Deacon Dan Wright

Media Reports Avatar Opposed by Church, Political Right

It's only been a couple days since I did my post on "Peace and Ecology."  In it I added my take on the film "Avatar."   Since then I’ve found ample stories on the Vatican and the political right being critical of the film.  I suppose my comments were timely.  It bothers me a little though that the media seems to be trying to portray the Vatican as being narrow-minded.  If anything the pope’s New Year’s address on peacemaking through protecting the environment should prove otherwise.   

Concerning “Avatar” I mentioned briefly in a paragraph what stood out to me in relation to my overall post, and really I'm no film critic but several things appeared clear to me. In my view of the film I mentioned that it seemed to convey a message of opposition to exploitation, though it’s not developed well.  The film also clearly has an underlying philosophy of pantheism and neo-paganism, which are not compatible with Christianity. Add to that the portrayal of the worst militaristic and capitalistic stereotypes imaginable, which are abundant and not easy to find likeable, and you end up with an overall poor view of humanity.  I'll repeat what I actually said, though if you scroll down the page to the January 11 post you can read it in context:

…as a society we tend to listen closely to what film and other media presents.  Undoubtedly "Avatar" expresses a strong theme of respect for nature, but it also has a strong underlying theme of pantheism and neo-paganism based on nature worship.  While I believe the film presents a good message on the importance of being opposed to environmental exploitation, it unfortunately plays too heavily on militaristic stereotypes, demonizes humanity, and is rather pessimistic concerning the future of the human race overall.  In the end it comes off as little more than an epic sci-fi tale of cowboys and Indians.

Now, I must add that I actually enjoyed the movie quite a bit.  In terms of exciting action it had me hanging on the edge of my seat for better than two thirds of the film.  However, I agree with much of what I've read about a lack of depth, though depth is not what gets movie goers out.  We live in a world where depth more often confuses people and they would rather get the simple version.  Frankly, film provides an excellent escape.  It has value often just in its ability to entertain and offer a momentary step back from the events of the week.

So “Avatar” doesn’t disappoint.  It has entertainment value.  It also expresses a simplistic view, one that has roused strong sentiment on both the political left and the right.  I find it interesting that those who can have their political feathers ruffled on either side don't actually need a lot of depth to get them going.  Rather, they seem to thrive on the more shallow expressions of real issues and the accompanying implications.  

I would have personally preferred that the film went into greater depth in making an anti-war message clear.  It could have done better to explore the real need for true environmental activism. It could have better explored the detrimental effects of unchecked capitalism.  It might have even gotten into a deeper exploration of the existential dilemmas of the characters.  However, it only had three hours for all of this and in some ways it did a good job of at least touching on these subjects. 

I found it interesting that the folks at beliefnet.com seem to be not too concerned with the heterodox challenges of pantheism or neo-paganism, rather they seem to feel that the obvious fictions of the science fiction presents a bigger challenge:

But while it's a given that the media outlets of the Catholic Church will, and should, take a particular theological stance on any bit of pop culture that may get reviewed in their pages or on their airwaves, I can't help but think, "Really? Neo-pagan nature worship is a real sticking point here?" What about the fact that human bodies no longer hold special significance, that human consciousness can be transferred into genetically-crafted empty vessels, Na'vi avatars, manufactured through a means of asexual, gene-manipulated reproduction, "matured" on a spacecraft and then decanted? And that's just one example. To worry about pantheism, and that a 3-D movie might inspire a little too much tree-hugging, just seems so antiquated, so very early Church, especially in a world full of poverty, war, and challenging scientific questions.

Actually, when it comes to a world of poverty, war, and challenging scientific questions, I don’t believe the Catholic Church has been silent. Clearly the Church has great concern with such issues and does so in a way that transcends the polemics of political ideology.

On Peace and Ecology

Last week in Thursday’s post I mentioned that I would like to return to comment on certain sections of the pope’s message for the celebration of the World Day of Peace.  Therefore, today I want to begin by taking a closer look at the document.  However, more than just providing my commentary on an already well-expressed message, what I would like to offer is concrete direction on how we might work to make a difference as well as just to reflect on the subject with greater depth.

