Angels & Demons: "Be Careful, these are men of God you're dealing with."

This is an interesting movie on many levels. Obviously, this is the heir apparent to the kingdom created by the fanfare surrounding the “Da Vinci Code” but it takes on a darker mantel and deals with more sinister issues than its cinematic predecessor. Fundamentally, the movie and the book deal with a “war” (to borrow the term from them both) between the Church and the Secularization, or if you choose to take a broader and perhaps more correct view, Religion versus Science. In this war, two age old adversaries combat each other, and just before the final blow is issued or has a chance to be issued, the tide turns and this war is shown to be a shadow war- a ploy designed to achieve particular aims and goals at the expense of a great many all in the name of ideology.

What is perhaps most important in both the book and the movie is not this battle, it is an underlying defense of Religion, albeit delivered by the architect of the “battle” around which the film and book are set. While this defense will, in my writing, form the main theme of the book and the movie, there is a side theme that does reinforce this main theme that is a historical lesson, one that we must not forget and be mindful of in our critiques and damning of Religion. Let us explore these themes just briefly.

The main theme develops in both book and film at the same instant: when the Camerlengo breaks the Conclave to request that the College of Cardinals evacuates and resumes Conclave later or elsewhere. To plead his point, Camerlengo delivers a magnificent oration highlighting the danger, but also the need for the Church to be open and upfront. While this is nothing new as many members of the Clergy have called for this for decades and even centuries (I imagine), the part that is stunning and is most important is that to support his argument for openness, Camerlengo describes the reason that this conflict between Religion and Science exists: caution and concern. Here is the most important part of the argument and the defense of the Church/Religion (from this point on, I will simply use “Church” to refer to matters religious, and the use of capital Church is intended as this refers directly to the Roman Catholic Church, a bastion of backwardness and ignorance according to some). Camerlengo states that the reason that the Church has tried to slow down or retard scientific development is that it (the Church) is trying to be a voice of caution and concern and maturity in a world fascinated by the newest scientific advances, be it medicine, astronomy, or physics. The Church has tried to curb enthusiasm in scientific progress not because of a desire to keep people in ignorance, but rather to force maturity and understanding of the scientific breakthrough (what ever it may be) as each new advancement and breakthrough can be looked at as unlocking a new secret of the puzzle that was created by God.

Isn’t this an interesting perspective? The Church wanting to slow down advancement not because of ill-will but rather wanting to be a voice of maturity and reason that calls for greater understanding and maturation of the scientific process is an interesting take, one that is very much uncommon. I think that a better way to understand this perspective is to cast it in the light of a family scene- one that has played itself out thousands of times across thousands of cultures:

The young child is exploring the world and comes across a fuzzy little caterpillar. Being curious, the child tries to pick up the caterpillar only to discover, much to the dismay of the child and to the grandfather rushing to the child’s side, that the caterpillar has self defense spines that sting painfully. As the child drops the offending caterpillar and is about to squash it in retribution, the grandfather whisks the child into his arms to calm the child and save the caterpillar from imminent destruction. Once the child’s tears have been wiped away and the crying stopped, the grandfather explains to the child the reason the caterpillar stung them and why it has those spines. As a part of this lesson, the grandfather also tells the child about consequences and how, even though the child was harmed by the caterpillar, that does not justify the death of the caterpillar. Because of this lesson in nature and in understanding consequences and justice, the child now has a different perspective on the caterpillar and a different understanding of simple and universal truths about consequences, and responsibility, and even accountability- granted the child can not even formulate the concepts into words at this point, but the understanding is there.

In the scene above, the child can be seen as being science and the grandfather can be seen as the Church. Each with their own unique viewpoints, interests, and motives, but yet each serving a vital and important role: exploration and discovery tempered by understanding, compassion, patience, and love. This, in my interpretation, is the message that Dan Brown is trying to get across in his book, either intentionally or otherwise. I would imagine that “otherwise” would be more correct, given that one of the best ways to make money is to produce a work that holds a religious institution in the role of either protagonist or antagonist, or even in this case, victim. This is a discourse for another day and time.

The side supporting theme that is in the movie and in the book in some places is the fact that religion is not perfect because man is involved. The new Camerlengo at the end of the movie says this himself, and this is a very important point. True faith is as close to perfect as we can understand because that is something that is between created and its Creator and does not (or should not) be subject to the demands of the outside world. While educated and enlightened faith is important, the simple kernel is what matters most. Christ told his apostles that if they only had faith the size of a mustard seed, they could move mountains. In that passage from the Bible, Christ does not say you must be educated, or some world renowned scholar, you just need to have faith. Faith, un-questioning belief and trust in the Divine, is a difficult and tenuous subject to tackle, and one that I do not feel qualified to take on, but I do understand that I do not have the faith to move mountains because I doubt and I question, but I am trying.

