Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Lester The Angry Christian On Emotions 1-3

    Uploaded by

    David Danao Franco Mendez
    11 views24 pages

    Original Title

    Lester The Angry Christian on Emotions 1-3

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    11 views24 pages

    Lester The Angry Christian On Emotions 1-3

    Uploaded by

    David Danao Franco Mendez

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 24
    THE ANGRY CHRISTIAN A Theology for Care and Counseling Andrew D. Lester Westminster John Knox Press LOUISVILLE * LONDON, a eee Het 8 The Significance of Emotion is a human emotion, Like sadness, fear, and joy, itis experienced as a ‘We cannot begin to develop a pastoral theology of anger without first considering this larger reality: Humans are emotional beings. Fmations, therefore, are a basic category for any study of the human condition. In this chapter, we look at emotion from the viewpoint of philosophy, the social sci- ‘ences, and the neurosciences. An important consideration is the wider issue of hhow Western culture and the Christian tradition think about all emotion, because these p snecesseriy influence beliefs about any specific emo- tion such as ange: WHAT IS EMOTION? ‘Most of us know immediately when we feel an emotion, but philosophers and psychologists argue over a precise definition of the term. Mose definitions of ‘emotion are similar to Aristotle's that emotions are “states of feeling—passions : which one’ mind or consciousness is affected, moved, or stirred up.” Dictionaries describe the same phenomenon with phrases such as “an agitation o disturbance of mind” and “excited mental state.” Everyone agrees that emotions are certain kinds of mental states, but disagree about howr they may be different from other mental states. Most definitions and descriptions refer to the bodily sensations that accom pany emotions, giving them the sense of “feelings”? Faak Panksepp, a neuro- scientist, writes that emotion occurs “when powerful waves of affect overwhelm neater 20 ‘Thinking about Fimotion our sense of ourselves in the warld."> Emotions, he notes, are rarely expected, often catch us off guard, and threaten to move us to action that may or may sot be appropriate, Observers from various disciplines agree with Aristotle that ‘emotion includes being “stied up” in both mind and body, resulting in strong ‘physical and mental motivation toward action. ‘This connection between emotion and acti tandings of emotion. Emotions push us towar is central to most under- ¢ particular behavioral ‘upon. The action sparked by emotion may be helpful, such as wher tems evidently developed as part of ancestors, as we will diseuss later. "THE PHILOSOPHICAL CASE AGAINST EMOTIONS ture, including C! lato and Aristotle, accepted that emotions had a positive ics, in contrast, tool passionate contemplation, apatbeia or apathy.”* Tn modern Western culeure, ‘Emotion has been relegated to the sideline $0) emphasis on thinking ("I think, therefor ition became the favored traits of the human speci reaction or response—anger toward striking out, fear toward hiding, joy toward dancing, sadness toward crying—whether or not the impulse is acted gives us strength to resist an assault, But somesimes the immediate physical ‘ppropriate, such as when anger leads to mn” aspect of emotion is a primary ed in humans. Primitive brain sys- survival functions of our evolutionary losophical debate among Mediterranean philosophers about jcantly influenced Western col- ‘emotions must stay under the control of reason if they ‘were to serve -dained purposes rather than becoming destructive. Vir~ uous persons, they argued, use their wll to force emotion to function under more negative stance, arguing that the virmous life and “that life has meaning only inso- ‘ovr emotions” and respond to life with “detachment, dis- jlosophers have tended toward the Stoic id treated reduction Greek philosophers, these characteristics were identified in the modem era as the most defining mark of humans, distinguishing us from the animal world.é Furthermore, rationalists could deal with the seemingly obvious dimensions of chought processes easly, while emotions were a complex phenomena that made definitive study dificult? Indeed, one of the defining features of moder- ‘The Significance of Emotion n nity is the dualism between emotion and reason, with reason beit more respected.S aaa tvecd ; set the tone for such negas suggested that emotions are “an illness of mind.” saetaphos Kane not only patbologied emotion bu suggested that enovions are intcapsychic events, primarily occurring within a person's prt fino rather an aes of muracion withthe coven are more, Kant conceptualized emotions as if they ha of their own: instinc- tive entities that represent our animmal nature and exist spat fem interaction with the extemal world. Many philosophers discounted emotions, writes philosopher Martha Nussbaum, by identifying them as “blind animal reac- tions, lke or identical with bodily feclings, chat are in their nature unmixed with thought, undiscriminating, and impervious to reasoning.”!° Only in the last few decades, as discussed below, has it been demonstrated that emotions makes one more or less biind."!! This i c critique of irrationality bas a long his- tary in pilosopty From ahisterical prpective, notes picwopher Robert Unger, concern about emotion h to reason [and] a risk to soci assumption that judgments made by emotions are based on false premise about lf situations that homans cat conto. Curren research, howere, as Idiseus below, demonstrates that it von rom i at itis impossible to separate emotions from cognitive processes i. i ‘The connection of emotion with irrationality also infh mn with irrationality also influenced the fi psychology. Sigmand Freud pe arating them from the reasoning, sense-making , sense-malking Ego. In psychoanalytic theory the rational Ego is always in danger of being overwhelmed a‘ passions of che Id . ace In the twentieth century, emotion was basicaly i ‘orenteth century, emotion was basically ignored, receiving alzuost so anention in Wester philosophy. Philosopher Rabere Solomon has er 1g that it leaves the discipline with what he poetically 1 heart.”"* Hle summarizes the modern view of emot we been generally agreed to be primitive and ‘natura, ional, lacking in judgment and purpose or reason, without seruples, and sometimes shockingly shore of taste."'5 ‘The perception that ee eee n ‘Thinking bout Emotion even mental illness, and are a threat to our ruses philosophers to believe they should be cated, in order to free humans to fonction tightly controlled, or even rane scl scenes hae ben sigh beer in aendng to emotions, During the mveaieth century, howeres these disepines wore! hard to be recognized as academic fields of say by using hardcor sen methods. Because emotions are nororiousy dificult wo quanti che seudy of motions was marginlized in academic research, Furthermore, tvensicui= ced in predicting and controlling the behav- Understanding thinking and resoning rocesses seemed much mor to that task than emotions, which seem ree es dena ren thon couagenn enough 0 Saye tions could rarely agree on a definition of the subject, or on accept 5.6 genres psychiatrists, and parscularly peychosherapsts vere more lilly to pay close ateation to emotions. Though agrecing oe trnodons were important, they often pronounced eonfliting views on the subject. Given that they were most frequently working with people who Bat tment dsurbuness, pychotherapsts spent more time on the pathology Grotion than on the significance of emotion for healthy hursan . “THE POSTMODERN RECOVERY OF EMOTION i important role in bein In the twentieth century, existentialism played an important role in Bingo wa of cognition, i alist ‘motion bacsinto philosophical discourse. Existent 2, Jean aol Sartre, and Rollo May resisted the ao “aculties” of che sel—# lace in the total pe includes intellect, emotional, and oe ‘The Significance of Emotion 7 “Byvery feeling has its value and significance. A life without passion would be 2 doll wasteland of neutrality, cut off and isolated from the richnéss of life itselE"Y Particularly from existentialist and phenomenological perspectives, ‘emotions are now acknowledged as 2 central aspect of our humanity, enliven- ing and energizing all of life: “Emotions are constituted by forces of great power that vitalize and revitalize the live,” says philosopher of reli- gion James Gilman.2" Without emotions, life would be fat, lived out in a per~ petual state of robotic mumbness. The idea chat emotions are left-over ingredients from our biological h «ty, has been forcefully refuted. Solomon sums up nicely the positive view postmodemists about this crucial aspect of human existence: “Emotions a intelligent, cultivated, conceptually