The first thing I’d like to do is direct you to the website of the Catholic Climate Covenant.  On it you’ll find additional information and ways to promote and be involved in peacemaking through environmental awareness and protection.  In investigating and promoting such efforts we are following through with informing ourselves in “ecological awareness,” which “needs to be helped to develop and mature, and find fitting expression in concrete programs and initiatives.” (See section 3 of the World Day of Peace message)

In order to better understand the need to protect the environment I often turn to my own personal experience and apply it to reason.  It makes good sense to be pro-environment, but we who hold this may have come to it from different backgrounds and for different reasons.  My experience of ecology has long been one that includes the understanding that nature is sacred.  I believe that my realization of this fact first came about at a time in my life when I began to understand and acknowledge the hand of God in all things—it came about through my experience of conversion.

As a young man growing up in east Texas I had ample opportunities to experience the power and awe of nature first hand.  I saw it as the work of God and I understood nature as a way in which God was communicating with me.  There was a connection made that I have never lost.  In the years to come I began better to understand the role of human beings as stewards of the environment.  The link that has always been clear to me is that of our having a shared responsibility for future generations.  This, of course, is what the pope means when he speaks of intergenerational solidarity. (See section 8)

It is my strong conviction that I should live in such a way that respects all living things to the highest degree possible.  I see in all created things a connection and interdependency that demands respect and greater understanding.  Furthermore, I truly do believe that respect for creation is the foundation of bringing peace to the world.

An important point to keep in mind, which is expressed in the pope’s message, is that being concerned with protecting creation, and thus bringing about peace through it, does not mean putting the environment—ideologically—above the human person.  To be an environmentalist does not necessarily entail a philosophical position of ecocentrism or biocentrism, which would make the claim that nature in itself is the highest good while ignoring the centrality of humanity as God’s creation.  Nor does it mean embracing pantheism, or even a form of neo-paganism which makes a god of nature and refuses to address the issues of planetary ecology from the viewpoint of true reason. 

I reflect on this keeping in mind that I just saw the movie Avatar this weekend, which I immensely enjoyed watching in 3-D.  What Avatar has to do with my reflection today is that as a society we tend to listen closely to what film and other media presents.  Undoubtedly Avatar expresses a strong theme of respect for nature, but it also has a strong underlying theme of pantheism and neo-paganism based on nature worship.  While I believe the film presents a good message on the importance of being opposed to environmental exploitation, it unfortunately plays too heavily on militaristic stereotypes, demonizes humanity, and is rather pessimistic concerning the future of the human race overall.  In the end it comes off as little more than an epic sci-fi tale of cowboys and Indians.

On more than one occasion in the pope’s message on the World Day of Peace he calls for sober lifestyles in response to the need to show greater respect for the environment.  This is something that all of us can consider.  I believe that we must also take on strong convictions that support legislation in favor of both protecting natural resources and making resources such as water and clean energy available to developing nations.  In our ecological sentiment we must move beyond ideas that are merely fantasy, such as those presented in science fiction, or even the unrealistic or seemingly romantic ideals associated with ecological efforts.  In multiple ways the survival of humanity depends on our ability to convince the world to stop destroying the air, water, climate and other resources on which life depends. In other words we have to get real, which I believe also means abandoning any pet political ideologies that are opposed to environmentalism or that deny the real existence of ecological issues such as planetary warming.

The pope goes on to say (in section 11) that concern for the environment calls for a global vision that moves beyond nationalistic interests.  Indeed this is where true peace lies.  We truly move toward obtaining the ideal of world peace when we are able to put the interests and well being of the whole world ahead of nationalistic and self-interested motives.  A global vision is also a vision of a world in which there is a renewed earth and a human society that has learned to protect its greatest gift, a gift that is the handiwork of the Creator, a gift that we were given to be its responsible stewards.