Why is this a supporting argument or notion? Simple, because as flawed and imperfect as the Church is, it is flawed and imperfect because it is of man. The message that it seeks to convey daily is as close to the kernels of spiritual truth if not the same kernels that were handed down from Christ to his disciples to us, and is therefore highly relevant and of the greatest importance to us. Further, in a world fascinated with the rapid advances of science and technology, the Church has found itself more and more in the role of the grandfather mentioned earlier- a voice of maturity and responsibility to a world that might not be ready for the consequences that its technological and scientific explorations and advances might unleash. Rather than trying to retard scientific growth, the Church is simply trying to beseech those making the advances to slow down, to wait a minute, and to think about the potential consequences of their actions. Such an interesting and valuable concept that we must take to heart in this world of immediate gratification and desire only for the immediate pleasure or happiness with little regard for the long-term can be found in a work of fiction. That in itself is an interesting paradox: truth shrouded by fiction, but it is a valid and necessary element.

Another important aspect that we must keep in mind when discussing religion can be found in a line delivered by the assassin in the movie. When addressing Prof. Langdon (Tom Hanks), the assassin says:

‘I had many opportunities to kill you tonight, but you were un-armed, also I was not asked to kill you. Should you follow me, I will kill you. Be careful, these are men of God you are dealing with.’

This is an interesting line. An assassin, a professional murderer advising someone to be careful because they are dealing with men of God, and yet he is (by our understanding) the most dangerous person in the room and in Vatican City and has recently racked up an impressive kill total including clergy and police. In his words, we find an interesting message that must be viewed within the context of history for its meaning to be understood. His words, ‘be careful, these are men of God you are dealing with’, should be seen as an admonition that just because someone wears the robes of a clergyman, does not mean that he is above the most vial and inhumane acts. Using historical context to understand his words and bring the allusion into focus, we find ourselves mindful that for centuries war, torture, murder, and other heinous acts have been committed in the name of God or by those with blind and bloodthirsty ambition who have decreed “God wills it” to justify their acts. For centuries, people have died in the name of God, in many cases a cleric or man of God called for it or justified its occurrence. This ties back into what the new Camerlengo said when he stated that religion is flawed because man is involved.

To paraphrase Chesterton, it’s not that religion has been tried and found wanting, its that it has not been tried at all. The tenets of a majority of the worlds religions is peace, yet all too often these religions go to war in a misguided effort to just either please the divine or out of fear or ignorance of the opposing religious viewpoint. Men of God are just as capable of sin as a street thug or assassin. This side theme or lesson should be taken to heart: that man is not perfect and that religion is not perfect or free of sin because man is involved. All we should simply ask is the teachers of the religion strive to live by the precepts and the teachings of the true tenets of the religion: peace, love, charity, compassion.

Together, these themes or ideas that replay themselves time and again throughout the movie are themes that we should take to heart. These themes, while more than likely not intended to stand alone or even be that prominent, are to me. I know that Dan Brown is writing to earn a living and has a good protagonist/victim in the Catholic Church, but he does touch on a couple of key themes in this book, themes that fortunately were transferred to the film.

This movie, while not as well done as the book is interesting and thought provoking. These have been my thoughts. Perhaps this will serve as a spring board for further thought and exploration in time.

The life defining choice, and the decision.

A few weeks ago, I posted a note on Facebook informing the world of my acceptance to graduate study at Iowa State University for my Ph.D. Today, I write another note, this time on my blog, informing the world that I have been recommended for admission to the Doctor of Education Program in Higher Education Administration at Auburn University.

Now, I have to choose. I have to weigh the pros and the cons of each, the opportunity costs, time investment, all in an effort to determine and shape the future. This is Frost’s fork in the road. The well travelled path versus the less travelled path. The implications of my choice will shape my career and my life for decades to come. While both lead to employment and the realization of some dreams, they also impact the fulfillment of other dreams. An easy or lighthearted choice this is not.
Imagine a tree if you will. We’ll call this tree ISU as this is an easy way to describe this choice and it makes for a nice little visual:

If this is the tree that is chosen, there are many implications that go with the choice. The first of these implications is cost. Cost is an issue, both financial and mental. Financially speaking, the ISU tree, while solid in the roots, is weak the further you get away from it. What cannot be painted into the picture is a fundamental truth of Academia: brand new Ph.D.s (if fortunate enough to be hired on somewhere) are saddled with teaching exorbitant numbers of classes so that more senior Ph.D.s can focus on research or graduate classes. This leads to an interesting phenomenon where departments deny tenure to young faculty because there has been no real progress made towards tenure (interestingly enough, because the young faculty are doing all the teaching for the senior faculty) and thus, the young Ph.D. is now looking for a job because their contract will not be renewed. This is a gross generalization, but it is a documented occurrence.

