Under construction. This page will change through the year.

Contact info: jwoodruff@sstx.org

Note: The Theology Department Grading Policy can be found by scrolling down to the end.

Fall Term , 2017:

1. Read Siddhartha by Herman Hesse for the first day of class.

  • Know these characters: Siddhartha, Govinda, Kamala, Kamaswami, Vasudeva. Are there other characters you should know?
  • Know these terms: brahmin, nirvana, samsara, maya. Are there other terms you don't know?
  • Consider: What is Siddhartha's problem? How is he behaving in a rational way, or not?
  • Consider: How does Siddhartha change in response to a person, event, object, or teaching during the story?

2. Write and present a 2-3 page autobiographical essay focusing on

  • who it is you understand yourself to be, and
  • three influences that have changed you, and how they did so.

We'll start presentations Friday, Sept. 1 and continue through the following week.

3. Read the essays by Sigmund Freud and Christopher Lasch, below. How do their descriptions of religious and non-religious people fit Siddhartha, or not? We'll be writing an in-class essay in mid-September.

4. Read the first 40 pages of Rudolf Otto's The Idea of the Holy. How do Siddhartha's experiences fit, or not, the descriptions of the "numinous experience" in Otto's book? We'll be writing an in-class essay in late September. Focus on these ideas:

  • rational, irrational, and non-rational
  • orthodoxy
  • the numinous
  • creature-feeling
  • mysterious tremendum
  • mysterium fascinans

It could help to reflect on my long-ago advisee's email (which I'll share with you), or interesting experiences of Teresa of Avila, Morihei Ueshiba, Xochipllli, Barbara Ehrenreich (check her great interview), Philip K. Dick, and many others, as well as the general notion of Buddhist enlightenment. Can you add to this list?

People are still trying to make sense of this experience, as you can see here, and here, and here. Can you find other perspectives?

5. Read chapters 1 and 2 of Mircea Eliade's The Sacred and Profane,. Using the ideas you find there, create a ritual for which you see a need, paying particular attention to how space and time are structured in that proposed ritual. (Early-mid October.)

6. Read chapterse 3 and 4 of The Sacred and the Profane. Using the ideas found in those chapters, add to the ritual you've constructed, incorporating ideas about nature, women, and the existential transitions we make in our lives. (Mid-late October.)

Winter Term, 2016-17

7. Read chapters 1, 3, and 6 of The Dynamics of Faith by Paul Tillich. Explore how his ideas fit, or don't fit, the case study you choose from this list:

8. Read the first 12 chapters of the Bhagavad Gita. Prepare to write on one of the topics below

  • Since our body's senses, and the appetites/desires they create, are seen a problem in the Gita regarding spiritual life, what do you think about Krishna's advice that Arjuna control his senses and recognize that the real enemy is his own desire (kama)?
  • How does the quote from T.S. Eliot (see just before the First Teaching) relate to the Bhagavad Gita?
  • What is the most important verse (OR your favorite verse) in the Gita? Why?
  • Some say that all religions say the same thing. Compare the Gita with a tradition with which you are familiar to explore this idea. Where do you see similarities and differences? For example, how are "devotion/bhakti" in the Gita and "love/agape" in the Christian tradition similar, or different?
  • Which specific teaching in the Gita could be the most useful to you? Why?
  • If President Obama had followed the teachings of the Gita, how would that have affected his presidency?
  • If President Trump followed the teachings of the Gita, how would that affect his presidency?
  • What problems do you see with the teachings found in the Gita? Why?
  • In 13:7, the Gita mentions ahimsa -- "non-violence" -- as one of the twenty virtues necessary for attaining self knowledge. Gandhi and MLK both emphasized non-violence as a central teaching of the Gita. Explain how they were interpreting the Gita correctly, or not.
  • How does the Gita relate to a) the Crips & Bloods: Made in America documentary? OR b) the Emmett Till documentary h ? OR c ) Penn State: America's #1 Party School? OR d) the D-5 presentations by Shane Maguire, Alan Pogue, or Jeff Broaddus '94?

9. Read the Gospel according to Mark in the Christian New Testament. In what ways does it resemble the people and groups prseented in the PBS Frontline documentary With God on Our Side (see below)?

Spring Term, 2017

10. Read the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu. Consider the following topics regarding the Tao Te Ching, and how you'd explore the connections you find:

  • how does the TTC relate to our D-5 speakers (aikido, tai chi, traditional Chinese medicine)?
  • how would St. Stephen's (or the U.S.) change if run by Taoist principles?
  • which idea or chapter from the TTC is most useful or appealing orinteresting to you? (e.g., tao, wei-wu-wei, p'u, the female or yin, weakness/softness, emptiness, a specific chapter, etc.) Explain!
  • if your parents followed the TTC, how would your life change (or how would it have been different)?
  • after strolling through the Gulch, explore: how does the Gulch relate to the ideas in the TTC?
  • if the Chinese government OR the protesting students at Tiananmen Square adopted the TTC's ideas, how would they have acted differently, and how might the outcome have changed?
  • how is this book similar to, or different from, the Gita? Or, the Gospel of Mark?
  • how is this book similar to, or different from, the religion with which you are most familiar?

