Scribbled Meanderings

"But if you agree, you have to go the next step. If only the minority can say, 'It is against our conscience to fight because we must love enemies as well as friends,' and the majority must say, 'We must fight to protect pacifists so that they may have the right to think as they do,' then the majority, the non believers, may live. Who then is the martyr for the faith?" page 46, Peace Shall Destroy Many by Rudy Wiebe. I used to live in a small town where the majority spoke of Pacifism as the only way of life. That war was wrong and not necessary, and that only the non-believers would fight in a war. I remember one Remembrance Day time when one of the Pastors of that town was quoted in the local Newspaper as saying that "only the 'worldly' would fight in a war, and that certainly a Christian would not take up arms." Not that I personally 'believed' in war, but I remember the comments surrounding the duty of soldiers to be especially shallow. And I remember a few people talking about the author of this book - Rudy Wiebe. It seems that his book Peace Shall Destroy Many stirred alot of controversy. But sometimes that controversy is good for us, isn't it? Even though it 'gets us going' so to speak. Rudy Wiebe risked alot when he wrote that book. Many in his community turned against him - and I don't mean his town, but his fellow church people from across Canada that turned against him. Some felt that he had spoken out on a subject that should have been best kept silent. Interesting how a book that stirs the hearts of people and causes the otherwise compliant to think deeper turns out to be a best seller. I'm not sure why I love to read so much, but I do know that I'm not afraid of being challenged by someone else's scribbled meanderings. I borrowed a book to a friend today Emotional Intelligence by Daniel Goleman. Interesting how I felt a sudden trace of misgiving as I handed the book to his dad. Part of that though was because I had underlined various parts of it. One of the areas that stirred controversy in that book was where Goleman spoke of cognitive reframing, or seeing things differently, as a way of lifting oneself out of depression. Certainly a sensitive topic. I was given the book as a gift in 1998 when I was taking some courses in Family Studies and Psychology. A few friends questioned later on my reasons for taking those courses - they were curious why I would bother with it when I wasn't following a specific course of study. I tend to remain distant at those times... how do you explain to someone that you enjoy challenges that seem beyond their comprehension of a good time? Possibly they were concerned because of my personal battles with depression. At that point I found their concern a curious thing. I wondered if they were actually apprehensive of what they may discover about themselves. Critical thinking is a good thing, but not necessarily comfortable I suppose. And maybe I don't necessarily appear to think critically because I don't run around espounding the latest scribbled meanderings that I've read. Maybe I prefer to remain silent in order to confuse the curious.