Why is tenure so important, you ask? Simple: on average (in 2008 money) non-tenured faculty make, on average, $70,055 compared with tenured faculty salary averages of $95,199 (those averages are actually less than that if you are female). Tenure, in the academic world is a wonderful element when those being awarded tenure are deserving of it and do not abuse it. It is also a great thing when those awarding tenure award it to the deserving, not because of inter-office politics or university applied pressure, but because through their teaching and research efforts they consistently prove that they are a rare gem.

Let’s get back to trees. As we can also see, the opportunities for branching out with this tree are slightly limited which in actuality means that career choices are slightly limited. Costs that must also be considered are obvious, but significant: re-location, wardrobe, opportunity, vehicle maintenance, and out-of-state fees for a minimum of 1 year. These are all significant expenses, and the only one that really should be explained is the vehicle maintenance cost. While this will be a standard, it will increase slightly due to higher diesel prices in the northern Midwest, plus the addition of road salt to the equation as road salt is a nice corrosive agent. Another important element to consider is the state of the economy and the impact that it has had on funding for graduate students. Were I a smarter man and in something deemed “necessary” such as engineering, funding would not be a problem. As I am in history, there is only funding guaranteed for fall semester. Spring semester of 2010 is not guaranteed, nor is it guaranteed should there be enough in the budget to fund graduate students. This tree is, while desirable, does not lend itself to long-term opportunities or survival.

Let’s consider another tree. We’ll call this one AU, keeping with the theme.

As can be seen by this tree, it has a good root system, and wonderful opportunities for growth and development, personally and professionally. This tree also has greater opportunity gain rather than cost. Further, in-state fees are less, and there are no relocation costs, and the cost of diesel fuel is lower in the Southeast than Northern Midwest. Also, while there is no chance of funding with this particular tree, I am gainfully employed by an employer who is willing to keep me on and be flexible around my academic schedule.

The time cost with this tree as well as the ISU tree are approximately the same, so there isn’t much of a difference there in terms of time from beginning to ending of curriculum. This is a major plus in that we’ll be keeping things roughly on par in terms of time.

The opportunity cost of tree one (ISU) versus tree two(AU) is absolutely amazing. The potential benefits that come with tree two are incredible, financially speaking. Should I choose tree one, I would essentially be writing a check for an averaged minimum of $94,000 per year that I would not have the opportunity to earn. While this sounds like I am only going after the money, let us also consider that Ph.D.s in History, because we are in the Liberal Arts and are not deemed as being that “critical” don’t have that high of a starting salary to begin with. This will make re-paying student loans a longer and more time and money consuming affair. The potential yield of tree two, while not immediate, will make loan reparations easier and more manageable as time progresses.

If the decision was based solely on love of field and of topic, this would be an easy choice to make. Alas, there comes a time when one must realize that while love of a subject or dream is important, a pragmatic approach to life must also be taken, even if that means putting off accomplishing the dream or goal so that a solid living can be earned and the opportunity for employment is realized, thus enabling later pursuit of that goal or dream.

I very much want to go to Iowa State. The opportunities re-discovery and re-defining of self are priceless, and the opportunity to work with outstanding scholars is a rare find. I must also look at the larger picture and see that I need to have options and opportunity. These grant freedom and security. They also grant the opportunity to have a reasonable pay-check that can be put towards retirement and long-term care.

So, after careful thought and analysis, and no small measure of soul-searching, I have declined the offer of graduate study at Iowa State and will remain here at Auburn to pursue an Ed.D.

Notes:

Salary averages based on information from but not limited to: College and University Professional Association of Human Resources 2005 Survey; American Association of University Professors 2007 Survey.

Concept Trees: Theoretically, it is possible to click onthe trees to enlarge them for easier viewing. These are realistic hypotheticals used in evaluation and decision making.

Welcome

Hail and well met!
This is the beginning of a new phase of life for me. Soon, huge decisions will be made, life defining choices will be made, and I will embark upon a new ocean.
Stick around, the next few months should be very interesting.