As I have mentioned in this blog, I divorced my ex-wife about four years ago. As a book lover, I read considerably after my divorce trying to use the information to help me make sense of my experience. Several of the next few posts are going to be over divorce books, so my apologies if this is nothing that you would find of interest. As a form of shorthand, I am calling these posts "Starting Over", so you can feel free to ignore them.
Bill Butterworth had a successful career as a Christian writer prior to be surprised when his wife asked him for a divorce. Reminiscent of C.S. Lewis' A Grief Observed. Often people do speak of divorce as a death of sorts, I don't truly subscribe to this analogy, because while you can find closure for the death of a spouse, parent, or child, the finality of divorce is of a different kind. Yes, you may mourn your divorce and the loss of whatever your marriage represented, but if you have children, younger children, the marriage is not exactly over. Honestly, with sons in their twenties, you are still likely to have interactions if not a relationship with your ex.
Butterworth titles his book New Life After Divorce: The Promise of Hope Beyond the Pain. He has remarried and does seem to have found hope beyond the pain of divorce. I have read other works too where the author is happily remarried. While this does provide hope for those like me who are not remarried, I would like to read a book by someone who has divorced, but for whatever reason(s), has not remarried yet. I think the dynamic might be different and perhaps more interesting. Nevertheless, Butterworth's book proved useful. The other obvious point I need to make is that it is written by a Christian author who makes certain assumptions that readers might not accept or agree with. Even as a Catholic, I don't know that my worldview is entirely in sync with Butterworth's, but many of the points raised are not explicitly religious.
He speaks about self-pity in his opening chapter, "But if we are not careful, out grief can sidetrack us into a full-blown pity party, complete with al the sadness and depression that accompany it." (9) So true, I know I wallowed in self-pity initially. Everything negative snowballed into a great ball of anxiety, fear, and depression. How was I going to survive? Where would I live? Who was I if not a husband? He goes on to quote St. Paul's words in Philippians about "contentment." Here I am reminded of the counselor I worked with after my divorce, who told me "God does not promise us happiness, so we should seek contentment." He too was an openingly Christian counselor, so these words surprised me. However, time has proven him to be right.
In addition to self-pity, divorce brought out feelings of self-loathing and questions regarding my worth and place in the world. "We've slapped ourselves silly, and it's no wonder we can't function-we've made ourselves punch-drunk." (13)
I referenced the idea of divorce as death earlier, the finality is something every divorced person must deal with. There was a time, mostly in the first year, I held out hope of reconciliation, when I realized this was not to be and that it should not be, I truly began to move forward with my life. Part of this is working on getting along with my ex-wife. Once I accepted the finality of my divorce, I began dating in earnest. I had an eighteen month relationship that did not end in engagement or marriage. This is okay! I remember coming across one of those internet sayings which spoke to me: Fall in love when you are ready, not when you are lonely. Remember too that no one, not your ex or a future partner is the end all and be all of your life. I had to learn how to be self-sufficient and I am so much better for that experience.
Part of my self-sufficiency involves being able to overcome fear. Fear is one of the biggest pitfalls of life after divorce. One of the pieces of philosophy I have embraced comes from the film Bridge of Spies. Throughout the film, the Russian spy Abel when asked if he is afraid or scared simply answers "Would it help?" It would not and fear does not help you either. Worry is destructive in so many ways. Stick to the facts and not your often vivid imagination. Things will work out, but you have to work to make it so.
Now for Butterworth, there is also God to support and love him. If you are a person of faith, you might ask the question Butterworth poses in one of the final chapters: Where is God in my divorce? Rather than supplying platitudes, Butterworth uses case studies and his own faith to attempt to provide an answer. His conclusion- God loves us unconditionally.
As he promised hope, Butterworth concludes his book by encouraging us to break through whatever walls hold us back from a future and a second wind and second chance. It can happen even after divorce.
