September 1, 2010
George Packer writes:
What President Obama called the end of the combat mission in Iraq is a meaningless milestone, constructed almost entirely out of thin air, and his second Oval Office speech marks a rare moment of dishonesty and disingenuousness on the part of a politician who usually resorts to rare candor at important moments. The fifty thousand troops who will remain in Iraq until the end of next year will still be combat troops in everything but name, because they will be aiding one side in an active war zone. The proclaimed end of Operation Iraqi Freedom has little or nothing to do with the military and political situation in Iraq, which is why Iraqis were barely aware when the last U.S. combat brigade crossed into Kuwait a few days ago. And for most of us, too—except, perhaps, those with real skin in the game, the million and a half Iraq war veterans and their families—there’s hardly any reality or substance to the moment.
It’s hard to have an honest emotional response or even know what one feels. After seven years of war, the occasion deserves some weight of feeling, but many Americans stopped paying attention a long time ago. And that’s exactly why the President made his announcement: because Americans want the war to be over, have wanted it for years. Tonight he told us what we wanted to hear. August 31, 2010, will go down in history as the day Americans could start not thinking about the war without feeling guilty.
Read the rest of this entry »
1 Comment | 
Kyle R. Cupp | 
Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
August 28, 2010
That’s the assessment of Father Terence Henry, TOR, the president of my alma mater, who on August 26 prayed and reflected on the meaning of honor with radio and television showman Glenn Beck as a prelude to the Restoring Honor Rally. Unlike the Republican surrogate Sean Hannity, Beck isn’t a loyal partisan, and prizing honor is hardly an act of political tribalism, so I’m not completely surprised that a Franciscan priest and Catholic university president would associate with this rally.
What I find surprising, and not a little weird, is the lavish praise Fr. Henry bestows on the popular media personality and his overall views. He compares Beck to Paul Revere, spreading alarm about where this country is going and “doing the job the press is not doing.” He expresses his admiration for Beck’s sometimes “deeply emotional,” chalkboard instruction about the importance of what is at stake, the first principles of our government, and the exceptionalism of our country. America has a “destiny to be a bright shining city on a hill,” says Fr. Henry, invoking the biblical metaphor for the disciples of Christ.
Read the rest of this entry »
99 Comments | Kyle R. Cupp, Socialism, Weirdness, social justice | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
August 27, 2010
I know next to nothing about Polish civil law or the pop sensation Dorota Rabczewska, who apparently makes some pretty raunchy videos, but I nevertheless find it very wrong that the singer faces trial and possibly two years in prison for saying the Bible was written by “people who liked herbal cigarettes and were drunks.” Not a classy or intelligent thing to say, granted, and if her offensive remarks cost her sales in the Catholic-heavy country of Poland, so be it. Speech has consequences. Jail time, however, is a ludicrous consequence for offending religious sensibilities. In Poland, the Middle-east, or anywhere else. Stories like this make me glad to live in the U.S., which, for all its problems, has perhaps the best track record of protecting freedom of speech. Let’s keep that track record, please.
Hat tip: Thom at Ad Dominum
4 Comments | Kyle R. Cupp, Language, Politics, The State | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
August 26, 2010
Peter Suderman articulates why he suspects opponents of same-sex marriage are bound to lose: their opposition is based on intuition rather than rational justification. At least his opposition was. Suderman has since changed his mind on the prospect of this social change. When he tried to find support for his intuition that same-sex marriage was wrong and ought to be illegal, he couldn’t do so. The arguments that came to mind he found wanting. He concludes:
Same-sex marriage opponents are no doubt failing in part because of their own inability to express a compelling rationale for their position, one that starts with the existing public understanding of what marriage is and should be and then argues that such an understanding is best served by keeping out same-sex couples. But in the long term, I suspect that the fight for equal marriage rights will succeed because millions of Americans will struggle with their intuitive opposition and decide, as I did, that they can not justify it to themselves.
I suspect Suderman will be proven right. It wasn’t long ago that Willow and Tara’s relationship in Buffy the Vampire Slayer marked U.S. television’s first depiction of a lesbian couple. Now same-sex couples are commonly presented and accepted, and with each passing day the idea of same-sex marriage seems less radical and unthinkable. The meta-narrative about the homosexual lifestyle has also developed from a story of licentiousness and promiscuity towards a tale of love, sacrifice, and life-long commitment.
Read the rest of this entry »
87 Comments | Critical Thinking, Democracy, Dialogue, Ethics, Homosexuality, Kyle R. Cupp, Politics, Sexuality | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
August 22, 2010
Paul Moses provides an anecdote:
In this case, the sacred ground was Manger Square in Bethlehem, where Pope John Paul celebrated Mass on March 22, 2000.