rich engagements with the world, not mere reactions or instincts.”2! ‘The difference between perceptions of emotionality in modernist and post- modernist perspectives can be illustrated by the difference between the origi- nal Star Tek series and Star Trek: The Next Generation. Theologiat: Stanley Grenz has pointed ont that Spock was perceived asa hero in the original Sear ‘Trek because of his use of reason. Spock’s rationality was uncompromised by ‘emotion, thereby making him “a transcendent human idea!” for modernist. He reflected the desire of the modernist to reach a level of ‘pure reason” that would allow 2 totally rational existence undistarbed by’ postmodern The Next Generation, however, Spock is replaced by Data, an android who is a “more fully realized version of the rational thinker than Spock.” Unlike Spock, however, Data thinks of himself as incomplete because he does not have such human qualities as emotion. His curiosity aboue, even desire for, the human capacity for emotion reflects the postmodern conviction that rationality by itself is not adequate for being fully buman.22 Emotions and Rationality A major postmodernist tenet is that our culture's worship of reason as the only viable way of knowing truth and informing behavior is much t00 narrow. Social scientists from various disciplines are challenging this “modernist” belief that reason is the only crustworthy guide to understanding life. In his book Emotional Intelligence, neuroscientist Daniel Goleman suramarizes this critique: from experience, when it comes to shaping our decisions and our actions, feeling counts every bit es much—and often moze—than 4 ‘Thinking about Emotion thought. We have gone too far in emphasizing the value and import of che purely rational* Farthermore, postmodern thinkers in both psychology and. philosophy argue dt developing research in the neurosciences makes separating emotion from reason impossible. Rather than being only 2 raw of; that emotions are irrational is under antack in many disciplines. gues that “emotions are themselves rational.” Current research, he says, demonstrates that emotions Ceptza and intlligent form” and are characterized by their own logic Bar- fier, Jean Paul Sartre wrote that “emotion isa way of apprehending the world” and argued that emotion isa basie contest for “reading” licting the proper response from humans to their wor seeing and engaging the 27 Bmotions are an integral 1 in tandem, which also argues againse the belief chatemotion are irrational. Was con eas hated Mother Teresa and her followers toa life of sacrifice? Or does their choice of vocation depend on 2 commitment that results from emotional responses to poverty and llness and their love of sions, which is easy to illustrate with rmind and heare were in agreement that the Bill of Rights, bue untenable from a Christin et ‘ye are emotionally bonded to what our thinking process bas identified not then the emotions provide the energy for sions that support the cognitive conclusions. ros women and African Americans to the active, and sometimes dangerous, pursuit of cognitively held beliefs about equality is fled by the emotional imensity that grows from commitment to-tis belief Emotions, Truth, and Reality Postmodernism challenges the modernist assumption that truth exists in objective realities and is, therefore, known only by reason. Social scientist ‘The Significance of Emotion 25 Pauline Marie Rosenau, for example, says, “reason and rationality ae incon sisvent with post-modern confidence in emotion.” She points out other aspects cof human capability often overlooked by the scientific method, such as “el- ing, msospenion snd inten, iaginaon, fava and patel ostmorlern thinkers argue that most “cruchs” are subjective and can be Inown through these oer boman aribes inching th emotions “Besmores;” smumsies Gres “ook beyond reson wnonrional ayy of noing, conferring bxghtened ts on the exotons and into.” ostmodernism promotes emotion to stand alongsi Pormodemim promotes emosos to stad longs cogaton atthe center “Many people now argue that emotions offer th le a ; weir own perception of real- ity, which may be different from the reality that reason perceives. This differ- ence in perspective oceus because emotional responses ae inclusive of other “information” than presents itself to reason. A team of theologians and scien- tas wots, “Our emotional reactions inform ws (nny dns unescon) of things we know but may not be able o formulate in rational discourse or conscious mental images. Our tacit knowledge is communicated t6 awareness via our emotional respons to our reasoning process. They demon: arated from the “data” revealed by our emotior uation, then our reasoning process can easily mi relationship, or a threat to an important value more qui nitive interpretations. fc a ceraal ‘Our emotions are more in touch with our exi with our existential 1 deeper meanings of rel eee empathize, so “we can thank emotion for our shared humanit man. Prom the existentialist perspective, says theologian aaa ee 26 “Thinking about Emotion insights.” Ontological anxiety in the face of fnitude, for example, often reveals and accepts reality in a way that our reason finds difficult. Emotion and the Self avi fessor of philosophy and cognitive science, argues that eae a tenet dn ease orgning errr for ndesanding te st Uecuse “emotions. combine in complex pattems dat conrbute sstnan tally to the makeup of one’ character and personalit extnore, lifestyles and elif sytemsem serves funtion forthe self only ifthey are “to a high degree, emotionally charged.”*” Emotions “highly influential processes in oar personal lives that affe ity of our other mental states but also our sense of bodily [An existentialist perspective, which views the human condition as a psy- chosomatie unity, sees emotion as that aspect of self which unites us to the physical and socal world around us. Feelings, existentialists point out, are our fost unique way of directly participating in the world. The language of exis- tentalists, such as Paul Ricoeur’ use of atmospheric, describe bow emotion is the process by which we “breathe in the world .. . and are merged into the world a the environmentin which we live and move and have our being. rious disciplines has increased understandit chological condition daar vey rational proces en world an see pans emosons Paynes Creme Tor, Mico! Bagh, and ‘James Parker argue persuasively chat many psychiatric and medical disorders axe a result of “affective disregulation."® Such 2 condition in milder form results in personality styles called sociopathic and in extreme form ean be psy- chopathie! Study of this disorder raises our awareness about the important function of affect in healthy humans. ‘Without emotional attachments to people and ideas, humans find ic difi- fies the connection: ssom alone cannot answer the question, whatabout our impas~ iyeco ments rotons) 3s in life? Thus T sug thatemotions are the meaning of se we fel, chat life has a me < dispassionate life of pure reason, is the meaningful 4 ‘The Significance of Emation 2 Unger writes persuasively about the significance of the “passions” in our entire quest for a full hurzan life, pointing out the importance of emotions for ‘establishing our identity, comprehending our existential experience, and moti- NEUROSCIENCE AND EMOTION Neurological research is providing a biological basis for understanding the physiological components of emotion, helping us construct more informed psychological hypotheses.%° Technological developments have fostered a sig nificant increase in neurological research, particularly of the brain, using non- invasive procedu major advances in neuroanatomy, neurochemistry, and neurophysidlogy make it possible to farther understand the intricacies of how the brain works. Brain imaging technologies, for example, allow researchers to observe how brain cells are functioning while a research subject is experiencing emotions such as anger and fear. Given that psychologists have focused historically on intrapsychic phe- nomena, perceived to occur only within the mind, they often define emotions inpsychological terms that neglecrthe biological for mental processes. Current neurological research, however, makes fe untenable to portray emo- ychological phenomena, as if they exist separate from our sarch demonstrates that complex neurological processes when we experience an emotion. Neurological research understandings of what some call Pa tifiable activities of the brain related to the the emotions, regard~ less of point of view or type of re their short list of primary emotions. Other emotion: strong support for being primary systems include love, surprise, disgust, and shame.