Confessions of a Recovering Fundamentalist
[Most Recent Entries]
[Calendar View]
[Friends]
Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in
Todd Trembley's LiveJournal:
[ << Previous 20 ]
| Wednesday, August 13th, 2008 | | 9:46 am |
House in Seattle
Sarah and I just got a basement apartment in Northgate. We will be moving in this Friday the 15th. It is two blocks north of Northgate and two blocks east of Aurora. It has more space than anything else that we looked at, and we really like it. Oh and the best news of all is that it is probably four blocks from the disc golf course in Northgate. Sorry to my West Seattle friends - we will not be sharing a home course. | | Tuesday, June 10th, 2008 | | 8:02 pm |
Jobs
I sent out application materials to 13 community colleges, 1 university, 1 graduate school, and 1 brewery in the Seattle area. And I have a new blog. | | Tuesday, May 20th, 2008 | | 10:20 am |
Clarity
I have a new blog.This year has continued to work out the same way, which should make Sarah and I feel blessed. We keep pursuing various opportunities, and then run into closed doors. I had thought that Vanderbilt University was going to make me an offer to study philosophy there, because I was at the top of the wait list and a professor emailed me asking if I was still interested in going to Vanderbilt. But at the last minute, the two people who they thought were going to pass on their offers accepted them. That was the tough decision I was alluding to in my last post. Out of the eight PhD programs I applied to, I was only accepted to Marquette University, and I wasn't offered any funding. Additionally, I was passed over for all of the private high school jobs that I applied for in the Seattle area. I have now sent out my CV to eleven community colleges between Everett and Olympia. I am hoping that I will be able to pick up some classes. If that doesn't work out, I'll have to find some more doors to knock on. Sarah and I are going to be moving back to Seattle. We will probably be in Bremerton for most of the month of August living in my uncle and aunt's motor home while we look for jobs and a place to live, but then we will be back in Seattle. | | Tuesday, April 15th, 2008 | | 9:17 am |
Uncertainty
I have a new blog. Sarah and I have been in a place of uncertainty for a very long time. We have pursued quite a few different paths for next year, and nothing seems to be working out. I have been thinking that I would rather not pursue a career in academia, and would rather work towards becoming a priest. But we don't know what we're going to be doing next year. And because of the uncertainty, opportunities that I would rather not take are presenting themselves as considerable temptations. I hope that I can navigate these waters well. | | Friday, February 22nd, 2008 | | 12:06 pm |
| | Saturday, February 9th, 2008 | | 9:57 pm |
Politics!?
Today Sarah and I caucused for Obama. Our caucus was not demographically diverse (as it took place on WSU's campus and was 95% students) but the vast majority of Obama supporters was really surprising. There were 50 people in our caucus room. Out of the 50, 44 went for Obama, 4 for Clinton, and 2 undecided. I made the joke that the two undecideds should identify themselves so that everyone could focus on them, to laughs all around. It was funny because there were a lot of one minute speeches by many of the people there in support of their candidate, and I was actually considering speaking. I was going to say the following:
I have voted republican in every election that I have participated in, and I would vote for Obama but not for Clinton. I am increasingly tired of partisan politics, and I believe that Obama could take us beyond them. If democrats do not nominate someone with crossover appeal, they will lose, because the republicans (willingly or unwillingly) look to be putting someone forward with a lot of popularity among independents and thus large crossover appeal. I believe that Obama can beat McCain, but that Clinton cannot. My presence at this caucus is proof of Obama's crossover appeal. | | Wednesday, January 9th, 2008 | | 9:09 am |
For the Life of the World
I have been meaning to read this little book by Alexander Schmemann for a long time now, and it is completely blowing my mind. His ability to succinctly articulate the Christian worldview that the Orthodox life instills is amazing.
