Admiration

Passages

Every passage tagged with this emotion in the Vela corpus. Search the body text, narrow by source or register, click through to a book’s profile to see how the passage sits with the rest of the work.

Page 182 of 288 · 20 per page

• From Quit: The Power of Knowing When to Walk Away (2022)

  Title : Quit Author: Duke, Annie ASIN : B09PTLY4BL [image file=Image00023.jpg] Praise for Quit“This brilliant and entertaining book documents a major flaw in human actions and decisions: the bias against quitting. I learned a lot from its compelling tales of failures and sound recommendations. You will too.” —Daniel Kahneman, Nobel Prize winner in economics and #1 New York Times bestselling author of Thinking, Fast and Slow “Every business school has a course in starting new businesses, but few have a course in shutting them down at the right time. This book fills that gap with brilliant new insights and fantastic stories. Quit what you are doing right now and start reading this book.” —Richard Thaler, Nobel Prize winner in economics and bestselling coauthor of Nudge “Engrossing, important, and grounded in science, Quit is a gem that will allow you to navigate the world more effectively.” —Katy Milkman, bestselling author of How to Change “Quit is the rare book that is both a page-turner and a legitimately important contribution. If you’ve never thought of quitting as a competitive advantage before, prepare to be enlightened.” —David Epstein, bestselling author of Range “There aren’t many times you will say, “this book changed my life.” This is one of them.” —Seth Godin, bestselling author of The Practice “Only a poker player could write this classic book on when—and more importantly how—to fold a bad hand in business, investing, relationships and life.” —Ryan Holiday, #1 New York Times bestselling author of Stillness Is the Key “There’s no wisdom that matters more in life than knowing when to persist and when to pull the plug. Annie Duke offers a wealth of knowledge to help you figure out whether it’s time to let go.” —Adam Grant, #1 New York Times bestselling author of Think Again and host of the TED podcast WorkLife “A game-changing book of strategy from a world-class thinker on risk and decision-making.” —Shane Parrish, host of The Knowledge Project podcast “The opposite of a great virtue is also a virtue. And Quit is the perfect dialectical complement to Grit . Weave these two virtues into your character and live a much more fulfilling life.” —Philip Tetlock, bestselling author of Superforecasting “Quitting is not just an art; it’s also a science—and there is no one so uniquely suited to teach us both as Annie Duke.” —Brian Christian, coauthor of Algorithms to Live By “Not since Kenny Rogers has an expert storyteller so clearly demonstrated the importance of knowing when to hold ’em and when to fold ’em, nor presented a clearer strategy to determine when, instead of merely walking away, it’s time to run.” —David McRaney, author of How Minds Change “You won’t want to quit reading this book, both because it is such a rewarding read and also because its lessons are so important, useful, and memorable.” —Don A.

• From Paul and Matthew Among Jews and Gentiles: Essays in Honor of Terence L. Donaldson (2021)

  Paul and Matthew among Jews and Gentiles2 2 was a very decent banjo player. For a night of songs and games, we just played and played together while others were singing. I knew right then that there was something fascinating about this person. Later on, I learned that his undergraduate degree from the University of Toronto was in Mathematics. One can see traces of that training in his work as a biblical scholar. There is always in his work a search for precision and for beauty, for balance and for nuance, for logical development and for capturing vast amounts of information in ways that help one see patterns without ever imposing rigid or formulaic propositions on the materials under study. One may, for example, refer especially to Terry’s Judaism and the Gentiles for this kind of careful approach. 2

• From The Laws of Human Nature (2018)