11. Write and present to the class an essay in which you explore how someone has helped you this year, how you have helped someone this year, who you hope to become in the years ahead, possible obstacles you anticipate, both external and internal, in becoming that person, alliances (people) you will need, things you can control to help you become the person you hope to be, and what you're anxious about. And: when you say "we," to whom are you referring?


FREUD-Illusion.doc

[Speech]

The Illusion of Disillusionment

From “The Soul of Man Under Secularism,” by Christopher Lasch, a speech delivered in April at the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York City. The speech also appears in the July issue of New Oxford Review, published in Berkeley, California. Lasch’s most recent book is The True and Only Heaven: Progress and Its Critics, published by Norton. His essay “The Lost Art of Political Argument” appeared in the September 1990 issue of Harper’s Magazine.

1) There is a vast body of commentary on the modern spiritual plight, all of which assumes that the experience of doubt, moral relativism, and despair is distinctively modern and, in some sense, the product of mankind’s “maturity.” A survey of this literature, which includes the works of Freud, Jung, and Weber, reveals a recurring imagery that links the history of culture to the life cycle of individuals. In this analogy, civilization has passed through distinct phases, moving from a childhood of naive faith to the detached skepticism of an adult. Jung’s description of the modern condition, for example, begins with a reference to the lost childhood of the race. The medieval works, in which “men were all children of God...and knew exactly what they should do and how they should conduct themselves,” now lies “as far behind as childhood.” In this modern view, religion, at least in its traditional forms, can no longer speak to the needs of a world that has outgrown its childhood. Freud’s book on religion, which bears the scornful title The Future of an Illusion, concludes that religion has no future at all. Likening it to a “childhood neurosis,” he insists that “men cannot remain children for ever.”

2) The unexamined premise that history can be compared to an individual’s growth from childhood to maturity makes it possible to condemn any form of cultural conservatism or any respect for tradition as simply an expression of the natural human tendency to cling to the security of childhood and to resist emotional and intellectual growth. The educated classes, unable to escape the burden of sophistication, may envy the naive faiths of the past; they may even envy the masses who continue unthinkingly to observe traditional faiths in the twentieth century, not yet having been exposed to the wintry blasts of modern critical thinking. They cannot trade places with the unenlightened masses, however, any more than they can return to childhood. Once the critical habit or mind has been fully assimilated, no one who understands its implications can find any refuge or resting place in premodern systems of thought and belief.

3) It is this experience of disillusionment, more than anything else, that has been held to distinguish the artist and the intellectual from unreflective creatures of convention, those people who allegedly distrust artists and intellectuals precisely because they -- the naive multitude -- cannot bear to hear the bad news. Unenlightened ages past might be forgiven for believing things no educated person could, in the twentieth century, still believe, or for taking literally mythologies better understood in a figurative or metaphorical sense; one might even forgive the modern proletarian, excluded from an education by virtue of his unremitting toil; but the bourgeois philistine lives in an enlightened age, with easy access to enlightened culture, yet deliberately chooses not to see the light, lest it destroy the illusions essential to his peace of mind. The intellectual alone looks straight into the light without blinking. Disillusioned but undaunted: Such is the self-image of modernity, so proud of its intellectual emancipation that it makes no effort to conceal the spiritual price that has to be paid.

4) We might call it a quaint conceit, this mental habit of playing off our disillusionment against the innocence of our ancestors, except that it originates in an impulse that is anything but quaint and has very serious consequences, not the least of which is to prevent an understanding of vitally important matters. It betrays a predisposition to read history either as a tragedy of lost illusions or as the progress of critical reason.

5) I say “either/or,” but of course these two versions of the modernist historical myth are closely related; indeed, they are symbiotically dependent on each other. It is the progress of critical reason that allegedly leads to lost illusions; disillusionment represents the price of progress.

6) From this point of view, the relation of past to present is defined above all by the contrast between simplicity and sophistication. The barrier that divides the past from the present -- an impassable barrier, in the imagination of modernity -- is the experience of disillusionment, which makes it impossible to recapture the innocence of earlier days. Disillusionment, we might say, is the characteristic form of modern pride.

7) This pride is evident not only in the aggressively triumphal view of cultural progress that dismisses the past without regrets but, paradoxically, in the nostalgic myths of the past as well. Nostalgia and the idea of progress go hand in hand. The assumption that our civilization has achieved a level of unparalleled complexity naturally gives rise to a yearning for bygone simplicity.

8) Nostalgia is superficially loving in its re-creation of the past; but it evokes the past only to bury it alive. It shares with the belief in progress, to which it is only superficially opposes, an eagerness to proclaim the death of the past and to deny history’s hold over the present. Those who mourn the death of the past and those who acclaim it both take for granted that our age has outgrown its childhood. Both find it difficult to believe that history still haunts our enlightened, disillusioned adolescence (or maturity or senility or whatever stage of the life cycle we have allegedly reached). Both are governed in their attitude toward the past, by the prevailing disbelief in ghosts.