Czar
Sunday, July 16, 2017
Manchester By the Sea
In addition to being a voracious reader, I am also an equally big fan of movies. I teach a high school film class, one of the best parts of this is choosing one films to watch and study. So, I have been trying to catch up on all of the Oscar-nominated films I did not see in the theatres. I recently watched Manchester By the Sea and was underwhelmed. It was a good film, but I felt it was underwritten. I know that the director wrote the script too, but this reads like a really good draft for an uncompleted film script. I thought the flashbacks didn't truly flesh out the back story of the main characters.
I thought Casey Affleck was good, but I wanted to see more development of him and Michelle Williams. Yes, we see him trying to kill himself at the police station and we see her resisting his attempts to hug her while she is being put in the ambulance. I know we can read between the lines, but what exactly did happen to them? How soon after the death of their children where they divorced? How long did it take her to remarry?
Finally, after showing us a scene in flashback where Casey Affleck claims he would be a better father for his nephew than the boy's own father, we don't see this referenced again? Even at the end of the film?
The film left me disappointed, not because it was a bad film, but precisely because it was a good film that left me wanting more.
I thought Casey Affleck was good, but I wanted to see more development of him and Michelle Williams. Yes, we see him trying to kill himself at the police station and we see her resisting his attempts to hug her while she is being put in the ambulance. I know we can read between the lines, but what exactly did happen to them? How soon after the death of their children where they divorced? How long did it take her to remarry?
Finally, after showing us a scene in flashback where Casey Affleck claims he would be a better father for his nephew than the boy's own father, we don't see this referenced again? Even at the end of the film?
The film left me disappointed, not because it was a bad film, but precisely because it was a good film that left me wanting more.
Tuesday, June 27, 2017
The Scientific Holy Grail
For probably as long as humans have practiced religion, there have been those who oppose this practice. Theism is only slightly older than atheism or perhaps it is the other way around. For as long as I can remember, I have been fascinated by science, mostly physics and cosmology. In my eighth grade science class, I had a teacher who introduced stories about Hindu cosmology which he attempted to connect to the cosmological theories of the time. I found such ruminations fascinating and I was hooked. There was only one problem with my decision to become a cosmologist or astrophysicist- Math! Though I liked math well enough and had been very good at basic math in grade school, when I had to use formulas, the gig was up. Still, I did advance to Calculus my senior year, though this only lasted a semester. However, I never lost my curiosity and fascination with cosmology and the connection and relationship of religion to science.
The eminent evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould argued that there should not be too much of a connection. He believed in separate spheres that he called non-overlapping magisteria, a wink at the Vatican and the Catholic Church. It is believed that when the Pope is engaged in promulgating doctrine, he is infallible. In general, the Pope has issued encyclicals, bulls, and other documents based on his teaching authority, known in Latin as the magisterium. For an atheist like Gould, he could see the usefulness of religion for believers, but did not see its usefulness in the promotion of science.
In this view, Gould recalls the view of Galileo, perhaps the best known Renaissance scientist who ran afoul of the Catholic Church and received condemnation and house arrest for his perceived arrogance and incorrect views. Galileo too believed in the authority of the Bible and of the Church, but he had difficulty in compartmentalizing his faith and his science. He supposedly said The Bible teachings you how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go.
More recently the "New Atheists" have been far less sympathetic to religion, attacking it vociferously and mocking religious believers of all stripes, Christians and Muslims and everyone else in between.
Lisa Grunwald's 1991 novel, The Theory of Everything explores the terrain of science and its often tenuous relationship with religion in her debut novel. Even at the time of Grunwald's writing, there were religious believers and those who were not entirely dismissive of religion who were also prominent scientists. Writers like Paul Davies who I first encountered in his 1983 work, God and the New Physics and who continued to write in this vein with The Mind of God (1992) and The Fifth Miracle (1998). John Polkinghorne is a prodigious author and former Cambridge physics professor and Anglican priest and others like the biologist A.R. Peacocke, Ian Barbour, and Father Stanley Jaki.