At a later date I’ll be back with more discussion on the World Day of Peace message, until then I want to offer the following suggestions, which are provided by the USCCB website and may be downloaded in pdf format for bulletin inserts:

5 Ways You Can Cultivate Peace by Protecting Creation

 • Learn more about how climate change is related to global poverty at the

Catholics Confront Global Poverty Web site: http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/globalpoverty/ 

• Take the St. Francis Pledge to Care for Creation and the Poor at the Catholic Climate Covenant

Web site: http://catholicclimatecovenant.org/

• Take action to ensure that climate change policies protect poor and vulnerable people, and sign up to receive the most recent legislative updates/action alerts at http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/takeaction.shtml

• Join with family, friends, or fellow parishioners to pray for solutions that care for creation and care for the poor!  Access USCCB prayer resources at http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/ejp/climate/

The Vatican and Darwin

As an educator I enjoyed finding the article I'm including on today's post, though I know that this is the sort of thing that's bound to bring out negative feelings--especially where Catholic-Evangelical relations are concerned.

I recently heard of an educator who had regretfully decided not to return to her job next year because the state was going to "make her teach evolution" (Texas recently changed it's ruling on evolution--at least for the time being).

Interestingly, it was only a couple weeks ago that I had a conversation with an evangelical friend who works in the public schools.  We were talking about dinosaur extinctions and I mentioned that the age of the dinosaurs, the Mesozoic era, ran from 250 million to 65 million years ago.  She told me that was interesting theory but couldn't be true since the planet is only 6 to 10 thousand years old.

Needless to say, literal interpreters of the Bible are going to have problems with the Vatican's conference on Darwin.

The Vatican is hosting a conference to mark the sesquicentennial of Darwin's book, On the Origin of the Species, and taking a fresh look at Darwin's evolution theory. The Vatican is implying that Darwin's ideas are compatible with Christianity. The Vatican's upcoming conference will discuss intelligent design as a "cultural," not scientific issue.

A century and a half after Charles Darwin published his revolutionary study of nature, On the Origin of the Species, one of his most ardent foes is taking a fresh look at his theories.

Although the Roman Catholic Church never formally condemned Darwin or his theories (thus demonstrating some significant progress from Galileo's time), there is no question that for decades, it was openly hostile to Darwin's theory because of its apparent conflict with the teachings of the church.

Next month, however, the Vatican will host a conference to mark the sesquicentennial of Darwin's book. The gathering will be held March 3-6 at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, Italy.

Not only have church officials declared that the naturalist's views are "compatible with Christian faith," they have even argued that Darwin's ideas can be traced to great theologians like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. Both observed, for instance, that various forms of life on Earth have changed over time.

According to Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture, the teachings of the Church and Darwin can be reconciled: "In fact, what we mean by evolution is the world as created by God," the archbishop said recently.

The upcoming conference is the culmination of more than a half century of slowly easing tensions between the Catholic Church and the chief proponent of evolution. In 1950, Pope Pius XII declared that evolution was "a valid scientific approach." Just a decade ago, Pope John Paul II went further and said that evolution was "more than a hypothesis."

....the organizers did not invite supporters of creationism or intelligent design because it was "not feasible" to include ideas "that cannot be critically defined as being science, or philosophy or theology."

Source

Sagan Resurrected?

It’s been a long 10 years since we’ve heard Carl Sagan beckoning us to consider the possibilities inherent in the “billions” of stars peppering the sky and in the “billions” of neuronal connections spiderwebbing our brains....

In his absence, the public discourse on his favorite issues — the fate of the planet, the beauty and mystery of the cosmos — has not fared well. The teaching of evolution in public schools has become a bitter bone of contention; NASA tried to abandon the Hubble Space Telescope and censor talk of climate change; and of course, religious fanatics crashed jetliners into the World Trade Center, leading to a war in the Middle East that has awakened memories in some corners of the Crusades.

Now, however, Dr. Sagan has rejoined the cosmic debate from the grave. The occasion is the publication in November of “The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God” (Penguin). The book is based on a series of lectures exploring the boundary between science and religion that Dr. Sagan gave in Glasgow in 1985, and it was edited by Ann Druyan, his widow and collaborator....

“I would suggest that science is, at least in part, informed worship,” he writes at the beginning of a discussion that includes the history of cosmology, a travel guide to the solar system, the reason there are hallucinogen receptors in the brain, and the meaning of the potential discovery — or lack thereof — of extraterrestrial intelligence.

Never afraid to venture into global politics, Dr. Sagan warns at one point of the danger that a leader under the sway of religious fundamentalism might not try too hard to avoid nuclear Armageddon, reasoning that it was God’s plan.

