Swarthmore Peripateo (Vol 2, Issue 2)

Peripateothe Swarthmore College Journal of Christian Discourse

Volume 2, Issue 2 | Spring 2014

by Erin Kast

continuum by George Abraham

mercy ofthe womb

Also in this issue:

FOLLOWING

by Kathryn WuCHRIST HOME

Featuring:

1 | Letter from the Editor

A Letter from the EditorDear Reader,

At Swarthmore, it is all too easy not to think about God. Heavy workloads and a few too

many outside commitments narrow our vision to the realities of the physical present. We have

all experienced these times. Days, even weeks, fly by, during which our thoughts are endlessly

consumed by the next pressing obligation. Thoughts of God at such times can easily get pushed

to the side.

It is especially when life is bearing down on us, however, that questions concerning God

ought to occupy the forefront of our minds. Whether or not we believe He exists, our stance

towards God is relevant in all things. It informs our most fundamental assumptions. It dictates

our conceptions of hope, love, truth, reason, morality, and purpose. Even if only subconsciously,

it shapes the things we do, along with why and how we do them.

We, therefore, ought to be actively thinking about God. To do otherwise, I suggest, would

involve an active dismissal of eternally relevant and immediately influential questions: Who

exactly is God? Does He truly exist? What can we know of His character? What role does He

play in our lives?

We, the staff of Peripateo, in grappling with these questions, have come to believe that God

has been made known to us through the historical man of Jesus Christ. Because of this, we

believe Jesus’ claims about himself. We believe that Jesus, eternal Son of God, became a man out

of purest love, giving himself up as a perfect sacrifice on our behalf. We believe that Jesus died,

bearing the full penalty of human sin, and rose, providing the hope of new life to all.

In this hope, we, the staff of Peripateo, have gathered together. Despite coming from a plural-

ity of Christian traditions, we are united by our shared conviction in the endless relevance of

Jesus Christ. It is out of this conviction that we endeavor to thoughtfully and creatively articu-

late Christian perspectives within the Swarthmore community.

We hope that you will join with us as we engage, in various ways, with different aspects of

God’s influence in our lives. In this issue, we explore everything from the sacrificial love be-

tween daughter and mother in “Following Christ Home”, to a Catholic perspective on capital-

ism in “Subsidairity, Solidarity, Social Teaching: A Catholic Perspective to Political Economy.” We

invite you to contemplate perspectives of listening in Nathan Scalise’s “Leaving Space to Listen,”

mercy in Erin Kast’s “Mercy of the Womb,” and happiness in Christina Keller’s “Christianity and

the Pursuit of Happiness.” We hope you will allow these ideas to both complicate and compli-

ment your own.

In keeping with the meaning of the Greek word “Peripateo,” take some time to “walk around

in” the words and images put forth on these pages. Then pause and rest; wait a moment, and

sit with these ideas. We, in this third issue of Peripateo, are excited to explore these ideas right

along with you.

Michael Superdock

Editor-in-Chief

Cover and inside cover photos by Sam Gutierrez ’15

Swarthmore Peripateo | 2

IN THIS ISSUE

Peripateothe Swarthmore College

Journal of Christian Discourse

Michael Superdock ’15Meghan Huang ’14

Kathryn Wu ’14Roy Walker ’16

Josh Gregory ’15Carlo Bruno ’17

Christina Keller ’14Nancy Yeon-Joo Kim ’14

Nate Lamb ’17Nathan Scalise ’16

Nicholas Zahorodny ’16Shirley Ramirez ’14

Heitor Santos ’17Josselyn Tufino ’14

Patrick Han ’16Sam Gutierrez ’15

Renan Meira ’17

Editor-in-ChiefExecutive EditorDesign ManagerBusiness ManagerPoetry EditorEditorEditorEditorEditorEditorEditorDesignDesignDesignBusinessPhotographyPhotography

Who We ArePeripateo seeks to reconcile faith and academia by engaging religious issues through an intellectual lens. We believe that the message of Jesus Christ has powerful implications for our daily lives and the world at large. We aim to fuse creativity and intellectualism in this journal to invite readers into a thoughtful discourse: what role does God play in our lives? What are the ways that a Christian perspective both compliments and complicates an academic one?

Contact us at [email protected]

7 Essays & Articles

23

Subsidiarity, Solidarity, and Social Teaching: A Catholic

Perspective to Political Economyby Nicholas Zahorodny

29

Mercy of the Wombby Erin Kast

Christianity and the Pursuit of Happiness

by Christina Keller

Smeared Mascara and Baby Steps

by Pauline Goodson

Leaving Space to Listenby Nathan Scalise

Reflections

Following Christ Homeby Kathryn Wu

15

3

33

19Making Peace with My Worst Enemy

by Zoë Wray

Editorial Staff

Continuumby George Abraham

5

Pendle Hillby Josh Gregory

28

9, 23, 32, 35

Art & Poetry

21Knobsby Sam Gutierrez

Haikuby Dorothy Kim

La Iglesia de San Pedroby Nancy Yeon-Joo Kim

17

I have two younger sisters. The middle sis-ter is calm, shies away from conflict, and usually doesn’t care much about something if it doesn’t concern her. The youngest is hot-headed, unpredictable, and self-centered. One minute, she’s angry and rude; the next (literally, the next minute), she’s sweet and funny. I often became upset with her, mainly because she showed no gratitude for our parents, who are so good to us and have done everything possible to provide us with the lives they’d always want-ed for us. The years before I knew God, I would retaliate whenever she angered me. Yelling, cursing, smearing her makeup on her door, threaten-ing to hit her…once, I had even started to choke her before real-izing what I was doing. This wasn’t one-sided, and a few times I was the one being attacked, with hands suddenly wrapped around my neck. For the most part, I wanted nothing to do with her, and I made sure she knew it.

Things continued like this well into my adolescence, until I started believing in a higher power. I had always believed in a single God — the God of Jesus — but that

was about the extent of my belief until high school, when a friend encouraged me to go to church with her. How-ever, there was no dramatic transformation in me. I de-liberately ignored what I considered to be the behavioral demands of God in favor of the pursuit of my own desires. But despite my unwillingness to completely commit to a Christian lifestyle, I began checking myself and asking if using fire against fire was really the best way to interact with my sister.

At first, I would physically shake with unexpressed anger and unshed tears trying to restrain myself from hurting her emotionally and physically. Alone in my room, I would cry, mad at God for hold-ing such high stan-dards and upset with

Him for making me feel guilty when I considered revert-ing to the behavior of my former self. In time, I found that my emotions would need to change if I wanted to improve things with my sister. I tried to express my disapproval in a more level-headed way, tried to ignore her when words seemed inadequate, tried to remain si-lent when I knew she was provoking me. I wasn’t perfect. Sometimes I’d yell, curse at her, often telling myself that

Smeared Mascara

by Pauline Goodson

I think I was too caught up in the baby steps and my obvious missteps to notice how He was working outside of my awareness.

and Baby S epst

3 | Smeared Mascara and Baby Steps

http

://tin

yurl.

com

/n4b

dvrl

when she suddenly became apologetic, I wouldn’t forgive her. But knowing that forgiveness was essential to show-ing God my faithfulness, I let it go and waited for the next time she would inspire intensely negative feelings within me. That waiting definitely wasn’t forgiveness, but it was as close as I could get myself to forgiveness at the time.

This trial-and-error approach went on for so long that I didn’t even notice that my relationship with her had slowly been changing alongside my relationship with God. During this period, I had become more serious and committed to my faith. Gradually, I discovered sincere joy and gratitude in serving a being whose love was insur-mountable and unsurpassable, someone who could accept my faults and my tears, who was patient and had hope for me, and who had lovingly given grace to those unworthy of it. My eagerness to serve God, however, didn’t mean that I was at all perfect in making changes with my sister. I think I was too caught up in the baby steps and my obvious missteps to notice how He was working outside of my awareness. I now believe that as I learned more and more about the nature of God, it became easier for me to be more patient with my sister, to let my guard down and not expect the worst, and to both forgive and forget when things got rocky.

I went home one break and realized that in an entire month, my sister and I had argued only once and eas-

Pauline doesn’t know why she does what she does but she thinks it has something to do with her brain. That’s why it’s really helpful having God guide her throughout it all.

Pauline Goodson ’14

ily reconciled immediately after. At the end of the break, when I was helping her write her college essays, she told me she had already started writing one…about me. This was the first time she had made me cry tears of thankful-ness and love. She wrote of how she was amazed by my optimism, my ability to hold my head high and sincerely find the blessings in what I had. She saw a role model in me, no longer just in academics, but in who I had become. It dawned on me that while I was trying to change for her, she was trying to change for me as well. All those times that I felt frustrated, restrained, and helpless were worth everything, and looking back, I would never exchange those moments for easier alternatives. If I had given up on God, on what I felt would make me better in His eyes and better for others, I would have given up on my sister. By trusting in God, I was given the chance to learn just how kind and loving my sister really is and how great it is to be loved by her. r


My Math teacher once told me,the English language is not rigorous enough for definitions;he says definitions have to go back to equations,and isn’t it funny how equations can say so much,but nothing at all?Isn’t it funny how letters on a computer screen areCoded sequences of 1’s and 0’s —How “love,” translates to01101100011011110111011001100101you won the keys to my hear t,now let me give you the gift of encoded emotion,ranging all over an infinite continuum;but isn’t it funny, how discrete language can be?