** Each primaty emotion has a variety of close relatives, and some the- ‘orists prefer to speak of emotional “families” rather than single emotions. Not surprisingly, anger and its close associate fear both make everybody's shortlist of basic emotions.” Researchers used to think that all emotions, from a neurological perspec- tive, were processed in the same brain but they now know that differ- ent emotions occur within diverse neurological systems. Scientific debate ‘about the level of difference in the biological “signature” of each emotion is joy, and sorrow on 28 Thinking about Emotion sill in proces, as research demonstrates the dicaly of disingushing the sreorological particularity of specific emotions. Some neuroscientiss believe jotions has @.ch ‘as neuroscience research progresses, even as similarities are also identi~ Jude universal process, sas grief, fear, and anger al biological markers. “How does the body decide to mobilize in response to a particular} scion? The normal manner in which we intespret and respond to Our jn the following manner. Our senses, particularly stimuli in the environment. We see, hear, touch, 7 ” Our senses send this raw data to the thalamus, the tart ofthe brain that seems to he cesponsibe forthe fist stage of collating and Enganizing daca fom che senses, ‘Then the thalamus forwards his informed Gheoagh two neurological systems—the amygdalsfimbic eytem and the aereey/prefrontal lobe system-specically dedicated to processing and vy this information, and inating an appropriate pbysclosics) s system is the most jeveloped much logical history, and referred to as the moamunatian by f consciousness and cognitive abi point, neurologist know of atleast evo pathways by which information from ee censes is almost simaltaneoasly processed by the brain in order eo asper~ tain whether the elf needs to become aroused in response to some occurrent sake environment For ease of understanding, we will consider these path= sways separately. ‘The Amygdala and Emotion ‘ati recently, neuroscents thought tha all emosional responses involved neorotransinission through the neocort indicates that nevrological pathways directly conn nygdala and limbic system, Through these pathways information is ane, waned from our senses 10 the more primitive amyadala and limbic system bypassing the neocortexs? Fridence now exists that mechanisms for seeing areoring, and probably the other senses, are directly wired to che amygdala tac perhaps other par ofthe limbic system, which explains how cenit sights Hae eee vioger immediate responses. The “crnotional brain,” as this sys- “The Significance of Emotion 29 ‘tem is sometimes called, can fonction without immedia om comer, or “thinking brain.” ead ‘The amygdala is interconnected with other parts of the brain, such as the ich are involved in the process of memory: recording, stor- ing, and recalling events from the past. Whi .en receiving sensory information the amygdala rus a quick crosecheck within is “files” to see ifthe messes associated with past events that call for 2 mobilization of the body, an arousal response of some type. : ‘Many of an individual’ specific alternative neural pathways may have devel- action before we are conscionsly aware of what Iappeaed Flashes by war veterass offer an example of when cent stimalus, such as the sound of an airplane fl ee aizplane flying low to the ground, can spark ‘The Neocortex and Emotion the sensory data from the thalarnus. Humans have developed th red the capacity for complex emotions that are usu- ally rooted in psychosocial needs for connectic forth. These emotions developed along with to the regions of the brain that proces activate physiological respor interpreting, and responding to environmental even nected to psychosocial events. The neocortex enables us to encounters with the environment, make decisions, and tie beh: and tie behavior to needs sod desta gp beyond physical survival. This part ofthe brain produces gamed responses related to our values, meanings, worldview, and personal Contrary to earlier assumptions, the neocortex cannot by itself generate 30 “Thinking ebout Emotion emotionality. When stimulated by electrodes it does not produce emotional e subcortical structures of the brain the most primitive parts ofthe brain, ‘mammalian sections and the limbie sys- commonly called the reptilian tem. Thus the neocortex, while the primary instigator of most of our emo- tion, is dependent on the “lower,” more primitive, structures of the brain (Geveloped earlier in our biological to produce the physiological arousal so basic to the experience of “fecling So when the neocortex sorts through an thalamos and discovers something in the environment that calls for a specific response, that information goes to the amygdala. The amygdsle, whether responding to an immediate interpretation of information from the thalaxnus ‘orto a warning meseage sent from the neocortex, organizes the limabic system and sends an instantancous message throughout the body’s neurological sys- tem that triggers the sympathetic branch of the autonomic nervous system. ‘The body responds in a manner specific to the interpretation of the neocor- ‘ex, and this leads to particular emotions such as grief, compassion, erotic arousal, fear, and anger. “The neocortex is the part of the brain involved in the cognitive assessment ofexterior events that trigger emotions, but in reciprocal fashion the neocor- texis also significantly influenced by emotion. Emotions cue the neocortex to orgunize the storage of memories that become the basis for ater interprets tions of the environment that should trigger an emotional response. ‘The Evolution of Emotions Bvolutionary biologists and neuroscientists are examining the function of emotions in human development and developing theories about the natural history of emotions.%” Most agree tha process to motivate our easliest a ancestors had to be physiologically prepared for the hard work of obtaining the necessary ingredients sain life: food, water, shelter, safety, social interaction, and procreati “rage cireit,” for example, to which we retum in chapter 4, was necessary to mobilize the body into fighting mode in order to survive the attack of a predator or the dangers ofnatural phenomena“ ypment of emo- sumans would not have had the energizing pat ilosophers and behavioral scientists believe ‘on for our behaviors and therefore our emotions. Others argue ‘tive emotions can be shown to focus on “other-interest,” that ‘The Significance of Emotion 31 4s, punting the other person’ needs asa priority without thought td ones own. the emotions which lead to moral beh conperaton fires, and even love mull serve the good ofboth as that even “good” emotions are part of our capac- Emotion and Reason. Tnoted earlier the tendency of philosophy to -y of philosophy to separate em rea realy, fous, emoson snd reason are both petal poxenes ae nie physiology ofthe brain. Thinking and feeling both occur through neurologi- cal processes. Neuroscientists have now established the links between coge:. tion and emotion in the opertion of the neurcogial ye. Thongh motion ha fs roots in our phyiologialsstoms, neuroscience research muonststes that a iggering events necessary o provoke a feng _ Neurological research makes that emotional response irriginates with a perception of the environm ‘iggers a neurological response. As desetad earlier, experiencing a particular emotion begins with an environ- mental event that our brain appraises in a way that calls for activation of a par- he brain sends chemical messages, that provide the “feeling” compo lephone sags in the mide of the 1 interpretation that somethin; bed hashappened. The body then, simmediaely actratedint stat ete ‘anxiety as you answer the phone. If your mather isin the coromary care ‘ut ata hospital then your Scerpretation Hedy to focus on her conlton, and the possibility that she has taken a turn for the worse or even died. Ifthe night, the neocortex will most rcs the neocortex inept her death a a major os Al ner penton fers come from soctiaon process mbt pasand pres ‘An emotion does not oceur in the bra inst ° brain as an instinet activated by a bio- logical clock. A person’ cognitive perception ofthe environment, whether an ermal mental image, is what actualy trigge is what actually triggers the phys- ical pon ‘This interpretation can take place at both consciot E and on levels, Because of a epeienes, the amyalfimbi ater fore we have had time to cognitively process our response. ‘Though either emotion or cognition may toon a any: parealas ‘moment, they are always linked. In chapter 6 I discuss constructionist narra- tive concepts that help us understand the interaction between emotion and environment 32 ‘Thinking about Emocion "The Body/Mind Connection ‘Though some psychologists have attempted to separate the body and the rind, most recognize the pervasive interaction between them. Emotionality in each person is affected by