ramble through the bronx

Friday, April 28, 2006

Dryden

No relation.

jane 3:32 PM [+]

So... what else have I been up to?

This past semester, some folks at Fordham have started up a Social Justice Forum, which is entirely in line with Fordham's Mission statement, particularly where it says stuff like

Fordham recognizes the dignity and uniqueness of each person. A Fordham education at all levels is student-centered, and attentive to the development of the whole person. Such an education is based on close collaboration among students, faculty and staff.

Fordham is committed to research and education that assist in the alleviation of poverty, the promotion of justice, the protection of human rights and respect for the environment.

The idea of the Social Justice Forum was that it would be a "Monthly Conversation of the Fordham Community on Contemporary Social Justice Issues." One would think that ideally this would mean the whole Fordham community (it being a Jesuit university, and thus universally committed to social justice, right? the 32nd congregation of the Jesuits in 1974-5 declared "the promotion of justice" as a Jesuit aim & mission. As Kolvenbach, the current head o' Jesuits said, about Jesuit universities, in 1990, "the students need close involvement with the poor and the marginal now, in order to learn about reality and become adults of solidarity in the future.")

Well, it's become what you'd expect -- the same folks, each month, preaching to the choir, mostly undergrads, a few faculty members, a couple grad students (including yours truly), blah blah blah. And of course we all agree on everything (for the most part). We're all so fucking progressive. Nothing changes.

After a semester of this, I wrote to one of the faculty on the steering committee,

I wanted to drop you a line to ask about the Social Justice Forum and
its mission, because I've been thinking about it a lot lately.

Essentially, I'm not really sure what it's trying to do, even though
I've been to all of the fora this semester. Now this is fair, given
that the Forum is still young, but I still have some concerns --
namely, I don't feel that it is succeeding in being a 'conversation
with the Fordham community'. It seems to be the same small chunk of
the community -- mostly undergrad, few faculty or grad students, and
certainly no admin/service folks.

It seems as if a Social Justice Forum could have 3 purposes, each of
which seem to be important:

(1) Provide a forum for the *whole* community to address issues of
social justice. Given that the university's mission statement commits
it to caring about such things, everyone in the Fordham community
should be interested in that. However, this would mean deliberately
assembling panels/speakers that represented opposing/diverging
viewpoints. Even keeping within the frame of social justice, this is
entirely possible -- two people might argue that the reduction of
poverty is desirable and even possible, while having two very
different ways of getting there. This doesn't mean selling out on
social justice, but on genuinely trying to find the truth wherever it
may lie, and also undersatnding our opponents' positions as charitably
as possible -- good Ignatian principles.

(2) Provide a forum for progressive (lefty) members of the Fordham
community to learn more about causes they care out. This would mean
bringing in panelists to teach us more about different issues, and
provide resources for further action. (An action-oriented panel)

(3) Provide a safe space for members of the Fordham community who feel
alienated/ estranged from the broader Fordham community, or the
policies/attitudes of the administration. This safe space would enable
them to speak out in an atmosphere of trust & support. (This seemed to
be the feel of the post-vagina monologues forum; it was *definitely*
valuable, but not quite the same as #2, I don't think)

Each of these three seems to me to be a valuable mission for a Fordham
group/forum. However, I don't think that they're compatible with each
other. (1) seems to be the most open to the whole community, and to
serve the most toward bringing the Fordham community together. That
said, it wouldn't necessarily always create a 'safe' space -- things
could get uncomfortable, and to have a really high/good level of
discussion would require a fair amount of courage. (otherwise,
everyone simply recites platitudes about how nice it is that we're so
pluralistic.)

What do you make of this? I'm just speaking as a graduate student
who likes seeing these conversations take place, but who wants to see
them get just a little farther...

best wishes,
Jane

Anyway, the faculty member wrote back, inviting me to be on the steering committee, but also saying that these issues should probably be discussed in a face-to-face meeting (there are some sensitive areas, as you may gather) rather than over email. So I wrote her back, saying I'd love to talk face-to-face, but that I wasn't sure I had the time to join the steering committee, but that as incoming VP of the Graduate Student Association, I wanted to bring graduate students into this conversation.

So we'll see how this goes. Oh yes, and meanwhile I'm also going to look into why the Financial Aid office here is so lame. And what's up with Student Affairs in a legal case. And nonsense like that. And write a dissertation.