Pssst. Let me tell you a secret:

We can never know infinity.

Whether it diverges like the dreams of a vagrant,Or converges like two hear ts resonating at aUnified frequency;I believe in a God that promises eternal life,But has anyone ever stopped to think about how scary that sounds?We’re yearning for forever despite that we can never understand it;Just as the turn of a pageCan turn a cross upside down,We confuse fish, symbols of Christ, with infinity;He is alpha omega, beginning and end,But what is an end if it’s not defined —Is our existence nothing but an infinite loop of confusion?I never realized that God spoke in algorithms —

Perhaps, we were born to die.

Continuumby George Abraham

Pho

to b

y S

am G

utie

rrez

’15

5 | Continuum

Perhaps there’s beauty in ephemerality.There’s a cer tain beauty in the fact thatEvery time the sun sets, a night begins;That every star dissipates for another to shine brighter ;There are people who question if there is purpose in existence,If existence is ephemeral;Do you mean to tell me it wasn’t purposeThat made razor blades drop fromHands above wrists craving a sinister endTo this infinite masterpiece?That purpose didn’tguide Ludwig’s fingers downivory keys creating that which he could no longer hear?That purpose isn’t the force of attraction betweenaged, fragile hands on deathbeds,with rusted rings on four th fingers?It’s odd, that sometimes we forget about thatpulsating organ squeezed between ourribcages and our lungs;It’s odd, how time is ephemeral,yet we can get endlessly lost in it —but wandering in circular motions for too longis not healthy;My math teacher once told me the only thing that differentiatescircles and curves of infinite lengthis closure — closure. Closure exists; Purpose exists.Some of us just haven’t defined it yet.


Watch George perform this poem at:http://youtu.be/OC7RzVqe5pg

by Nicholas Zahorodny

From the first cry of “Habemus papem!”1 almost one year ago, Pope Francis, the succesor of St. Pe-ter and leader of the world’s over one billion Catholics, has charmed the world with a ministry of humility and compassion. Noticing at first his decision to withdraw from the papal apartments and to dress simply, the rov-ing eye of the media has since fastened upon his washing of the feet of those in prison, his embrace of the physi-cally deformed, and his special pastoral attention to the poor. Such coverage is valuable in that it highlights the labors of a man who has laid down all his heart, all his soul, and all his strength in obedience to God and in service to the Church.2 The value of this coverage wanes, however, as it seeks, on account of its preoccupation with novelty, to invest the current papacy with radical quali-ties that it does not possess. Such presentations, which describe Pope Francis primarily in contrast to those that preceded him, isolate his papacy from the richness and the majesty of the Church tradition. They depict the fruit of thousands of years as the harvest of a mere moment, ineffectually compressing profound, and often difficult, truths into six-word headlines or two-second sound-bites. It is a process that results in confusion and uncer-tainty even amongst those with a genuine openness to Catholic thought.

For this reason, Francis’ most recent papal exhortation, Evangelii Gaudium, has suffered from superficial treat-ment and widespread misunderstanding. I refer specifi-cally to its most controversial section, “Among the Crisis of Communal Commitment.” Here, the Pope denounces a culture obsessed with money, a culture in which the “sacralized workings of the market” have eclipsed the sanctity of the human person.3 In a statement echoed by President Obama, Francis laments the condition of a so-cioeconomic order in which “it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is

Subsidiarity, Solidarity, and Social Teaching:

A Catholic Perspective on Political Economy

Photo by Nancy Kim ‘14

7 | Subsidiarity, Solidarity, and Social Teaching: a Catholic Perspective to Political Economy

Subsidiarity, Solidarity, and Social Teaching:

A Catholic Perspective on Political Economy

news when the stock market loses two points.”4 Certainly, such statements form a major part of Francis’ exhortation, and yet only seldom does popular media offer its audience much more, save for insinuations, as vacuous as they are ubiquitous, that the new papacy will herald some suitably progressive “change” in Church doctrine.

As a result, many larger questions are unresolved. To what extent has Pope Francis broken away from his predecessors? Does a Marxist Pope sit in Rome? In answer to this first question, consider a quote that sounds suspiciously Francis-esque: “It is alarming to see the hotbed of tension and conflict caused by growing instances of inequality between rich and poor, by the prevalence of a selfish and individualistic mindset which also finds expression in an unregulated financial capitalism.”5 It might surprise some to learn that these words were spoken, on World Peace Day 2013, by Francis’ predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI. If Benedict counts as too recent to dispel beliefs in an impending revolution of Catholic social thought, consider the words of Pope Leo XIII, who wrote in 1891, “By degrees it has come to pass that working men have been surrendered, isolated and helpless, to the hardheartedness of employers and the greed of unchecked competition.”6 These words suggest that criticism of unregulated market forces has remained a constant in the perspective of the Church. But I would not, like so many in popular media, expect readers to be satisfied with or convinced by a few decontextualized quotes. A desire to understand the comprehensive groundwork of such admonishments, as well as their scope and implications, will motivate our investigation.

In this article, then, I will begin by examining the Church’s understanding of property rights. From there, I will expand the scope of inquiry to encompass the twin pillars of the Church’s economic teaching: the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity. Having accomplished this much, perhaps we will have moved closer to understanding the most underappreciated line of Pope Francis’ entire exhortation, namely, “I take for granted the different analyses which other documents of the universal magisterium7 have offered, as well as those proposed by the regional and national conferences of bishops.”8

As with any comprehensive economic philosophy, the Church’s social doctrine has, over the course of the 19th and 20th centuries, offered a careful account of the proper scope of the individual’s right to private property. And because the magisterial analysis of more complex topics rests implicitly upon the answers to such questions, it is here that prudence dictates our investigation begins. Pope Leo XIII, whose 1891 encyclical9 Rerum Novarum marked

a milestone in the development of the Church’s economic teaching, claimed that a right to private property arises, in the most general sense, as an outgrowth of man’s essentially rational nature. Man’s intellective powers, which set him apart categorically from all other living creatures, render him the sort of being fit to hold things in “permanent and stable possession.”10 If, borrowing from Aquinas, reason consists, at least in part, of the ordering of one’s actions to some final end, or telos, then an important part of man’s activity as a rational being necessarily finds its expression in his formulation of plans for the future.11 Consider one good perfective of man’s natural capacities: the good of knowledge. Right reason not only identifies knowledge of the truth as a form of human flourishing, but it also allows man to develop a plan of action in pursuit of this end. One might, for example, plan to enroll in a university with the further aim of attending classes and studying the assigned texts. Because the pursuit of final ends, such as knowledge of the truth, represents an enduring project rather than an ephemeral desire, man naturally projects his vision into the future, deliberating and ultimately deciding upon a reasoned course of action.

Furthermore, a little reflection will convince one that the flourishing of a human life depends upon this sustained striving towards substantive final ends, such as health, friendship, and closeness with God more than the satisfaction of passing desires. In order to provide for the sustenance of his own life and for the free pursuit of the final goods naturally perfective of that life, man must possess a certain sphere of permanence, stability, and control, within the context of which it becomes possible for him to engage in meaningful planning and action.12 The inviolability of a general, though not necessarily unrestricted, right to private property serves as the foundation of just such a space. As later affirmed by the Second Vatican Council, “Private property or some ownership of external goods affords each person the scope needed for personal and family autonomy.”13 To deny an individual the right to private property, therefore, would be to render him incapable of pursuing his integral fulfillment in the way appropriate to him as an inherently rational being.

At this point, one might object on the grounds that the benevolence of a centralized, high-functioning State could, through wise socioeconomic calculation, create this sphere itself, obviating the need for private property. Vested with suitable powers, it would claim ultimate control over all property, or at least all productive property, bending the economic activity of its members to satisfy some enlightened vision of human progress. In


the remaining space, man could pursue his personal ends, availing himself of the state-sanctioned use of resources but not their ownership. Thus, the whole would prosper through the State’s coordination of its parts. Under this maestro State, the right to private property, and perhaps a few other rights as well, would be irrelevant, if not flatly antithetical, to the common good.

Whether or not a State with the capacity for such calculation could exist in practice, I leave to more knowledgeable economists and political scientists. Papal encyclicals beginning with Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum, however, argue that even a hyper-competent State should be constrained to respect certain spheres of personal freedom. Because the individual and the family exist prior to the State “in idea as in fact” they possess the right and responsibility independent of the State to provide for their own sustenance and basic needs.14 To the extent that the State usurps, rather than supports, its members in this fundamental role, it reaches beyond the bounds of its rightful authority, interfering inappropriately in their lives. Because the stability requisite for the continuous fulfillment of man’s naturally recurring needs as well as for his planning for the future presupposes some general, though not necessarily unrestricted, right to private property, the State cannot justly abrogate these rights in favor of pursuing its own designs, however well-intentioned. Such analysis is an application of the principle of subsidiarity, a key part of Church doctrine that will be explored in greater generality later in this essay.

Some might wonder, even accepting the above argument, about the consistency of private property rights with the “universal destination of earth’s goods.”15 For in Genesis 1:28, God says, “Increase and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the Earth.”16 Creation is a gift to the whole of humanity, not merely to any single person or community. Private property rights, one might object, fail to acknowledge the universal generosity of this bequeathal.