9) Perhaps the most important casualty of this habit of mind is a proper understanding of religion. In the commentary on the modern spiritual predicament, religion is consistently treated as a source of intellectual and emotional security, rather than as a challenge to complacency and pride. Its ethical teachings are misconstrued as a body of simple commandments leaving no room for ambiguity or doubt. Recall Jung’s description of medieval Christians as “children of God [who] knew exactly what they should do and how they should conduct themselves.” Joseph Wood Krutch, the early - twentieth-century critic, took the same view of religion. Medieval theology, according to Krutch, made the conduct of life “an exact science.” It offered a “plan of life” that was “delightfully simple.” Medieval Christians “accepted the laws of God in a fashion exactly parallel to that in which the contemporary scientist accepts the Laws of Nature”; this unquestioning obedience to an authoritative science of morals was the only alternative to “moral nihilism.” “As soon as one begins to doubt either the validity of the laws of God...or as soon as one begins to raise a questions as the purpose of life,” one begins to slide down the slippery slope to relativism, moral anarchy, and cultural despair.

10) What has to be questioned here is the assumption that religion ever provided a set of comprehensive and unambiguous answers to ethical questions, answers completely resistant to skepticism; or that it forestalled speculation about the meaning and purpose of life; or that religious people in the past were unacquainted with existential despair. The famous collection of songs written by medieval students preparing for the priesthood, Carmina Burana, should be enough in themselves to dispel this notion; they give voice, these disturbing compositions, to an age-old suspicion that the universe is ruled by Fortune, not by Providence, that life has no higher purpose at all, and that the better part of moral wisdom is to enjoy life while you can.

11) Or consider the varieties of religious experience analyzed by William James in his book of that name, a book that is distinguished by a complete indifference to issues of historical chronology. To readers formed by the self-consciously modern tradition, such an indifference might appear to be a weakness of James’s book, but it is essential to his point -- that the deepest variety of religious faith always, in very age, arises out of a background of despair. Religious faith asserts the goodness of being in the face of suffering and evil. Black despair and alienation -- which have their origin not in perceptions exclusively modern but in the bitterness always felt toward a God who allows evil and suffering to flourish -- often becomes the prelude to conversion. An awareness of “radical evil” underlies the spiritual intoxication that finally comes with “yielding” and “self-surrender.” If nothing else, the shadow of death hangs over our pleasures and triumphs, calling them into question.

12) The modern world has no monopoly on the fear of death or alienation from God. Alienation is the normal condition of human existence. Rebellion against God is the natural reaction to the discovery that the world was not made for our personal convenience. The further discovery that suffering is visited on the just and unjust alike is hard to square with a belief in a benign and omnipotent creator, as we know from the Book of Job.

13) But it is just this comfortable belief -- that the purposes of the Almighty coincide with our purely human purposes -- that religious faith requires us to renounce. Religion reminds us of the inescapable limits on human power and freedom. Far from endorsing comfortable superstitions, it undermines the most important superstition of all -- that the human race controls its own destiny. According to its critics, religion provides the security of childlike dependence of a father figure who answers all our prayers. But the naive belief that our wishes govern the universe is precisely what religion attacks. We have no special claim on the universe, and our prayers are answered only when we surrender that claim. Such is the true meaning of religious faith, as it has been understood by a long succession of prophets through the ages.

14) The religious critique of pride ought to speak directly and compellingly to modern men and women, who find it galling to be reminded of their dependence on powers beyond their own control or at least beyond the control of humanity in general. Such people find it difficult to acknowledge the justice and goodness of these higher powers when the world is so obviously full of evil. They find it difficult to reconcile their expectations of worldly success and happiness, so often undone by events, with the idea of a just, loving, and all-powerful creator. Unable to conceive of a God who does not regard human happiness as the be-all and end-all of creation, they cannot see the central paradox of religious faith: that the secret of happiness lies in renouncing the right to be happy.

15) What makes the modern temper modern, then, is not that we have lost our childish sense of dependence but that the normal rebellion against dependence is more pervasive today than it used to be. But this rebellion is not new, as Flannery O’Connor reminds us when she observes that “there are long periods in the lives of all of us...when the truth as revealed by faith is hideous, emotionally disturbing, downright repulsive.” If “right now the whole world seems to be going through a dark night of the soul,” it is because the normal rebellion against dependence appears to be sanctioned by our scientific control over nature -- the same progress of science that has allegedly destroyed religious superstition.

16) Those wonderful machines that science has enabled us to construct have made it possible to imagine ourselves as master of our fate. In an age that fancies itself as disillusioned, this is the one illusion -- the illusion of mastery -- that remains as tenacious as ever. But now that we are beginning to grasp the limits of our control over the natural world, the future of this illusion (to invoke Freud once again) is very much in doubt -- more problematical, certainly than the future of religion.

dXAz�V2�º2

Theo Grading Policy 3.doc