Pages

2.09.2007

The Jesus Movie

Students will spend the next two weeks watching the Jesus movie that aired on TV in 1999. The film itself is about 3 shours long, but we pause and discuss many aspects of the film throughout the course of the two weeks. Students will have two reflection papers to write on the movie; the papers are due on the Monday following the viewing of the film. The first set of reflection questions can be downloaded here.

Blessins & Peace,
Mr. De La Rosa

2.08.2007

A Post About Nothing

Several pointless questions (no offense!) have prompted me to write as I sit here at my desk, waiting for a blood-stained white shirt to go through the soak cycle so that my son can properly dress for Mass tomorrow @ school. So here we go . . .

The Mayan calendar predicts that on December 12, 2012 we'll begin a new cycle in the life of our world. Some interpreters claim that we'll be in for a rude awakening as all of our technological gadgets come to life and attempt to kill us. Some say it's the end of the world. And some say that it'll be the beginning of a spiritual awakening of sorts for humanity. I read a blurb for a book that ties in all of the weird weather the world's been seeing to 12/12/2012 - it's a meteorological intimation of the physical/spiritual shift the world will experience on that day. (So goes my hurricane season answer!)

Regarding quantum physics, we're told that the act of observing a quantum action is actually an act of interaction - by merely looking we're actually subtly manipulating our results. It seems that nothing really happens until someone looks to see what the outcome is. Some people have taken this bit of quantum mechanics, run with it, and said that by going macro we can see God as the observer of the whole universe (or multiverse), and thus we exist and act only due to God's act of observant interaction. As God is the ontological ground of our being, the being that sustains us and in which we live and move and have our being, I tend to like that quantum leap. (So goes my quantum answer!)

I was actually involved in a conversation about romantic love with my 7th graders last week, and I reminded them that romantic love, far from being a "traditional" value, is actually a pretty late addition to our human mating rituals. As far as I can tell (from my limited reading in this area and related areas) the notion of romantic love is only about 500 years old. Before that time most marriages were arranged affairs between parents or between fathers and soon-to-be husbands, mostly based on wealth and desire. Some indigenous cultures still practice polygamy, we in the civilized Western world tend to practice serial monogamy, and our royalty (stars of all kinds) tend to take the notion of romantic love to the extreme: they marry the object of their desire, but when their ardor cools off (as it most certainly will - you can't stay in a perpetual state of infatuation!) they run off to the next person they've "fallen in love with" because the current person is now someone with whom they've fallen "out of love." Many adults treat marriage less as a commitment and more as a type of extended dating with benefits and mortgages. So much the worse for us (So goes my answer to the romantic love/arranged marriage question).

And I think that most churches/denominations don't fall apart because of theological considerations. Many people don't give a rat's tush about the subtler points of theology. For most people, I think, religion is about how/what they feel, what it offers, and how much it agrees with what they already believe. We're become such a consumer-oriented society that even our religions must compete for adherents. To a certain extent, that's a good thing - churches, mosques, temples, etc. have to make sure that they stay true to the teachings of their founders, constantly purifying themselves of accumulated dross so that their truth can shine forth. However, once people start to notice a certain lacking quality (the music is bad, people talk too much, look at the clothes those teenagers are wearing, why don't we have food before Mass, why do we have food before Mass, why do we have Mass, etc.) they shop around for something more suited to their temperaments. Hence many of us never make the commitment (there's that word again!) to a local community that's necessary to really live out a servant-oriented love towards our fellow humans. And seeing as I would probably fall towards the "hippie" end of the spectrum, I'd also like to say that fundamentalism of any sort tends to make people more close-minded . . . and I'm all for open minds! (So goes my religion response)

Finally, without further ado and with no more gilding of the lily, we come to the all important cat question. My response? Get rid of the cat. I read an article where researchers determined that some cat's carry a certain something in or on themselves (yeah, I read it fast and can't remember the details - sorry!) that does two things:
  • it makes human males dumber - there's a measurable loss of brain cells when these certain cats with that certain geno se qua are around males for extended periods of time
  • it makes human females more promiscuous - I guess if you're a single male this is a good thing (what's a few brain cells when you've got steady female companionship!), but for a married man, and especially a married man with daughters, you probably want to keep the feline population of your house to zero, zip, nada, zilch

So that's it - a stream of consciousness post about nothing (I just finished watching Seinfeld Season 4 - please tell me you catch the reference!), which will hopefully lead to a stream of consciousness post about something!

Blessings & Peace,
Hugo