Certainly, the Church affirms the bounty of creation, a bounty arising from the infinite love of God. Of such abundance Leo XIII writes, “God has granted the earth to mankind in general […] No part of it was assigned to any one in particular.”17 However, the earth does not simply yield up boundless resources at a mere whim

of mankind. Rather, God’s gift requires “a particular human response,” namely the application of man’s strength and perseverance, his intellect, and his will.18 Labor, by no means unnatural, then, to humankind, transforms the earth, rendering that which was once merely potential an

actual source of sustenance, even comfort. Such a process intimately involves a man in the object of his labor, and thus, in his toils, he “leaves the impress of his personality” upon it.19 Man changes the object of his labor so that it reflects the joint working of his reason and his will; in this way, he acquires ownership rights, strong but in no sense absolute, over it. Such ownership, encouraged and proliferated amongst all people, accords fully with the doctrine of universal destination.

Most, however, will find a general right to private property relatively uncontroversial. A wide variety of stark divisions tend to arise instead around questions that examine the nature of social justice and the proper role of the State in regulating economic affairs. Rather than render prudential judgments on specific economic policies, the responsibility for settling empirical disputes belonging to the laity, the Church seeks to elevate discourse on pressing socio-economic issues by promulgating Christian principles of action and judgment.20 One such principle that has proven invaluable to the strength and coherence of the Church’s social teaching over the last one hundred and fifty years is the often-overlooked principle of subsidiarity.

The principle of subsidiarity states, “A community of higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to coordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.”21 The essential conception here is one of a dynamically layered body politic in which the lower-level entities that together constitute higher-level institutions possess rights and responsibilities prior to those of the organizations in which they participate. This priority of rights and responsibilities stems from an existential priority “both in idea as

Pho

to b

y Jo

ssel

yn T

ufino

‘14

Wait until the day I have silver and barley summon me by name

by Dorothy Kim

9 | Subsidiarity, Solidarity, and Social Teaching: A Catholic Perspective to Political Economy

in fact” of lower-level groups such that, for example, the family precedes intermediate organizations, which in turn precede the State.22 Priority in “idea” means that higher-level groups exist for the sake of lower-level groups rather than the lower for the higher. Priority in “fact” means that the lower groups constitute higher groups.

The intermediate organizations referred to above might include trade unions, religious groups, and voluntary aid societies. They do not hold the distant, coercive power of the State but are composed of a community’s local members and are capable of ministering to that community in a direct and intimate way. When a broader organization attempts to appropriate for itself duties whose fulfillment is the natural object of lower-level societies, then that organization has failed to respect their autonomy and their rights.23 Thus, in the example of private property mentioned above, the State cannot justly withhold from the individual those rightful powers and instruments by means of which he satisfies an obligation to provide for his own sustenance. Alternatively, consider the right and duty, under anything resembling normal circumstances, of parents to provide for the healthy physical, intellectual, and spiritual growth of their children. The State should support parents by cultivating a sociocultural environment conducive to the rearing of children. Once the State attempts to replace the parents, however, or to infringe upon their autonomy in fulfilling their fundamental duties toward their children, for example, by mandating enrollment in exclusively State-run schools, then it has overstepped its rightful bounds, even if it does so with benevolent intentions. According to the principle of subsidiarity the State only acts justly, and the body politic only truly flourishes, when

the autonomy of all levels of society enjoys proper respect.

Subsidiarity’s relevance to economic affairs is likely already apparent, especially given

contemporary debates on the role of the State in alleviating the poverty denounced by

Evangelii Gaudium. Francis’ remarks therein have been interpreted by some as

justification for a comprehensive welfare state in which the federal government presides over vast redistributive programs. Given the principle of subsidiarity, however, such an interpretation screams implausibility. Subsidiarity, as one might imagine, demands a much less top-heavy solution, such as the one advocated by Pope John Paul II in his encyclical Centissimus Annis. In this encyclical, John Paul II is unambiguously critical of the “Welfare State.” A State that has empowered itself to undertake the tremendous levels of economic intervention necessary to build up a comprehensive welfare state, he claims, “leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies.”24 Such large-scale federal control would also foreseeably result in a ballooning of the bureaucratic

machine, one manifestly unsuited to the flourishing of fraternal sentiment in civil society. Much more than the raw data of a distant

State, “[human] needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them and who act as neighbors to those in need.”25 Although there does, in some sense, exist a right to work, it must be kept in mind that the State does not and cannot exist as the guarantor of each and every right. In fact, direct efforts on the part of the State to assure this right in every possible circumstance, independent of lower bodies and organizations, could only be successful through an untenable constriction of individual freedom.26

All these negative consequences flow from the welfare state’s breach of the principle of subsidiarity. The “primary responsibility” for ensuring the proper functioning of human activity in the economic sphere rests not with the State but with the plurality of lower-level institutions, organizations, and communities that comprise the body politic as a whole. Instead of directing its focus toward micromanagement of the economic system, the State’s duty is to “sustain business activities by creating conditions which will ensure job opportunities.”27 In this way, the State plays a supportive role, maintaining a framework in which the autonomous initiative of lower-level actors can shape and build society in a dynamic

We are called to act, to the extent possible given our socioeconomic situation, in sympa-thy and fraternity, in solidarity with the poor.


11 | Subsidiarity, Solidarity, and Social Teaching: A Catholic Perspective to Political Economy

way, from the bottom up. Thus, the body politic grows organically with the full participation of all its members.

Does subsidiarity translate into broad justification for laissez-faire policies aimed at separating the spheres of Market and State, with the former unquestioned and unrestrained in its action upon society? Does it entail a sort of justice unconcerned with the suffering of others? In answer to these questions, let us consider for a moment Jesus’ parable of the beggar Lazarus. It begins with a man robed in “purple and fine linen,” opulent clothing that testifies to a life of luxury. There is, however, a beggar named Lazarus at the rich man’s gate, covered not with linen but with sores. As he peers in, he longs to eat even the crumbs that fall from the rich man’s table. Lazarus, treated much like a dog, enjoys the company only of dogs. When both die, however, Lazarus is received into heaven, and the rich man is tormented in hell.28

Such a story provides a way into the second pillar of the Church’s economic doctrine: the principle of solidarity. The rich man never stole from Lazarus; he never abused him or exploited him. And yet, he was condemned justly to eternal damnation. The rich man had a duty to poor Lazarus. A duty, we may infer, that would not have been satisfied by the rich man paying taxes to Caesar, even a Caesar committed to establishing a generous “imperial” safety net for his people. The rich man understood his exorbitant wealth as a means of insulating himself from the suffering of the poor rather than as a means of alleviating it. His indifference, his lack of compassion, and engagement, are what testified against him at the end of his earthly life. We are called to act, to the extent possible given our socioeconomic situation, in sympathy and fraternity, in solidarity with the poor.

How does this message translate onto a larger scale? The market, just like the State, is not an end in itself but rather an instrument in service to the immensity of the dignity of the human person. Therefore, the market must not eclipse the State in power, becoming capable of defying the State’s authority as overseer of the common good.29 In harmonious cooperation, the relationship of mutual support ensured by the principle of subsidiarity, the two must together also strive to satisfy the principle of solidarity. The principle of solidarity emphasizes the importance of recognizing actively, and in fully human ways, the dignity of the most vulnerable. As the United

States Catholic Bishops write, “A fundamental moral measure of any economy is how the poor and vulnerable are faring.”30 In Centesimus Annus, John Paul laments “forms of poverty and deprivation unworthy of the human person.”31 A collapse in solidarity is one of the primary subjects of Francis’ Evangelii Gaudium.

Authentic solidarity must begin with a well-ordered conception of the poor, one no longer dominated by “a mentality in which the poor – as individuals and as peoples – are considered a burden, as irksome intruders trying to consume what others have produced.”32 Rather, current economic conditions must be assessed with the understanding that the poor ask for nothing more than “the right to share in enjoying material goods and to make good use of their capacity for work, thus creating a world that is more just and prosperous for all.”33 One cannot,

then, orchestrate an economic renewal that accounts only marginally for those suffering in abject privation. Instead, the fate of the poor must move to occupy a central position in

the minds of those seeking to improve the economic and moral character of society.