The pope had just finished his homily, ending with “Assalamu alaikum,” when the Muslim call to prayer broke forth from the loudspeakers at a mosque that bordered on Manger Square. It seemed, at first, like a rude intrusion on the historic Mass the pope was celebrating in the Jubilee year. But John Paul sat quietly and listened as the muezzin sang God’s praise; he seemed to be savoring the moment. It was as if the Muslim prayer mingled with the Mass.
Just before the Mass ended, it was announced that church and mosque officials had coordinated the call to prayer, which had been delayed to accommodate the pope’s homily. It was a small matter, really, but this cooperation stirred the crowd, mostly Arab Christians, to cheers, applause and even to tears. A sacred space had been shared, and everyone was the better for it.
5 Comments | Alterity, Islam, John Paul II, Kyle R. Cupp, Pope John Paul II, Prayer, Religion | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
August 20, 2010
According to Sarah Palin, a large publicly visible sign and structure of Islam close to Ground Zero “feels like a stab in the heart to, collectively, Americans who still have that lingering pain from 9/11.” Stated explicitly, Park 51 feels like a knife separating the skin, rupturing the flesh, and piercing the very source of life. It is no coincidence that Palin illustrates the building project of Iman Rauf as a weapon and fatal act of violence. Indeed, she has gone so far as to call it the “9/11 Mosque,” using the name of an event of fanatical mass murder as an adjective to delineate a house of religious assembly. She’s not the least bit shy about manipulating language to play on people’s fears, but then, her use of language reveals a likely perspective: Palin literally sees Park 51 as an act of violence. It’s not merely insensitive in her book; it’s like the threat of a knife-wielding enemy. At least, it feels that way.
Read the rest of this entry »
27 Comments | Alterity, Hope, Hospitality, Interpretation, Islam, Kyle R. Cupp, Middle East, Religion, Terrorism, Violence | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
August 18, 2010
My co-blogger Sam Rocha offers a “hesitant defense” of Michael Voris’ now deleted (!) video in which the RealCatholicTV host argued for a “benevolent dictatorship” and for granting only virtuous Catholics the right to vote. Sam acknowledges that Voris is “very confused” and “wants an America that never was: a Catholic Nation.” He also rightly considers the frightening possibilities of how Voris might separate “the sheep from the goats” and radically transform our democracy. Sam, however, also wants to acknowledge some legitimacy to Voris’ position: namely, that political freedom divorced from love results in its own kind of dictatorship. “I feel that we can forget that democracy and freedom are empty—and dangerous—without Gospel love,” he writes.
Read the rest of this entry »
9 Comments | Kyle R. Cupp, Philosophy, Politics | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
August 15, 2010
Glenn Greenwald, typically a fierce critic of President Obama’s policies affecting civil liberties, rightly commends the president for his politically risky reminder that the United States is a country committed to religious freedom for everyone–Muslims included. Obama has since clarified his statement by noting that he was not commenting on the prudence of building a mosque and community center near Ground Zero, but his initial point remains. As I’ve written before, those who wish to practice their religion tomorrow would be ill advised to deny or limit the religious freedom of others today, fearing that the other’s religion looks poised to increase its sway within society. It does no good to diminish or remove another person’s freedom of religion fearing that the other will someday diminish or remove our own. We all share the same religious freedom–a freedom meant to protect the minority against the majority.
Read the rest of this entry »
39 Comments | Democracy, Free Speech, Hospitality, Human Rights, Kyle R. Cupp, Media, Middle East, Obama, Religion, Theology, Weirdness | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
August 9, 2010
Writing over at The Stone, Simon Critchley suggests that the true nature of the faith Christ sought to proclaim is better revealed by the faith of non-Christians, by those whose faith “is not supported by the supposed guarantee of baptism, creedal dogma, regular church attendance or some notion that virtue will be rewarded with happiness if not here on earth, then in the afterlife.” Critchley goes on to say that it is the particular faith of the faithless that truly meets the criteria of strenuous rigor he, following Kierkegaard, associates with the faith illustrated in the Gospels. Christ, for example, praised the belief of the unbelieving centurion: “Be it done for you, as you believed.”
I grant Critchley that what some Christians call faith may be better called a false certainty or presumption about one’s standing with God. For some faith may act more as a security blanket than as a rigorous response to a revealing God, and I think especially of those public Christians quick to proclaim authoritatively and without a shred of doubt that some historical event, often a tragedy, was an act performed or allowed by God for such and such a purpose. These faithful speak as though they’d received a text message directly from God explaining his ways and purposes and designs, making me wonder whether they have a God’s Voice App on their smartphones. Aside from these examples, though, I wouldn’t say that baptism, creeds, moral theories and regular church attendance support faith in a way that makes faith more secure and less rigorous. I’m baptized and believe creeds and celebrate liturgies, but, in the words of John Caputo following Augustine, I do still not know what I love when I love my God.