  we are acknowledging people’s achievements, celebrating them, without having to feel insecure. We are admitting their superiority in the arts or sciences or in business without feeling pain from this. But this goes further. In recognizing the greatness of someone, we are celebrating the highest potential of our species. We are experiencing Mitfreude with the best in human nature. We share the pride that comes from any great human achievement. Such admiration elevates us above the pettiness of our day-to-day life and will have calming effect. Although it is easier to admire without any taint of envy those who are dead, we must try to include at least one living person in our pantheon. If we are young enough, such objects of admiration can also serve as models to emulate, at least to some degree. Finally, it is worth cultivating moments in life in which we feel immense satisfaction and happiness divorced from our own success or achievements. This happens commonly when we find ourselves in a beautiful landscape—the mountains, the sea, a forest. We do not feel the prying, comparing eyes of others, the need to have more attention or to assert ourselves. We are simply in awe of what we see, and it is intensely therapeutic. This can also occur when we contemplate the immensity of the universe, the uncanny set of circumstances that had to come together for us to be born, the vast reaches of time before us and after us. These are sublime moments, and as far removed from the pettiness and poisons of envy as possible. For not many men . . . can love a friend who fortune prospers without envying; and about the envious brain cold poison clings and doubles al the pain life brings him. His own woundings he must nurse, and feel another’s gladness like a curse. —Aeschylus 11 Know Your Limits The Law of Grandiosity We humans have a deep need to think highly of ourselves. If that opinion of our goodness, greatness, and brilliance diverges enough from reality, we become grandiose. We imagine our superiority. Often a small measure of success will elevate our natural grandiosity to even more dangerous levels. Our high self-opinion has now been confirmed by events. We forget the role that luck may have played in the success, or the contributions of others. We imagine we have the golden touch. Losing contact with reality, we make irrational decisions. That is why our success often does not last. Look for the signs of elevated grandiosity in yourself and in others—overbearing certainty in the positive outcome of your plans; excessive touchiness if criticized; a disdain for any form of authority. Counteract the pull of grandiosity by maintaining a realistic assessment of yourself and your limits. Tie any feelings of greatness to your work, your achievements, and your contributions to society. The Success Delusion By the summer of 1984, Michael Eisner (b. 1942), president of Paramount Pictures, could no longer ignore the restlessness that

• From Paul and Matthew Among Jews and Gentiles: Essays in Honor of Terence L. Donaldson (2021)

  Delighted to share in honoring Terry Donaldson, whom I have considered a model of scholarly probity since our graduate-student days, I offer this essay in a constructive historical vein. In a recent volume representing the PWJ approach, Donaldson wrote a typical y circumspect review, which highlighted several problems with this perspective. I shall take one of his positive reflections on the volume, however, as my departure point: I also appreciate the attention that is given to terminological matters. Many of the terms and categories used in critical reconstructions of the past are laden with meanings and connotations that have accumulated through centuries of subsequent use, which readily leads to anachronisms, distortions, and false assumptions. 18 This is a basic principle of ancient history. Alas, when it comes to terms and categories we all find it easier to strain out the gnats in others’ work while we swallow whole the camels we find more congenial. 19 I shall push farther in this direction, hoping to be radical enough to get at some ignored ancient roots. 18 Donaldson, “Paul within Judaism: A Critical Evaluation from a ‘New Perspective’ Perspective,” in Nanos and Zetterholm, Paul within Judaism, 283 (emphasis added). 19 As much of my research has been devoted to “the rectification of names,” I am sympathetic; cf. Mason and Tom Robinson, Early Christian Reader (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2004), 7–10. PWJ scholars place weight on framing categories, however—diaspora, gospel, Judaism—that had no currency, while their concern for shades of meaning in pistis is difficult to follow. Cf. Anders Runesson, “The Questions of Terminology: The Architecture of Contemporary Discussions in Paul,” in Nanos and Zetterholm, Paul within Judaism, 59–68: “Christians” is not emic language in Paul; etic definitions would be hazardous; and even if Acts 11:26 were trusted concerning early use, Christianoi might be better rendered “messianics.” But we normal y transliterate (rather than translate) place and group names. Although Christ-followers preferred in-house terms—brothers and sisters, slaves of Christ, in Christ—all known outside observers thought that Christiani had been around for decades before 100 CE (Josephus, Ant. 18.64 in the most likely authentic part, 93 CE referring to the 30s; Pliny, Ep. 10.96, on former Christians who left 25 years earlier; Tacitus, Ann. 15.44.2 and Suetonius, Ner. 16.2 on Christians in Nero’s Rome). Cf. John Barclay, “ ‘Jews’ and ‘Christians’ in the Eyes of Roman Authors c. 100 CE” in Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries: How to Write Their Histories (ed. Peter J. Tomson and Joshua Schwartz; Leiden: Bril , 2013), 313–26; Birgit van der Lans and Jan N. Bremmer, “Tacitus and the Persecution of the Christians: An Invention of Tacitus?”