Resisting the temptation to entrust the advancement of the poor to a distant and potentially despotic State, it is evident that all levels and branches of society must proceed in harmony with each other if the problem of poverty is to be addressed in a fully human way. The State has, in its subsidiary role, the responsibility of enforcing laws that uphold a just wage and that safeguard workers against discrimination and unsafe working conditions.34 These guarantees, however, would prove powerless to elevate the situation of the poor in the absence of a robust network of intermediary organizations. Local, volunteer associations are positioned uniquely to minister in real and intimate ways to the souls of their communities. Religious and other service-oriented groups can and do play a significant role in strengthening and preserving social connectedness. By organizing and empowering members of the community to tend to the needs of those within it, such groups can do a great deal more to infuse a real sense of hope, compassion, and belonging than can a series of government checks in the mail. With the flexibility and special understanding that proceeds from personal knowledge of a place and its people, these groups can work to heal what are often deeply fractured

The rich man understood his exorbitant wealth as a means of insulating himself from the suffering of the poor rather than as a means of alleviating it.


and disjointed communities, elevating the value of material aid by mixing it with the transformative power of personal compassion.35 Also of note here is the labor union. Free and voluntary associations of workers, bound together not by resentment or envy but by fraternal feeling, play an invaluable role in support of labor. Unions fair and reasonable in their negotiations can contribute to a greater cohesion in the community of workers and employers, the strengthening of which honors the dignity and magnifies the prosperity of both.36

The demands of solidarity, however, will never be satisfied in a framework attentive only to the material aspects of human life and cooperation. For the totality of the human person extends far beyond the satisfaction of physical needs and fleeting desires. Indeed, it is impossible to conceive of the flourishing life, and by extension the flourishing of the common good, that lacks a deep engagement with the non-commercial and the spiritual elements of human existence.37 In gauging the status of many contemporary forms of capitalism, man must reflect deeply on a number of difficult questions: To what extent does the system show contempt for the weak and disadvantaged? How does our form of economic organization respect and cultivate respect for the intrinsic rather than the merely instrumental value of human beings? How do current conditions either empower or enfeeble men and women seeking to lead their lives and raise their families in accordance with Gospel values? With regard to these metrics, much of the extant system has proven a profound and tragic failure. As Pope John Paul II and Pope Francis have accurately pointed out, “the human inadequacies of capitalism and the resulting domination of things over people are far

from disappearing.”38 An atomistic, individualist, value-free conception of society content to solve exclusively technical problems revolving around increases in aggregate production and consumption will never minister to the needs of the people, never allow man to realize his transcendent worth or to rise above the market and above the State. Only a deep and comprehensive infusion of Christian cultural values can ensure that the laudable advancements in economic wealth, opportunity, and innovation produced by a market system contribute not to the vitiation of society’s moral sensibilities but rather to the real and practiced recognition of the sublime dignity of the human person. r

Endnotes1. Translated: “We have a pope!”2. From Luke 10:27, Douhey-Rheims translation: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind: and thy neighbor as thyself.”3. Pope Francis Evangelii Gaudium, 2.I.544. Pope Francis Evangelii Gaudium, 2.I.535. Pope Benedict XVI Blessed Are the Peacemakers, 16. Pope Leo XIII Rerum Novarum, 37. The authoritative body that lays down the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church8. Pope Francis Evangelii Gaudium, 2.519. A papal letter sent to all bishops of the Catholic Church10. Pope Leo XIII Rerum Novarum, 611. Aquinas Summa Theologica, Question 91, Article 1 12. Pope Leo XIII Rerum Novarum, 7

Pho

to b

y S

am G

utie

rrez

‘15

Nicholas Zahorodny ‘16Nicholas is an Eastern Rite Catholic and a double major in philosophy and economics. He can’t wait to switch back

to the twenty-meal plan so that he can enjoy a leisurely breakfast every morning in Sharplés.

13. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, IV.3014. Pope Leo XIII Rerum Novarum, 1315. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, I.616. Genesis 1:28, DR17. Pope Leo XIII Rerum Novarum, 818. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, IV.1319. Pope Leo XII Rerum Novarum, 920. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, 321. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, V.4822. Pope Leo XIII Rerum Novarum, 1323. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, II.11-1524. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, IV.4825. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, IV.4826. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, IV.4827. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, IV.4828. For the story in full detail, see Luke 16:19-31, DR29. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, IV.3530. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. A Catholic framework for Economic Life

31. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, III.2232. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, III.2833. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, III.2834. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, II.1535. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, IV.4936. Pope Leo XIII Rerum Novarum, 4937. Pope Leo XIII Rerum Novarum, 57; Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, IV.3638. Pope John Paul II Centesimus Annus, IV.33

13

by D

ionne

Wils

on


Immerse Your Dream In A Rich RealityApply For A Fully-Funded Fellowship

academy.ttf.org

Trinity Forum Academy provides an exclusive nine-month graduate-level fellowship for spiritual formation, an in-depth personal research project, and vocational discernment. In community, Fellows develop an intellectually robust vision for Christian thought and life while expanding their understanding of the ideas and institutions that shape modern life.

Ruiningsuperficialdreamssince 2001.

15 | Following Christ Home

to my youth pastor over the phone. He listened, then said, “I think you should go home.” I was also convicted by a passage that I had read during a Bible study:

As He walked along, He saw Levi son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax collector’s booth. “Follow me,” Jesus told him, and Levi got up and followed Him. While Jesus was having dinner at Levi’s house, many tax col-lectors and sinners were eating with Him and His dis-ciples, for there were many who followed Him (Mark 2:14-15, NIV).

I was struck by the fact that Levi instantly left his lucrative career to follow Jesus – right into Levi’s own home. I started thinking about what it would look like for me to follow Jesus into my own home, which had always been the hardest place for me to model Christ’s love and patience.

So home I went. By this time, my mother had trouble walking on her

own. My dad and I took turns being her caregiver. I’d wake up at 7 am to help her get dressed, brush her teeth, and walk to the kitchen. Sometimes, at 3 am, I would

by Kathryn Wu

By my sophomore year of college, I had my life planned out. I was going to do biology research, attend graduate school, and become a professor. I ob-tained a research internship at Harvard for the summer, and everything seemed to be going as planned.

Except for the fact that my mother was slowly slipping away.

Initially, just her right hand was weak. She gave up her job as an ultrasound technician and struggled with simple tasks such as buttoning her shirt or closing the faucet. Then her whole right arm became limp and use-less. In January of 2012, my mother was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Googling the term confirmed what my mother already instinctively knew: she was dying.

I struggled with what to do. My parents encouraged me to go to Harvard, but I didn’t know how much longer my mom had on earth. On the other hand, I wasn’t sure what would happen to my career prospects if I spent the whole summer at home. I knew I wasn’t going to be able to work at Harvard the next summer, since I needed to conduct research at or near Swarthmore to complete my Honors biology thesis. I tearfully explained my dilemma

Following Christ Home

Following Christ Home


Kathryn Wu ‘14

Kathryn is a biology-loving pen-guin from Southern California.

She regrets not submitting her senior Honors thesis as a haiku.

wake up and help her turn in bed. When my dad was not able to take my mom to prayer gatherings, I carried her into the van and drove her there myself. I also stepped into the role of mother for my two younger sisters, mak-ing sure they ate well, buying their clothes, and disciplin-ing them when necessary. I was both physically and emo-tionally exhausted.

Yet it was during this time of my weakness that I saw God pour forth His blessings and grace. As my mom got progressively weaker physically, she became so much stronger spiritually. She couldn’t even lift a child’s sippy cup to her lips, but with her left hand, she would write letters of advice to our whole family, family friends, and everyone she could think of. In the past, I had been the one urging her to pray – now she was the one who would ask me if I prayed. She spent the early hours of the day praying for me and my sisters. Additionally, my church supported my family in every way imaginable - praying for and with us, giving my mother massages, providing financial support, bringing food and various herbal rem-edies, spending time with my sisters, doing bible studies and praise sessions at our home, and constantly encourag-ing us.

Looking back, I am so glad that I chose to go home that summer, which turned out to be the last time I saw my mom on this side of heaven. My worries about my fu-ture career turned out to be misguided: the next summer, God blessed me with a wonderful research internship on ALS at the University of Pennsylvania. Due to UPenn’s proximity to Swarthmore, I was able to continue my re-search throughout the school year. This work formed the basis of my Honors thesis, which focuses on epigenetic mechanisms underlying C9ORF72-associated ALS.

As a soon-to-be-graduating senior, I do not know where God will lead me next. However, I am convinced of this: God is good, and His way is true. By His grace, I will continue to lift my cross daily and follow Him. r

Photo by Sam Gutierrez ‘15

17 | La Iglesia de San Pedro

Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he

has given us new bir th into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ

from the dead, and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade.

1 Peter 1:3-4 (NIV)

“”

”


LA IGLESIA DE SAN PEDRO

The Church of San Pedro in Ávila is at the edge of a small plaza and grabbed my attention by its simplicity. It isn’t grand like the amazing cathedrals I’ve seen all over Spain, but the church, in the dazzling sun light on a beautiful autumn day, spoke to me. The church is named after Peter, an apostle who is called the rock on which Christ will build the church. I was awed by the significance of the everlasting character of the salvation that believers of Christ have. The physical church will pass away with time, but the rock and Christ on which my faith is built will not perish.

by N

ancy

Yeo

n-Jo

o Ki

m

by Zoë Wray

Sitting with my thoughts can be really, really annoying at times. When I get into a depressive, worrying mood, a vicious cycle begins where I worry deeply about something, almost always my relationships. I beat myself up for this worry, because it causes me to say ridiculous things that I later regret, because they are completely untrue, and it irritates me that I frustrate and even hurt the people I hold most dear. I harshly scold myself for saying such stupid statements, and I worry that I have permanently ruined my relationship with the peo-ple I offended, and the cycle continues. I always end up excessively apologizing, which only annoys the people to whom I’m directing the apology, because I can’t stop apol-ogizing, because I can’t stop feeling guilty. Going through this is the most emotionally torturous experience that I endure and sometimes it happens frequently enough to make me feel pretty depressed for weeks on end. Because it is a process that hurts both me and my relationships, it makes me hate myself for doing it. I become my worst enemy. I do nothing but hate and fail to appreciate one of God’s children.