While many scientists are not religious believers, I believe they still cannot entirely dismiss the notion of faith, especially when it comes to their search for The Theory of Everything, the Holy Grail of Science.
The Theory of Everything also called the Grand Unified Theory is the attempt to unify gravity with the three non-gravitational forces the strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces. It would be a combination of the theory of relativity with the quantum field theory.
In her novel, Lisa Grunwald introduces the main character Alexander Simon who is a brilliant physicist who is on the verge of developing this theory. His quest is complicated by his relationship with his parents. His father, more of a scientist like his son, supports this quest by Alexander. His mother abandoned his father and Alexander when he was a young boy. She reemerges in Alexander's life right when he is so close to publishing his work.
The phrase opposites attract seems very apt for Alexander's parents as his more scientific father balances out the mother who is drawn to astrology, numerology, and other more esoteric areas of inquiry. Through a series of events as Alexander tries to reconnect with his mother, Alexander himself abandons his work and goes in quest of enlightenment with a guru of sorts known as an adept who is also an intellectual and spiritual descendant of alchemists. Alexander's adept is helping Alexander to find his own "prime matter", which can be about anything.
Alexander's choice complicates his relationship with Linda, the woman he is sharing an apartment with. Alexander abandons her on his quest, leaving open the possibility he might never return from this quest and to Linda either.
The characters are well-drawn. The plot is good. Grunwald is adept at telling an intricate story. I liked 90% of the book. However, I found the ending to be quite disappointing. While there is a resolution, I feel that Grunwald simply could not think of a great ending and the books limps along until its conclusion.
If you have in interest in astrology, alchemy, and related subjects, The Theory of Everything might be worth your while.
The eminent evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould argued that there should not be too much of a connection. He believed in separate spheres that he called non-overlapping magisteria, a wink at the Vatican and the Catholic Church. It is believed that when the Pope is engaged in promulgating doctrine, he is infallible. In general, the Pope has issued encyclicals, bulls, and other documents based on his teaching authority, known in Latin as the magisterium. For an atheist like Gould, he could see the usefulness of religion for believers, but did not see its usefulness in the promotion of science.
In this view, Gould recalls the view of Galileo, perhaps the best known Renaissance scientist who ran afoul of the Catholic Church and received condemnation and house arrest for his perceived arrogance and incorrect views. Galileo too believed in the authority of the Bible and of the Church, but he had difficulty in compartmentalizing his faith and his science. He supposedly said The Bible teachings you how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go.
More recently the "New Atheists" have been far less sympathetic to religion, attacking it vociferously and mocking religious believers of all stripes, Christians and Muslims and everyone else in between.
Lisa Grunwald's 1991 novel, The Theory of Everything explores the terrain of science and its often tenuous relationship with religion in her debut novel. Even at the time of Grunwald's writing, there were religious believers and those who were not entirely dismissive of religion who were also prominent scientists. Writers like Paul Davies who I first encountered in his 1983 work, God and the New Physics and who continued to write in this vein with The Mind of God (1992) and The Fifth Miracle (1998). John Polkinghorne is a prodigious author and former Cambridge physics professor and Anglican priest and others like the biologist A.R. Peacocke, Ian Barbour, and Father Stanley Jaki.
While many scientists are not religious believers, I believe they still cannot entirely dismiss the notion of faith, especially when it comes to their search for The Theory of Everything, the Holy Grail of Science.
The Theory of Everything also called the Grand Unified Theory is the attempt to unify gravity with the three non-gravitational forces the strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces. It would be a combination of the theory of relativity with the quantum field theory.
In her novel, Lisa Grunwald introduces the main character Alexander Simon who is a brilliant physicist who is on the verge of developing this theory. His quest is complicated by his relationship with his parents. His father, more of a scientist like his son, supports this quest by Alexander. His mother abandoned his father and Alexander when he was a young boy. She reemerges in Alexander's life right when he is so close to publishing his work.