“He might be interested to see what that would be like,” Dr. Sagan wrote. “Why slow it down?”

Almost in the same breath, Dr. Sagan acknowledges that religion can engender hope and speak truth to power, as in the civil rights movement in the United States, but that it rarely does.

It’s curious, he says, that no allegedly Christian nation has adopted the Golden Rule as a basis for foreign policy. Rather, in the nuclear age, mutually assured destruction was the policy of choice. “Christianity says that you should love your enemy. It certainly doesn’t say that you should vaporize his children.”

Read more

In many respects Dr. Sagan's criticisms of fundamentalism don't seem to be too far off the mark. However, could it be that he failed to understand the true intent and purposes of Christ's transforming love?  Did he fail to understand the meaning of true religion?  Or, did he simply find it rarely practiced in our times? 

Interestingly, I find myself in agreement with the assertion that Christians frequently fail to follow the intentions of Christ. Too often we do the exact opposite with no intention of seeking to right the situation. 

In Sagan's assessment of fundamentalism I am reminded of Jesus' criticism of the Pharisees and the kind of religion that they sought to promote.  In many respects we might say that the Pharisees achieved some measure of success--this is something that I have mused over since my early experiences with evangelicalism.  Religion devoid of love is not the faith that is born of our Lord's passion, rather it is something truly alien to the heart of Christ.

If Sagan would have only searched for Christ with the same rigor that he applied to science, his findings might have yielded surprising evidence.

The Science of Doing Good

We have the answer that faith gives us, and now it appears the question is being approached by science.  Why do people choose to do good?

(HealthDay News) -- People may not perform selfless acts just for an emotional reward, a new brain study suggests.

Instead, they may do good because they're acutely tuned into the needs and actions of others.

Scientists say a piece of the brain linked to perceiving others' intentions shows more activity in unselfish vs. selfish types.

"Perhaps altruism did not grow out of a warm-glow feeling of doing good for others, but out of the simple recognition that that thing over there is a person that has intentions and goals. And therefore, I might want to treat them like I might want them to treat myself," explained study author Scott Huettel, an associate professor of psychology at Duke University Medical Center, in Durham, N.C.

He and lead researcher Dharol Tankersley, a graduate student at Duke, published their findings in the Jan. 21 online issue of Nature Neuroscience.

For decades, psychologists and neuroscientists have puzzled over the tendency of humans to engage in altruistic acts -- defined by Huettel's group as acts "that intentionally benefit another organism, incur no direct personal benefit, and sometimes bear a personal cost."

Experts note that altruism doesn't seem to provide individuals with any survival edge, so how and why did it evolve?

Read more here (no subscription needed on this one)

This takes me back to an old idea--God created us good, and we have learned to share goodness with one another out of being connected to one another.  It's a part of being a societal human to do good, that is, it's part of living on a level of sharing meaning, purpose, and value with one another.  Goodness is the stuff that depth of being is made of.  I like to say that good is synonymous with God, and certainly it's not a bad thing if science is discovering that there's good in us.

Pay Heed, the Clock is Ticking

Climate change stands alongside the use of nuclear weapons as one of the greatest threats posed to the future of the world, the Cambridge cosmologist Stephen Hawking has said.

Professor Hawking said that we stand on the precipice of a second nuclear age and a period of exceptional climate change, both of which could destroy the planet as we know it.

He was speaking at the Royal Society in London yesterday at a conference organised by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists which has decided to move the minute hand of its "Doomsday Clock" forward to five minutes to midnight to reflect the increased dangers faced by the world.

"As citizens of the world, we have a duty to share that knowledge. We have a duty, as well, to alert the public to the unnecessary risks that we live with every day, and to the perils we foresee if governments and societies do not take action now to render nuclear weapons obsolete and to prevent further climate change."

Get the story here

A certain wisdom exists in being able to recognize the signs--the symptoms of the closing of an age.  Indeed the times we live in point to a world out of control.  Nevertheless, we must have faith--we must keep the faith handed to us by the Apostles.  Also, we are mindful that no one knows the hour of the end.  Doomsday forecasts have been around a long time.