At the Salvation Army church in Chester, the pastor, Major McKoy (in the Salvation Army, church leadership is assigned the names of military ranks), gave a sermon about how we treat our enemies. He described how when he was a teenager, someone beat him up. He really hated that man, and if he met him today, his impulse would be to hate him and beat him up, too. But instead of giv-ing in to this impulse, Major McKoy preached, we should forgive our enemies and let go of the hate we may harbor for them.

As I listened to Major McKoy’s sermon, I thought about the enemies I had in my life and whether I had forgiven them or not. As cheesy as it sounds, I realized that of all the people I’ve hated and scorned in my life, the most consistent hatred I’ve felt has always been for myself. And as he talked about forgiving that enemy in your life, I wondered, how I could forgive myself when it

was me who was causing the pain and yet not stopping it? When I asked friends or family what I should do to

deal with my worry, they always told me that I simply needed to improve my self-esteem. Then I look around in society and am inundated with the message that I am beautiful just for being me, that I, just like everyone else, can achieve anything. I constantly see magazines, advertisements, TV shows, and music lyrics that tell me that I am special and wonderful.

But this message has always rung hollow to me. How could any of the producers of this media know that I am beautiful or special, when they have never met me, and have no idea who I am? They don’t even know what I look like or what my heart looks like. They have no credibility when they say that I am beautiful inside and out. Only God knows me completely. Only God knows my soul, my face, my body, my deeds. God is the only one in this universe who can truly tell me that I’m beautiful. So why would it make any sense to go to anyone other than Him to figure out how to improve my self-esteem and finally rid myself of crippling worry for good?

Before I came to Swarthmore, I had never really studied the Bible. As a result, I never realized that God addressed worrying and that it was something He recognized and could help us with. During my freshman orientation week, I attended the Swarthmore Christian Fellowship’s first freshman Small Group of the semester, a Bible study specifically for freshmen. The passage that we studied for that session was Matthew 6:25-34, and it was a blessed experience for me because this passage spoke directly about worrying. Some of the most salient verses of this passage for me were verses 28-30: “And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you—you of little faith?” I

Making Peace with My

Worst Enemy

19 | Making Peace with My Worst Enemy

realized I had absolutely no faith in God to take care of me and everything that I worried about.

When I prayed for God to take all my worries out of my mind and to give my mind rest, I gained several insights that have slowly but steadily helped me to worry less. First, I learned that talking to someone about my worries would be really helpful. By doing so, I have discovered how my past and upbringing have shaped my everyday thoughts and led them to be so destructive. I also learned that I have to give God control over my problems. I have to admit that I can’t fight the worries and criticisms in my head without His help. To put this into practice, I have done my best to pray as soon as I feel the worrisome thoughts surfacing. I don’t feel better instantly when I do this, but after a little while God graces me with clarity of thought, which allows me to rationalize my worries and realize that they are not as threatening as I thought they were.

By bringing myself closer to Jesus, I realize that I’m not a horrible, hurtful person and that I am not doomed to mess up my relationships. But if I only focused on why I am a good person, I wouldn’t realize the potential I could reach by reaching out to God. The reason we can’t find that potential on our own, whether we tend towards self-deprication or self-aggrandizement, is because we don’t have that potential on our own. We only find it through Jesus. As He said in John 14:1, “Do not let your hearts be troubled. Believe in God, believe also in me.” r

Zoë is an honors major in Art History. She is extremely excited about the latest Nancy Drew computer game to be released on

May 20. She loves video-taping her yorkie puppy, Slinky, running in slow-motion, almost as much as she loves ar t.

Zoë Wray ’16P

hoto

by

Sam

Gut

ierr

ez ’1

5


21 | Knobs

KNO

BSby Sam Gutierrez


Sometimes, I don't see the point in cer tain things. Then, I remember Colos-sians 1:16: "For by him all things were created, in heaven and on ear th, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authori-ties—all things were created through him and for him" (ESV).

Would you forgive me if I gave away my par ts? You bought them for yourself

by Dorothy Kim

23 | Mercy of the Womb

Over radio sur-veillance, two govern-ment security personnel hear a choked plea: “Oh please, have mercy!” In a whisper, a second voice rejoins, “Oh, not tonight Bishop…not tonight!”

These lines are taken from the movie V for Vendetta (2005), shortly before the execution of yet another of V’s tar-gets, Bishop Lilliman. Bishop Lilliman, in addi-tion to being a lascivious and hypocritical cleric, was, like all the rest of V’s victims, damningly complicit in the human

medical testing and state sanctioned mass mur-der of which V was both part and product. In this tense and thematically important scene, repri-sal for Bishop Lilliman’s past and present sins came at last in the form of the masked vigilante, V. With the aid of a potent intravenous toxin, V de-livered Bishop Lilliman’s lethal penalty and subse-quently vanished into the shadows from whence he came, a bloodless execu-tion paid in retribution for the bishop’s long, de-bauched life.

Now a movie titled V for Vendetta and a scene of such dark and vindictive reprisal must seem like an unlikely place to begin a discussion of Christian mercy; indeed, it is pre-cisely the mercy asked for by Bishop Lilliman that V does not provide. But I believe it is in a situation exactly as this that our cultural presuppositions regarding mercy are most acutely focused. Because we know what V is doing in the Bishop Lilliman scene: he is rejecting the bishop’s supplication on the grounds of just rec-M

ERCY

OF

THE

WO

MB

by E

rin K

ast



ompense. Implicitly, V is telling the bishop that the situ-ation demands something graver than mercy; it demands justice. Instinctively – and especially given the repre-hensible conditions of the bishop’s capture (he was meeting a girl whom he believed to be a prostitute) – the viewer agrees: mercy, bishop? No, not to-night.

Yet this is not to say our instincts are entirely mis-placed, for it seems to the viewer the same as it seems to V – the bishop is waving a “get out of jail free card,” hoping that V will spare him reprisal for his misdeeds. To acquiesce would not be justice, and if it is mercy, then what kind of mercy lets a man simply get away with mur-der (in this case, literally)? The short answer, and the aim of this essay is: not the kind in which Christians believe. But, before we get ahead of ourselves, we should first ask: why do Christians care about mercy in the first place?

The importance of mercy in Church tradition cannot be understated. In the English translation of the Bible, a quick search indicates that the word “mercy” appears approximately 261 times, absent in only 16 of the 66 books. Confirming the significance of the concept, in the Gospel of Luke, Jesus explicitly exhorts his follow-ers to “be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.”1 This scriptural imperative has manifested it-self in various ways throughout Church history: Psalm 51, often known simply as “The Miserere,” is one of the greatest and most oft repeated psalms, in frequent use by Christians around the world for centuries; indeed, the Psalm was a favorite of St. Francis of Assisi who could be heard repeating it daily. The Psalm begins, as the Latin name suggests, “Have mercy upon me O God, accord-ing to thy loving-kindness: according unto the multi-tude of thy tender mercies, blot out my transgressions.”2 “The Miserere” is a wonderful prayer of mercy and love to God, the psalmist beseeching the Lord for spiritual healing and compassion. But perhaps there is no better historical example of the Church’s mercy tradition than that of the Jesus Prayer, long held as one of the most profound expressions of Christian wisdom and repeated particularly by the Church’s Orthodox for over a millen-nium: Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me, a sinner. A simple but entirely profound prayer for mercy borne of the proverbial tax collector’s humble and contrite plea.3

Yet if antiquated tradition were not enough for the 21st century reader, we may now turn to the 2013 inter-

view with Pope Francis reviewed earlier in these pages (“A Papal Perspective on Community,” Fall 2013). In it, Pope Francis avers: “the ministers of the church must

be ministers of mercy above all…[priests have a tendency to be] either too much of a rigorist or too lax. Neither is mer-ciful, because neither of them really takes

responsibility for the person [...]. In pastoral ministry, we must accompany people, and we must heal their wounds.”4 Mercy is central to Pope Francis’ theology as it was for St. Francis of Assisi before him and as it has been for the Church throughout history. For Francis, mercy is the location of human responsibility, spiritual healing, and growth, all undoubtedly essential aspects of a Christian’s spiritual and social life.

And now we are perhaps prepared to address the first question of this essay: what is mercy and, by extension, why is it so overwhelmingly important to Christians? As we observed earlier, justice at times seems a more appro-priate response to this sinful world than mercy and, given its robust biblical foundation in over 500 passages of the King James Bible, we must ask what exactly is it that the Church is defending when she puts such a strong em-phasis on mercy even at, some might argue, the expense of justice?5 For this analysis, we will turn to roots, and specifically that of the word translated in the Bible as “mercy.”

