The Waltonian

Scandal alert: “Did I just see the housekeeping staff throw the recyclables in with the rest of the trash? Does Eastern even recycle? Have I lived a lie for the past four years of my college career?!”

Well, yes and no. Officially, the school does have a pretty comprehensive recycling policy. As is noted on the website, “Eastern University participates in a single-stream recycling program. All plastic, glass bottles, aluminum, steel cans, and paper materials can be placed into one recycling container for collection.” Most students would recognize these green containers placed around campus in most of the highly trafficked locations. The housekeeping staff is responsible for maintaining these containers, collecting and depositing materials in the designated dumpsters when appropriate.

Sodexo also has a comprehensive recycling policy. They have attempted to measure their food waste by instituting a weighing program and have achieved significant improvements as a result. Other initiatives, such as food reuse and box recycling, are also in place.

But yes, you may have seen a member of the housekeeping staff toss the recyclables in with the rest of the garbage. The reason for this confusing reality is that the recycling containers often get contaminated with unrecyclable waste and therefore cannot be put in their proper place. While the virtuous housekeeper may remove a piece or two of the contaminated waste and salvage the rest of the load, if too much contamination is spotted, all the materials in the container are tossed in the garbage. The housekeeping staff does not have time to sort through all the school’s recycling and therefore can only do so much.

So, you, concerned citizen of Eastern University, may actually be the cause of this unfortunate scenario. To avoid having the recyclables thrown away, the simple solution is to avoid contaminating the recycling container. Place only the designated products in the recycling cans, steering clear of “food, plastic bags, food tainted items (used paper plates, paper towels, or napkins), polystyrene cups or plates, plastic toys or sporting goods, DVDs, foam egg cartons, or ice cream cartons.”

Despite the available recycling disposal containers placed around campus, one may ask, “Is this enough?” The Eastern student has likely seen the small green bins in their residence halls overflowing with bottles and cardboard. Similarly, the student has probably seen the amazing amount of trash that piles up on move-in/out days which probably contains much recyclable waste. Or further, one might ponder the accessibility of trash cans compared to recycling. A trash can exists in every classroom yet only one or two recycling containers are placed in an entire building. Surely one can recognize that more could be done.

One resident director suggested that trash and recycling containers be placed somewhere on each hall which federal work study employees could maintain. Budgets and housekeeping contracts may hinder the accessibility of placing more receptacles around campus, but these ideas seem a good place to start.

Do you care about environmental justice? It seems that here is a place of need. Do not wait for others to initiate the change, do what you can to help. As Gandhi famously remarked, “Be the change you want to see.” Much is done but more is needed: lead the way.

Soon, dates will be had and flowers given, chocolates, cards, and cliché verses consumed: Valentine’s Day is almost here. A day to celebrate love, a beautiful thing. And as this time approaches, many will be confronted with loneliness. Not because they do not have dates; no, but because love is an elusive thing. Found one moment then seemingly gone the next.

Where is love, this thing that we so badly want, where is it?

Love is here, always; it is all around us. If only we had eyes to see.

Pause. Breathe. See that you are not alone. See that you are surrounded with color and sound, movement and life: a gift. This is love. The person sitting across the table, the woman with the shopping cart, the policeman in the cop car: this is love.

In one of his poems, the farmer and poet Wendell Berry describes his ideal Heaven to be the world as he knows it but redeemed. In this Heaven, he would have the memories of his mortal life and again dwell in his life-long residence, a farm in rural Kentucky. Berry notes, “A painful Heaven this would be, for I would know / by it how far I have fallen short. I have not / paid enough attention, have not been grateful / enough. And yet this pain would be the measure / of my love.” Here, Berry sees the beauty that is all around, in this earthly home, and calls it good! This is love; do we see it?

As the biblical faith shows, love is characterized by reciprocity, a giving and receiving, ascending and descending. God has invited us, his image bearers, into this love. We find ourselves, and the rest of the earthly world, to be created in goodness. God has given us life, and even himself, and everything that exists speaks to his infinite gift. This is love.

So, as Rainer Maria Rilke writes, “You who let yourselves feel, enter the breathing.” Be still, do not worry about studying enough, being cool, having a date. Come into this. See the love that surrounds us always: the tree branches with the snow, the stack of books ever growing, the text messages waiting on your phone. Do not miss the moment, it will not happen again. Notice the little things, the gifts. Be here. Love is here. Love is here.