Read the rest of this entry »
1 Comment | Faith, Kyle R. Cupp, Philosophy | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
August 5, 2010
The relatively new field of philosophy called Environmental Hermeneutics has perhaps only a few handfuls of people devoted to its exploration, but it’s nevertheless gaining recognition with delivered papers and published articles. Lead scholars in the field Brian Treanor, David Utsler, Forrest Clingerman and Martin Drenthen have recently started an Environmental Hermeneutics blog which promises to bring their work and the work of others in the field to a larger audience. The blog “reports news of the intersection between philosophical hermeneutics and environmental thought.” Its area of study “has variously been called ‘ecological hermeneutics,’ ‘environmental hermeneutics,’ ‘hermeneutics of place,’ ‘hermeneutics of landscape,’ and ‘biological hermeneutics.’” The blog “also serves as a clearinghouse for information on an electronic seminar devoted to the topic, to be held during the 2010-11 academic year.” Those interested in hermeneutics, environmentalism, justice, identity, biology, ecology, and philosophy in general would do well add the blog to their reading list.
1 Comment | Blogs, Environmentalism, Interpretation, Kyle R. Cupp, Philosophy | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
August 1, 2010
Overheard from my son while he played with his Buzz and Woody toys:
“Don’t worry you two. I’ll save you from the thunderstorm. I’m like God, except I’m another guy.”
1 Comment | Family, Kyle R. Cupp | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
July 26, 2010
The reactions to the the building of mosques and Muslim community centers in New York, Tennessee and elsewhere have got me thinking about the ramifications of religious freedom for our increasingly pluralistic society. Exercising the freedom of religion in this country as we do, we can’t reasonably expect our society to remain religiously static. Religious freedom allows for more than the freedom to worship (or not worship) as one sees fit in one’s home or private community; it also allows for religious believers to proclaim their religious beliefs in the public square through words, deeds, art, literature, architecture and other works of sacred significance. Moreover, as those who truly believe hold their beliefs to be, well, true, they tend to want to share their beliefs with others. Christians seek to make disciples of all nations. Muslims seek to spread Islam. It’s therefore quite conceivable that Christianity could in time cease to be the prominent religion in the United States. Another religion might someday take its place as the most commonly practiced religion. Such is a consequence of religious freedom.
The freedom that allows for the ebb and flow of prominent religions also prevents practitioners of a religion from using the law of the land to force others to follow their ways. Those who wish to practice their religion tomorrow would be ill advised to throw out religious freedom today fearing that another religion looks poised to increase its sway within society. It does no good to diminish or remove another’s freedom of religion fearing that the other will someday diminish or remove one’s own. We all share the same religious freedom. Fighting against another’s, we fight against our own. Those who fear a future in which they are no longer free to practice their religion ought to be out there defending religious freedom, even if it means an increase in religious pluralism.
Read the rest of this entry »
19 Comments | Democracy, Free Speech, Hospitality, Identity, Kyle R. Cupp, Philosophy, Politics | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
July 24, 2010
My son, who recently turned four, prefers books with pictures, and so my efforts to read him The Hobbit have led us through the novel at the pace of a hungry hobbit moving away from his dinner table. We’re nearing the end, though. Bard just pierced the dragon Smaug with his trusty black arrow. I’m not sure how much the boy is comprehending and remembering, given his young age and the fact that he tends to fall asleep after a few pages. Still, I’ve been debating with myself whether or not I am spoiling his first read of the book. When I read The Hobbit, I hadn’t the foggiest about what was to transpire, so the suspenseful parts proved very suspenseful. When Tolkien wrote that Bilbo fell into darkness and knew no more, I seriously wondered if the little adventurer had met his untimely end. My son, I’m sure, will read the books I’ve read to him regardless of his knowing the gist of what happens, but will his first reading experience of them be as good as if he were in the dark about the major plot points? Are spoilers really that big a deal in works of classic literature?
7 Comments | Children, Kyle R. Cupp, Literature | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
July 22, 2010
A potent stench can ruin a splendid view. My recent trip to the East Ohio River valley reminded me of this adage. Eastern Ohio presents some lovely scenes: rolling hills, lush grass-heavy valleys, and, among my favorite, a peaceful lake hidden at the foot of steep, winding path. And hidden as well from cell phone signals–unless one stands upon a particular tree stump waving the phone around in the air.
Alas, there’s also the infectious smell of pollution. I understand the air is much cleaner than it used to be. I read a children’s book about how drivers in an nearby industrial town had to turn on their headlights at noon because of the dense concentrations of smoke in the air. You can’t see the pollution as much these days, but the nose knows it’s still there, lurking. Sundays seem particularly stinky for some reason.