There are many words in the Greek and Hebrew Bi-ble that are translated as mercy when the original text is converted into English. Some of these words are alter-nately translated as kindness, loving-kindness, goodness, favor, compassion, and pity. Already from this array of translations, some of the depth of the concept is brought out; mercy, it seems, is a virtue with strong ties all the way back to the greatest virtue of all, love.6 But there is something else that comes to mind when we think of mercy, and it is the aspect alluded to in our discussion of V: the feeling of being “let off the hook.” This aspect of mercy lends itself to a power dynamic of high and low, as in that of the knowing father condescending to a misbehaving son. A cursory glance at the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of “mercy” confirms all of our intuitions thus far, defining the term as “compassion-ate forbearance,” “kindness,” “divine favor,” or the “discre-tionary power of the judge to pardon or mitigate punish-ment.” But what I would like to argue is that this is not

Mercy, it seems, is a virtue with strong ties all the way back to the greatest virtue of all, love.

the mercy of the Old Testament. When Mary sings to Elizabeth in “The Magnificat,” “and [God’s] mercy is on them who fear him from generation unto generation,” she is not referring to a mercy which speaks down but a mercy which lifts up; one that “regards the lowly estate of his handmaiden” and causes that from “henceforth all generations will call [her] blessed.”7 What, then, is this mercy? For this we must return to the Hebrew Bible, where the Magnificat and all its theology of mercy, favor and faithfulness find their beginnings.8

Of all the words translated as “mercy” in the English Bible, I wish to focus first on the Hebrew word racham This same word appears in Arabic, a related .(םימחר)Semitic language, as raHma (ةمحر). As a testimony to racham’s spiritual significance to all the Semitic faiths, we need only look to the Qur’an where the name ar-raHeem (ميحرلا) precedes every chapter (sura) and func-tions above all other names as the most glorified ninety-ninth name of God, The Merciful.9 Next in our Semitic root-finding exercise, we will draw up on an apparently unrelated word: womb. In Hebrew, the word for womb is rechem (םחר) and in Arabic it is raHim (محر). Strange that these two apparently disparate terms look and sound quite similar – this similarity is not coincidence. Both Hebrew and Arabic are rooted languages, which means that words in these languages consist of certain key let-ters that impart meaning, these letters being collectively referred to as the word’s “root.” For example, in Arabic, words typically contain a three-consonant root. These three consonants confer to the word, regardless of what other consonants and vowels may intervene, the ba-sic idea for which the word is a lingual representation. Roughly the same is true of Hebrew and so the lexico-graphical similarity of “womb” and “mercy” in the Jewish script suggests a continuity in meaning. Thus, to ask for the meaning of mercy – the greatest attribute of God and one of the most cherished Christian virtues – demands the surprising question: what does it mean to be in or of the mother’s womb?

Firstly, to be in the womb is to be within. The child in the mother’s womb is entirely contained within the womb of his or her mother. From the spirit to the flesh, the infant is subsumed by the one in which he or she co-inheres. Likewise, the mother is the world of the child; the child knows no existence outside of the mother and the mother cannot, even if she wanted to, voluntarily and independently extricate the child from her womb. The womb is the ground of the child’s being and from it life flows. The mother cannot help but sustain the child and the child cannot help but remain in the womb. She, the

infant, is subsumed entirely and the mother subsumes her.

But to be in the womb means more than to be merely surrounded – it means to be utterly dependent, and in dependence, to be in a constant state of transformation. What the mother eats, the child eats; what the mother drinks, the child drinks. In the womb, the substance of the mother is formed and transformed into the sub-stance of the child. It is in the nature of the child to be absolutely dependent on the mother; at no moment, so long as the child remains in the womb, can the child be considered independent of his or her mother. Without the mother, the child would die – it would be reab-sorbed by or expelled from the womb. Yet it is not only the child who is transformed: as the extensive debate over family planning has made eminently clear, the mother too has something at stake. The mother is made vulnerable and is forced to sacrifice parts of herself. Just as the child is formed by her mother but not so defined, the mother is formed and transformed by her child while all the while retaining her motherhood. The mother loves her child not because she loves her father nor because she knows her future, but she loves her child – the child whom she does not know and who can-not know her – because the child is her own, bone of her bone and flesh of her flesh.10

Thus, to say God is merciful means far more than to say God is com-passionate or God


http

://tin

yurl.

com

/lz2g

znx

PENDLE


is pitying or God is kind. To say God is merciful is to say God loves us like a mother loves a child in her womb, or, rather, like the relationship of a child to the womb. The philosopher Ivan Illich describes this concept of mercy – racham – as “the womb in the state of love.”11 But it is important that, unlike the mercy of the judge for the defendant, racham is two-way. Racham is a love that gives itself unconditionally without asking for anything in return. It is gratuitous, undeserved, and committed. It gives excessively because this love cannot help but give itself entirely – it is the nature of being a mother and the essence of being a child; a Creative Love whose love overflows into the act of creation and not the other way around.

It is perhaps for this reason that the prophet Hosea wrote, speaking for God, “For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt of-ferings.”12 Justice would require sacrifice, and burnt of-ferings, though a form of worship and praise, are also a means for reparation – a repayment for debts and an offering for gifts received. What God desires is some-thing greater than justice and is itself a form of worship: racham. And we are fortunate that God is, as it is written in the Qur’an, the All-Compassionate, the All-Merciful (arraHmaan arraHeem) because it is only out of uncon-ditional love that we humans – in all our sin – could be loved by God, and only out of gratuitous love that God would take “upon Him[self ] the form of a servant” and humble Himself even unto death on the cross – to be-come as in Genesis bone of our bone, flesh of our flesh.13 Our fortune is no better put than in the book of Lam-entations when the prophet writes, “It is of the Lord’s mercies that we are not consumed, because his compas-sions fail not. They are new every morning, great is thy faithfulness.”14

For Christians, the implications of this mercy stretch out across modern political and social discourse. What does it mean to have this mercy that is the womb in the state of love? For the government? For the fam-ily? But perhaps we should return to the circumstance with which we began – V and Bishop Lilliman. There we were presented with V’s demands of justice and Chris-tianity’s mysterious and apparently inappropriate claims of mercy. To love Bishop Lilliman despite his disturb-ing depravity seems nearly impossible and to respond to his plea for mercy seems a misapprehension of a man whose moral authority had been decimated by iniquity years ago. But is it not the same for V? To ask a just man consumed by revenge to accept into his womb a wicked man consumed by fear is no less than outlandish, isn’t

it? Bishop Lilliman wanted to be let off the hook, but neither V nor Christianity would allow it. Justice may have required death, but for a Christian, something more demanding was asked of both victim and vigilante – to be not let off the hook, but pruned by it until what was left was nothing like what was there before. A consum-mation and a completion in which the product could not be the same as its beginning, the womb in the state of love: mercy. r

Endnotes1. Lk. 6:36 (KJV)2. Ps. 51:1 (KJV)3. cf. Lk. 18:134. Antonio Spadero, “A Big Heart Open to God,” Amer-ica Magazine, September 30th, 2013. Accessed January 6th, 2014 at http://www.americamagazine.org/pope-interview.5. This count is actually a catalogue of two words, “jus-tice” and “righteous.” This approximation significantly underestimates the actual prevalence of this concept con-sidering other words such as “upright,” “fair,” “equal,” and “just” may also contribute in some instances to the entire conceptual word count.6. cf. 1 Cor. 13:13 7. Lk. 1:48-50 (KVJ)8. The Magnificat appears to be based on the Song of Hannah (1 Sam. 2:1-10) and other Old Testament pas-sages.9. Indeed, William Chittick and Sachiko Murata write in The Vision of Islam (1994) on page 76: “The Prophet reported that God has written upon his Throne, ‘My mercy takes precedence over My wrath.’”10. cf. Gn. 2:23 11. Ivan Illich, Rivers North of the Future: The Testa-ment of Ivan Illich as told to David Cayley, ed. David Cayley (Toronto: House of Anansi Press Inc., 2005), 184.12. Hs. 6:6 (KJV)13.Phil. 2:7-8 (KJV)14. Lam. 3:22-23 (KJV)

Erin Kast ‘15Erin is from Wausau, Wisconsin and is majoring in Biology and Religion. He is currently studying abroad in

Morocco, but will return in the fall for more good times at Swat.

Leaves tumble on through the ear th

in pirouetting flame,glowing plume

& ember. The handof one branch

stretches downinto your chest

where blood star tsthen torrents;

ashgraces the pond,

your own bodylight

enoughto stand on its water.

PENDLEHILL

by Josh Gregory


and the

PursuitChristianity

Happinessof

29 | Christianity and the Pursuit of Happiness

by Christina Keller


In Pharrell Williams’ Oscar-nominated song, “Happy,” he sings in the chorus:

Because I’m happyClap along if you feel like a room without a roof

Because I’m happyClap along if you feel like happiness is the truth

Because I’m happyClap along if you know what happiness is to you

Because I’m happyClap along if you feel like that’s what you wanna do1

“Happiness is the truth.” What an interesting line.In Beyoncé’s video for her song, “Pretty Hurts,”2 off

of her latest album, she reenacts her days doing beauty pageants. During the question and answer part of the pageant, she is asked by the host, “What is your aspi-ration in life?” She pauses for a moment before saying, in a montage of the difficulties being a beauty pageant contestant, “Oh, my aspiration in life? Wow, wow, that’s a great question… I wasn’t expecting that question. What is my aspiration in life? Um, well, my aspiration in life would be to be happy.”

In Kid Cudi’s song, “Pursuit of Happiness,”3 featuring MGMT and Ratatat, he sings:

I’m on the pursuit of happinessAnd I know that everything that shine ain’t always

Gonna be goldHey, I’ll be fine once I get it

I’ll be good.