the constant interaction between perception and ‘memory that influences ongoing interpretations of our environment. Each person's distince physiology and life experience cause the experience and i que for chat person. repared to respond with different degrees er oise, light and movement. Neurological diferenes led us o nung ehild’s personality with phrases like “lid back,” “gets upset casi,” “constantly active,” “never stops,” and so forth. We often use the word “temperament” to describe both the cumulative personality pattern that results from this biological diversity and the ncurological disposition or x ‘ness t0 experience certain families of emotions and moods. Like the fx grammed to experience § ‘uniqueness of our temperaments, each person also experi emotion a litde differently than anyone else. Secon¢ specific external events that have occurred during 2 perso yped that person's neurological system. Farther- more, a given emotion usvally leads to an entire cadre of associated subjec- tive perspectives that create a person's unique moods, which are more muted and last longer than specific feelings. An individual’s emotionality is mutually ‘and interactively informed by both original biological dis ing life experience, particularly in response to trauma. Pa accidents and injuries, frightening occurrences such nificantlosses such as divorce of parents or the death of a family men horrific experiences such as rape or incest all affect the shape of our 1 logical systems. In short, the neurological pathways in our brain literally change as we interact wit particularly traumatic ones, thet challenge us. ‘Throughout life, therefore, our brain responds uniquely to events that “remind” the brain of previous experience, as we discuss furcher lobe “The Significance of Emotion 3 10 think of as the “hard-wiring” of our neurological system. Neuroscientists have known for several decades that cognition is normally connected with the activation of emotions, but recent research establishes is also true: emotional experience, in eyclic farther cognitive perceptions. As Panksepp not informs and influences Emotional circuits achieve their profound influence over the behavior and mental activity of an organism through the widespread effects on the rest ofthe nervous system. Emotive circuits change sensory, per~ ‘eptual, 1d cognitive processing, and initiate a host of physiological tare naturally synchronized with the aroused behavioral tendencies characteristic of emotional experience. Emotions “mold and are molded by experience throughout the life spaa." The idea that thought and feeling are either separate functions or processes of lffcult to defend in light of current research. Cognition and emo- king and feeling, are mutually inveractive, and both develop in the gical research: “Why do certain external events, and not others, tig- 1e neurological system?” and “Why do some external events trigger an. emotional response in one person and not the other?” tative theories, to which we turn in chapter 6, help us answer this question. Weare programmed to experience anger in the face of threat, as T explore in chapter 5, but our individual and cultural stories, inckuding our faith narra- tives, shape both what we discern as threatening and how we express our anger. ‘NEUROSCIENCE AND PASTORAL THEOLOGY We live in atime of significant advances in the field of neurological research, particularly ofthe brain. Developments in neuroscience and neuropsychology are changing our understanding of many human processes. This neurological ink has been pivotal in the postmodern renewal of interest in the emotions, because such research reveals significant data about the biological faccors that contribute to the experience of emotionality. These disciplines are jon partners with pastoral theology as we continuously The final answers about emotion are not yet known, Davidson reminds us of the current limitations of neuroscience when he says: oo 34 “Thinking about Emotion semust be emphasized... that the circuit instantiating emotion in the ea el conplexandignonesa number of neelatedstuens "Therefore, bypotheses about the set of struccares that participate in ‘he production of erpotion must necessarily be speculative ‘can assume that in a few ic ways in which our neu- Given the constant advances in nevroscien years we will understand even more about the: F .g” affects our experience of connected to—and demon- seate contimsty with—a theology of emotion. Theological reflection on ‘otions from a pastoral theological perspective, however, nmust include wha a mi cology. So, in the next chapter I examine i S ‘and theology to see what the Christian eraditon has to sey about Serpe Then in chapter 3, Teombine these ideas with the new insigh's of pasenodern philosophy and the exciting developments in neuroscie Chology, and other social sciences to inform my theological reflection emotion The Christian ‘Tradition and Emotion Neuroscience provides @ physiological basis for the current interest among philosophers and social scientists to reclaim the central place of emotion in mn emotion seems antithetical to the common perception that the Christian tradition frowns on emotion, at least the so-called negative emotions—such as anger. Because my goal in this fist part of the book is to establish basic theological concepss about emotion, its necessary to explore this popular idea from the perspective of the Christian tradition. What is the E jcologians James tional practices and offer a helpful overview when views of emotion within the tradition of Christian a theological picture of emotions 2s dangerous to the life demonic. The response to these problematic emotions isto master them. This tradition, as the Whiteheads describe it, takes the stance that “emotions are like wild animals that must be domesticated and controlled.” The second view recognizes the volatility and dang accepts thern as “potential partners in our search for ting off emotions, or denying their existence, this positive potential partners that can connect us with che Creator. This perspective on 36 ‘Thinking shout Emotion spiviesality rejects dualism and aocepts thet body and soul, fsb and spirit are amity. “We shall see examples of both views when we explore how Christian thinkers have wrestled with this universal marker of human existence, First, however, I explore what can be learned from Seriprure that informs a theol- ogy of emotion. EMOTION AND THE BIBLE cripeure is Glled with stories thar include emotional responses to life situa eae eee Cain’ jealousy to David's lust and from Peter's fear to ‘Many’ grief. The entire scope of human emotion is on display in its pages Scripeare assomes that emotion is simply part of the human. condition, so T now focus on issues subject to debate over the centuries: emotion in the life of Jesus and in the natare of God. Jesus and Emotion. close look at the Gospels provides a picture ofa fally human Jesus, a real pesson who was ested and tempted in every way that we are (Heb, 415)-The Gospel writers are clear that Jesus experienced and expressed the fll range of human emotion: sorrow as he overlooked the city of Jerusalem (Luke 1941), fearinthe Garden (Matt. 2637-44), griefat che tomb of Lazarus John 11:35), jin wleoming the clren (Mark. 1016) dsapointnen i the denial of 1 (Luke 22:61), and, of particular interest, anger on nu casions— Mora fall discus). 7 en Jesus went into Gethsemane to pray 1 Sa ee ing confintaion withthe suoritis and the poeibity ibeing arrested, convicted, and executed. As you would expect of any per Son, the possibility of death, and the presumed falure of is mission, cre red stress for Jesus, Fear seems to be present in his request of God, “Remove this cap from me” (Mark 14:36). His anxiety is clearly described by she Gospel writers. Matthew 26:37 says he was “grieved and agitated r '33 notes that he was “distressed and agitated.” To show how com- ve early church was with Jesus’ emotions, a seribal addition to the ke 22:44 describes him in such “anguish” thet “his sweat became like great drops of blood flag dows on the god hia iptive phrases purposefully portray Jesus going through an intens descriptive phrases purposefully portray Jost G08 mous in declaring snple, he seemed to be eee eee { l ‘The Christian Tradition and Emodon 37 shat Jesus was fully buman and took partin every aspect of finice life, includ ing feeling anguish and anxiety in the face of potential loss, life-threatening circumstances. Not everyone in the Christian tradition has been convinced of Jesus’ humanity. The Docetic controversy in the carly church reflected the church's theological seruggie with the dualism of Hellenistic philosophy that drew clear lines between the flesh and the spirit, and emotion and reason. ‘The Docetics adopted the dualistic belief that spirit is good and