So despite the beautiful scenery, I don’t think much of the environment. Or, rather, when I do think of the environment there, I think mostly of the stink and much less frequently of the sights. If I didn’t have family there (who, for the record, are fine-smelling people), it would be a place I’d rather visit through pictures than in person.
9 Comments | Beauty, Environmentalism, Health, Kyle R. Cupp | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
July 18, 2010
The long historical disagreement about how to interpret the plainly written U.S. Constitution, and the many conflicting interpretations of it that mark our national history, clearly show that certainty of meaning is not likely to be found in the actual practice of writing, interpreting and enforcing our nation’s laws. Those who write a law may intend one meaning, while those who apply it may understand its meaning differently. We can see these differences of interpretation in the recent debate over whether or not the newly passed healthcare legislation will fund abortions. My co-bloggers Morning’s Minion and MZ argue that the legislation is clearly written to prevent such funding, while others warn that “Obamacare” will undoubtedly fund abortion, pointing to how the legislation is being interpreted and applied in Pennsylvania and other states. We’ve seen still other positions and arguments, such as those from opponents to the legislation who point to how Planned Parenthood has interpreted it, asking if abortion isn’t going to be funded, why is the organization is so pleased with its passage.
At this stage, I cannot answer the abortion funding question with certainty because textual interpretation and speculation about how a text will be interpreted and applied do not allow for certainty. Even if a piece of legislation were to contain the most clear and unequivocal language establishing the most effective safeguards against abortion funding, still certainty would not be completely available. Debates such as the ones we’re having now might still exist.
Read the rest of this entry »
19 Comments | Abortion, Ethics, Healthcare, Interpretation, Kyle R. Cupp, Language | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
July 7, 2010
E.D. Kain makes the case in the pages of National Review for Democratic congressman Alan Grayson’s proposed “The War Is Making You Poor Act,” which, writes Kain, would “carve out $159 billion of pork from the defense budget and give 90 percent of that money back to taxpayers,” using the remaining 10 percent to trim the national debt. Social justice advocates might prefer to see that money go toward social welfare programs, a preference I understand, but the bill is much more likely to gain bi-partisan support if it simply returns the money to the taxpayer than if it redirects the funding towards programs that fiscal conservatives and others would undoubtedly oppose.
5 Comments | Capitalism, Kyle R. Cupp, Taxing, War and Peace, militarism, social justice | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
June 17, 2010
When somebody asks me who I am, I tell my story. I narrate the life that I have lived, while the other listens to or reads my narrative. My identity is fundamentally narrative in character. The same is true for the identity of my community. My family has a story that it lives and tells. So does my place of employment, my church, my city and country. Every group, organization, and institution of which I am a part has a narrative identity, a story to tell and retell, to construct and reconstruct.
Despite my love of stories, I too often neglect to listen to others, to their stories. Sometimes I forget that another person or a group has a story to tell. And while I try not to take over the telling of another’s story, to construct another’s narrative against their telling, I have on occasion done just that. When I narrative the course of a war and provide my interpretation and judgment, I sometimes fail to consider the stories of all those who fight that war or are closely affected by it and how their stories might intertwine with mine and my narration with theirs. When I vent about someone’s annoying me, I might entertain not a single thought to what has happened to him during his day. When I attempt to strike a mortal blow during a debate in the blogosphere, I may care less about who it is that I am debating, where that person has come from and where he is going. I separate myself from others by not listening to their stories or caring about who they are.
Read the rest of this entry »
3 Comments | Alterity, Hospitality, Interpretation, Kyle R. Cupp, Philosophy | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
June 16, 2010
J.M. Bernstein takes a philosophical approach to understanding the anger of the Tea Party movement. His hypothesis is intriguing, but his conclusions are less than convincing. He writes:
My hypothesis is that what all the events precipitating the Tea Party movement share is that they demonstrated, emphatically and unconditionally, the depths of the absolute dependence of us all on government action, and in so doing they undermined the deeply held fiction of individual autonomy and self-sufficiency that are intrinsic parts of Americans’ collective self-understanding.
