It's aQuestion ofFaith: Discourses of Fundamentalism ... - JAC Online

More documents

Recommendations

Info

338]AC critiquingor comparingthe "theories"offeredabout genderrolesinthe essayswith the narrative examplein the poem. Preparedfor the possibilitythat somestudents might not know the biblical story of Lot and therefore have no context for understandingthe poem, I gavethem abriefplot summarybeforehandandreferred them to the biblicalcitation. What I wasnot preparedfor, however,wasthe hostile reception that the poem receivedby studentswho werethe most familiarwith the story. Luke's responsepaper wasrepresentativeofthis group. Presentedhere inits entirety,Luke'spaperfocusessolelyonthepoem,separatefromtheothertwo assigned essays: Responseto "Lot's Wife" "On the breast of the hill, shechoosesto be human, and turns, in farewell-and never regretsthe sacrifice.U This poem by Kristine Batey (sic)is really kind of naive when consideredby an Old Testamentstandpoint. How canshesaythat Lot'swife"neverregets(sic)the sacrifice"?The woman wasturned into apillarofsalt. Allthrough the poem,the author makesitsound like God issomealoofcharaeterthatcanpronouncejudgement(sic)onsomeoneatanytime. God, inthe Old Testament,wasafriendto Lot's familyandto anyone who calledon hisname. It wasGod who sentthetwo angelsto warnLot andhisfamilyaboutthe impendingjudgement on SodomandGomorrah. It wasnot somealoofGod that remainedquietwhilehisdisciple waskilled. The poem takes an event that happened thousands of years ago and tries to give it twentieth century logicandunderstanding.Backinthistime,there wasno placeforawifeto questionherhusbandorto disobeyhimin anyway. Thispoemtakesastandpointthat isvery sympatheticto Lot's wife. The factstillremainsthat shewaswarned not to look backafter fleeingthe judgementof God. Shelooked backandpaid the consequencefor her action. I personallydonot believethat shelookedbackout ofcuriosityto seethejudgementofSodom andGomorrah. Shedidnot obeythecommandofGod givenbythe angelsandpaidthe cost. Thispoem istrying to look attheeventthrough the eyesofatwentieth century woman not a woman who livedthousands ofyearsago. Furthermore Lot's wifehad been livingwith him for years and wasfamiliarwith the workings ofGod. Shemay havedoneallthe thingsthe poemdescribes,shemayhavesaidall the goodbyes.but they aretrivialthings when comparedto the plansofGod. In the closing linesofthe poem,the author makesLot'swife'sactionsoutto be"good."Obviouslythey were not goodbecausethey went againstwhat God hadtold them to dowhichwasnot look back. Yau cannot justifylookingbackandthereforebreakingGod's commandby nostalgia. Clearly this poem triggered apowerful responseinLuke. While I had envisioned studentswouldcritiquethepoem,I thoughttheywoulddosoonthebasisoftheother two essaysandthediscussionswehadthroughout theterm. ButLuke'sreadingmakes no mention of other texts or discussionsabout socially-constructedgenderroles. Instead, Luke relieson his own authority asaBiblicalscholar to read-and resist reading-the poem in waysthat I had not envisioned. Upon first readingLuke's response,I immediately wasstruck by the way he differentiatesbetweenthe pastandthe present. AsMarty andAppleby note, oneof the tenets of fundamentalist discourseisareachingback to the past, either realor imagined,oforiginalconditionsandselectingor retrievingfundamentaltruths from that pastinorder to thwart the changingpresent (3).One ofLuke's maincriticisms isthat the story ofLot's wifeisbeingread"through the eyesof atwentieth century
Discoursesof Fundementalism 339 woman not a woman who lived thousands of years ago." This emphasis on distinguishing between past/present isalsoreflected in the phrases "Old Testament stand point, ""twentieth century logicand understanding," and "Back in this time." Arguing that the tale can only be understood within the context it waswritten, Luke callsany other reading naive. Luke's resistance to arevisionist reading of this biblical story isunderstandable given how he views the authority of biblical text asthe literal and unmediated word of God, an authority of meaning that must remain stable and unified across time to ensure that all readers can accessthe same moral creeds. Rather than retrieving this moral from the story ofLot, Luke argues,the poem (and,by implication, the narrator) "takes a standpoint that isvery sympathetic to Lot's wife." It isthis standpoint-a situated reading from a "modern" perspective-that Luke cannot accept. Using phrases that reflectLuke's attempt to convey an "objective" perspective-"the fact still remains" and "Obviously"-Luke suggests that those who "impose" twentieth century logicarenaive. His statement "You cannot justify looking back and therefore breaking God's command by nostalgia" refersnot only to this specificpoem but also to Luke's overall philosophy ofhow biblicaltexts canbe read. Readingtextsthrough a revisionist lens is dangerous, Luke suggests, becausesuch readings are used to "justify" actions that conflict with God's will. If the Bible's textual authority is destabilized, God's authority isequally open to interpretation-and revision. Given Luke's perspectiveon the authority ofmeaning within biblicaltext, it's not surprising that he does not mention the other two articles that were assignedon this day. What I first attributed to possible laziness on his part (perhaps he hadn't read them or just didn't feel like taking the time to write about them) could also be attributed to the fact that, for him, the Bible is the sole source of authority for interpreting allother texts. Incorporating ideasfrom the articlesto interpret the poem would have led him to the same downfall asthe narrator of the poem, atwentieth century "stand point" that might have justified readings contradictory to God's intentions. Luke might have used biblical authority to critique the "secular" essays, but he chose instead to focus on the objectionable reading that the narrator offers. Although Luke 0 bviously does take an interpretive stance to the poem, he views himself ascorrecting and informing the narrator's naive and nostalgic perspective rather than adopting an interpretive position himself As Boone suggests,fundamentalists do not view texts asoffering multiple readings-there are correct or incorrect readings of atext and those with moral authority have the ability to discern which reading istrue (20). Luke's resistance to the author's revisionist reading might be subtly directed to me aswell. AsKincheloe notes, students with fundamentalist assumptions often view teachers asthe enemy, secularhumanists who attempt to destroy faith by undermining religious authority. Kincheloe saysthat ministers and parents often warn students to remain ever vigilant in fending off such attacks to their religious values (50).Luke's concluding statement, "You can not justify looking back," could be interpreted asa reminder to himself or asawarning to me-the one who has selected the poem to begin with-that he will not succumb to what he views asthe heretical reading of a
Page 1 and 2: It's a Question of Faith: Discourse
Page 3 and 4: Discoursesof Fundementalism 335 the
Page 5: Discoursesof Fundementalism 337 bib
Page 9 and 10: Discoursesof Fundementalism 341 Chr
Page 11 and 12: Discoursesof Fundementalism 343 ver
Page 13 and 14: Discoursesof Fundementalism 345 for
Page 15 and 16: Discoursesof Fundementalism 347 Luk
Page 17 and 18: Discoursesof Fundementalism 349 exa
Page 19 and 20: Discoursesof Fundementalism 351 mea
Page 21: Discoursesof Fundementalism 353 Ber

It's aQuestion ofFaith: Discourses of Fundamentalism ... - JAC Online

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?