material things, including the body, are evil. Because Jesus was the Son of God, one expres- sion of the deity, the Docetics felt the need to protect his essence as a spiri- tual entity: They could not conceive of the Divine participating in our flesh-and-blood existence and argued, therefore, that Jesus didn’t really have a human body like ours, but only appeared to have a body.6 a number of conclusions about the nature of Jesus’ “humat that Jesus did not experience any real human emotions, certainly ative ones such as anger. ‘Though Doceticism fell into disfavor in the early church, many of is ideas fileered into various Christian traditions. Even today, a common assumption is that people who claim to be transformed into brothers and sisters of Christ cought not experience negative emotions, particularly anger. Despite the eare- fal attempts of church councils and denominational creeds to balance the di- vinity and the humanity of Jesus, Christian teaching often emphasizes the divinity of Jesus (the Son of God) and discounts the humanness of Jesus (the articularly when it comes to emotionality. Some people -pt that the “humanness” of the carpenter from Nazareth included having emotional reactions to persons and events. Buceven people whose Christology accepts that Jesus was fully human may assume that Jesus transcended emotion. Believers who grow up in a comma- nity of faith that is suspicious of emotion may view Jesus through that prede- termined lens and imagine that he was too “good,” or 100 “perfect,” to have emotions. Accepting Jesus as a model for what being a mature Christian means, their assumption may be that those who are Christ-like have overcome any tendencies toward emotionality. “The Docetic tradition would agree that Jesus “loves,” of course, but this love is a nice, comforting, thoughtful character trait, rather empty of actual passion, not the love portrayed in the Gospels. The love Jesus expressed was filled with compassion. In English the word “compassion” means “to feel with,” referring to our visceral identification with another person's pain and heartache. New Testament scholar Marcus Borg points out that the word “compassion” was used often by the Gospel writers to describe Jesus.” The Greek word splangcbnizomai, which is translated by the phrase “moved with sring, and Sunn EEERENERENENEEnERENEEEPEOEE TE er eee eee eee eee eee eet 38 ‘Thinking about Emotion i exclusively to sion,” is used only twelve times in the Gospels and refers Sane Jeu or God. The word -splangebma identifies that part of my 7 5 ‘womb in women, where we refer ‘guss” the bowels in men and the wom in women, w! ve feel most intensely che physiological symptoms of exnosion* This Gresk ‘Word, as pastoral theologiens Donald McNeill, Douglas Morrison, and Henri Nouwen point out: “Jesus? compassion was a deep, powerful feeling, not superficial sympathy. God and Emotion ‘Tp establish that Jesus experienced emotion is one thing, but what about God? “While we do not know definitively the mystery of God, the Christian tradi- asly those experiences with God recorded in Scripture, which do portray a God who felt emotion. Furthermore, Christians have often reported that the God they encounter in religious experience 0 esses emotion.’ sar dhe Hebrew Scripcres, te Israelites clearly experienced God as at ing God. Ar the begining of the fod narative the Lord looks on human 7 was “grieved” “heart” (Gen. 6:6). In this same story we find the ae s “sorry” to have created humankind (Gen. ‘and self-proclaimed as “a jealous God” Exod. God is “merciful and gracious, slow to anger rage? Or merely the projections of human expe- ing anthropomorphic lengu: “Genet onto God Certainly when considering events in Hebrew Sexipeare that include violence against innocent people, which is attributed to God's com- tzand (a problem I engage in chapter 9), projection is often proposed ss an answer, But even ifwe concur with this interpretation of those specific events, that conclusion does not automatically suggest that all emotions perceived in ions. i fiers important insight into God's emotional ‘The Christian Tradition and Fmotion 39 nature. When Christology claims that in some mysterious way Jesus was not only flly human, but also fully divine, then another significant theological truth sunfolds. The Christian tradition developed the concept of Trinity to explain the xelationship between the Creator God of the Israelites, Jesus of Nabareth sent mentary on this idea of Trinity has provided numerous perspectives for under- standing this relationship, each one recognizing in some manner that Jesus is part of the Godhead. This approach was troublesome to some of Jesus’ temporaries: “For this reason the Jews were secking all the more to because he was not only breaking the sabbath, but was Father, thereby making himself equal to God” (John 5: understanding of Trinity, if Jesus, one participant in the Trinity, experiences ‘canotion, then logically the other two participants also experience emotion. 4s quoted as saying, “The Father and I are one” (John 10:30). described as compassionate in the Gospels) {ngs about God. One suecinet but powerful saying of Jesus sums up this truth: “Be compassionate as God is compassionate” (Luke 6:36)." “For Jesus,” Borg says, “compassion was the central quality of God and the central moral qual- ity ofa life centered in God.” To flly appreciate the theology of Jesus’ stare- ment, we must further examine this word “compassion.” As noted earlier, the Hebrew and Aramaic word translated as “compassion” means “womb.” The ancient Hebrews associated compassion with the lower abdomen, rather than the head, where thinking takes place. This word, rachaming, then, refers to the i feelings we find deep within our bodies associated with people who 10 us." Jesus’ claim that God is compassionate, therefore, is a foun ological idea: God feels intensely! God is visceral, affective, and emotional about what happens in Some people argue i 1 God feels anger, perceived to be compassionate, they would argue, is qualitatively different than challenging them to be angry, but show in chapter 12 that anger and compassion are more closely connected than this viewpoint realizes, aonemotional. Next, we explore brieliy how the Christian tradition has ‘wrestled with the human experience of emotions. ne eee eee 40 “Thinking about Emotion HISTORICAL FACTORS AFFECTING "THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION “Through the centuries, Christian theologians, like hei contemporasies is x, have been ambivalent about emotion. ‘The theological, philo- rand cultural reasons for this ambivalence are not easy to discern. ‘pointing all of the factors that influenced the early church’ devele oping atitude toward emotion is diff i ‘tor was the belief of classical Greek reason was more spiritual than emotion, jo understanding the Divine more certainly than emotion. The sec ‘eas the need of Christian apologists to defend God as transcendent, moral in contrast to the popular gods in the Greco-Roman wor losophy, and later of Stoicism, that because reason could guide a person sed as jealousy, revel entiation between flesh and spirit adopted into the belief and “The Influence of Mediterranean Philosophies A basic concern in the ancient world was the apparent tension, even “The most famous of classical Greek philosophers, P ences aside, both recognized the defeating bebas by reason was in danger of becoming ‘They argued, therefore, that emotion she direction of reason, which, along with sruished pars of the soul. This tension between reason and emotion ‘onicated in the metaphor that compares emotions to the spirited horses that pulled chariots and reason to the charioteer. When the charioteer (reason) is x command, the horses (emotions) function effectively and accomplish their purpose, butif che charioteer (reason) Jose control, the horses emotions) pull Jncontrary directions and chaos results. Emotions must be bridled and guided by the frm hand of reason. Stoic philosophy, which flourished a centary later in Greece and then in Rome, viewed emotions less positively. The famous Stoic, Seneca («4 B.C- 65 ‘believed that the mind is vulnerable to the passions and loses ae. echen emotions are felt and expressed.!7 Stoic doctrine ety in which passions were una we would call “dysfunetion — ‘The Christian ‘Tradition and Emotion 41 a aria should not affect a person's inner life; only reason should. ee jotions were a response to something external that a person eithi feed or dsr, they revealed ef in exon * Furthermore Stoic beled that emosions were che enemy of the pra principle and, thee , that reason should not only contro! emotions bus suppress them. As Ver sm. The virtuous [person] “The clsscal Greek view, particulary th i - pareularly the more radical Stoic approach, was ever mead Gear nares oe