Read the rest of this entry »
51 Comments | Individualism, Interpretation, Kyle R. Cupp, Philosophy, Politics, nihilism | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
June 11, 2010
My co-blogger Morning’s Minion rightly criticizes the reduction of human relations to social contracts. This reduction occurs when we understand and act upon our moral obligations to one another only within the framework of a social contract–when we limit our obligations to those who have entered into such contracts and consider ourselves obligated only to those who share our citizenship, have signed a treaty we have signed, or participate with us in some other contractual arrangement. I make this reduction when I don’t care about torturing terrorists because they’re not signers of the Geneva Conventions, when I wish to alienate the immigrant who enters my country against my country’s laws, when I ignore my obligations to those not yet born because the laws of the land do not recognize their personhood, or when I insist that others shouldn’t be given Constitutional rights when the rights I wish to withhold from them are basic human rights. The reduction of moral obligation to the limits of the social contract chokes morality and kills the moral life. It severs me from my obligations to others. It makes morality relative to those who are the same as me: anything goes when I encounter the other. The river has no contractual relationship with me, so I may engineer it and pollute it as I deem necessary for my designs. The cow never signed a contract with me, so I may treat it with cruelty as I prepare it for my feasting. Those people living on land I claim as my own make no legal claim upon the land themselves, so I may remove them as I see fit. Clearly this contractual morality sins against those others with whom I have no contract, but it also inclines me toward viciousness. I cannot grow in virtue and turn my soul to the good when I consider myself obligated only to some and never to others. Even if I strive always to respond morally to my contractual obligations, I develop villainous habits when I divorce myself from my obligations to everyone and everything else.
10 Comments | Alterity, Animals, Ethics, Hospitality, Human Rights, Immigration, Justice, Kyle R. Cupp, Morality, Torture, Violence | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
June 7, 2010
“Historical communities are constituted by the stories they recount to themselves and to others,” writes Richard Kearney. By telling and retelling stories, communities, like individual people, narrate their identities. Indeed, my own personal identity is in part formed by the community in which I live: its origin, history, narratives and mythology contribute to and shape my story. Who I am is not a matter of mere fact, but a matter of storytelling, the telling of multiple and sometimes conflicting stories by myself and by others. My nation is likewise a no mere historical and social entity; it is also a product of competing and conflicting narratives. Some of these stories reveal great achievements. Others conceal, dissimulate, and produce false consciousness. The same story may both reveal and conceal.
The telling of grand national narratives and modest tales of personal sacrifice accompanied this past Memorial Day, a holy day recognized by our national community that serves as an occasion for telling stories that define ourselves, our families, and our country. We related our memories of heroism by those we love and honor. We praised them for what they did and why they died. We remembered and expressed our thanks, our gratitude, our appreciation. The stories we told helped define not only those we remember, but also the causes and community for which they sacrificed. On Memorial Day, we speak not only of the dearly departed, but also of the country and its larger narrative. It is here at the meeting of the personal and the national that we are perhaps most tempted to conceal, dissimulate, and produce false consciousness regarding our national identity.
Read the rest of this entry »
15 Comments | Alterity, Critical Thinking, Interpretation, Kyle R. Cupp, Nationalism, Patriotism, Religion, Violence, War and Peace | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
June 5, 2010
I doubt many Christians look upon Hollywood as a friend to their religion. However, two cartoon movies my son never tires of watching take non-Christian stories and re-imagine them in a way indebted to the Christian imagination. Sinbad by Dreamworks and Hercules by Disney receive a retelling in which their central theme of heroism is informed by the Christian narrative. Sinbad and Hercules here prove their heroism not by successful voyages or accomplished feats, but by their willingness to give their lives for a beloved.
Read the rest of this entry »
Comments Off | Film, Kyle R. Cupp | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
June 1, 2010
That seems to be the implication of Tom Hoffman’s theory of virtue. Hoffman laments what he calls the feminization of men: too many men today, he says, no longer celebrate the values of “rugged individualism, risk-taking, courage, bravery, loyalty, and reverence for tradition” and are no longer committed to fighting “the bad guy.” Instead, “warfare is demonized as violence and negotiation is raised to an art.”
Hoffman isn’t content to defend the “manly” virtues; he demeans what he calls the “womanly” virtues: “Caring, compassion, sensitivity, and understanding are virtues meant to blur the distinction between good and evil and drown out the call of manly conscience to ‘do the right thing,’” he writes. He continues: “All reference to the service of a higher calling — to God and country — has been replaced by the call to community service with the emphasis on care and compassion for the downtrodden.”
In Hoffman’s strange virtue ethics, men should extol one set of virtues that he associates with manliness, while avoiding another set that he associates with womanliness. Hoffman’s ideal man of virtue would be a psychopath. Why? Because his concept of virtue is grossly disordered. He also mistakes virtues and vices. Virtues are habitual dispositions to do the good. Having one doesn’t prohibit having another. One can be and should be both magnanimous and humble, courageous and prudent, loyal and wise. One should seek them all. Seeking only some and running away from others, Hoffman’s manly man is less than what a human being ought to be. He’s a rugged warrior without care, compassion, sensitivity, or understanding.