So far Schmemann has started with a meditation on Feuerbach's dictum that "Man is what he eats." Whereas for Feuerbach, a materialistic philosopher, this was meant as a repudiation of any ideal or spiritual reality, Schmemann stands Feuerbach on his head and says that this dictum expresses an important and central religious truth. He invites us to see the whole world as a gift of God. Humans are hungry, and God feeds us. We are to receive everything as a gift and sacrament. The definition of sacrament in the Episcopal church is that a sacrament is an outward sign of inward grace, and here, the definition is useful. Our food is a sign of God's presence, generosity, and care for us. Why else is it proper to say grace before meals? What is more, Schmemann says that what distinguishes human beings from the rest of the animal and plant kingdom is not our hunger, or the fact of God's provision, but rather, the fact that we can and should bless God in response to the blessings He pours out on us. We are Homo Adorans (adoring and worshipping humanity), in addition to Homo sapien, and Homo faber (industrious humanity).
One of my favorite parts of the book is when Schmemann proclaims that even the rise of secularism has been unable to squelch the sacramental nature of life. He says, "Centuries of secularism have failed to transform eating into something strictly utilitarian. Food is still treated with reverence. A meal is still a rite-the last "natural sacrament" of family and friendship, of life that is more than "eating" and "drinking." To eat is still something more than to maintain bodily functions. People may not understand what that "something more" is, but they nonetheless desire to celebrate it. They are still hungry and thirsty for sacramental life" (16).
All of this dovetails quite nicely with Sarah and my recent conversations about food, about trying to eat more locally, naturally and sustainably, while also seeing every meal as a Sabbath, or celebration. Her reading of Barbara Kingsolver (Animal, Vegetable, Miracle) also seems pertinent here, as Kingsolver delves into different food cultures around the world, highlighting this "natural sacrament."
So finally, for those who have made it this far, is the American lack of a food culture (other than fast food or mass consumption) and our increasingly utilitarian stance towards food a signal of the final victory of secularism here? In other words, will secularism prevail here through consumerism where it failed in Russia with Communism? How close are we to killing that part of ourselves that is hungry and thirsty for sacrament, for transcendence, for God?
| | Wednesday, December 12th, 2007 | | 8:49 am |
| | Saturday, November 17th, 2007 | | 9:15 am |
Dog Sitting
Sarah and I are dogsitting this weekend for some friends from Sarah's work. The dog's name is Johnny, and he is a Pembroke Welsh corgi. I think that he is a really attractive dog and he has a very sweet demeanor. This morning when I just got up I was petting him on top of his head, just between his ears and under his chin, I caught myself saying, among many repetitions of "You're a good boy Johnny," that "You have a share in creation Johnny, yeah, you have a share in redemption." It was really funny to me, even though it expresses a theological truth that I think is very important, and one that gets us beyond anthropocentrism. If only we were dogsitting for the weekend of the blessing of the animals during St. Francis' feast day. | | Tuesday, November 13th, 2007 | | 9:36 am |
Elijah Moments
Sarah and I have been feeling somewhat discouraged with the Episcopal Church. It is really wierd for us to feel like some of the most conservative people there, and it often seems (at least to me) that there are many people within the church who say the words of the liturgy every week but who do not really believe what they are saying. There are a number of people who are ashamed of miracles, including the resurrection of Jesus Christ (I really can't figure this one out since our own scriptures tell us that we are above all fools if this event did not occur). But a few nights ago, Sarah looked up the Episcopal church that she was a part of in Boston when she was in college and we discovered that the church has already realigned with the Anglican Communion Network. This was an Elijah moment for us because it felt like God revealed a remnant to us who have not worshipped at the altar of liberal modernity. It was also encouraging because it dissolves much of our current struggle. The question for us is no longer whether we should stay within the Episcopal Church or not, because we have discovered that one of our main connections to the Episcopal church has itself already departed. It's like trying to decide whether to go outside or not only to discover that one already has one foot outside the door (P.S. there is still much in Anglicanism that is attractive to both of us, it is just a matter of finding churches that are primarily Anglican rather than Episcopal). | | Wednesday, October 10th, 2007 | | 11:13 am |
Two competing conceptions of freedom; (Or) How to choose where to Eat and Shop.