aero cme ei oton: Many erly Crises admized the Sts forthe strong emotions, particularly fear and anger. Early monastic svchorsfequenti wed Stoic eoncepisto conplemencandreinfones thes ow theological positions, and these ideas are found throughout early Christian ason, they agreed, was to contro the passions and suppress the appeti example—the forerunners ofthe seven deadly sins—often referred to parallels . Christian lists of vices and virvaes, for between Stoic thought and specific biblical passages. A negative result of this gradual adoption of the Stoic distaste for emo- ey interfered with the process of seeking unity with Christian Apologetics: Defending God's Holiness Barly Christian apologists had to demonstrate that th Jndeo-Christian faith was different from calture. How could they argue that the to claim that God did not even possess the capacity for humanlike passions, so obviously God couldn't express them destructively. This Christian defense of ‘God was shaped by the perception both ofthe Greeks an the emotions were one of the main motivational cul sinful behaviors If God doesn't have any emotions, tian theologians thus began to argue that God was impassive and immutable— unmoved by emotion either toward or from the world. Augustine (354-430), one of the most influential theologians in the early angued that despite biblical passages to the contrary, God and angels feel any emotion. He attributed the use of emotive words to describe 2 ‘Thinking about Emotion to which these emotions move us. 50 .d writings significantly influenced the monastic tradition, also are ind argued on the basis of “the ineffable, incomprehensi- logy has been lon; eu God as on of volition, no motion: “When [emotions] are attributed to God or the angels... they refer simply to acts of will which produce indeed the save sort of result as does action prompted by ‘emotion, but are not in fact accompanied by emotion.”"* Some theologians continued to shape theology ‘an immutable God who was unmoved by ple, who studi various psalms mmoved,” and that “nothing could Aquinas Flesh/Spirit Dualism say ofthe early charch theologians belonged to, or were significantly infiu- me is he monastic madi, which made a disinetion Senses thing of ‘nd things of the spirit. The monastics strove to achieve purity 0 pee aed wth God, and be perfected in their bir to love like Grice Their doaistic theology held thatthe Gesh is corrupt and antithetical tosptiuaig, and interferes with one ability to unite with God. Flesh, there- fon imusr be completely overcome to attain salvation. Spirit, in contrast, i pure the arena in which we meet God. Because the monastcs recognized the limitations of both reason and larger than the “head?-versus-“he difference between actions resulting f ee Jnyscal reactions thac accompany emotion make it easy (0 strong physical reactions that accompany emotion 3 sndemand hes emotions becane assigned tothe lsh; ce body rather than the bar served np emtions. Fuh ons sed that ‘svally served selfish purposes, another re re et esa ‘anean philosophers who elevated reason ino the realm ofthe pil anda tude toward the divine, believed chat reason, lke emodions, was past of Fai ee sould also lead a person away from God. Both emotion and reason, this flesh-versus- guage that popularly ‘emotions and those resulting from ‘The Christian Tradition and Emotion B therfore, were part of the flesh and had to be conquered in order to “put on. the mind of Christ.” “The monastic path toward being Christ-like included poverty, which one could achieve through renunciation of material possessions, which one could attain by subduing reason and emotion—e selves with whips, starving isolating themselves fo ing to conquer the flesh and the desires of the body for food (the prot siutrony) and sex (che problem with lust). Their positive purpose in subduing the body, including the emotions, was to allow freedom for their spirit to find God. A WORD FROM THE THEOLOGIANS Before the twentieth century, Christian theologians carefully and thoughtfully diseussed the emotions, though usually within the context of their thinking about the “passions” and the “affections.” As a result of their own life- changing religious experience, they rarely separated theological reflection from their concern about spiritual life and morality. Theological thinking was their atempt not only to understand God, but also to reflect on how to be faithful Christian disciples. They felt it necessary, therefore, to analyze and understand emotion because they recognized experientially and existentially focus of constant concern for those struggling to sw Gods desire. So they soughr, within the context of their times, to reconcile the cultural perceptions of emotion and Christian beliefin a way that allowed them to most faithfully live what they perceived to be “the life of Charist.””7 Like the classieal Greek philosophers, early theologians gave prominence to the human ability to reason, but they did not separate cognitive fram emo- tional processes. Even as they considered reason superior to emotion, they acknowledged both of these basic components of consciousness. In other words, they were more followers of Plato and Aristotle than of Stoicism and normally resisted the complete negation of ‘They accepted emotions 1s part of what God had created and understood that emotions contributed to sbundant life, even though they had significant potential for harm. From the Reformers to the twentieth century, theologians wrestled with the reason- emotion dmamic. They had lent feelings about emotions and mm “Thinking about Emotion ‘warned abont the dangers they posed vo Christan living, bo in light of eit tnderstanding of fth and religions experience, cheologians sesepiet cme dons as an important aspect ofthe nunan condison, Consider no, 1 5 specives of seven prominent theologian from Augustin chrough Jonsthes wards; and chen a short summary and critique of twentieth-centary thea ‘ogy’ approach to emotions. St. Augustine (354-430) ike the Stoies, had a high regard for our ability to reason, although from them in bis belief that the ability to reason and to focas our he di : ae al been compromised because of original sn, Ia Augastine’s theology, emotions to lead us astray : : ¢ did not want to eliminate emotions, butto direct them ae 38 In The City of God, he Plato and Aristode and i : to subject the passions the sumn of Christian knowledge” directs us to subject ana de Cd ean help ws “moderate and bridle chem, and tar them Gighteons uses.” Augustine clearly acknowledged that emotions come from ‘God and have 2 potentially important role in dhe Christian life, Saint Macrina (327-379) i Basil, crina, the older sister of both Gregory of Nyssa and Saint Basi, Sr a eee gee part of Gos incentinal creation of buran fhe “desiring and spiced faculties” thacare “joined to the (oul but chey are not whar eonsiates the essence of the soul"? Interest Y of ereation asa process by which the sensuality necessary £0 fie implanted in pants and anions asd the, fats fn ation saga, into humans, who as the crown of creation were innbus ge emir of seamual appetites and ineligent taught Gregory hates "Temodons] er norbeen lore se,” butare necessary in order oo created for an evi emotions had bet ‘The Christian Tradition and Emotion 45 tions do not serve evil when reason is in control, but in fact they enable the -ccomplishment of virte: “when emotions govern the mind, man goes from the intellectual and the godlike to the irrational and the foolish, and he is ruined by the onrush of such affections.”™> ‘Thomas Aquinas (c. 1224-1274) Aquinas, who filled three volumes of his Suonma Theologiae with theological reflections on the emotions,¥ placed emotions in the context of physiology. He believed that emotions are a feature of existence that we share with the ani- mal kingdom, and he intentionally included the emotions in his chapters that describe characteristics common to both humans and animals, rather than his chaprers discussing uniquely human behavior. Though ultimately rooted in ‘the soul, emotions, Aquinas believed, are finitely based in our physical senses, and are part of the created order, an aspect of our finitude planned by the Creator. ‘Martin Luther (1483-1546) Luther was convinced that emotionality is based in God’ intentional creation and criticized the Stoies, and monks who adopted Stoic philosophy, negative perspectives about emotion. In a sermon after the death ol Luther challenged the idea of a “heathen” who considered ita “virtue not be affected by the death of a good and dear friend or to weep at his bi identified the Stoic idea that “we must entirely shed all human emotions” “affections,” he argued in another er contrary to nature, which was ereated by God to have such inclinations." Luther accepted emotion as a significant aspect of the human condition, necessary for the faith by which we are saved. He believed that emotion was tore important to the Christian life than reason, and in his commentary on Romans argued that faith is 2 feeting.