hand, that it must already be real to be an object of choice.  This is possible only if I am, myself, the choice, and if freedom is the very essence of my existence, for only then can I become myself through realizing my freedom.  The fact that I am essentially freedom is at the origin of the paradox that I choose the most concrete reality, myself, and that this self becomes concrete only by that choice.  In order to choose myself, I should already be myself: on the other hand, I become myself only in choosing myself.

Louis Dupré, Kierkegaard as Theologian, 43-44.

For those interested…

I have the most amazing fiancée.  She continually amazes me with her sharp mind, warm heart, keen perception, lively sense of humor, and a seemingly unending list of mysteriously wonderful qualities which I look forward to learning more about.  She is also, among other things, a very competent poet.  I would like to recommend her poetry blog to anyone interested in poetry written from a true sense of theological exploration of what it means to be human.

Elisa’s Place

Here is one of my favorites:

Flowers flicker light against the sapphire sea,
the sun plays the fiddle and the grass
yawns, stretching its thousand arms.

There is so much to say. So much

that floats

on the soft winds of easy silence.
But only a whisper is heard -
a butterfly brushes past:

“Rest here, rest here awhile, children.
For moments hold and gather
the real. Then comes time.”

World Cinema, by Joel and Ethan Coen

GRE Advice?

Anyone out there taken the GRE lately?  What helped?  What didn’t?  Should I be as nervous as I am?

I tend to freak out about this kind of thing.

2010 Olympics

As a resident of Vancouver and critic of big business, I feel obliged to post this letter about the 2010 Winter Olympics.  It seems like the Olympics are a microcosm of global economic forces, blind to the possibilities of human life which fall outside the guidelines of the “pursuit of profit” or “development.”

Statement on the 2010 Olympic Winter Games

The Council of Canadians, one of Canada’s largest public advocacy organizations, with members and chapters across the country, views positively the Olympic goal of friendly international competition between athletes who excel in their respective sports. We understand and appreciate the pleasure and enjoyment so many around the world share in the spectacle and achievements of the Olympic Games.

However, we are gravely concerned by the increasing evidence that these worthy aspects are being overwhelmed, if not totally supplanted, by an “Olympic industry” focused on real estate development and massive corporate marketing opportunities. An “Olympic industry” founded and based in undemocratic and unaccountable national and international structures, implicated in numerous corruption scandals that undermine everything a truly noble Olympic movement should stand for.

In particular, the Council of Canadians believes the February 2010 Olympic Games in Vancouver and Whistler will leave a negative legacy contrary to the goals set forward during the application and approval process to host the games. There is now no doubt that the Vancouver Organizing Committee (VANOC) and its affiliated partners will fail to meet their commitments with regard to the environment, social programs and fiscal accountability.

The Council of Canadians is committed to working with activists who are highlighting the negative aspects of the 2010 Games, especially the fact they are being held on un-ceded First Nations territories and are providing mining, resort, real estate and energy developers with opportunities to continue expansion of projects on indigenous territories throughout the province.

As well, we are concerned that the civil liberties of local communities and those who have a critique of the Games are being undermined by an unnecessary security presence. The security budget for the games has ballooned to $1 billion, while security and law enforcement agencies have identified protest groups as the most significant threat to the Games. Over 4,500 Canadian military troops will be deployed to the 2010 Vancouver Olympics – twice the number Canada has in Afghanistan.

Federal Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart and the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association have both raised serious concerns about the threat to fundamental rights to privacy and protest arising from the installation and introduction of new surveillance and security measures. Almost a year before the start of the Games surveillance cameras are being installed in Whistler and Vancouver and, according to several credible reports, harassment of protesters has begun.

Residents of Whistler, site of the nordic and downhill venues, are already living in what amounts to a “security zone,” which is only expected to escalate as the opening date approaches. Critics of the Games, including a Council of Canadians board member, have allegedly been placed under surveillance, while hikers and mountain bikers find favourite wilderness trails blocked by mysterious military operations.