I have been thinking about freedom recently. I am convinced that one of the gifts that Christianity (as well as Judaism) has to give to the world is the conception of human beings as independent, radically free, and therefore responsible. Atheistic existentialism is also able to affirm our value and meaning as free beings, but is unable to ground this claim in the same way that theists can. For the theist, our freedom is grounded in the doctrine of creation. For in this doctrine we affirm that everything that exists does so only by virtue of a free act of the creator. On the other hand, the atheistic existentialist must take it on faith that deterministic and naturalistic processes just happened to result in the existence of human beings who are free and not strictly subject to the very deterministic and naturalistic forces which gave rise (caused?) them. But all of this is something of a tangent. A while ago I read an article by Christos Yannaras, an Eastern Orthodox thinker who has pretty extensive exposure to contemporary continental philosophy. The article can be found here: http://orthodoxytoday.org/articles/YannarasEcumenism.php In this article, Yannaras says that the ultimate fulfillment of the Western philosophical conception of freedom is the supermarket. I think that he elsewhere likens it to a shopping mall. He says that our modern world conceives freedom as the possibility of unlimited choice, and thus, the places that most celebrate this notion of freedom are supermarkets and malls, because we can choose whatever we want as consumers. In contrast to this purely secular understanding of freedom, it is useful to state the more religious notion of freedom, that is, freedom for someone else (the Other, i.e. God or our neighbor). Here freedom is not expressed in the possibility of determining what I shall eat or wear, but rather in what I will give to others, or in other words, in how I will gift myself to others. Here then are two different conceptions of freedom. In the first, the final goal of my choice is simply myself, while in the second I excercise my freedom of choice within the contraints of my relationships with others such that the purpose of whatever self development or personal expression that I achieve is in its possibility of being gifted to others. The reason that all of this has seemed important to me lately is that I have been reflecting on the crass consumerism of our culture and realizing that by and large it is the first conception of freedom that is at work. But there are also glimpses of the second. Sarah and I have been enjoying going to the farmers market and getting fresh and local produce. Last week, Sarah said that she loves to look at all of the booths and see all of the creative and interesting things that people make and then have for sale there. I would like to contrast these two images, the shopping mall and the farmers market, for while they both give us the ability to choose, I believe that the second conception of freedom is present in the farmers market while it is absent in the shopping mall. In the farmers market there is an element of community and gifting that is absent from the shopping mall. The emphasis of the shopping mall is on consumption, pure and simple, while at the farmers market, the different booths reflect the unique characters of those who man them. Each booth at the market is also a gifting to the community. A couple of weeks ago, we also had the chance to eat at Nicholas', a really good Lebanese restaurant in Portland. I think that small restaurants like this are also a gifting in a way that chains and fast food restaurants are not. So even though our culture seems to be dominated by the first conception of freedom, it seems that there are places where the second conception of freedom is also present, which is something which gives me hope. | | Sunday, September 23rd, 2007 | | 12:42 pm |
A thought for us shrewd managers, us prodigals...
The gospel reading at St. James today was the parable of the shrewd manager (Luke 16:1-13). This parable has always been very problematic for me. What the hell is Jesus trying to say? What is the "moral" of this story that praises an embezzling manager for being even more dishonest out of purely selfish motives? I have held this parable up in my own mind as proof that our faith is more paradoxical than we would like to believe, and I have been very critical of a Campus Crusade for Christ small group that I was a part of that used this story to talk about the importance of tithing. The following post is a reflection upon this parable and perhaps a defense of Campus Crusade against some of my more angry words. What struck me today about this parable, and in large part because of a few comments that our rector, Mary-Beth made during her sermon, is that this parable occurs directly after the parable of the prodigal son. I think that much light is shed on the parable of the shrewd manager when we look at it along with the prodigal son. Because in both of these stories, it is not the actions of either the prodigal or the manager that should surprise us, after all, these people are lowly sinners like us, stiff-necked people who rebel time and again no matter how often God delivers us. Rather it is the actions of the father and the master that are surprising. The father forgives more absolutely than we would ever imagine, while the master commends the manager for being so shrewd. So in both cases, what is surprising is that God not only continues to put up with us, but also welcomes us and commends us. The second perplexity of this story is that the shrewd manager does not get commended for using