*t While discussing Psalm 119, Luther ‘expressed a strong preference for emotion, saying that “faith needs affection, wimary, place of emotion i dynamic faith? a nn eee 6 ‘Thinking about Emotion John Calvin (1509-1564) alsin believed reason was the mark of human nature that distinguished ws ‘fom “irrational animals.” In fact, at several points he seems to identify ratio~ nality as the aspect of the self that represents the image of God.* In contrast fhe argued, emotions operated in exces, rebelled against God) resisted contro} by che intellect and seas sndangered the Sov fluenced by the era- experiences, Calvin , and described it as ‘dict and corruption” and “a stinking inf negative view of embodiment colored his view of the passions. Beesuse he felt that emotions, ‘phen unaccompanied by reason, were so dangerous, Calvin, like the classic ‘lilosophers and theologians before him, wanted emotions to be under rea- Fon’ strict control: “God bas given us reason and judgment to combat our passions"? ‘Nevertheless, Calvin attacked the Stoies mature persons should com “must have been devoid of sential humanity: “ at the son of God ‘yamune from human passions do not seriously acknowledge him as 2 Fle illustrated this 9 snack ighcand afflicted with anxiety.” Emations were foun i humanity and therefore, Calvin concluded, are appropriat rut with them dynamic faith and fod and suspected that reason, for all ofits good qualities, was not necessarily helpful to faith, In the Instzues, ‘indicated that “knowledge of God” is rooted in the heart, not the ‘“Pleart” for Calvin, when put beside the “mind,” refers clearly to “the d he actually reprimands those scholastics whe ple assent arising out of knowledge” and who “do not have regard 10 that firm and steadfast constancy of heart, which isthe chief part of fh" Discussing the dependence of faith om illumination by the i jumination mast not only be of the mind ich higher than human smething that we can- not grasp primarily with the i the fallness of faith, ‘we must use other aspects of 0 emotions. ‘The Christian Tradition and Emotion 47 Jobn Wesley (1703-1791) Ina sermon titled “What Is Man?” Wesley differenti belicved that within the body is rd pic judges, and reasons but is soul from body. He ” that not only thinks, capable “of love, hatred, joy, sorrow, desire, fear, rhich are commonly Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) | Amery Jonathan Edvard followed the Reformer ley ncading the inhis ical anthropology. Fawards wrote his famous Religious the importance of emtotion in religious experi- the “affections” were the primary motivator of ough sos ofthe exaggerated enthusiasm and saw ism of the Great Awakening, hea eslgily aginst people mho wed such exes 20 fem te lec . oto in eso esperene, White ery careful noo separate he alle- tens tanding” and “will,” the other two aspects of selfhood, s was adamant that emotion brings a foundational ingredi q fos eaperiene” He argued thatthe valid work of the Spirit n an nds soul is marked by warmth, joy, and zeal. Genuine religious experience i fect pers consists in holy afeedons.™® His thealogy definiely suppor the ca that emotions are part of Gods planned creation #* reli ‘Twentieth-Century Theologians Onec his’ ‘big surprises ofthis project was discovering that not many twentieth uty theologians, at least not the infiuential “giants,” chose to engage th subject of emotionality ina scholar, gotematicshion Lil in che workcof wer sclogians can informa dheology ofemodions such eso ieee a pastoral theology of anger. Some scholars seemed to oh serene Some scholars seemed to neglect the subject; oth- Tn Church Sut om a sovereign God revealed in Jesus Chit and he was challenging idea of subjective religious enperience as a substantial window into tras, the affections as a “point of contac*® and didnot believe that cheology should atend woof aod SinnE TT nnEEEEEEEENENEEEEEPEPPEOEPET rer ree te eee ee eee eee 48 ‘Thinking about Emotion assions as significant vehicles Jing God or discerning our relation- eth be bine In Bi intedly declared, “Psychological analysis cannot serve as a means to reveal in man not only bis sin and not only his protest against himself but beyond that his saving openness to che will of God." Barth, moreover, held that buman sinfulness significantly scarred our capacity as huraans to know ourselves. This approach added to his suspicion of emotions; “There is a way from Christology to anthropology: There is no ‘way from anthropology to Christology." : ‘Emil Branner, Barth’ contemporary, did not deal with em: elation and Reason: The Christian Doctrine of Faith and Knoasledge to elaborate on the tension becween these two aspects of conscion sued. Though focused on rev- ider the role of emotion in elation and “knowledge, Jnowing about God. In .pproach to anthropology is by the perception Je understands man as a whole, a5 an raising of ‘ou!’ or ‘spirit? and “body.” Though he addresses the i embodiment with postive atinudes, he does not include the emo- tons, passions, o ffecons —leving his readers with the dea cht these are inrclevant to understanding the human condition. 1m Reinhold cant wea, The Narre and Destin of Ma: A Cristian Interpretation, the concept of emotion is not inchuded in the index. “Though dealing briefly with ansity, and trying to develop a fall theological ol emotion does not receive categorical treatment as a significant spect ofthe human condition. Niebuhr also examines the narare of bursan "The Self andthe Dramas of Hiory, but the subject of emotions does aspect of the human equation.® His brother, ore of emotions, particularly in bis Experiential Rei- ‘explores the many meanings of affections and passionsand then fection, the corrective implied cf hithiu! man asa rational soul, nor even asa rational being whose {ignites in choosing or willing. Te is also an affectional being, ignore this is to commit a poychological rehuesonism.”” jan Paul Tillch, though not addressing emotion as a sehen discussing reason. In the frst ludes the role of emotion in reasoning at an emotional element is present in specific eaegory, do ‘volume of Systematic Theology, be ocesses. He claims, for exany nt ere rational act” and defends a positive role for emotions when he says, “the fact that in some cts] the emotional element s more decisive than in “The Christian Tradition and Emotion 49 others does not make them less ration: "1 Tillich even suggests the primacy of emotion, noting that “Emotion is the vehicle for receiving cognition” and claiming that “No union of subject and object is possible without emotional participation.” Specifically talking about revelation, Tillich declares that emotion and reason are equal partners, even though he also wars of “emo- tional distortions."?? ; Interestingly, volumes 2 and 3 of Systematic Theology, where Tillich also deals with anthropological themes, do not return to emotion except i ginal mannex. When he addresses existential concern existential existence implies a positive place for em¢ play a part in estrangement and evil”! Moreover, when he discus actualization” and the effect of “the spiritual presence” on our finitude, emo- tion is only tangentially an issue.” Although his The Courage to Be" made an influential contribution to theological anthropology, it does not spécifically ‘analyze emotionality. In dealing with anxiety in this work, including fear and guilt, Tillich does, however, bring attention to that which goes beyond the tational. He makes clear in this work that because we are finite crestures, a threat of “nonbeing””” permeates our exis- y itself in questions about our a ‘threats to our sense of meaning, and in the ambiguity and guile attempts to live a moral life. In the midst of this ubiquitous and natural anxi- as including emotionality, Tillich is inquiring In Hans King’s major work, On Being a Chistian, he does not deal with emo- tion as a theological category, though he does mention its importance to love: ‘When erasis depreciated, however, agape is overvalued and debuman- ized. ... Vitality, emotion, affectivity are forcibly excluded, leaving a Jove that is totally unattractive. When love is merely a decision of the will and not also venture of the heart, it lacks genuine humanity.”® Forthermore, when talking about our responsibility to become “fully human,” Kiing says, “Must we not strive for the best possible development of ‘Wolthart Pannenberg includes emoti addressing affections in a chapter in his Anthropology in Theological Perp. Pannenberg discusses the affective life in the context of the p tity and selfhood, and views feeli original familiarity," in which we are aware of our lives lationship. This awareness comes through to us in feelings, characterized by pleasure and displeasure. 