The phrase opposites attract seems very apt for Alexander's parents as his more scientific father balances out the mother who is drawn to astrology, numerology, and other more esoteric areas of inquiry. Through a series of events as Alexander tries to reconnect with his mother, Alexander himself abandons his work and goes in quest of enlightenment with a guru of sorts known as an adept who is also an intellectual and spiritual descendant of alchemists. Alexander's adept is helping Alexander to find his own "prime matter", which can be about anything.
Alexander's choice complicates his relationship with Linda, the woman he is sharing an apartment with. Alexander abandons her on his quest, leaving open the possibility he might never return from this quest and to Linda either.
The characters are well-drawn. The plot is good. Grunwald is adept at telling an intricate story. I liked 90% of the book. However, I found the ending to be quite disappointing. While there is a resolution, I feel that Grunwald simply could not think of a great ending and the books limps along until its conclusion.
If you have in interest in astrology, alchemy, and related subjects, The Theory of Everything might be worth your while.
The Fifth Gospel
How long does it take to write a gospel? If you are Ian Caldwell, the author of The Fifth Gospel, the answer is ten years. Caldwell was co-author of The Rule of Four, a novel I have not read. According to the blurbs and jacket, he spent 10 years researching this novel. It shows. I have never read another work of fiction or nonfiction for that matter which provides such a credible portrait of life in Vatican City and the inner lives of Catholic priests.
Caldwell is a brilliant author and a talented writer whose intelligence and craft show up on nearly ever page. With my strange hours the last few years, I rarely get a chance to read fiction, so this book was a great choice. For those of you who read this blog, you know I am partial to historical fiction and thrillers based on rather arcane subjects like ancient Egypt or the history of Christianity. Caldwell's books indulges my preferences as well as telling an intricate and compelling story.
As someone who teaches creative writing, I have become good at figuring out most of the plots of books I read or movies I see, but Caldwell kept me guessing throughout this surprising murder mystery and thriller.
The protagonist is Alex Andreou, a Greek Catholic priest. Careful, I said a Greek Catholic priest, not Greek Orthodox priest. As a lifelong Catholic, history teacher, and student of the Catholic Church, I was not aware of the Greek Catholics. Not only are they in Communion with Rome, but they are allowed to marry. Father Andreou lives in the Vatican with his five-year old son. Apparently not only can Greek Catholics marry, they can also have bad marriages too. Though it is not central to the novel, I learned a great deal about the Greek Catholic Rite and Caldwell provides a great insight into the life of this priest who lives on the fringes of the institutional Church, though he lives within walking distance of the Pope. It was not pedantic, as Caldwell weaves his exposition of the Greek Catholic priesthood within the novel itself. This is one of the many strengths of this novel.
A murder occurs and Fr. Andreou's house is broken into, presumably by the murders who appear to be looking for something in Andreou's possession. He was the research partner of the museum curator killed. Worried for his family's safety, Andreou begins to research the murder himself.
Here is where the story begins as well as a beautifully constructed narrative regarding the four canonical gospels and a document produced over a thousand years ago that attempted to combine all four gospels into one document. This document, the Diatessaron, is often called "the fifth gospel", which provides the title for Ian Caldwell's novel.
The dead curator was in the process of mounting an exhibit in the Vatican with the Diatessaron. However, Fr. Andreou discovers a connection between the Diatessaron and a much better known Catholic relic- the Shroud of Turin.
One blurb references The DaVinci Code, only to dismiss any comparison between Dan Brown and Ian Caldwell. Caldwell is deemed to be the much better and more accomplished writer and storyteller. Having read nearly all of Dan Brown's novels, even those not involving Robert Langdon, I would agree Caldwell is erudite and his research is impressive. Dan Brown is not a slouch in my opinion and Brown tells a riveting story. However, while they may trod on the same ground, Caldwell is much more balanced in his approach. Dan Brown takes the narrative easy way out by turning the Catholic Church a den of corruption and conspiracy, in a very black and white approach. Caldwell is leagues more empathetic and subtle in his storytelling.