his own money well (hence my anger at Campus Crusade for talking about tithing in this context), but rather for using his master's money well. The end of the parable is instructive in this regard for it states that we cannot serve both God and money. To serve God then is also to acknowledge that all money belongs to God, that is, all of the money belongs to the master, none of it is ours, and thus, if we serve God, we are always already living off of His means and with His resources. Thus Campus Crusade was right to talk about how we use money but wrong to talk about tithing. The invitation of this parable is not to ask what we should be doing with OUR OWN money, but rather how we should use the money that properly understood is not ours at all. This brings us to the truly beautiful section of the parable, for we are to use our master's money shrewdly, that is to gain friends for ourselves so that we may be welcomed into heavenly homes. In other words, we are not invited to spend our masters money on high and mighty projects, on those things which make sense given the fallen reasons of the world, but rather we are invited to spend our money on individuals in order to make their lives better. Furthermore, this is a creative process. Jesus does not give his disciples a cause that will best use their money but tells them to use it on individuals that they might gain these individuals as friends. There is a subversiveness here that I am only just discovering. We are invited to use our money in questionable ways, for questionable people that they might be welcomed into the absurdity of divine forgiveness as we ourselves are. The questions that I find here are who have I taken out to beer lately? Who have I taken out to coffee? Have I done so without ulterior motives, but instead with the simple motive of being a friend? How have I offered hospitality and how can I do so more and more? If Jesus gave us the name of the cause that we could give money to to justify ourselves before humans and before God we would not have to decide how to use it. As it is we have to decide how to use it. May we use it so creatively that there are always those who look upon our behavior as if we are squandering someone else's money. So long as we have used it to gain friends, we will be welcomed into heavenly homes (not to mention having already lived with others in communities such that heaven is brought down to earth). | | Thursday, September 6th, 2007 | | 4:22 pm |
Returning from a long absence
1. I haven't posted in a long time, and a lot has happened in that time. Since losing my office at the WSU philosophy department I have spent significantly less time on the internet. This makes posting much more difficult because I always feel rushed while on the internet which doesn't help in terms of freeing the thoughts that I've been thinking while away. 2. I applied for two different teaching jobs (one at the University of Idaho, one at North Idaho College) and one academic advising postion at the U of I, but to no avail. It's not much of a surprise that an M.A. in philosophy is not very marketable, but it just makes me that much more antsy to get into a Ph.D. program and get on with it. 3. I did, however, get a part-time job at Neill Public Library in Pullman as a library support assistant. I work at the circulation desk, which means I spend most of my time checking books in and out. The coolest part of the job is being exposed to all of the titles. It is a good way to know what there is to read, and it is even humorous at times. The funniest book that I checked in today was a children's book called, 'Tails Are Not for Pulling.' The other thing that I find extremely odd is that all of the comic books are classified as Non-fiction. Has the library truly embraced the very post-modern position that comic books represent reality in the same way as works of reference, biography, autobiography, etc.? And if this is the case, what does the library have against literature and the novel in this regards? Perhaps stories are always more true when they are (literally) illustrative. 4. I went to an amazing conference put on by the International Institute for Christian Studies called "Truth Under Deconstruction: Presenting Christ in a Relativistic World." The paper I presented is called "Difference and Deconstruction: Towards and Authentic Expression of the Church." The reception was favorable and I was very encouraged. Most of all it was just great to be in conversation with so many Christian academics. It was unlike any conference I have been to before. If anyone would like me to email them the paper, let me know, and I'll send you a copy. 5. I did an immense amount of reading to prepare for the conference, and have undergone quite a bit of change in the way that I would express the relationship between theology and philosophy, and the church and the culture at large. I am very sympathetic to the theological "school" known as radical orthodoxy. In a nutshell, this is a theological position that celebrates the critique of modernity because of modernity's claim that a secular public sphere exists which is governed by knowledge that is gained through objective sciences. The problem with such a conception is that religion is relegated to the private and subjective sphere where its influence is minimized. Radical orthodoxy sees the failure of modernity as an opportunity to be even more orthodox, or in other words, to be unashamedly Christian in every social sphere. Thus radical orthodoxy is post-secular in its rejection of the abilities of anyone to gain a God's eye view which is disconnected from faith commitments, but it is precisely this rejectio that opens the place for specifically Christian philosophers, scientists, sociologists, psychologists, etc. 6. And what all of this means for the church is that we should not seek to promote churches which are even less representative of historical Christianity (which is perhaps how some strains of the emerging church could be interpreted) but rather we should seek to produce worship experiences that are even more representative of the historical church's liturgical tradition (this is also a strain of the emerging church movement and is known as Ancient-Future faith and worship). 7. This all boils down to some intense struggle for me, as I try to figure out which liturgical church to call home. Right now I am incredibly torn between becoming Anglican and Eastern Orthodox. | | Thursday, May 31st, 2007 | | 1:51 pm |