50 “Thinking ebout Emotion Furthermore, this view of feeling as the backdrop of “original familiarity” ‘means that Pannenberg is writing about the affective life in a “comprehensive ‘sense”,® he believes that the “original familiarity” of fecling relates to the way in which we begin to differentiate ourselves from caregivers and from the world during the first few years of life. Feeling provides the “symbiotic exis- tential certainty” out of which this differentiation cccars. Another important anneaberg, “Every feelin “This wholeness provides through guile and the “judgment of con- ecience,"® in which we sense ourselves separated from this wholeness and authentic relationship. Alienation is what “keeps us imprisoued in noniden- ‘n;" the freeing of which can only come through commanity.”*” ‘Another current German theologian, Jirgen Moltmann, does not atvend systematically to theological anthropology in his work’ and, therefore, no ‘treatment of emotions as a significant part of human existence or in faith expe- rienoe is found in his writings. ‘After the rich exploration of emotion in the writers of the carly centuries of che Christian era, the lack of attention to emotion (with the exception of Tillich and Panneniberg) in the systematic writings of these theological giants is both surprising and frustrating. How can this absence be explained: ‘were males of European origins, mostly Germanic, reared in 2 € prized the intellect over the emotions, and perhaps they feared that to deal sith the emotions would make their work suspect. As in every period of his- tory, these theologians were influenced by philosophy, and from Deseartes through the middle of the twentieth century most Wester philosophers tended toward body/mind dualism.*® Perhaps these theologians are more ic than they imagined. Richard Niebuhr describ the modernist era emphasized objectivity, logic, and scientific method, as dis- cussed in chapter 1. Personal experience was not accepted as valid epistemo- logical data. They also wrote at a time when disciplines were carefully categorized and jealously guarded, so they may have felt inadequate to con sider emotions academically without specific training in the physical and social sciences. “Whatever the reasons, that these influential theologians did not deal with this central aspect of the human predicament is disappointing. We now intense passion for their ftith and work guided cheir lives, as can be seen in their sermons, but the omission of emotions from their systematic writings ‘The Christian Tradition and Emotion 31 conveys the idea that they discount the emotional if, implying that emotional responses are intellectually inferior or irrelevant. ‘Their failure to’ deal sys- ‘ematically with emotion in their doctrine of personhood leaves the impres- sion that they concur with the modernists’ decision to set emotion at the smargins of the intellectual life, perceiving that emotion interferes with the process of logical thinking. The silence, whether intended or that emotions are second-class citizens within the created order, to the life of faith. ‘The astute reader might wonder if this sample of theologians working in the twentieth century is too small to draw my conclusions. Certainly delimi- tation was necessary because of time and space constraints. Many moder theologians doubtlessly have given serious attention to emotion. I hope that theologians will do more thorough research, and if my findings are accurate, make a more scholarly attempt to understand the reasons—both theological and psychological—for this omission. In the later decades of the century, feminist and process theologians did accept emotionality as 2 significant aspect of the human condition. They became concerned with the absence of emotion from the work of contempo~ rary theology. Patricia Beattie Jung sums up my own experi reading the influential theologians ofthe twentieth century, and she gives a strong descrip- tion of che differences between feminist theology and these more dominant theologies: ‘The fall spectrum of feelings, including not only joy but also sorrow, anger, and fear, is seen as integral to hurman wholeness within feminist, theologies. In contrast, patriarchal theologies are highly suspicious of ‘emotionalis” in general and condemn the “negative” cmotions in particalar.... jos traditional theologies have denigrated the aflec- tions and advocated the Stoic ideal of emotional detachment. They commended the restraint, if not the elimination, of the distarbing power ofthe affections. ...‘The importance ofthe affections has been grossly underestimated within sach theologies.” Recovering the significance of emotion sidering morality and study the developmes ticularly necessary when con- strating the significance of emotion both for the pilgrimage of faith and for ethical choice. Ellen Charry, for example, challenges the perception that humans are basically cognitive min srants to “encourage theology to reclaim the emotions.”°* “If we are not per- ceptive in discerning oar feelings, or if we do not now what we feel,” says nnn oe ee 32 ‘Thinking about Emotion Beverly Wildung Harrison, “we cannot be effective moral agents." Sidney Callahan has written extensively on the importance of emotions for the devel- opment of conscience.® From 2 constructionist perspective (see chapter 6), she thoughtfully discusses the importance of both emotion and reason in the construction of moral values.% In summary, these theologians argue that a theslogical understanding of the emotions s essential to integrating Christian ‘ich and bebavior. ‘Process theologians are also a notable exception to the lack of astention given to emotions inthe twentieth century. Feelings a metaphysical category Jnpprocess thought. Feelings area central component of Altred North Whit jecause through feelings everything in the universe is rtinnally relating to everything else. An emotional tone under nships, and relationality itselfis an “ability both to affect and to F and that realty itself can be thought of as ‘an ocean of feeling.""S Process theologians make the point thet virtually everything we experience in lif i Charles Hartshorne, icehead’s work to help cers, the entire universe is composed of “entities that fee,” ‘process theologians, feeling plays an important role in ‘of God as completely relational and open to all emotions, Whitehead beld char God “is the lure for feeling, the eternal urge of desire."!% From this assertion, we 1 God is constantly touching or calling usin each “drop of experience,” which is best for us in et ‘Keeling writes that Elartshome believed God was “Perfect Being, [includ~ ing] al reality within himself. ] feels the feelings of every indi- ‘iadoal in the universe and. preserves forever the values inherent in these experiences.” ‘An understanding of “self” that dismisses the emotional life as a founda- ‘of personhood, 1 would argue, cannot produce a valid theologi- cology must realize that humans without emotion would ‘Constructing a theological anthropology with- life is like trying to understand an automobile emotion is a necessary ingredient in any theological consideration of tive for a theological anthropology. ‘The Christian Tradition and Emotion 33 ae Nanna before fom char 1a bref overview of wt philoso roscience, psychology, and the social sciences are discovering about emo- tion, and from this chapter a selective history ofthe theological struggle with untion in he Chitin ‘sion, With shi informacion in mind the el- lowing chapter discusses some theological perspectives on emotion. ‘Theological Reflections on Emotion ° of a theo ecause anger is an emotion, establishing some basie components a eer poant a cones or ny pinay pope cxsOSBOE Beanger A theological exploration of anger is dependent congrent wth aid helo persis on emotion in fepoal In his chapters L7eflec theologian the pew dscoveres and he Sis sbout eoton les rom the pilsopish, peel nurs i ret heslogical sources explored inthe previous wo chapters arenes cea ee ehoaghourthe ny of Wenem entre, not oniyinpilosophy and science, butals inzelgion.The- ology ith some ambivalence, has wsvlly been suspicious of emotions asi ing them a subversive role in human natare. me canssentlyarempted o dovoont, even suppress the emotional spect of esoatond including ee, cosy ex pasion, and ange 8 par of oe coer atare--ovr depravity and relegate them rote “demonic” side Bee Uimocons have stone dine or another been viewed as inimical tsps 1 grew up in a family that subscribed to Western cures exmphasis 0° tee threst © taonalig. Emsions were seen ‘ a3 and pat to be tightly controlled or yn. was adopted: h emotions were "nous be. The Chureh played into dat

    You might also like