rain and the rhinoceros

Last week my wife and I went out to see my favorite director, Paul Thomas Anderson’s new film, There Will Be Blood. I have to say I think this my favorite of his films so far and it is profoundly relevant as it exposes the disastrous human costs of capitalism epitomized in the oil rush.

I have been openly critical of some of my friends choices to go to Alberta in order to “cash in” on the great Canadian oil rush. In my criticisms I am not attempting to place myself on some higher moral ground, for I am well aware that I am complicit in the current human destruction of the earth. However, I still strongly discourage my friends to resist the desire to pay off university debt by means of exploiting the earth’s resources. It is my hope that St. Stephen’s University would become a place that fosters the kind of growth in students that would render active participation in economic exploitation, war, and environmental degradation unintelligible.

Recently, an environmental group called Environmental Defense reported that “Canada’s massive oil sands are the most destructive project on earth.”
According to a Reuter’s article the report noted that “excavation of the oil sands in the western province of Alberta — home to the richest petroleum deposits outside the Middle East — is producing vast amounts of greenhouse gases and poisoning local water supplies.” According to the article “The Alberta provincial government says it has issued leases for 4,264 oil sands projects covering 25,065 square miles . New projects costing more than C$100 billion are on the books for the oil sands region and production is expected to triple to 3 million barrels a day by 2015.”

I’m aware that I’ve missed a few days of blogging. Hopefully, I’ll be able to post more frequently in the coming months. Today is my first day back at work and school after a wonderful month break. This past month I had the opportunity to read some more Wendell Berry (I attempted to read his fiction, but ended up reading his work on modern agricultural). I also read Stanley Hauerwas’ new book The State of the University, which was great. I began Charles Taylor’s massive A Secular Ageand began Marvin and Ingle’s Blood Sacrifice and the Nation. I read a wonderful book by the late Herbert McCabe entitled God Still Matters, which I bought at the best theological bookstore in the world Loome Theological Booksellers in Stillwater. McCabe got me excited again (actually, for the first time really) about Thomas Aquinas. I’ve got some other books on the go too (I really should finish the books I’ve started!), but I’ve got some required reading now for the courses I’m taking and so I’m trying to focus most of my attention on that. Anyway, I hope to post more frequently from now on, but things might be a little slow starting up here again. Bear with me… This semester I’m only taking two courses: Christianity Since the Enlightenment and Fundamental Moral Theology. Assuming that I’ll be somewhat interested in the class readings and discussion, I’ll probably be posting on these subjects soon. In the meantime, go out and vote. . . for the ugliest theologian that is.       

As many of you probably know, a controversy has recently broke out at my school, the University of St. Thomas, over a decision to not invite Archbishop Desmond Tutu to speak at the annual PeaceJam event. Evidently, the St. Thomas administration thought Tutu was too controversial because of his statements in opposition to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. Our Justice and Peace program has been at the center of the controversy. In fact, the faculty member who initially got Tutu to agree to coming, recently lost his grant to continue working for the university. And, of course, the Director of the program lost her job over the controversy.All of this is strange considering that I saw Ann Coulter speak a couple years ago at St. Thomas. In her speech before a full auditorium, Coulter made dozens of racists comments. Unfortunately, she received a standing ovation.As we anticipated, last week the City Pages featured an article on the controversy. Many other newspapers from around the country and the world picked up the story. It was one week ago today that the piece was published in the City Pages and I just received an email from the president of St. Thomas addressed to faculty, staff, and students. In the email, Dennis Dease says that he had made a mistake and decided to change his mind on the issue. In the letter he extends an invitation to Tutu to speak at a forum that addresses the Israel-Palestine conflict. He explained that two Jewish groups have already agreed to sponsor the event.As you might have guessed, this controversy has stirred things up a bit at St. Thomas, but not as much as one might have hoped. Of course, all the faculty from the theology department and Justice and Peace program are freaking out, but the student body doesn’t seem too upset by the whole thing. Yesterday, during the lunch hour, a few people were protesting and holding up a sign that said, “Let Tutu Speak.” I spoke with my friend and legendary activist Marv Davidov about it. He was determined to get the New York Times to cover the story. As I lit his cigarette for him he said, “They thought this thing would blow right over, but they were wrong, cause we’re not going to let it.” If you know Marv, you know that he’s serious.Well, evidently, it didn’t take too long for the University to reverse its decision about Tutu. Although I am happy to hear that Dease recognizes his mistake, I am not confident that this really marks a significant change in the administration. The larger issues have to do with the future of a fairly radical Justice and Peace program at aconservative Roman Catholic institution. Unfortunately, it appears that the future of the program is in jeopardy. As a graduate of the university and someone who was actively involved in the Justice and Peace program, I am deeply saddened by all of this, but I’ve been trained to not go down without a fight.