I won't give away the ending, but it is tremendously well crafted and I walked away feeling it was consistent with the rest of this brilliant novel. I am a fan of Caldwell and plan to read The Rule of Four sooner rather than later.
Though I am a religious believer, I feel I have the ability to be willing to listen to opposing points of view whether it is a work of fiction, theology, or history. What I have too often found is that authors have an agenda disguised as fiction. Caldwell is too good of a writer for something like that. The Fifth Gospel is one of the best novels I have read in years. I cannot recommend it highly enough!
Caldwell is a brilliant author and a talented writer whose intelligence and craft show up on nearly ever page. With my strange hours the last few years, I rarely get a chance to read fiction, so this book was a great choice. For those of you who read this blog, you know I am partial to historical fiction and thrillers based on rather arcane subjects like ancient Egypt or the history of Christianity. Caldwell's books indulges my preferences as well as telling an intricate and compelling story.
As someone who teaches creative writing, I have become good at figuring out most of the plots of books I read or movies I see, but Caldwell kept me guessing throughout this surprising murder mystery and thriller.
The protagonist is Alex Andreou, a Greek Catholic priest. Careful, I said a Greek Catholic priest, not Greek Orthodox priest. As a lifelong Catholic, history teacher, and student of the Catholic Church, I was not aware of the Greek Catholics. Not only are they in Communion with Rome, but they are allowed to marry. Father Andreou lives in the Vatican with his five-year old son. Apparently not only can Greek Catholics marry, they can also have bad marriages too. Though it is not central to the novel, I learned a great deal about the Greek Catholic Rite and Caldwell provides a great insight into the life of this priest who lives on the fringes of the institutional Church, though he lives within walking distance of the Pope. It was not pedantic, as Caldwell weaves his exposition of the Greek Catholic priesthood within the novel itself. This is one of the many strengths of this novel.
A murder occurs and Fr. Andreou's house is broken into, presumably by the murders who appear to be looking for something in Andreou's possession. He was the research partner of the museum curator killed. Worried for his family's safety, Andreou begins to research the murder himself.
Here is where the story begins as well as a beautifully constructed narrative regarding the four canonical gospels and a document produced over a thousand years ago that attempted to combine all four gospels into one document. This document, the Diatessaron, is often called "the fifth gospel", which provides the title for Ian Caldwell's novel.
The dead curator was in the process of mounting an exhibit in the Vatican with the Diatessaron. However, Fr. Andreou discovers a connection between the Diatessaron and a much better known Catholic relic- the Shroud of Turin.
One blurb references The DaVinci Code, only to dismiss any comparison between Dan Brown and Ian Caldwell. Caldwell is deemed to be the much better and more accomplished writer and storyteller. Having read nearly all of Dan Brown's novels, even those not involving Robert Langdon, I would agree Caldwell is erudite and his research is impressive. Dan Brown is not a slouch in my opinion and Brown tells a riveting story. However, while they may trod on the same ground, Caldwell is much more balanced in his approach. Dan Brown takes the narrative easy way out by turning the Catholic Church a den of corruption and conspiracy, in a very black and white approach. Caldwell is leagues more empathetic and subtle in his storytelling.
I won't give away the ending, but it is tremendously well crafted and I walked away feeling it was consistent with the rest of this brilliant novel. I am a fan of Caldwell and plan to read The Rule of Four sooner rather than later.
Though I am a religious believer, I feel I have the ability to be willing to listen to opposing points of view whether it is a work of fiction, theology, or history. What I have too often found is that authors have an agenda disguised as fiction. Caldwell is too good of a writer for something like that. The Fifth Gospel is one of the best novels I have read in years. I cannot recommend it highly enough!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)