Sources: “This Day” by Wendell Berry, “Sonnets to Orpheus” by Rainer Maria Rilke

A creative writing piece

“The only people for me are the mad ones…” – Jack Kerouac

My friends, my brothers:
all of us are full of madness.

You have seen me grow,
from grade school to graduation,
and now you watch me wander,
from here, from this city,
in which we were raised,
to distant places;
only to return again.

You too have left,
traveling along similar roads,
meeting others who are equally mad for life,
who are desirous about everything,
and who see God everywhere.

We have gone from Perth to Palestine,
and have not escaped the pull of this place,
a place we cannot help but call home.
And here we are again, drinking coffee.

Tonight, with the frost on the windows,
and school out for the semester,
what else is there to do, but sip and smile,
and speak of times that are to come,
of children that will be born, of weddings,
of breakups, and of the places we plan to see.

For before long, we will again be on the road,
and God, in his madness, might take you far away.
But we will be here, sitting, slurping.
These times, these people, they are the ones for me.

Often in our culture today, money takes precedence over relationships. The culture preaches that money will make us happy and that relationships are expendable. This is certainly not the Christian position. Christ tells us that we can serve only one king, either God or Mammon. Further, in the Kingdom of God, persons, like God and one’s neighbors, receive the utmost value. Material goods are important, they are gifts from God, but they are not ends in themselves and ought to be valued in their proper order.

Eastern’s situation regarding its relationship with its housekeeping staff seems to have encountered the risk of adopting this cultural vice which values money over relationships. Navigating through business contracts is a difficult endeavor and makes one vulnerable to deciding new contract conditions based on abstract calculations and not on the concrete particularities of the persons affected. The latest news regarding the housekeeping situation has sounded optimistic, citing that many of the housekeeping staff will be returning to work under the new housekeeping-provider, but the scenario that we are slowly coming out of has raised many questions: how can one deal well with the relationship between money and persons in a business context; are there guidelines to help navigate the ethical problems involved with these scenarios; how ought one proceed in deciding these things?

Since the Christian perspective gives persons the utmost value, the place to start, then, would seem to be here, with the persons involved. The missiologist from Fuller Theological Seminary, Bryant L. Myers, argues that the root cause of all poverty, all brokenness, is the damaged relationships between persons, especially the damaged relationships with God. Since the root cause of brokenness is damaged relationships, the place needing attention, or where healing is required, is on the personal/relational level. If hard financial decisions need to be made that will inevitably impact a community, the way to proceed, then, is by caring for the persons and relationships involved. Questions to consider are: How are the persons involved affected by the issue? how can the parties maintain a mutual love? is everyone having their voices heard?

The school’s situation involving its housekeeping staff has been a difficult process for many. There are signs that good may be coming from the housekeeping-provider change, but the process is not yet finished. The continuing transition ought to consider the good of the persons involved before any secondary ends, like money. Seeing many staff and students respond to the housekeeping-provider change out of a concern for the parties involved has been encouraging and seems a good way to make sure that those directly affected receive the love they deserve.

The relationship between money and persons easily gets complicated, and can be the cause of much pain, but through the hurts and challenges, the soul ripens. And so, with this challenge, our school is presented with the chance to grow, to blossom, into a more beautiful creation. The clouds are starting to clear, the sky is lightening up, and soon we shall see what will sprout from our soil, from the seeds we have planted.

[/media-credit] Sahar Vardi spoke on Oct. 30 regarding her views on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

On Thursday Oct. 30, an Israeli anti-militarist activist, Sahar Vardi, spoke in the Baird Library to an intimate crowd on her experience as a conscientious objector in Israel.

Vardi, a petite young woman with a strong yet soft spoken voice, articulate English, and a hint of an Israeli accent, merited an attentive audience. She began the session by providing a brief history of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, highlighting Israel’s progressive land annexation and political influence over Palestine since the 1948 U.N. Partition Plan, which attempted to create two new states, one Arab and one Israeli, in much of the land traditionally known as Israel or Palestine. Following this introduction, Vardi shared about her own experience as a citizen of Israel and her journey to activism against her country’s militarism.