However, rather than taking a position of resignation or disbelief, ours is to step up to the problem and allow the power and presence of Christ to be visible in our world.  We can still save the world in which we live.  To attempt to do so is the ultimate sign of peace.

My youngest son just asked his mother, "What year will I be 50?"  She hesitantly replied "2048."  Let's keep the future of our children in mind.  May God be with them in these perilous times.

I sort of Doubt it, but Let's Wait and See

No religion and an end to war... sounds a little like the John Lennon "Imagine" school of philosophy is at it again, doesn't it?

People's fascination for religion and superstition will disappear within a few decades as television and the internet make it easier to get information, and scientists get closer to discovering a final theory of everything, leading thinkers argue today.

I have no problem with people's fascination for superstition disappearing, but there's something that someone is missing: the human being is a religious animal, and being an intelligent creature(providing I'm not assuming too much) there's no way that television and the Internet will satisfy our longing for God--though eventually it may drive humanity closer to God when we finally lose our fascination the information idol. What follows in the story comes closer to a sales pitch for the atheist religion.

Philosopher Daniel Denett believes that within 25 years religion will command little of the awe it seems to instil today. The spread of information through the internet and mobile phones will "gently, irresistibly, undermine the mindsets requisite for religious fanaticism and intolerance".

Really, cell phones undermining fanatic intolerance? Well, maybe we might use them for our purposes. I can see the headline now "Dial-a-Prayer Leaps Into the 21st Century." We just need to get some phones into the hands of the extremists and, voila, problem solved, right?

Biologist Richard Dawkins said that physicists would give religion another problem: a theory of everything that would complete Albert Einstein's dream of unifying the fundamental laws of physics. "This final scientific enlightenment will deal an overdue death blow to religion and other juvenile superstitions."

Anyone who supposes that theory can replace the human longing to seek God seriously misunderstands the depth of that longing and has a poor image of God--certainly it must be an image of God that lacks the quality of God being a reality that we can know through lived experience.

What has theory--even noteworthy theory, unlike anything I've seen from Dawkins, though River Out of Eden was an interesting piece of anti-theism--given us that remotely approximates the richness and depth of faith?

The problem with the ivory tower is that it's a little too remote from where people actually live, and I'm not talking about a naive view of reality, but a deeply rich and observable life in faith. Rather the (a)theistic notions that arise from being infatuated with theory are simply reflections of the fascination with the scope of empirical data--an idol at least--while lacking a single nanometer of depth. Something I have noticed often in juveniles is a fascination with the surface of things--one would think a man of Dawkins age would have grasped that much. While I can somewhat tolerate the religion he espouses, I cannot tolerate the prejudice he seeks to inspire through it.

Get the story here

Just Plain Strange

Here's one to muse over that's just plain strange:

The parents of a nine-year-old girl who suffers from a rare brain condition have said they are deliberately keeping her child-sized to give her a better life.

Get the story here

As a parent--of a disabled child at that--I'm going to withhold making a negative judgment, but I believe we can sometimes be guilty of interfering a little too much.

What's more interesting to me is that my state is now mandating that educators, such as myself, test children with this degree of disability on grade level.  Thanks NCLB.

Robolab Goes National

For the past couple years my two older children who attend Catholic school have had the opportunity to participate in a extracurricular technology project called "Robolab."  Being an educator myself I couldn't let it pass, just as a mention, when I found this article on CNS.  I had no idea they were doing the same thing as far away as Vermont.

BARRE, Vt. (CNS) -- John McHugh, a fourth-grader at St. Monica School in Barre, would like to see robots used as police officers.

"They could have rockets on the bottom of their feet and fly around town looking for people who are being attacked by criminals and come down and arrest them," he said. "It'd be a big help."

Classmate Ricky Gariboldi would like to have a robot clean his room and do his homework.

Now, if I could only get my 7th grader to build a robot that'll clean his room and do his homework...

Euthanasia? No thanks.

Here's a story from Reuters to get you thinking. Never let go of hope...

A woman in a vegetative state for five months appeared in brain scans to imagine playing tennis and to respond to commands, researchers reported on Thursday.

They said their study showed the woman was conscious despite her coma-like state...

Get the story here.