special post 2

“The Spirit of God Hovered” was written by Steven M. Fettke. In this essay he tackles some very sensitive areas that he has been exposed to in his life. He has a mentally disabled son, Phillip Fettke, who lives with a severe form of Autism. Steven wants to understand his son’s life force of life substance that God breathed into Phillip when he was born. This is life force is apparent in Ezekiel 37:6 “I will put breath in you and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the Lord.”  “What does that make him and how should he be viewed by other humans, by believers in the local church.” These are some questions that Dr. Fettke addresses in this essay because having Phillip as his child has altered his understanding of God’s intentions in creation.

     It seems that the Pentecostal church has formed a hierarchy of those with the best gifts most spiritual gifts all the way down to the insignificant people who have been so marginalized to the point where their life force means nothing to the church at all. Fettke states that “if our pneumatology can begin with conception at birth, then those who are not high on the hierarchy of giftedness or significance in the way normally understood can be appreciated for the way God has created them and given them their unique life force.” He opposes the common doctrine that says the Spirit begins to work in someone at “an age of accountability,” because Luke records the angel Gabriel’s claim that John will be “filled with the spirit from birth.” This implies that God did not make a mistake when he created people with disabilities. Their disablements are not a product of human sin or demonic activity and are a part of God’s good creation. Our concept of good and God’s concept of good is different because we marginalize those whose existence seems contrary to contemporary understandings of who is a part of God’s good creation.

            Fettke concludes from Eichrodt’s statement that the image of God is the gift of personhood. This means that we have characteristics of God in us because we received the gift of god making us in his own image. In the church we have formulated ideas of what it means to be human, those who are considered to be able bodied. A reformation of the lens in which things are understood needs to be changed. For the church to say that the disabled need to be divinely healed of their illness is to condemn them for their embodiment. No one chooses how they are marked (embodied), according to Anderson the mark of Jewish circumcision “exemplifies how cultural meanings convey social values.”

            Nancy Eisland says, “My disability had taught me who I am and who God is. What would it mean to be without this knowledge? Would I be absolutely unknown to myself in heaven, and perhaps even unknown to God?” Fettke puts this quote in here because if he and his wife were to wish healing over Phillip then he would not be the one whom God created as a person who happens to have autism. And I am sure he and his wife would not be the people they are today if healing took place.

     This leads me to the part of the essay that needs special interpretation. “That God should be understood to be in the lives of any person, disabled or not, can only be explained by God’s love.” This ties in with the statement, further on in this essay, about the Pentecostals definition of ministry “success.” Now I am not going to try to explain God’s love because it is impossible and will only lead to more questions that we do not know the answers to. This needs to be interpreted because there are many people with disabilities and this essay shows us the flaws the church has concerning the disabled.  At first this statement can seem to be pretty clear, but it is not. Sure, God loves us because he made us in his image and he gave us the Holy Spirit and gave Jesus to die on the cross for those who believe. Some might say that God loves the disabled to, but not in the sense that we know to be his love. This statement is not clear to us because we think that they cannot contribute any ministry to the church and can only be burdensomely ministered to. This statement eludes to something way more than God’s love explaining everything. Sure, it does. But honestly, if we really understand that God is in the lives of any person, then success in ministry would look a lot different. According to Matthew 25: 31-46, the “least of these” are the ones that Jesus represents. They are the ones that Jesus abides in. Philippians 2: 7-8 states that “rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death— even death on a cross!” Although Jesus did not seem to have any physical or mental disability he was not a “perfectly” made human being, he had some “disabilities”. He was not wealthy, there’s no record of him being stunningly handsome, and he died a sinners death (crucifixion was a method of execution used by Rome on runaway slaves). Helen Betenbaugh a permanent disabled human being says this about her condition, “it’s a symbol (she) would present (to the church) of an Easter life, an Easter faith being lived in a Good Friday body.” This sheds light on the fact that part of God’s nature involves suffering. Now weather that is a mental disability of an emotional one, the Spirit started his work in us before birth and the disabled were made into who they are today. Who they are today, disability and all, are perfect.  