26 Comments | Ethics, Kyle R. Cupp, Violence, War and Peace, Weirdness | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
May 27, 2010
Is it possible that human beings could evolve into beings that reproduce, but not sexually? If not, why? If so, what would be the ramifications for culture, society, ethics, love, and self-understanding?
24 Comments | Culture, Human Person, Interpretation, Kyle R. Cupp, Love, Philosophy, Science, Sexuality | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
May 23, 2010
At a Texas State Board of Education meeting on May 21st, member Cynthia Dunbar offered an invocation, at the end of which she proclaimed her liking to believe that we are living today in the spirit of the Christian religion and that “as long as we do so, no great harm can come to our country.” What are we to make of this? Dunbar’s statement here associates the United States and Christianity even more strongly than her remark earlier in the prayer that our country is a Christian land governed by Christian principles. Whereas this earlier statement speaks of the country’s religious character by referring to its people and their actions, her latter statement refers directly to God and his actions. Our country exists by divine providence. She believes, or rather likes to believe, that the United States has divine protection as long as the people of the country retain the right religious spirit. The implication is clear: when great harm does come to us, it will be because we have forsaken the Christian spirit. Dunbar, of course, has spearheaded changes in the Texas school curriculum. Her invocation suggests one of her motives: keeping the Christian spirit alive in our school system as a means to keeping it alive in our country. It’s pretty clear she sees herself as an instrument of providence, doing God’s will. Her religious beliefs may well have an underlying influence on the school children of Texas. And, perhaps, beyond.
6 Comments | Children, Education, Kyle R. Cupp, Prayer, Weirdness | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
May 20, 2010
Disposed as I am to doing lists, I present my ten favorite film scores in alphabetical order. Click each entry for a sample. I started writing brief remarks on selection, but decided that it was better to let the music speak for itself.
Read the rest of this entry »
3 Comments | Film, Kyle R. Cupp, Music | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
May 19, 2010
A reader commented on a recent post of mine that what I had written was the most shocking thing he had ever read on Vox Nova. I may be about to increase the electrical flow. I propose that, speaking practically, the theist has no more of a motivational basis for acting morally than the atheist. When both seek to act morally, both act based on what kind of world they would prefer to live in. To explain: the theist, in explaining his reason for acting morally, may posit the existence of a good God who established the moral order, and posit further that the world really is governed by an objective, moral law. He may say to the atheist that if God did not establish the difference between right and wrong, then such a difference is merely an arbitrary and mutable creation of man. Nevertheless, for the theist’s origin narrative to have motivational force, the theist must not only believe the narrative; he must prefer the world produced by morality to the world produced by immorality. In preferring one over the other, the theist acts, at this level, in basically the same way as the atheist who prefers a world with more happiness and less suffering. Preference underlies both their moralities.
20 Comments | Atheism, Ethics, Kyle R. Cupp, Morality | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
May 17, 2010
My posts of late have touched on the questionable and controversial. I need a break from writing about such heavy topics, so now seems an opportune time to celebrate some cinematic sinners. I present below a hastily produced, not entirely spoiler-free list of my ten favorite villains from the movies.
Read the rest of this entry »
21 Comments | Culture, Evil, Film, Kyle R. Cupp | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
May 15, 2010
Some Catholics have a track record of relying on the declarative statements of teaching authorities in the Church when making arguments for how one should think or act. It is not uncommon to see Catholics cite biblical passages, papal encyclicals, or church documents when formulating their cases, but it is not the mere citation of such authorities to which I wish to draw attention. In debates among Catholics, it makes perfect sense to cite authorities that all those in the discussion hold as authorities. Moreover, the traditional “appeal to authority” can add a persuasive layer to an argument. Invoking or citing authorities doesn’t necessarily mean relying on authorities. The reliance occurs when the invoking of authorities ceases to be a supplement to thought and comes instead to supplant thought. It occurs when we repeat without even trying to understand, when we allow others, even others we trust, to do our thinking for us. Rodak, one of our regular readers, says that Catholics too often recite without using their reason. He’s not wrong. However, recitation without reasoning is no more a proper Catholic action than other forms of unthinking. The Church proclaims that faith and reason are compatible; its proclamation here translates into an invitation and an obligation to think about what Church authorities teach. Thinking involves testing, challenging, exploring, questioning and, to be sure, thinking otherwise.
