Interpretive Frames In Faith And Science: Is Power A Myth?
avatar

Truth is power. This simple phrase was often the topic of discussion for many a theology and philosophy class in seminary. Whether it be Nietzsche or Machiavelli, much of our philosophical studies sought to debunk this secular axiom. Any committed Christian, regardless of denomination, would quickly affirm that authentic faith seeks to be detached from power. Nevertheless, the Christian must also be aware of just how deeply the "truth is power" axiom is presumed in our cultural worldview.

Jean Vanier

The parish of which I serve, St. Joseph Parish in Menomonie, Wisconsin, is currently conducting a book study on Jean Vanier's work, Drawn in the Mystery of Jesus through the Gospel of John. Jean Vanier is a personal hero of mine for his ministry to those who have developmental disabilities. Through this ministry, Jean Vanier has authored many books and reflections on what it means to be community in light of his experience of founding L'Arche, ecumenical religious communities for the developmentally disabled. In 2015, Jean Vanier was the recipient of the Templeton Prize for his work with the developmentally disabled. Below is a video of highlight from Jean Vanier's reception of the Templeton Prize.



Jean Vanier's core theological anthropology is simple, but powerful: 1.) We are precious in the eyes of God; and, 2.) We discover this truth when someone treats us as someone who is precious. This vision of Christian anthropology also affirms that if we don't treat others as precious in God's eyes or experience someone revealing this reality to us, we suffer a deprivation of the love we need the most in life.

At the heart of this theology of "beholding and being beheld" is the title given to John the Apostle by Jesus in the Gospel of John: The beloved disciple. The key to this naming of the beloved disciple is that it is not only the title for John, but is the status of all of us: We are Jesus' beloved. This reality calls us to vulnerability with Christ and one another, emphasizing more of who we are in God's eyes instead of what we do or accomplish.

A key biblical support of this understanding of vulnerability with Christ is the answer given by James and John to Jesus' question, "What are you looking for?" Their answer in John 1:38 is somewhat surprising, "Teacher, where do you live?" Interesting. The first desire of those who encounter Jesus as Lord is not to seek power, ask for special abilities, or desire insight into future events. Instead, the desire is simply to be with Jesus, not get something from him.

On the first night of our book study, the question was raised by the group: Who is the beloved disciple? Knowing where Jean Vanier's theology ends, I was surprised as I listened to good, grounded parishioners turn this question into speculations about power relationships.

Why wasn't it Peter, he was made the head of the apostles after all?
I read someplace that it wasn't John, but Mary Magdaline that was the beloved disciple and the power-hungry male leadership wanted to recast it as John.
I don't understand why John would be the beloved. He was the youngest of all the apostles. Wouldn't it have been one of the older of Jesus' followers?
Does this mean that John was the most powerful of all the apostles?

Listening to these reflections and questions, my thoughts interpreted them all as, "Power statement, power statement, power statement." It became so clear that the interpretive lens we were approaching this question through was power, "Who has it and who doesn't?" As I went home, I began to wonder: Has the axiom of "truth is power" become so imbedded in our psyche that it is becoming difficult to think in terms that are not about power?

This question led me to reflect on another axiom I hear quite a bit in science when it comes to natural selection: Only the strong survive. My repugnance toward having Scripture reduced to a modern understanding of power made me wonder, is interpreting evolutionary processes in nature through the interpretive frame of strength and power equally inadequate when trying to understand questions of science? Just as our book club participants instinctively chose power over vulnerability, is there a similar bias in the way scientific data is interpreted that imposes a cultural presumption of power relationships that marginalizes the scientific equivalent of vulnerability?

This is a post that makes me wish I had more formal scientific training. Therefore, I ask our scientists to weigh in to offer a more scientific explanation. From a theological standpoint, my first issue with the axiom of only the strong survive is the word "only." Only implies an absolute, excluding other possibilities. For example, I have heard scientists say that the human person has poor adaptation skills and that it is our advanced intellect that allows us to adapt through technology. The problem I see with this is that, from a non-scientific perspective,"technology" seems to be such a modern term connected with the Industrial Revolution. Yes, there were advancements in the bronze age, the gold age, iron age, and so forth, and I can affirm that, typically, the genetically strong survive, but to cast this as an absolute seems to play into a "power myth" that is more rooted in utilitarian philosophy than an objective view of creation. Similar to how an atheist and a Christian can gaze into the night sky and behold this experience in profoundly different ways, have we become myopic in how we view the data which points to the presumed axiom that "only the strong survive?"

Whether it be science or faith, the beauty of people like Jean Vanier is that they remind us that life is often an interplay between our perception of the strong and the weak. One of the ways we can look at cultural history is how these cultural presumptions have been morphed into a social ethic of, "the strong must eliminate the weak," leading to some of the most horrific tragedies in human history. Many have said, both atheist and Christian, that a social ethic of natural selection would be devastating, awakening new forms of Nazism and ethnic cleansing. I whole heartedly agree with this assessment. I also wonder, could this be a challenge to the scientific community to revisit the interpretive frame that is used to understand the data that supports natural selection, seeking a new lens that deals less with absolutes and affirms the role of vulnerability in the natural world? Perhaps there is room for the axiom from Catholic Social Teaching that affirms that the test of any society is how they treat the most marginalized of their people. I eagerly look forward to reading your comments!

What are your thoughts? Am I way off base, given my deficiency in scientific background or could the "absolutist" narrative we have infused into our culture be a myth that needs to be challenged not only culturally, but scientifically? Leave your thoughts and, together, let us walk together in faith, seeking to be vulnerable with the Lord, finding our dignity not in strength, but by humbly beholding one another as precious in God's eyes, making that intentionally known in those we meet.