The Episcopal Church and Christian Unity
It is my belief that the single greatest problem involved with the reunification of the churches of Christ is that many of the churches believe that they are embodying the message of Christ (or Christ himself) correctly while most of the others are embodying it (him) incorrectly. Each of the churches which considers itself exemplary in terms of the embodiment of Christ is usually unwilling to enter into conversations with other churches that could result in learning, compromise, and a struggle together towards unity. This brings me to one of the things that I am currently finding very appealing about the Episcopal Church. The thing that binds all Anglican churches together is a commitment to using the Book of Common Prayer in worship. What this means is that Anglican churches, because they do not exist because of any given doctrinal issue, are less likely to claim to have a monopoly on the truth. Is it any wonder then that C.S. Lewis could urge Christians of every stripe to look to the "mere Christianity" that each of them share? What is more (and this is actually what I am finding the most appealing about the Episcopal Church), there is a sense in which the Anglican Church is the Balaam's ass of churches. After all, the Anglican Church was not formed as a result of theological or doctrinal dispute, but because Henry VIII, the King of England wanted to divorce his wife in an attempt to produce a male heir by remarrying. But since the Catholic Church prohibited divorce, he broke away from the Catholic Church and formed the Anglican Church. I cannot think of a reason that is less idealistic, or less prone to the interpretation that the Anglican Church is the exemplary body of Christ, especially since the Church's existence, according to at least one interpretation (Jonathan Hill, "The History of Christian Thought", pg. 209) is a purely political accident. Thus, if the distinguishing characteristic of the churches of Christ is that they struggle to live together in unity, and the best way towards this unity is the humility of not believing that our church best represents Christ to the world, then it will be that church which least considers itself to be exemplarily embodying Christ which actually does embody him (perhaps even in an exemplary way). And all of this is in accordance with a certain foolish logic that those who wish to save their lives will lose them while those who lose their lives for Christ will save them. | | Friday, May 18th, 2007 | | 12:17 pm |
Restlessly Underoccupied.
The title of this post is also my "status" on facebook. When I don't think about what they mean, those two words are very poetic together. It has been almost two weeks since I graduated with my Masters degree, and almost a week since I have had all of my coursework finished. It never ceases to amaze me how quickly I can swing from absolute stress to utter boredom. What is worse this time is that I am putting a lot of pressure on myself to get some sort of job. And cruising the on-line classifieds for the inland northwest for a job that is at least marginally related to my qualifications is downright demoralizing. This whole process makes me wonder whether I am not too much a product of American culture. After all, without busy-ness I find myself unsatisfied. Do I need to be distracted? I have always thought of myself as being beyond the grasp of our culture's pressure to work, to achieve, to make money, to buy things, etc... But not caring about all of these things is not the same thing as having cultivated the ability to really rest. I want to learn to rest - in that place that is even beyond the busy-ness of recreation. | | Monday, April 30th, 2007 | | 2:33 pm |
Markides 231
This will be the third summer in a row in which I read a book by Kyriacos Markides on Eastern Orthodox mysticism. Two summers ago I read "The Mountain of Silence," last year I read "Gifts of the Desert," and this summer it will be "Riding With the Lion," which I found for $2 at a used book store after having had the book in my Amazon wishlist for more than a year and a half. So far the lion is a little bit wierd. I am thinking that I have been struck by the misfortune of having read Kyriacos' best first, followed by others that cannot measure up. Oh yeah, I passed my defense. It was stressful! I was in the hot seat for about 2 hours and 10 minutes: 30 minutes of presentation followed by 1 hour 40 minutes of question and answer. I think that there were close to 30 people there, as an entire ethics seminar was cancelled so that they could attend. Again, it was stressful, and now very anticlimatic. What is worse, I still have to write a 15 pager for the one class that I am taking this semester. | | Thursday, April 5th, 2007 | | 12:56 pm |
Thesis, thesis, thesis...