9 Comments | Alterity, Authority, Critical Thinking, Hospitality, Kyle R. Cupp, Magisterium, Philosophy, Truth | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
May 13, 2010
Joshua B joins the discussion:
I think we need to be careful about discussing inerrancy, which has an important place in magisterial texts prior to VCII, but is curiously absent from Dei Verbum. DV says that ”the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation,” but it does not teach that the texts are inerrant in faith and morals. Furthermore, verification of error generally requires some sort of empirical fact check. This simply cannot be done in regard to the Bible. There is a Truth which is taught without error in the Scriptures, but what that is precisely is left unanswered by the Council. This does not seem to support to semi-fundamentalist understanding of inerrancy which is often put forth. For example, in 1 Sam 15:11 God tells Samuel, “I regret that I made Saul king,” but in verse 29, Samuel says to Saul “The Glory of Israel will not recant or change his mind; for he is not a mortal that he should change his mind.” In Hebrew, the words for “regret” and “change his mind” are the same word. Clearly we must be cautious in how understand inerrancy and in how we draw grand theological ideas from these complex texts.
34 Comments | Bible, Evil, Interpretation, Kyle R. Cupp | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
May 11, 2010
One of these days I’ll write a post that won’t result in raised eyebrows from the ‘sphere’s self-appointed heresy examiners. Today probably won’t be one of those days. I’m of the opinion that religious thought and practice today needs to take seriously the criticisms of religion offered by Freud and Nietzsche. In his book The Conflict of Interpretations, Paul Ricoeur describes their criticism as follows:
For Nietzsche and Freud have created a kind of hermeneutics which is completely different from the critique of religion that is rooted in the tradition of Britism empericism and French positivism. The problem for them is not that of the so-called proofs for Gods existence, nor do they criticize the concept of God as something devoid of meaning. They have created a new kind of criticisn, a critique of cultural representations considered as disguised symptoms of desire and fear.
What Freud and Nietzsche show me, in their different ways, is that, at the very least, not all of what I call religious faith really is religious faith – really is a response to a God who reveals. What I classify as religious faith because it appears to be a response to a holy text, a sacred event, or another religious experience, may in fact be an expression of ressentiment, or a fiction created to comfort, or an inexpensive drug offering escape, or a cultural means of working out neurosis. It may be an illusion or an idol or a wish.
Read the rest of this entry »
41 Comments | Atheism, Faith, Interpretation, Kyle R. Cupp, Philosophy, Theology | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
May 5, 2010
Violence is no stranger to the Christian story, but we find it on the side the antagonist rather than the protagonist. Unlike heroes in most mythical tales of good versus evil, Christ does not conquer evil by inflicting violence. He triumphs over sin and death by suffering violence, by sacrifice, by paying the price for our sins in order to achieve our redemption. His response to evil is the sacred sacrifice of divine love and the giving of undeserved sanctifying grace.
A recent post here witnessed a debate about whether or not God as depicted in the Old Testament truly commanded the Israelites to commit genocide. Rather than continue that specific debate, I would like to consider the narrative meaning of a God who ordered genocide and its significance for the Christian story and for the narratives of those who seek to justify violence today.
Read the rest of this entry »
79 Comments | Bible, Culture of Death, Ethics, Evil, Interpretation, Kyle R. Cupp, Salvation History, Violence, War and Peace | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
April 28, 2010
My post on what I called a perverse prayer on Facebook prompted some questions about the possibility of similar perversity found in Sacred Scripture. In another forum, I have faced accusations of heresy, sacrilege, blasphemy, and impiety for my adamant insistence that the wish to harm another is a perverse wish whether we find that wish in mostly harmless jokes or in the sacred pages of the Bible. I had and have no qualms about stating that we can find perversity in the writings of the sacred writers. Some statements in the scriptures express or point to ideas that are perverse, immature, or downright evil.
Read the rest of this entry »
263 Comments | Bible, Evil, Interpretation, Kyle R. Cupp, Salvation History | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
April 26, 2010
To my mind, a sensible immigration policy is grounded in the principle of hospitality and effectively balances our obligations to the immigrant and our obligations to our fellow citizens. Immigration presents us with important economic and social challenges, and it would be a mistake to downplay its many consequences, positive and negative; nevertheless, it is also a mistake to treat illegal immigration as if it were a moral evil, to treat those who enter our country illegally as if they have broken a moral law. It may be a crime to cross a border, but it’s generally not immoral. That our laws governing entry into the country are at best based on a prudential assessment of economic and social realities, and not on the moral law per se, a moderation, flexibility, and openness ought to govern our legislation and enforcement. I’m not calling for lawlessness, but a recognition that our immigration laws should be written not only for us, for our good, but for those who come invited and uninvited, for their good, with their interests and needs in mind.