 

Fr. James Kurzynski

About Fr. James Kurzynski

Fr. James Kurzynski is a priest of the Diocese of La Crosse, Wisconsin and a hobby astronomer. Originally from the small town of Amherst in rural central Wisconsin, Fr. James completed his undergraduate studies at the University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point, majoring in Applied Music (Saxophone, Voice, and Composition). After graduating from UW-SP, Fr. James worked at the University of Nebraska at Kearney as a Hall Director and pursued a M.S.ed. in Group Counseling. After a year at UNK, Fr. James left his position to attend the University of Saint Mary of the Lake - Mundelein Seminary to discern his priestly vocation.

Fr. James earned a Bachelor in Sacred Theology, a Master of Divinity, and a License in Sacred Theology. While pursuing these degrees, Fr. James also studied Spiritual Theology with the Institute of Priestly Formation at Creighton University and completed the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola.

Fr. James was ordained a priest June 28, 2003. Fr. James’ first assignment was as an Associate at the Tri-Parishes of St. Mary’s - Durand, Holy Rosary Parish - Lima, and Sacred Heart Parish - Mondovi. After two years, Fr. James was assigned as Chaplain and Instructor of Religion at Regis Middle and High School and was also assigned Associate Vocation Director. In his final year at Regis, Fr. James was also appointed Parochial Administrator of Saint Raymond of Penafort Catholic Church, serving south east Eau Claire County. From 2012-2015, Fr. James served as Pastor of Roncalli Newman Parish, serving the college students of Western Technical College and the University of Wisconsin - La Crosse. In 2015, Fr. James was named Pastor of St. Joseph's Parish in Menomonie, Wisconsin, which also serves St. Joseph's Grade School (3K thru 6) and the Newman Center at the University of Wisconsin - Stout. In 2017, in addition to his responsibilities to St. Joseph Parish and StoutCatholic, Fr. James was also named Pastor of St. Luke Parish in Boyceville, Wisconsin. Fr. James also teaches Introduction to Philosophy for the Diocese of La Crosse’s diaconal formation program.

In regard to his interest in astronomy, Fr. James is a member of both the Chippewa Valley Astronomical Society and the La Crosse Area Astronomical Society. He taught an Introduction to Astronomy course during his time at Regis High School in Eau Claire. Fr. James' first involvement with the Vatican Observatory came when an inquiry led to the development of the first "Faith and Astronomy Workshop" (FAW), designed for parish educators and clergy that are not professional scientists.

This blog is made possible by contributions from visitors like yourself. PLEASE help by supporting this blog.

Get the VOF Blog via email - free!

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.


Comments

Interpretive Frames In Faith And Science: Is Power A Myth? — 4 Comments

  1. I don’t know whether “Truth is Power”, but it certainly seems that Love may be the antithesis of it. Whose heart doesn’t melt with love at the sight of an utterly helpless infant? How else to explain why we rush to aid the victims of natural disaster or human war, especially when those suffering are powerless to help themselves? Genuine love is not directed toward generals or admirals, the captains of industry, or heads of state. In such cases, a “hothouse” faux love has to be artificially cultivated through propaganda or salesmanship (the “PR” business). But observe an elderly man fall on the sidewalk (as I did recently), and there is nothing but unalloyed and unmanufactured love in one’s response. No need to even know anything about the person. They’re just someone who can’t get back up without assistance, who needs a concerned question (“Are you OK?”).

    When one of my (grown) children accomplishes something significant, I feel pride. But when my infant grandson cries and cries because he’s overtired and doesn’t know how to put himself to sleep, I am overwhelmed with love. When Mark noted that Jesus loved the rich man searching for eternal life (Mark 10:21), was it because he had just claimed to have faithfully followed all the commandments from his youth, or was it because Jesus knew full well that the man was incapable (on his own) of making that final necessary step to achieve eternal life? I suspect it was the latter.

  2. I noticed in the last years of his life that the weaker, physically, Pope John Paul II became, the stronger his presence was felt. In those days we still lived in the papal summer palace and I could see his audiences on Sunday out my bedroom window. It was remarkable. And certainly the times when I got to see him face to face I felt it.
    It has been suggested that one sign of God’s omnipotence is precisely that He emptied himself to become weak even to die on a cross, as St. Paul tells us; and that He shows His power by not flaunting it. Something that those with power could learn from.

  3. It seems I feel most “powerful” when I am helping someone else. Perhaps it’s more, “The strong survive, only to protect the weak”.(That satisfies Dawkins Selfish Gene, but opens other questions)
    I guess we all know that if “only the strong survive”, well, we will all eventually be overcome, probably sooner rather than later.
    At the risk of opening a bigger can of worms, from a mortal point of view, Death has a very looming, powerful presence, but I then wonder what is the “risk” or loss taken by God who is immortal? The only thing I can understand so far was that Jesus came to show us how to live, and also how to die. He went thru it first hand as both God and man. I know this is a “juvenile” philosophy, but when I try to read/understand more advanced works, I just flounder.
    Power, Truth, KINDA LIKE FRESHMAN PHYSICS.
    I’m enjoying “…the Way to the Dwelling of Light”. I even got out my old physics book. I’m that guy that was sitting in the back wondering “How did he recognize that equation was a wave?”
    Maybe there’s hope to understand somethings after all!
    Thanks to all who work/contribute here.

  4. Thanks for your thoughts everyone! I’ve been wrestling in my prayer with the language of “receptivity” vs. “power.” Years ago, I needed an iron infusion and the Doctors gave me a lengthy explanation of the binding drugs they were going to use to allow my body to receive the iron. It stuck with me that creation is often advanced not by one thing overpowering another thing, but one thing receiving another thing. There is a mystery in the receptivity of creation that can bring about new life or healing to a body. Not ready to write about it yet, but something I’m turning over in prayer.

Leave a Reply