Really, the moral of the story is.... if you want something done, do it yourself. And if you don't like how something's done.... you might just have to be willing to join its bloody steering committee. Argh.

jane 11:47 PM [+]

The Death and Life of Jane Jacobs

Jane Jacobs has passed away at age 89.

She's really one of the greats.

Her impact transcended borders. Basing her findings on deep, eclectic reading and firsthand observation, Jacobs challenged assumptions she believed damaged modern cities -- that neighborhoods should be isolated from each other, that an empty street was safer than a crowded one, that the car represented progress over the pedestrian.


Her priorities were for integrated, manageable communities, for diversity of people, transportation, architecture and commerce. She also believed that economies need to be self-sustaining and self-renewing, relying on local initiative instead of centralized bureaucracies.


"She inspired a kind of quiet revolution," her longtime editor, Jacob Epstein, said Tuesday. "Every time you see people rise up and oppose a developer, you think of Jane Jacobs."

from the NY Times obit, linked above.

jane 3:35 PM [+]

Bob Rae...

I made mistakes before I was in politics, I made mistakes when I was in politics, I made mistakes as premier.

From a CP article on Bob Rae's run for the Liberal leadership.

I invite your comments... what's the buzz about this in Canada? Also, I'm aware that my memories of Bob Rae's premiership are pretty hazy, since I was pretty young at the time. I remember his unpopularity, but I admit that I'm not too sure what it actually was like. Is there a good article somewhere appraising his career as premier in Ontario?

jane 11:39 AM [+]

More Catholic stuff

St. Ignatius of Loyola developed his Spiritual Exercises to help develop & practice being able to discern what helps move us closer to God, what opens us up & makes us more loving (movements of consolation) and what moves us farther, what closes us off & makes it harder for us to love (movements of desolation.)

My friend Doug talks about knowing that a movement is good if it brings us closer to ourselves (personal authenticity; be your own self), closer to others, and closer to God.

So all of this seems to make quite a bit of sense, and of course there's nothing that says a person has to be Catholic because of that.

But, if exploring Catholicism, going to Mass, regularly talking to Catholics about how they understand their spirituality, and praying -- if all of these readily make me feel more loving, more courageous, more hopeful, more patient -- then this seems to be a good thing. And does seem to indicate that, for me, there is wisdom in moving closer to this community.

Now, obviously there are problems within this community, and obviously there are ways in which the problems even within this community extend out and risk harming others (I'm thinking of the Vatican's dissemination of false info about condom effectiveness in areas ravaged by HIV/AIDS, specifically, but other things - hey, witch burnings - could be included here.) Yes. Yes, there is sexual abuse. Yes, there is an essentialist view of women even amongst some of the more 'progressive' folks. Yes to all of that. And obviously I have to come to terms with that. And I don't want to minimize it.

I was talking to a Jesuit scholastic the other day who has an extensive background in politics, and significant reasons for disareeing with the Church's sexual teachings, and hated the Church. He left as a teenager, never to come back, or so he thought. And coming back was hard. Further, he says that even now, the tension never really goes away. The tension between 'what is now' and 'what is to come.' The tension between the 'now' of Ratzinger & the recent Vatican document* about rooting homosexuality out of the seminary & all that, and the 'what is to come' of -- well, that's a mystery. The words 'God's kingdom' ring a little hollow to me. They remind me too much of those crazy Christians. The crazy ones. Yes. And it's going to take me a long time before I can wrap my mind or my heart about what exactly Christians mean by resurrection. But I believe a better world will come. In which we really actually fucking love each other, all of us, recognizing our unity in God. I can't point to any statistic, or trend, or data, or anything, that would prove this. But I believe it.

And further, I always have believed it, even before I admitted to myself that a holy mystery might have something to do with it. Faith, hope, and love.

I'll finish this blog post with a quote from Karl Rahner, a theologian that I really dig-- one of the biggies from the 20th century & an adviser at Vatican II. This is from an essay that I read about a month ago, when I was first thinking that maybe I could be a Catholic:

Hence when we say that one should learn from the experience of one's life whehter Christianity is the truth of life, this does not demand anything which is beyond us. It simply tells us: ally yourself with what is genuine, with the challenging, with what demands everything, with the courage to accept the mystery within you. it simply tells us: go on, wherever you may find yourself at this particular moment, follow the light even though it is as yet dim; guard the fire even though it burns low as yet; call out to the mystery precisely because it is incomprehensible. Go, and you will find -- hope, and your hope is already blessed interiorly with the grace of fulfillment. Anyone who sets out in this manner may be far from the officially constituted Christianity; he may feel like an atheist, he may think fearfully that he does not believe in God -- Christian teaching and conduct of life may appear strange and almost oppressive to him. But he should go on and follow the light shining in the innermost depth of his heart. This path has already arrived at the goal.

