Impressing or Making Impressions September 12, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Ethics, Random, School.add a comment
I have been giving some thought lately to the idea of “making a good impression” on people. Being at a new school with new faculty (to me) and being a part of a new church (for us) and meeting people there has met I have been doing a lot of “impression forming” on people–and they on me. Which causes the question: “Is there a difference between seeking to make a good impression on people and on impressing people?” We think it is important to make a good impression on people, because we never get a second chance to make a first impression. However, we also seem to say that you should not try to impress people–that this is a bad thing to do–but should be yourself. Since the same word is at the root of both words, though, are they that different? Is my attempt to make a good impression actually an attempt to impress people, by fitting myself into their values and expectations? This might be on the scholarly level by talking about certain things and not talking about certain things, by doing extra work or having the right answers. Is my goal in making this impression so that they might help me in my work and get me through the program? Is that right? On the social level, is this in being funny and engaging as a person, not saying awkward things, talking about the things that they value or are interested in, and not doing anything rude? In seeking to make good impressions, do I cease to be me and become more in line with the desires of the other person? Am I a chameleon–both in the academic field and also in the social world? (I have often wondered this) Does this matter? Are people who “be themselves” the ones who make bad impressions because they are conforming to their own ideas about themselves and the world as opposed to yours? Do I evaluate others this same way or value their honesty, integrity, and self-awareness? Basically, do I form my impressions of someone on whether they impress me? Or am I making too much of this?
Oh the thoughts of a scholar!
Morals July 18, 2008
Posted by bdennert in Ethics, Spirituality.add a comment
I have been slowly working through Plantigna’s Not the Way It is Supposed to Be over the past month or so. It is a book about sin…not how to sin, but reflections on sin. As I read it and hear how he talks about our reticence to discuss sin, even as preachers, I realized that this is true in myself. I am hesistant at times to talk about right and wrong because I do not want to devolve into a moralist or one who simply says, “We need to stop doing these things.” I do not want to fall into the traps of behaviorialism or legalism. However, I believe in right and wrong. I know my sense of right and wrong might be messed up at times, but I believe in it and I need to preach it–because it ties back to right and wrong.
When I was a chaplain, I had an interesting experience that made me reflect. A nurse told a man, “You need to stop smoking and drinking so much.” She says this (maybe without tract) and I wonder what would happen if, as a chaplain, a spiritual guide, I would say this. She says it because of the physical effects, these things are bad for you, but I would point beyond just physical (though the physical is spiritual as well). When we tell people to empty themselves or anger, to stop sleeping around, to not get drunk in the party scene, to stay married as opposed to get divorced, etc. they do not view it as the same as a medical professional saying something. What is the difference? I am looking at the spiritual side of things. It is interesting that people will say, “Well, it feels good to me so it must be okay?” as if their spirits are not mistaken, when they could make the same argument about physical things (it makes me feel better, etc. but studies show it will kill you!). How should I phrase these? Should I just make deontological statements–this is right and wrong? Should I make consequenalist arguments? Perhaps at times, though one can always debate the consequence (I feel good now), as well as it is wrong for more than consequences. There are spiritual consequences to actions that are often overlooked. All I know is that I need to reclaim morality and sin, calling it what it truly is.
Eyes Opened June 24, 2008
Posted by bdennert in Ethics, Justice, Ministry.add a comment
I came back from my trip with Sacred Road Ministries (www.sacredroadministries.com), a PCA church planting ministry on the Yakama reservation in Washington state. While I had tried to prepare for this trip over the past few months (and prepare others), I knew that there was no way that I could totally be prepared. I was shocked by what I learned and saw, in terms of the way that we have treated our first neighbors in past and in the present. As the missionary (Chris Granberry) pointed out, Native Americans do not like it when we say that “We know that they HAD a hard time” because it is still current. The struggles on the reservation are real…injustices are real. You cannot help but go and see that things are not the way that they are supposed to be. I have never considered the plight and how we should seek to “put the wrongs to right” before this trip on reservations. What can we do to help thing? How can we put this on the agenda for the government; we talk about all sorts of social programs (whether you like them or not) but what about our first neighbors? Is the per capita check of $25 every other month really a gift or a slap in the face? Is the land that we gave them (9% of their original land, in a region that is a desert…which was strategic) compassion? How can we fulfill the call to be like Christ, to be like God, and have concern for our neighbors, to do justice and love mercy? I am pondering….may we all ponder together.
Not Yet….. June 9, 2008
Posted by bdennert in Ethics, Spirituality.add a comment
I have been thinking a lot lately about the biblical narrative of creation, fall, redemption, restoration. I have been thinking about how important that is to keep in mind. As I have been doing a lot of studying in ethics lately, I have seen some of the implications for life. I couple I want to type to help me process…
1. The Fact of the Fall-this is the basis for which we make the claim that what IS is not necessarily what OUGHT BE. We see brokenness all across the world. We cannot argue from the way that something is currently and then accept it, we must wonder if this is the way that it is supposed to be. Furthermore, it reminds us that just because we CAN do something does that mean that we SHOULD because our hearts are tainted by the Fall.
2. The Fact of Restoration (in the Future)–this is also tied to redemption, but it is a constantly reminder that we will NOT have our best life NOW. We (and I include myself) think that life should be perfect, that there is an obligation that we can do what we want to do, that we are not limited in this world. However, our doctrine shows us that this is not true. There will be many longings in our hearts until the day that we die; life will not be easy. There is hope in redemption, we will see injustices fixed, but not all of them. Life will not be fair on earth and we should not expect it to be. We have glimmers of hope (that is what the doctrine of redemption teaches us), but we will not have the life that we totally want here and now. If we did, why would we even think about the eternal state.
There are WAY more implications for living than these, but I think that these have been on the forefront of my mind lately, so I processed them and shared them with whoever might read this 
Bioethics Ignorance November 27, 2006
Posted by bdennert in Ethics.add a comment
Since my ethics class only vaguely touched on the issue of stem cell research (there has to be some irony in that the hottest button issue in culture is omitted in a Christian Ethics class), I did a little outside reading from a book the professor recommended (God and the Embryo). First of all, it reminded me how uninformed I am about many different issues in the world, ones to which the church needs to speak. I have had my head in the ivory tower and in the meeting room too much that I have become irrelevant to our society as a whole. Secondly, I realized how complicated it is to come to a “Christian” position on a certain issue. One might critique this book because it has mainline and Jews, rather than evangelicals, but I am grateful for seeing parts of the other side of the debate. Is an embryo in vitro the same as a person? There are different ways (theologically) to answer that question, and there are many uncertainities in the debate. Let’s not pretend that it is a simple issue; I am still wrestling through portions of the debate. In all of this, though, I was confronted with the lack of adequate health care (getting people basic need) in our culture as well as my personal lack of compassion of others. Regardless of where I fall in terms of experimental embyro issuage, I must remember to have these as priorities for all people.