This is by far one of the most difficult things that I have had to do. I have three out of four chapters done. And I will be working on the fourth over the weekend. That will leave most of next week to finish the fourth chapter and write an introduction and conclusion. I currently have 66 pages written. When everything is done I expect to have around 90 pages. I have to have a completed draft by next Friday, the 13th. My brain is tired, which is why I'm writing words on livejournal instead of on my thesis. I will be happy come the 13th. I am not nearly as worried about defending as I am about getting the writing done. | | Monday, March 12th, 2007 | | 3:08 pm |
St. James
Sarah and I have been attending an Episcopal Church here in Pullman called Saint James. We have been consistantly amazed by how friendly and welcoming everyone has been to us. When we received the January issue of "The Tower" (St. James' monthly newsletter) it had a blurb about all of the people who are new to the parish and Sarah and I were listed as communicants in good standing. This last Sunday we found out what that actually means. To be a communicant in good standing one must have partaken in communion at least three times and have demonstrated a commitment to furthering God's kingdom through worship, giving, and something else that I can't remember at the moment. This last week we attended a special gathering of the inquirers class to discuss our participation in a special liturgy of welcoming which will take place March 25th. This liturgy is the first step for those who want to be confirmed in the Episcopal church, which requires being received by the Diocesan bishop. Now, the Episcopal church is the last place that I ever expected to end up, and both Sarah and I are not really at the place where we can commit to becoming Episcopalian. In fact, we may never arrive at this place, considering our view of rigid denominational divisions as out-dated relics. But, what is so cool about Saint James is that they're ok with that. The rector, Mary-Beth says says that she would love to include us in the liturgy. What is more, I believe that we will be basically be considered members of the parish which is stretching the official procedures of the Episcopal church. Mary-Beth is adamant about Saint James being a place of welcome, even for those who may not want to join the Episcopal church. One thing that I said at the meeting was that it is obvious to us that Saint James is the place for us for as long as we're here in Pullman, but that after we leave we don't know. Since so much of what defines church takes place on the local parish level, we cannot commit to a denomination without knowing that we are in fact commiting to a parish of which we'll be a part for quite some time. | | Thursday, February 8th, 2007 | | 10:15 am |
Yay
Last semester, I co-wrote a paper with one of my fellow graduate students and colleagues from the University of Idaho, Jamal. Our paper is entitled, "Between the Necessity and Violence of Community: De/Construction and the Community to Come." We submitted it to a graduate conference at Loyola University in Chicago and just found out that our paper has been accepted. So, Jamal and I will be in Chicago March 15-18 to present our paper. This is exciting. This also means that we'll be in Chicago for St. Patties. I only have two regrets: 1) Sarah and I will be separated, and 2) I won't be able to host my second annual corned beef and cabbage meal. | | Tuesday, January 30th, 2007 | | 10:16 am |
Decisions
I related the story of my being at sea last night to a few professors. I told them that for the first four months out, I read nothing but Nietzsche and Kierkegaard, and that I underwent an existential crisis in which I doubted the meaning of everything. I then told them that I did not yet see the affirmation of life in these philosophers because I was not yet ready to create myself and give my life meaning in such an act of creation. In some ways, I still feel like I cannot yet decide who I want to be. I told another professor today that I don't know who I want to be. I have been so torn between philosophy and religion for so long that I have learned to operate in these different spheres. What would it mean to choose one of the spheres? What would it mean to integrate them? I am increasingly thinking that I want to teach at a Christian University. That way, whatever work that I do is not just interesting, thought-provoking or challenging, but is part of a process of spiritual reform. I want to engage in this reform with others. And it seems that the easiest way towards doing this is to be in community with others who share the same passions and commitments. |
[ << Previous 20 ]
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
toddtrembley's journal