She explained that, although she had grown up in the city of Jerusalem, a city with a large Palestinian population, she had never actually gotten to know any of her Palestinian neighbors. The ones she had encountered were usually cleaning a friend’s house or her school’s hallways. It wasn’t until she attended an olive planting event (olive trees are an important regional and cultural icon) where Israelis and Palestinians worked side-by-side that she recognized a disconnection between her community and the Palestinians. That day, she learned that a wall would soon be built in the valley below which would separate the two communities in a tangible way. It was then, Vardi explained, that she began to question the cultural norms she grew up believing.

Vardi explained that her questions slowly led to a growing awareness of the profound influence militarism has had on Israeli society. She found herself moved to know and be in solidarity with her Palestinian neighbors, which, in light of her approaching age and the near requirement for conscription, caused her to rethink the path Israeli youth almost inevitably follow. She decided that she could not be protesting the injustices of Israeli militarism one day, and then the next, under the orders of a commanding officer, be a part of the militarism. Therefore when she was of age, she refused to enlist in the military. There were legal, punitive consequences, she explained, but the major effect was social stigmatization.

The reason for this effect, Vardi explained, was a result of militarism’s influence on the Israeli culture. Vardi pointed out that the Jews are constantly reminded by their culture, history and traditions that they are a persecuted people. As a result, there is much comfort in having a state defined by a Jewish character and its ability to defend itself from outside intruders. The significance of militarism, Vardi pointed out, has made its way into cultural icons, educational curriculums and everyday life. She noted, for example, that Israelis have become desensitized to guns because they see soldiers everyday walking around with semi-automatic weapons strapped to their hips. Thus, not supporting this militarism is socially deviant behavior, and the result is a kind of marginalization.

She concluded her presentation by citing her reason for coming to Eastern: to ask the community to take responsibility for its role in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Vardi explained that the U.S. is one of the largest supporters of Israeli militarism, supplying billions of dollars every year for the country’s military investments, and therefore the EU community needs to speak to its governmental representatives and policy makers about the injustices occurring in the Holy Land.

Dr. Boyd, a professor at EU, and Dr. Nuzzolese, a faculty member at Palmer Theological Seminary, followed up on the presentation by sharing their thoughts after hearing it. Dr. Nuzzolese, a trained psychologist, pointed out that the two communities are suffering from a kind of societal trauma, and Israel’s militarism seems to testify to this condition. Dr. Boyd reflected on how the U.S. also seems to demonstrate a kind of alarming militarism, citing a recent re-emergence in patriotism as an example.

The presentation left the audience quiet and reflective, and the time concluded with questions to ponder: How are U.S. citizens responsible for bringing peace to the Holy Land; how has militarism influenced our own society; what is patriotism for the Christian; and lastly, in light of these things, what does it mean for the Christian to be transformed by the renewing of their mind?

Response to Dr. Cary’s Lecture,“Chastity Does Not Discriminate”

We need to discriminate. Yes, if we are to preserve diversity and difference, and to love each other well, we need to discriminate

On September 18, Dr. Cary, a professor of philosophy at Eastern, gave a lecture at the invitation of the school’s philosophy club to an auditorium full of students and faculty in which he articulated this need to discriminate. His lecture was in defense of the letter signed by Dr. Duffett this summer regarding Eastern’s right to require faculty to uphold a standard of conduct which conforms to a traditional Christian sexual ethic.

In the lecture itself, Cary explained that the university has always upheld a traditional Christian sexual ethic and Dr. Duffett’s support of the letter only expressed what has always been the case. Although the policy is controversial in light of the varying beliefs Eastern’s students and faculty hold, Cary argued that Duffett’s actions did not signal any change at Eastern. Rather, it simply defended Eastern’s right to act on policies it has always maintained.

Cary also asserted that the school’s hiring policy is discriminatory, but it is a good kind of discrimination. Though discrimination intuitively sounds morally reprehensible to any modern, Cary argued that maintaining a certain kind of discrimination is necessary for upholding diversity, difference and the love of one’s neighbor.

According to Cary, discrimination, drawing borders between oneself and others, is necessary for personal and communal identity. A person needs to distinguish oneself from the other; a family needs to distinguish their house from their neighbor’s; Christianity needs to distinguish itself from Judaism or Islam. Recognizing difference is essential to identity. Cary argued that this drawing of borders, this distinguishing of oneself from other, is good and necessary to our identities. It is the kind of discrimination we need.