     This matters to me and to you because if we deem the physically and mentally persons a burden or how Hauerwas puts it, “we are stuck with them” and, “all things considered, it would be better if they did not exist,” then we will be separated from the sheep. Matthew 25: 31-46 tells us of the importance of the disabled. To the sheep (ones on the right) God will say, “whatever you did for ones of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.”

Imaaaagination

    Why did the neighbor women tell Pelayo and Elisenda to club the very old man with enormous wings to death? This is the one thing that I cannot grasp in this story. Everything else makes somewhat of some sense to me, other than the fact that I see no moral or message behind this story. But wait! Now that I think about it, there is a message behind this story. Everyone in the story thought this "angel" was sick... but maybe this angel was not sick, maybe he was faking to be sick. Here is the thinking behind my conclusion. Since this story is a tale for children, I have to think and have a wild imagination like a child. The family had something bad coming to them all along. Everything points to this. The weather had been terrible for 3 straight days; the water had washed tons of crabs into Pelayo and Elisenda's house and was making the newborn child sick. So this angel fakes that he is sick and lands in the courtyard. God or whoever was giving the angel directions new that if the family kept living in the same house, the child would die. So it was God who told this odd looking angel to do this. God knew that the appearance of this special angel would cause such curiosity and hype that people from all over would come to see this being. Because the people were so interested, the family knew charging a fee to see the creature wasn't out of the question. The family raises enough money to upgrade houses. This saves the child’s life because when it rains the crabs will not wash up into the house thus causing fever and sickness. Once the hype from this angel's appearance settles down, because God knew the people would not be interested in this for too long, the angel’s mission is complete. So the neighbor woman does make sense now. Every child’s tale seems to have a protagonist and antagonist. Although this story required a lot of imagination, the antagonist was the women who represented an angel of death. She wanted to kill the protagonist, the old man with enormous wings (angel from God).

Omelas=Guilt

It sounds like Ursula K. Le Guin does not believe in fairy tales. Throughout the whole story she is describing a beautiful city and beautiful people but at the end it all changes. These people who walk away from Omelas are the ones who realize that fairy tales exist, but it is at the expense of others' well being. This is the message that Le Guin is trying to portray. No matter how perfect the society is, or how docile the people are, there is always something behind the scene or in this case cooped up in a small room that detracts from the utopia. "The terms are strict." This tells me that there was some sort of deal between this utopian society and another being. This surely tells us about how politics runs this society. The part of the story that puzzles me is when the author says, "One thing I know there is none of in Omelas is guilt." But later on it tells me that when people see this locked up child for the first time "they may brood over it for weeks or years." This certainly sounds like guilt to me, or at least a side effect of guilt. Then the people make excuses and say, "Indeed after so long it would probably be wretched without walls about it to protect it, and darkness for its eyes, and its own excrement to sit in." I do not know if the statement by Le Guin is sarcasm when she says the guilt is absent in Omelas because this whole society seems guilty and excuses are rampant. Indeed there are no fairy tale societies but if enough people believe and adore in a perverted way of living than sure fairy tales exist but only at the expense of another’s conscious. The conscious of the few who walk away have been troubled, thus destroying the very thing they hoped and dreamed was a reality. The only ones to admit their guilt and want to do something about it are the ones who leave Omelas and never return. Where are they going, the ones who walk away? They just know that Omelas is not where they are going.

Figurative Language

    Metaphors/Figurative language:
"among whom you appear as lights in the world"
"But even if I am being poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrafice and service of your faith"
"whose god is their appetite"
"who set their minds on earthly things"
"taking the form of a bond servant"
"fruit of righteousness"