20 Comments | Hospitality, Immigration, Kyle R. Cupp, Law, Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
April 24, 2010
Readers may be interested in an interdisciplinary Dietrich von Hildebrand Legacy Project conference being held in Rome on May 27-29, 2010. The conference will explore von Hildebrand’s philosophy of love and offer a critical reception of his work, The Nature of Love, recently translated into English. A student of Edmund Husserl, von Hildebrand wrote on matters including ethics, aesthetics, personalism, and phenomenology. His thinking marked my initial formal encounter with philosophy and sparked my interest in the discipline. While my philosophical wanderings have taken me away from his mode of thought, into poisonous swamps, some would say, I remain indebted to his work and grateful for my time studying his philosophy. Kudos to John Henry Crosby, Anthony Gualandri, and the others at the Legacy Project for their promotion of his work and for their efforts to bring von Hildebrand’s thinking into dialogue with other philosophers and multiple disciplines. The conference is titled The Christian Personalism of Dietrich von Hildebrand: Exploring His Philosophy of Love. For more information, visit the conference website: www.hildebrandlegacy.org/rome.
Comments Off | Human Person, Kyle R. Cupp, Love, Philosophy, Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
April 22, 2010
A number of my friends on Facebook have posted the following on their status:
DEAR LORD, THIS YEAR YOU TOOK MY FAVORITE ACTOR, PATRICK SWAYZIE. YOU TOOK MY FAVORITE ACTRESS, FARAH FAWCETT. YOU TOOK MY FAVORITE SINGER, MICHAEL JACKSON. I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW, MY FAVORITE PRESIDENT IS BARACK OBAMA. AMEN.
The post, of course, is a joke, and I’m sure that none of my fellows on Facebook truly wish harm upon the President of the United States or are actually praying this prayer. Nevertheless, the post means something. It implies a wish that God would take the life of Barack Obama, and it implies this wish whether or not the poster actually shares the wish or expresses the wish in his or her prayer life. Indeed, to use the form of a prayer to joke about God bringing about someone’s death qualifies as an example of using the Lord’s name in vain. Furthermore, the joke disrespects the dead. I certainly wouldn’t take kindly to someone using my deceased daughter in a joke that implied a wish for a person’s death.
44 Comments | Culture of Death, Kyle R. Cupp | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
April 19, 2010
Power wielded in the Church offers no fewer temptations and dangers than power wielded in the State, and, in some ways, those in the Church’s political culture face unique, heightened temptations. Therefore, just as a system of checks and balances is needed in the secular state to keep secular power within legitimate limits, so too is such a system needed in the Church to prevent power from extending beyond the limits of legitimacy. Such a system would obviously look very different in the hierarchical structure of the Church than in the democratic structure of the United States; it would not have to imply a division of powers into three separate but equal branches, for instance. Indeed, the particular structure of the Church may make checking and balancing power more difficult, at least in theory, than arranging power through modern constitutions and social contracts. As the Church is not a democracy and isn’t meant to be one, I’m not sure how such a system would be constructed; nevertheless, instituting measures to prevent the abuse and misuse of power remains a vital task before the Church, especially in the wake of the abuse scandal.
When power is abused, loyalty to those in power can become a vice. In her most recent column, Peggy Noonan tells us about Cardinal Law’s reaction to a piece she wrote in 2002 responding to the abuse scandal: “We don’t need friends of the church turning on the church at such a difficult time,” she quotes him as saying. “We need loyalty when the church is going through a tough time.” I’d say we need a devotion to truth and justice when the Church is going through a tough time; these are, after all, among the things towards which the Church is meant to direct us. Loyalty has its place, of course, but not at the expense of truth and justice. And not at the expense of people. If anything, loyalty to the Church today means insisting that the Church tell the true story about and behind the abuse and not leave revelation to the media.
19 Comments | Abuse Scandal, Justice, Kyle R. Cupp, Politics, Truth | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
April 16, 2010
I’m more than old enough to remember the Church before the sickening abuse and cover-up scandals, but Catholics much younger than me know firsthand no such time. The Church’s story they have experienced is a story marked by institutional sin, failure, and crime. They know it as a corrupt and scandalous institution. This dark time in the Church’s history spans but part of my life, but it may span the entirety of theirs. Unless the Church authorities fully address the conditions that allowed for abuse to occur and, perhaps more importantly, the conditions that contributed to the systematic cases of cover-up, generations will go by before people inside and outside the Church cease to dig for answers and to narrate new stories. The Church presents itself to the world as the pillar and foundation of truth, as the moral authority in this fallen world, as the authoritative interpreter of the moral law. We should only expect that those inside and outside the Church will hold it to a high standard and jump all over it when its authorities undermine and let fall the truth through lies, authoritarianism, and lawlessness. As long as there is a hidden story to find, there will be those seeking to find that story and tell it. Therefore, the Church can reclaim its own narrative only by speaking the full truth of what happened, how it happened, who was involved and how, and, moreover, by taking responsibility for the actions that comprise its story.
30 Comments | Church History, Culture, Ethics, Identity, Interpretation, Justice, Kyle R. Cupp, Lies, Papacy, Politics | Permalink
Posted by Kyle R. Cupp