As many of you know, I am just beginning a Master of Arts in theology at a Roman Catholic seminary. I am not Roman Catholic, so I am expecting to be challenged. I am hopeful that my theology will be broadened and deepened by this experience. I have just started a course on the Eucharist that will center on the Roman Catholic understanding of the sacrament. As part of my required reading for next week I am reading the excerpts on the Eucharist in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Part two of the Catechism reflects on the many names and dimensions of the inexhaustible sacrament. They are as follows:

It is called Eucharist because it is an act of thanksgiving to God for his great works of creation, redemption, and sanctification.

It is called The Lord’s Supper because it is intimately tied to Jesus’ own act of blessing, breaking, and distributing bread at the Last Supper.

It is called the Eucharistic Assembly because the sacrament is celebrated among the faithful, the people of God.

It is called a Memorial because it reminds us of Jesus’ passion and resurrection.

It is called the Holy Sacrifice because it “makes present the one sacrifice of Christ the Savior and includes the Church’s offering.” Thus, this name implies reciprocity between Christ and humanity. As he sacrifices himself on behalf of us, we are so called to offer ourselves to him.

It is called the Holy and Divine Liturgy or the celebration of the Sacred Mysteries because the church’s worship and liturgy finds its apex in the sacrament of the Eucharist.

It is called Holy Communion because “by this sacrament we unite ourselves to Christ, who makes us sharers in his Body and Blood to form a single body.”

Finally, it is called Holy Mass (Missa), because “the liturgy in which the mystery of salvation is accomplished concludes with the sending forth (missio) of the faithful, so that they may fulfill God’s will in their daily lives.”

Tonight I had my first class as an M.A.T. student at the Saint Paul Seminary School of Divinity at the University of St. Thomas. The class was wonderful and I am really looking forward to it. The instructor, Rev. J. Michael Byron, did his doctoral work under the supervision of the controversial Roger Haight who was recently “silenced” by the Vatican. This class is on Ecclesiology from a Roman Catholic perspective. We will be reading a ton of Vatican II documents as well as Avery Dulles’ Models of the Church. I am really looking forward to this course and I will keep you posted on what I’m thinking about in terms of ecclesiology.

On Monday I attended two speeches at the University of St. Thomas: Ann Coulter and Arun Gandhi. If you don’t know who Ann Coulter is, you are probably better off that way. She is a radical ultra-conservative extremist (i.e. violent, rude, and dangerous). She considers herself a Christian, and also strongly believes that “Jesus would have supported lassaiz-faire capitalism.” When a young republican student asked her how the US could improve its image abroad to the status of “likeable,” she laughed and said, “We don’t want to be liked; we want to be feared!” She had many comments about “liberals,” although she kept making fun of Bill Clinton. Of course, I think Clinton is far from being a liberal, but more conservative than anything else. So, I yelled out, “Bill Clinton is a conservative!” Of course, this could not be heard amidst the cheers and banter. Come on, that was the smartest thing I could think of to say. Coulter is also widely known for saying, “Women should be allowed to carry guns, but not be allowed to vote.” And, “We should go into Iraq kill their leaders, teach them English, and convert them to Christianity.” She is just off the wall crazy. But, you know, she didn’t even bother me that much. What bothered me was the huge acceptance she received from St. Thomas students - this was sad.Later that evening I went to see Arun Gandhi, grandson of M.K. Gandhi. He spoke of the great power of nonviolence and I was blown away. He told amazing stories about his grandfather and touched everyone’s heart.I watched a radical conservative and a radical pacifist stand at the same podium on the same day - I’ll follow the latter.