Cary was not naïve to the fact that much evil has come from discrimination. He recognized that borders are the places where conflicts occur, but that this border violence is the antithesis of good discrimination. Good discrimination practices the virtue of hospitality and extends an invitation to one’s neighbor, inviting them into one’s home to eat and share at the dinner table: this is good discrimination, that which recognizes difference, respects it, and upholds the dignity of the other. Ultimately, Cary suggested that this good discrimination was what Dr. Duffett was endorsing by signing the letter.

He stressed that Eastern was not discriminating against people but against behavior. The school’s hiring policy upholds a traditional Christian sexual ethic, and in doing so, enforces a kind of discrimination which says employees must behave in ways which conform to the school’s official values. Though the hiring policy discriminates by requiring faculty to uphold Christian beliefs, it is important to note that it does not discriminate against differing beliefs about sexual ethics, but only behavior.

Personally, I found the lecture compelling. We are all “others” in a sense: I am distinct from you, you from me; my community from yours, yours from mine; and on and on it goes. Difference is not necessarily bad. Difference and diversity is beautiful. All the creatures God created are beautiful in their diversity and difference. Our differences can be beautiful too, and we should learn to appreciate them, to see the unique beauty God has created in us all. At the same time, we ought to be open to change: our neighbors might have much to teach us! We must, as the poet Wendell Berry once said, “Conserve the good and be free.” To do this, we must discriminate and must recognize difference.

Of course this good discrimination becomes more challenging in community. Community, by its nature, attempts to bring otherness into communion. So, how do we do this well? How can we be together and yet apart at the same time? I think Dr. Cary showed us how: by respecting each other’s identities while simultaneously being open to learning and change. To do this, Cary suggested we must challenge ourselves to be open, we must invite our neighbors to dinner, we must, as he eloquently puts it, “Carry the cross of listening.” Let us carry our crosses, invite our neighbors into our homes, pursue truth together and pray that we can see the beauty which God has uniquely placed in us all.

Less than a month ago, two American journalists were assassinated in Iraq by the Islamist extremist group IS, or the Islamic State, and since then, the ring of the American battle drums have again been beating to the sound of another military intervention in the Middle East.

IS’s assassinations and numerous deplorable actions have created a firestorm of emotions, evoking impassioned responses. Vice-president Biden, in a speech to a New Hampshire audience, proclaimed, “We will follow them to the gates of hell until they are brought to justice.” Others, like Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson, argue that we ought to “convert ’em or kill ‘em.”

The drum ring has been growing louder and louder, and on the eve of the commemoration of 9/11, it all stopped for fifteen minutes while President Obama addressed the nation.

In an unforgettable speech given by the United States’ President Obama, he addressed the swelling demand for an American response to the IS threat and outlined a national response.

[/media-credit] President Obama addresses the recent killings of two American Journalists.

The president began the speech by highlight how America is safer now than it was years ago because of his foreign policy initiatives but soon acknowledged IS as a new threat, quickly asserting that he intends to “degrade and ultimately destroy the terrorist group known as ISIL” (the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant). He sternly asserted, “ISIL is not Islamic… not a state… [but is] a terrorist organization pure and simple and its vision is to slaughter all who stand in their way.”

Before outlining his response to the IS threat, the president clarified that the actions require a multilateral approach and that the Iraqis and Syrians need to take responsibility for their own situations. That said, Obama highlighted his four pronged responses; a systematic campaign of airstrikes; to bolster the Iraqi and Syrian forces already fighting IS; to draw on America’s counter-terrorist capabilities to prevent further attacks; and to continue providing humanitarian solutions to those affected by the group.

The president further clarified that he will continue trying to enlist regional Arab states to join the coalition and will not send American troops into combat scenarios on foreign soil, using only air forces for direct attacks.

Significant Christian populations have been affected by IS, many killed and others displaced. The Vatican has appealed to the United Nations for a response to the situation, inviting humanitarian solutions while also reminding them that force may permissible as a last resort. Other Christians echo the call of Phil Robertson, and still others, like the blogger Carl Medearis, look for alternatives to violence. Medearis, an expert on Middle Eastern culture asks, “What if we spent a billion dollars on creative ways of shaming ISIS – what might we come up with?”

Sources: Youtube.com, Carlmedearis.com