The language Paul uses in his letter to the Philippian Church does contain some figurative images and phrases. For instance he uses the phrase "Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision." This phrase highlights all the corrupt people and ideas that have been circulating around the church at this time. It serves as a warning from a friend of this church. One's perception of the meaning of this letter to the church might change from a shallow letter of trying to get a gift from the church to a letter of real concern for the well being of the church because it is a part of the Body of Christ. Paul considers these people brothers in his faith because they share the same passion for the gospel. This point is further reinstated when Paul tells the church he wants to send Timothy to them. "But you know of his proven worth, that he served with me in the furtherance of the gospel like a child serving his father." This metaphor "like a child serving his father" is a crucial point to understand. One's perception could change from thinking that this letter is a far-fetched demand of the church, to a plea for its benefit and the benefit to others. Children don't do work for their father's because they have to, they work for their fathers to please them, and because they know a noble cause is the underlying motivation. Paul uses the figurative phrase "the cause of Christ" when referring to his imprisonment. One needs to understand that seemingly bad things happen to good people because most of the time the good people want the "bad" things to happen to them. Paul is not angry with God or the church for putting this on him, he rejoices in this bad circumstance because it was a great thing. His will and God's will were lined up and because of that, the gospel was preached and boldness was given to the brethren who were also spreading the gospel. 

Pass

USING MY 2nd PASS!

Oranges

     The way Gary Soto uses symbolism in his poem Oranges is genius. He does a great job of taking an object and giving it meaning. Although this meaning could have been applied in different ways, it is necessary for him to write about the orange's meaning to him. It is an interesting gift to be able to take an object that has no meaning to anyone else except oneself and reveal the significance of that object to an audience. Some examples of this in today's society can include many commercials like Brett Favre's Wrangler commercials. He takes a brand of jeans, an arbitrary object, and basically tells the audience that these jeans have been a part of his life forever. Another example could be in Gatorade's commercials of the letter "G." The meaning behind this letter includes athletes’ ability to outperform their competitors because they have the electrolytes needed for energy. Finally, symbolism is used by Jesus in a lot of parables. Jesus tells the people that he is like the groom and his followers or church is like the bride. Although this symbol easier to understand, Jesus uses this to explain his love for them and the devotion of his followers to him. Symbolism is all around us, and it is true that effective symbolism is created by an effective "turn." This turn is either done consciously or unconsciously and moves from something familiar or established to something fresh. An example of an unconsciously making of a symbol would be something that is made fresh throughout the course of time that others pick up on. We see this happen all the time in sports. A young kid grows up playing his sport and is unaware that he is a prodigy. Others may be able to see the potential of greatness in him like a coach or parent. These coaches and parents are the only ones who see the kid's unconscious efforts at becoming a franchise symbol quarter back or pitcher. On the other hand conscience "turns" at creating symbolism usually do not require as much time to develop as unconscious turns do. Anyone can place significance or fond memories on a random object and boom, there's your symbol. The trick is to convey the meaning of the symbol in an effective way. Gary Soto does this beautifully in his poem Oranges.

The Man who Came to Dinner

     I attended and watched the play The Man who Came to Dinner on Friday night, November 12. This play was a great experience. To me it evoked the nature of the well known novel by Charles Dickens, A Christmas Carol. Since Christmas is just around the corner, I thought this play would end with Mr. Whiteside finally coming to the realization that he was a selfish and cynical man, just like Scrooge. I thought this was going to happen when, by the end of the play, everybody was turning against Mr. Whiteside and it looked like he was going to lose his secretary (Maggie). I thought for sure he was going to help the Doctor with his book, apologize to the nurse and Stanley's kids, let Maggie marry Burt, and drop the suit against Mr. Stanley. But that would have been easy to predict and would fall under Corrigan's idea of "fast food literature." This play was a fine dining experience, after all it was 10 bucks! I have learned throughout this literature course, some works of literature are not made to solely convey morals. This play was mostly about the development of Mr. Whiteside's character. When Mr. Stanley gave Whiteside the fifteen minute count to get out of the house, I thought he would change his attitude but he did not. Maybe an underlying theme here is how a little bit of wealth and fame can cause one to want more wealth and fame. I think Mr. Whiteside would have been embarrassed to admit to all of his friends in high places that he accidentally fell and broke his hip, but instead he wanted to suit the Stanley’s for 150,000$ to make it look like it was their fault for his mistake, or just out of pure greed. I cannot help but think of the verse in James 2:6 "Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court?" The actors in this play were very talented; Mr. Whiteside's character played a great role. The one thing that astonishes me is how these actors can stay in character for that long of time, and especially after those 10 minute intermissions. Bravo to the actors and the theatre department for choosing a work that was not ordinary and especially not ordinary for this time of year.