Log in

No account? Create an account
Errantry: Novak's Journal
...Words to cast/My feelings into sculpted thoughts/To make some wisdom last
Theological Notebook: First Day of the New Semester (For Me); "God in America" 
12th-Jan-2011 11:37 pm
October 2009 Haircut
I still was pretty weak this afternoon, and hesitated on whether going in to the university was pushing things, but I just so didn't want my "The Experience of Grace" course or my once-a-week Master's course "Church, Sacraments, and Ministry" to be a week behind that I decided I had to do it. I had had to take a rest while doing the monumental task of shaving, with the voice of Thumper from Bambi providing commentary in my head with the line, "Kinda wobbly, isn't he?", but in spite of that, I figured I could do it as long as I took the streetcar there and back, rather than walking the mile either way. I'm glad I did. I was tired, and more than a bit achy, but it felt good to get things going. I had already gotten a heads-up from a student that the bookstore didn't order any of my Grace books, so I was particularly keen on getting in there to get them their first text, which I had actually ordered and bought 25 copies of myself, since I wanted a previous edition of the text. So that let the crew get started, and I made a point of directing those who were perhaps more ready for a more general class toward my course on Catholicism. Although the two courses are both second-level courses, presuming only the required "Introduction to World Religions" as a prerequisite, just by its specific topic, the course on Grace is going to be a bit harder, as I saw that the course on Jesus was last semester. The course on Catholicism, by contrast, is necessarily more survey-ish, and a more natural "second Religious Studies" course. I might point out that kind of distinction in a future department meeting, that maybe we could actually distinguish some things as more naturally filling the second general requirement in the subject, and others as more naturally filling the third. I don't think students would need to be required to follow the distinction, but for some of them that sort of graduated step-taking would be helpful.

It was all mostly standard "opening day" sorts of business for me, then, but in the Master's course for the Loyola Institute For Ministry (which swelled to a dozen people from the seven I'd had signed up a few days ago), we all did verbal introductions of ourselves for an hour or so, and that was fascinating. They're mostly an older set, with a few mid-twenty-somethings thrown into the mix, but they're all coming from such varied backgrounds, and possess such a variety of ministry goals for employing the degree, that it is going to be every bit the "adult learner" discussion group that I had been hoping for, with a real bunch of earnest and experienced people spicing the stew. There's more men than I had hoped (I had had only one on the original list I had been looking at), including a priest from Ghana who arrived in the States four days ago on a sudden sabbatical after something like a dozen years of various jobs since ordination, for a total of four guys out of the dozen. That group is just going to be fun and fascinating to read with.

Other than that, my only really notable point for the day is to just complete my "set" of comments over the last few days and to note that the PBS documentary God in America ended with its third episode being particularly strong, I thought. It handled the two key current major movements in public religious culture with clarity and without the sort of slant that I would fear. They noted the history of the rise of the Religious Right in the 1970s and 80s and the Republican Party's interest in grabbing this particular voting block (and even noting, as so few seem to remember, that where Evangelicals weren't previously apolitical, that they had been a Democratic block, consistently leaning for the "party of the little guy" before the New Left turned on them in the late 1960s/early 70), and hit the points and players I would have hoped. They also addressed the especially recent development of the Democratic Party's growing realization after 2004 that its repressively Secularist hostility toward religious discourse in the public sphere was utterly self-defeating. I had been particularly curious to hear Howard Dean start to express this at the start of his tenure as Chair of the Democratic National Committee at the time, during an interview on Meet The Press with the late great Tim Russert, and then to hear Barack Obama publicly making exactly that argument loudly, clearly, and rationally to his own party.

Along with a look at the particular "employment" of religion in America as part of the resistance to the consuming threat of global Communism in the 1940s through the 1960s, it also did a section on the fundamentally religious nature of the bulk of the Civil Rights movement. It made for a consistently-strong third and final two-hour episode that I wouldn't be embarrassed to use this one at all in a beginning course with students on Religion in America, just to let them eyeball and perhaps take in more strongly much of what would be (naturally) better treated in any of the great texts we have on the subject after this last generation of scholars working on it.
13th-Jan-2011 02:33 pm (UTC) - Democratic party shift in attitude
After their defeats in 2004, some Democrats did realize that their party coalition's hostility towards many religious groups and traditions had become a hindrance to them -- as well as a rallying point for the secularists and members of the Religious Left (whose identities in groups and as individuals are constituted in part by their opposition to -- and generally highly reductivist views on -- more traditional, practice- and theology-robust religious groups).

I took part in several "dialogues" between "traditionally religious people" and Democrats who were interested in winning back religious voters. What I found, unfortunately, was that they lacked prerequisites of genuine dialogue: good faith, respect for the intelligence of one's dialogue partner, curiosity about then other side, and the willingness to own up to their own failings. So, these dialogues petered out after about a month.

At the NCRSA in 2008, I talked with a young woman who had recently been hired as a consultant for a Democratic think-tank focused specifically on developing religious rhetoric to "win back" Catholics and "win over" Evangelicals. This particular one had been around since they started gearing up for the 2006 election. Investments like that certainly paid off in votes, diminishing the Republicans' edge. But, are the Democrats, as a party any closer to understanding, e.g. Catholics who actually practice their faith, who view the Church as more than a social group with pick-and-choose doctrines? Clearly not.
13th-Jan-2011 02:35 pm (UTC) - Re: Democratic party shift in attitude
oops -- that's me -- too used to Blogger, and forgot the default here is set as Anonymous
13th-Jan-2011 04:52 pm (UTC)
Well.Mike, I hope you are feeling stronger and healthier as the days go on. I admire your attentiveness to your work. It is clear that you truly care about what you're doing and about the students. We hope that would be the norm for all of us.

I have to say that when I teach in our MTS program, dealing with adult learners can really be a joy. Typically ours of women and men already engaged in church ministry who are motivated and bring rich experience to the academic work.

Well, good luck! We start on the 24th although I do have an independent student for te J-term.
This page was loaded Jun 25th 2019, 6:50 pm GMT.