From Karl Rahner, "Thoughts on the possibility of belief today," in Theological Investigations (1966). I copied that into my journal March 25. On March 22 I wrote in my journal that I wanted some sort of proof, some sort of 'bang!' flash of light. On March 12 I wrote in my journal "What is the mystical? What is in that silent still place? What was it I used to try to reach? I'm honestly more comfortable with the idea of magic than of God. If there is a God there is no getting off the hook. The promise is infinite, and so is the demand. Am I capable of that?" So you can see there's some development. (And also why it's good that I have a journal that no one sees, as well as a blog!)

Alright. So... I could go on about other stuff I've been reading, or other thoughts about how/why the Church is both messed up (human!) and divine, but what I've written is probably the core of what I've been thinking lately. So, I don't think I'm crazy, and I'm certainly not going to become a mindless drudge (I doubt St. Thomas Aquinas, even with all of his particular shortcomings when it comes to writing about women, would approve of that).

Off to go indulge in the delightfully Catholic pastime of drinking, with two non-Catholics, Reuben & his friend Bryant. Huzzah!

--
* Update, 22 April -- I had 'encyclical' here, but Doug corrected me. I need to brush up on my differing levels of Vatican documents! Anyway, the document re. homosexuality in the seminaries is much less formal than an encyclical -- as i undersatnd it, it's more of a directive to folks, from the Vatican's education 'dicastery' (like a department). Thanks Doug!

jane 5:11 PM [+]

Rebel without a Cause

And so, what [the Iranian president]'s doing by embellishing -- and
this is my guess, my sort of heuristic guess, because I don't know,
but what I think he's doing, he's basically playing chicken, like in
the old James Dean movie, the two cars going at each other at high
speed. He's playing chicken with the President of the United States.
So that's what we're into. We've got the President of the United
States, who's been making -- Bush, as you know, and Cheney have been
making an awful lot of bellicose statements in the last couple months,
saying that they'll rule out no option, which obviously is a nuclear
suggestion, also making declarations about red lines and where Iran
can or cannot go. So the bellicosity of the United States is now being
matched by the bellicosity of the Iranian president. I mean, great way
to run a world.

Sy Hersh, in an interview with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now!, edited version available at Alternet, full version at Democracy Now.

Good times.

jane 11:10 AM [+]

Idea

So how about I make a list of all the possible objections that I could have to becoming Catholic. Y'all can tell me if I've left any out.

1. The teachings on sexuality with regard to marriage/pre-marital sex/masturbation/etc.

2. The teachings re. homosexuality.

3. The abortion issue.

4. The lack of ordination of women.

5. The history of patriarchy.

6. scary conservative Catholics who get together with scary evangelicals & call for John Kerry to be excommunicated for promoting abortion.

7. I've been brainwashed by Fordham.

8. the issue of needing to be obedient to the Magisterium [pope & his folks] (hell, just the word 'Magisterium' itself).

9. obedience in general (as opposed to freedom).

10. America is corrupting my morals.

11. I just want a nice community of folks & am therefore selling out in order to 'belong.'

12. I'm making it all up because it fits together nicely & philosophically.

13. I'm deluded by beauty.

14. What about other religions? less offensive ones?

15. Believing weird stuff about life after death.

16. believing that Jesus was resurrected.

17. Believing that Mary was free of original sin.

18. Having to believe in original sin, period.

19. Legacy of crusades, inquisition, burning witches, etc.

20. anti-feminist.

Let me know if you have any others. Brainstorm! Fun times!

Basically, I'm on some sort of path. I don't know where it leads. Even if I were to start taking Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults classes, it would still be at least a year or two before I was even baptized. So there's no need for me to rush anything. And I trust you all, and thus am genuinely interested & open to anything you could have to say.

jane 3:58 PM [+]

So....

I just have a minute before I have to go over my lecture -- I teach day 2 of Sartre today (and then on to Simone de Beauvoir on Tuesday, yay!) --

but what would y'all say if I told you I was thinking about converting to Catholicism?

I'm just curious what the 'cradle catholics' will say. and the wholly non-catholics. etc. yes. hmmmm.

anyway...

jane 9:59 AM [+]