As with Beijing 2008, there are plans to suppress legitimate dissent, including restricting demonstrators to areas far away from venues, visitors and the media. The Council of Canadians is concerned for the civil liberties of those who challenge the negative impacts of the Olympics and asks: Will those who ignore such undemocratic limitations be pepper-sprayed, tear-gassed and arrested? Will they be labeled “terrorists” and face global travel bans for exercising their democratic rights?”

As an organization focused on global justice we are especially concerned that the 2010 Olympics are providing a prime “green-washing” opportunity for corporations involved in the most egregious threats to the survival of humanity and the earth through their active participation in the privatization and commodification of water and massive environmental degradation exemplified by the exploitation of the tar sands.

A Worldwide Olympic Partner, Coca Cola (also a sponsor of the Torch Relay), is notorious for depleting groundwater in areas of India and Latin America with scarce water resources. Furthermore, Coca Cola is a leading promoter of water commodification as one of the largest producers of bottled water in the world. The Council of Canadians is actively promoting bottled water bans in communities across the country, and has grave concerns about the impact of Coca Cola’s sponsorship on public water infrastructure support in Vancouver and Whistler.

EPCOR, an Official Supplier for the games, has been working to privatize the water utilities of municipalities across the country, including BC. Epcor tried to bid on the privatization of waste water treatment in Whistler in 2006. The bid was successfully overturned as a result of efforts by the Council of Canadians and community members in Whistler. General Electric, another Worldwide Olympic Partner, is a major financier of private power projects in BC, including the enormous Bute Inlet proposal through its subsidiary Plutonic Power. The Council of Canadians has taken a stand against private power projects in British Columbia through the ‘IPP’ model.

The Royal Bank of Canada and Petro Canada, both National Partners for the 2010 Games, are directly involved in the Alberta tar sands, one of the most environmentally destructive projects in the world. The Royal Bank is a major financier of tar sands projects and is also a sponsor of the Torch Relay. Ironically, their ad campaigns for the relay ask individuals to make a “green pledge” by volunteering to carry the torch. The Council of Canadians is campaigning for no new approvals in the tar sands and a halt to any development infrastructure designed to increase the capacity of tar sands exploitation.

Dow Chemical is also an Olympic sponsor. Currently Dow is suing the Government of Canada for $2 million, through NAFTA’s Chapter 11 investor-state dispute process, as part of a  challenge to a Quebec ban on the use of lawn pesticides. Dow claims that the ban has amounted to an unfair expropriation of Dow’s Canadian pesticide business. The Council of Canadians has long campaigned against NAFTA and Chapter 11’s harmful impact on public regulation.

At a time of economic crisis when federal, provincial and municipal governments should focus on public projects that create a lasting positive social and economic foundation the 2010 Games appear set to leave a legacy of social and environmental destruction and massive debt that will hobble our ability to make positive change and respond to the serious challenges facing communities across the province and the country.

——————————————

Harjap Grewal

BC-Yukon Regional Organizer

Council of Canadians

The Placed Pilgrim?

My love of Wendell Berry has often brought me to the realization that – among other valuable insights -  place is important.  Surely there is theological justification for this.  There may, however, be even more sociological justification as we live in a world which is almost completely uprooted and disconnected from the Earth.  But as I continue to reflect on the importance of place in my own life, I have been reminded that we are also called to be strangers and pilgrims in this world.  Of course I’m not talking about the idea that our lives on earth don’t matter, nor do I mean that place is unimportant.  Rather, I’m struck by the sociological realism that pushes me to see the importance of being rooted in a specific place, while being similarly called to be free to follow the command of God without hesitation.  This call may be one that asks me to be uprooted.  Or, it may hinder me from ever having roots.

So how can Berry et al’s call to be recconnected to place be held in dialectical tension with the biblical call to be strangers, pilgrims, and wanderers on the Earth?  Rooted, but always willing to leave?  Wandering, but always willing to be rooted?