Some Christians would probably like to think that this theme of happiness, of happiness being an “aspira-tion,” “the truth,” or something to pursue is found only in secular pop music. However, plenty of contemporary Christian songs focus on happiness as well. The Da-vid Crowder Band has a song called, “Oh Happiness,”4 where the repeated line is, “Oh happiness, there’s grace enough for us and the whole human race.” Matt Red-man has a song called, “The Happy Song,”5 which goes:

For now I know that God is for me not against me Everybody’s singing now, ‘cause we’re so happy Everybody’s dancing now, ‘cause we’re so happy

If only I could see your face See you smiling over us

And unseen angels celebrate The joy is in this place

One could argue that contemporary Christian songs

Pho

to b

y S

am G

utie

rrez

’15

31 | Christianity and the Pursuit of Happiness

focus on happiness or some sense of fulfillment just as much as secular pop songs. However, the focus is God bringing a sense of happiness or fulfillment. The source in secular pop songs often remains uncertain.

This rudimentary analysis of two genres of music, though, is not meant to show people that believing in God is the way to happi-ness, that God’s grace will have you perpetually smiling. Rather, I would like to complicate both of these mentalities. I would like to complicate the notion that we, as humans, should ever be pursuing something like happiness or contentment, whether it be through God or some other means.

As someone who identifies as Christian, I struggle with finding happiness or contentment, just as much as the next person. My faith in God does not bring me perpetual happiness. God’s grace, as mentioned in the David Crowder band’s song, does bring a certain degree of comfort. But happiness? Not so much. I think all of us, as humans, struggle to find happiness. Things hap-pen in our lives. We’re disappointed by those around us. Loved ones die. We get rejected from internships, jobs, and graduate schools. We don’t do as well as we’d like to on tests and papers. Our families fight and break apart. We get broken up with. We have our identities rejected and marginalized. We stub our toes.

Happiness is a feeling. It’s inherently ephemeral. We feel it for brief moments of time. That moment at the end of a long finals period. When we find out we got a job or an internship we really wanted, or when we found out we got into Swarthmore. That moment when our screw date isn’t that awkward of a person and actually ends up be-ing kind of fun to talk to. When our favorite song comes on at Paces and people are actually dancing. When it’s Indian bar, or whatever-our-favorite-bar is at Sharples. When we get a care package in the mail or receive words of affirmation from a professor. Happiness does come. It just comes in brief moments and is usually replaced at some point by another feeling, whether it be disappoint-ment, sadness, grief, or something completely different.

To be perpetually happy is to ignore or somehow es-cape from the harder struggles in life that happen to us, some more than others. I struggle to aspire to happiness, because, to me at least, it seems impossible, through God or any other means. Life is full of shortcomings. Happi-ness is a feeling, like any other. However, I doubly strug-gle to pursue happiness or see it as some kind of truth, because to pursue happiness would not just be finding

some way to ignore my own struggles and disappoint-ments, but also the struggles and disappointments of others. To put it bluntly, to pursue happiness inherently involves some form of ignorance about the struggles and oppression of other people, and that, to me, is inherently

wrong on a human moral level, but even more explicitly, on a Christian level. I do not think one can al-

ways be happy knowing about the pain of marginalized friends or that there are 27 million people still work-ing in slavery today or that that man you just passed on the street in Philadelphia doesn’t have food or a place to sleep. Happiness is elusive knowing that queer peo-ple face a life of imprisonment in Uganda, that around 350,000 queer youth are homeless in the United States, and that thirty-three people in North Korea were shot for being Christians. One cannot be consistently happy knowing the disproportionate rate of black male impris-onment or the high level of poverty, and poor levels of educational resources in urban areas. In other words, one cannot be perpetually happy knowing about a lot that is happening in this world. To be endelessly happy would require ignoring a lot of what is going on and affecting those around us.

Moreover, Jesus explicitly calls us as humans to not ig-nore the suffering of those around us. In Matthew 25:31-46, the Parable of the Sheeps and the Goats, He tells his listeners that those who will receive their inheritance of the kingdom of God are those who took care of the hun-gry, thirsty, naked, and imprisoned in the here-and-now, because in doing so they are taking care of Jesus. While there are numerous interpretations of this passage, with respect to good works being or not being a path to salva-tion, it is clear at least from this passage that Jesus did not want his listeners ignoring the pain and needs of others. This passage is a call to take care of others because to care for others is to show that you care about Jesus. Through-out other passages in the Gospels, Jesus calls for those who follow Him to care for the poor. In Matthew 19:21, he tells a rich man to sell all his possessions and give his money to the poor. Throughout all four Gospels, He was constantly healing people from their suffering. Many Christians sum up Jesus’ commandments as loving God and loving one’s neighbor. Loving one’s neighbor inher-ently involves a degree of empathy, of emotional involve-ment in their suffering and disappointments.

Thus, from both a Christian angle and a humanist angle, I think happiness is not something we should be

Happiness is a feeling. It’s inherently ephem-eral. We feel it for brief moments of time.


striving or aspiring towards, or viewing as the truth. Does this mean we should never feel happiness? Far from it. We should experience all of the emotions we have been en-dowed with and handle them appropriately. However, we should strive for things that are less ephemeral than a sin-gular feeling. As a Christian, I would argue that we should be striving for love and empathy, for caring about a neigh-bor’s suffering and trying to walk with them through it. I would not say, “love is the truth,” per se, because love has many different meanings and can be interpreted many different ways. One could even argue that love is just an-other feeling. However, to have a mentality that strives to care for and have compassion about those around one’s self is a truth to aspire towards. To be conscious of one’s actions and their impact on others and the surrounding environment, I would argue, is worth pursuing. To fight oppression and to feel enraged about the injustices of the world is worth pursuing. To grieve, to mourn because of the way people are hurt is worth pursuing. To feel a sense of joy or fulfillment because some progress is made or a struggling friend achieves some sense of contentment or closure or healing is worth pursuing.

However to pursue happiness just for the sake of hap-piness, whether it be from God or some other means? It just doesn’t make sense to me. r

Endnotes1. Williams, P. (2013). “Happy.” On G I R L. New York City, NY: Columbia Records.2. Furler, S. (2013). “Pretty Hurts.” [Recorded by Beyoncé Knowles]. On Beyoncé. New York City, NY: Columbia Records. 3. Mescudi, S. (2009). “Pursuit of Happiness.” [Record-ed by Kid Cudi, MGMT, and Ratatat]. On Man on the Moon: The End of the Day. New York City, NY: Good Music.4. Crowder, D. and Parker, J. (2009). “Oh, Happiness.” On Church Music. Roswell, GA; sixsteprecords.5. Redman, M. (1995). “The Happy Song.” On Passion For Your Name. London, UK: Kingsway Records.

Christina is from St. Paul, Min-nesota and a special major in sociology/anthropology and educational studies. Her dream

is for everyone to realize the game “Duck, Duck, Goose” is actually called “Duck, Duck, Grey Duck.”

Christina Keller ’14

The monster fish swims dangerous inside of methree days and three nights

by Dorothy Kim

33 | Leaving Space to Listen

musicians. When I heard what sounded like some sort of harmonic alchemy, one of them might turn to another and name the chord progression with an intrigued smile.

What also became clear was that when other musicians asked, “Who are you listening to?” they were referring to a very intense kind of listening that could be just as accurately described as studying. If I said I listened to a particular artist, I would have to be able to talk about particular chord progressions, what made a certain melody so interesting, a singer’s tone quality, or other very specific musical details that I wouldn’t really pick up if I simply “listened” in the way that I “listen” to music while I write. The goal of listening to a particular

artist was usually some combination of imitation and understanding. Similarly, when I was interacting in combinations of English and Spanish, I had to listen with that same level of focus in order to actually understand what people were telling me, as well as to, then, use the phrases that would most effectively communicate what I was trying to say.

Looking at the Bible, various writers frequently exhort their readers to listen. James 1:19 says, “Let everyone be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to anger.”1 Proverbs is full of statements like, “If one gives answer before hearing, it is folly and shame.”2 And most compellingly, Jesus frequently begins or ends parables by declaring variations of, “Let anyone with ears to hear listen.”3 When Jesus tells me to listen, I believe that what is being asked of me is at least as intense as what I had to do in Panama and what I have to do as a musician. I also believe that a deep level of listening is a necessary element of both the Christian faith and the kind of dialogue and community life that Swarthmore has so emphasized.

When asked to name the greatest commandment,

“So, who are you listening to?” the quest-tion caught me a little bit off guard. I was squeezed into a folding seat in a 15 passenger van with musicians at the Panama City Jazz Festival, where I was externing. “Right now, a lot of Nina Simone,” I answered, and soon everyone was chiming in. We discussed particular tunes and suggested artists who were similar while universally affirming that while there were comparable singers, and there might be comparable pianists, there was definitely no one else who could do both in the way that she did. After a few days of very similar occurrences, I realized that I would have to be ready to answer, “Who are you listening to?” at the Panama City Jazz Festival as readily as I answer, “What do you study?” at Swarthmore. I also realized that talking coherently and competently about jazz required informing speech with listening to a deeper extent than I had first thought.

Over the course of my extern week, I listened in ways that I never had before. This was because I was interacting with people in my second language and listening to, and sometimes playing, jazz with professional jazz

LEAVINGSPACE

to listenby Nathan Scalise

Jesus responds, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.”4 Imagine trying to love someone without listening to them. Showing love to someone requires an understanding of their desires and needs. It entails a level of emotional involvement and interaction that cannot occur without listening. Trying to love without listening is awkward at best and can even be harmful at worst. As George Bernard Shaw somewhat humorously put it, “Do not do unto others as you would that they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same.”5 For instance, a freshly baked apple crumble would make my brother very happy, but it would make me sick because I’m allergic to apples.

Loving God, therefore, requires listening to God. The more time I’ve spent both pondering and practicing prayer, the more it has struck me as strange that it is described as a conversation in theory, and often looks like a one-sided conversation in practice. I’ve spent a lot of time in Christian communities, and I’ve seen an emphasis on praising God, on serving God and on praying to God. All of these things are implicitly rooted in and require listening to God. Without listening, it’s not possible to know how God wants to be praised or what kind of service pleases God. Fre q u e n t l y, I’ve heard it said that we read the Bible in order to know what God says. In other words, we listen by reading. I believe that reading the Word is a necessary but not sufficient component of listening to God. Seriously listening to God isn’t something that can be done while reading the Bible any more than it would be possible to seriously listen to lectures while doing my readings. Listening requires an exclusive focus on the speaker and their words. In that respect, I don’t believe that listening to God is fundamentally different from listening to anyone else. As such, listening to God requires listening in the most literal sense of the word. When I listen to God, what I do is very similar to what I do before a jazz concert.

I clear some mental space and I focus on the “sound” that I’m trying to hear, then I wait.

Seriously listening to anyone entails prioritizing that person and implicitly states that you value them, their perspective, or some combination thereof, enough to invest energy in trying to understand what they are saying. Put more succinctly, listening is an act of love. Therefore, choosing whom or what to listen to is a decision about whom to love. As a Christian, I believe that God loves everyone and that any expression of my faith would be hideously incomplete without love. In the words of Paul, “If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but

do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.”6 Consequently, I believe that I cannot dismiss anyone as unworthy of the level of listening I have described above. This isn’t to say that I agree with or support

everything that I’ve listened to. I don’t. But, returning to my analogy to music, when I truly listen to something that I don’t really like, I know why I don’t like it. I can point to the spots

where I’d like to have rewritten the melody or changed a lyric.

When Jesus

Trying to love without listening is awkward at best and can even be harmful at worst.


35 | Leaving Space to Listen

was twelve, He was in the temple “sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions.”7 This is the first time in the Gospel of Luke that Jesus is acting as an independent person and the first even remotely mental task that Jesus does is listen. That’s a powerful statement. About twenty years later, Jesus would proclaim, “Woe unto you, teachers of the law!”8 but before He denounced them, He listened to them. A similar pattern, compressed into a few minutes, occurs over and over in Jesus’ interactions: someone asks Him a question, He responds with a question, He listens, and then He exposes what’s going on beneath the surface. This pattern shows up in the introduction to the story of the Good Samaritan,9 the question about paying taxes to Caesar,10 and the question of whether the baptism of John was from heaven.11 Jesus knows God and the word of God in an incredibly intimate way, and not just because He is God. On the occasions when Jesus actually critiques

the theology of the Pharisees and Sadducees, He points to specific practices and the specific commandments that they are violating.12 In other words, Jesus has studied the Word of God and he has

listened to those around him. That same model, studying the Word, listening, and looking at what does and doesn’t line up, is still the best model I can find for the process of discerning how to respond to what I listen to.

Reflecting on my experiences as a member of the Swarthmore community and various Christian communities on and off campus, I have been on both ends of good and bad listening. Weeks or even months after a conversation and usually in the light of some additional piece of information, I have realized what someone was trying to tell me. I have waited until I had what seemed like enough information, drawn conclusions, and stopped trying to listen in the way I’ve described above. I’ve then found out later that my conclusions were wrong, and that occasionally my assumptions could not have been further from the truth. This has happened with relatively small things like suggestions for essay revisions and more important things like understanding why people felt excluded by some of the many groups of which I

Nathan Scalise ’16

Nathan is from Brewster, Massachusetts and is currently

searching for the 25th hour of the day. When not running or eating, he basically lives in the Lang Music Building.

am a part. At times, my own bad listening has caused unnecessary pain to people that I care about. The only way that I’ve found to make up for bad listening is through a significantly larger amount of good - at least much better - listening.

Listening requires leaving space for speech.

Sometimes listening to the silence and what isn’t said is as important as listening to anything that is said. It can be awkward. But, I’ve often heard people talk about being able to have a wonderful conversation with a close friend without saying a word. Furthermore, as a musician I have learned that the rests are as important as the notes. Great pieces of music often sound comically bad if you play them without the rests - for fun, try this with the “Lacrimosa” from the Mozart Requiem. Listening is a serious endeavor. It takes work, time, and energy. Even so, I have regretted listening poorly but never regretted trying to listen in the way I’ve outlined. Now, since I appreciate the irony of writing about listening, I’m going to stop talking and listen.

Thank you for listening.r

Endnotes1. James 1:19 (NRSV)2. Proverbs 18:13, (NRSV)3. Mark 4:9 and 4:23, Matthew 11:15 and 13:9, to name a few.4. Luke 10:27 (NRSV)5. http://www.bartleby.com/br/157.html6. 1st Corinthians 13:1, NRSV verses 2 and 3 also elaborate on the idea.7. Luke 2:46 (NRSV)8. Luke 11:46-52 (NRSV)9. Luke 10:25-37 (NRSV)10. Luke 20:20-26 (NRSV)11. Luke 20:1-8 (NRSV)12. Mark 7:9-13 (NRSV)

If I perish, I perish for such a time as this set my path on fire

by Dorothy Kim


CONTRIBUTORS

Sam Gutierrez ’15

Hi, my name is Sam. You can find me either staring blankly at a window or daydreaming my time away.

George Abraham ’17

George plans to major in Engineering and/or Mathematics. He has written spoken word po-

ems since 10th grade. He is a member of OA-SIS and recently competed in CUPSI.

You can see his piece on page 5. You can see his piece on page 21.

Josh Gregory ’15

Josh, from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is an Honors Religion major. He is an avid pil-grim.

Dorothy Kim ’15

Dorothy majors in Biology and English Literature and is from Port Washington, New York. She en-joys eating Moose Tracks ice cream and reading The Swatter in her free time.

You can see his piece on page 28. You can see her piece on pages 9, 23, 32, and 35.

Nancy is a special major in Literary Translation who still has too many things she wants to do in

life to decide what she will do after graduation. Her goal right now is to finish translating her first novel from Korean into English.

Nancy Yeon-Joo Kim ’14

You can see her piece on page 18.

Dionne is a Studio Art major from Ghana. She loves design and has a deep contempt for Comic Sans.

Dionne Wilson ’15

You can see her piece on page 13.

Our Lord and Redeemer,

You alone are good. You are full of grace, mercy, compassion. Slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love. In complete authority, you stand supreme. Your greatness exceeds far beyond our limited understanding.

In endless creativity you shape all things. Even this journal you formed from the beginning. We invited you to be present in every detail, large and small, reflected and glorified on every page. We now dedicate this work to you and pray that its purpose be fulfilled on our campus.

We pray for Swarthmore College. That you would shape this community into a place of radical, transformative love. That we would jointly set aside sinful desires and pursue righteousness for our good and your glory. We ask that you would open the hearts and minds that have hardened against you, reminding us of your forgiveness in the midst of our continual rebellion. That in our classrooms, our concert halls, our athletic fields, your will would be made complete.

Let heavenly peace come down upon us. Give us eyes to see and humble hearts to listen. Lead us to your Truth and to a clear under-standing of you. For eternal is your power, and your justice, and your glory, and your love.

PRAYER FOR SWARTHMORE

Amen.

37 | Peripateo Staff

PERIPATEO STAFF

Meghan Huang ’14

Meghan is a Psychology major from Elkins Park, Pennsylvania. On Wednesdays, she wears pink.

Michael Superdock ’15

Michael is from Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania and is a major in Computer Science. When hold-

ing a hot object, he likes to drop it like it’s hot.

Shirley Ramirez ’14

Shirley is a Biology major with a minor in Spanish from Upland, California. She likes exploring and singing songs about sun-shine.

Josselyn Tufino ’14

Josselyn is an Economics major with a minor in Public Policy from Brooklyn, New York. You can find her avoiding the sun and drinking coffee.

Nate Lamb ’17

Nate is a minimalist.Carlo Bruno ’17

Carlo is an intended Political Science major from Half Moon Bay, California. He misses the beach and the Mexican food.

Roy Walker ’16

Roy is a Lutheran from York, Pennsylvania, ma-joring in Economics and minoring in Statistics.

If these fail to pan out, he plans to expand his backroom dorm barbershop into the biggest business since Paul Mitchell.

Heitor Santos ’17

Heitor is Political Science and Education special major from Recife, Brazil. He likes to lie on

Parrish beach and complain about pasta bar.

Patrick Han ’16

Patrick Han plans to major in Political Science and minor in Public Policy and Chinese. A Chinese-born Korean raised in southern California, he enjoys fencing and long walks on the beach. He is also a great driver.

Renan came all the way from the south of Brazil to explore his many talents in the States. He is cur-rently a freshman at Swarthmore and hasn’t yet decided on his major and two minors.

Renan Meira ’17

May the path rise to meet you and surround you with good yet to be done. May your hands grasp onto love andestablish peace.And when you are weary,may the Spirit overflow its banks and bathe your feet in grace.Selah

Selah.

סֶלָה

Pause.Breathe.

Think of that.


סֶלָה

Documents

Swarthmore Peripateo (Vol 2, Issue 2)