• From Sex God: Exploring the Endless Connections Between Sexuality and Spirituality (2007)

  We know why he kept it. How you treat the creation reflects how you feel about the creator. When a human being is mistreated, objectified, or neglected, when they are treated as less than human, these actions are actions against God. Because how you treat the creation reflects how you feel about the Creator. To be a Christian is to work for the new humanity. Jesus commands his followers to feed and clothe and visit and take care of those who need it. They’re fellow image-bearers, they’re just like us, and when we love them, we’re loving God. A church exists to be a display of the new humanity. A community of people who honor and respect the poor and rich and educated and uneducated and Jew and Gentile and black and white and old and young and powerful and helpless as fully human, created in the image of God. These bonds we have with each other are why, for many, there is so much power in the Eucharist, also called Mass or the Lord’s Supper or communion. We take the bread and dip it in the cup to remind ourselves of Jesus’s body and blood.19 To reflect on the truth that we’re all in this together, one body, and that his body being broken and blood being spilled are for our union. It isn’t just about our relationship to God as individuals. Often communion is seen as a time to reflect on God’s love for us in Jesus’s dying on the cross. Which it is. But it was originally just as much about my desperate need to be reminded of your humanity and the humanity of all the people around us. When I respect the image of God in others, I protect the image of God in me. When Jesus speaks of loving our neighbor, it isn’t just for our neighbor’s sake.20 If we don’t love our neighbor, something happens to us. And in trying to protect the image of God in them, we just might be protecting the image of God in ourselves in the process. Because with every decision, conversation, gesture, comment, action, and attitude, we’re inviting heaven or hell to earth. I have a new hero. Her name is Lil, and I would guess she’s in her late fifties. I met her earlier this year when she introduced me to her daughter, whom she was pushing in a wheelchair. Early in their marriage, Lil and her husband21 decided that they would adopt two children. As they became familiar with the family services system, they learned that there were kids in the system nobody wanted. So they went to the local adoption agency and asked for the kids with the most pronounced disabilities, the most traumatic histories, and the most hopeless futures. They asked if they could have the kids nobody wanted. Over the past thirty or so years, they have raised well over twenty children, raising their biological children alongside their adopted children.

• From The Laws of Human Nature (2018)

  them from our influence. At a certain tipping point, they may turn against us with a suddenness that is shocking. Like Elizabeth, we must realize that we are actually in a weak position, and we must struggle to adopt the opposite attitude: We expect nothing from the people around us, from those whom we lead. We are not defensive or sitting back but completely active— everything we get from others, and most definitely their respect, must be earned. We have to continually prove ourselves. We have to show that our primary consideration is not ourselves and our sensitive egos but the welfare of the group. We must be responsive and truly empathetic to people’s moods, but with limits—to those who show themselves to be mostly self-promoting, we are tough and merciless. We practice what we preach, working harder than others, sacrificing our own interests if necessary, and being accountable for any mistakes. We expect the members of the group to follow our lead and prove themselves in return. With such an attitude, we will notice a very different effect. People will open themselves to our influence; as we move toward them, they move toward us. They want to win our approval and respect. With such an emotional connection, we are more easily forgiven for mistakes. The group energy is not squandered on endless infighting and the clashing of egos but is directed toward reaching goals and accomplishing great things. And in achieving such results, we can forge an aura of authority and power that only grows with time. What we say and do seems to carry extra weight, and our reputation precedes us. That . . . is the road to the obedience of compulsion. But there is a shorter way to a nobler goal, the obedience of the wil . When the interests of mankind are at stake, they wil obey with joy the man whom they believe to be wiser than themselves. You may prove this on al sides: you may see how the sick man wil beg the doctor to tel him what he ought to do, how a whole ship’s company wil listen to the pilot. —Xenophon Keys to Human Nature We humans like to believe that the emotions we experience are simple and pure: we love certain people and hate others, we respect and admire this individual and have nothing but disdain for another. The truth is that this is almost never the case. It is a fundamental fact of human nature that our emotions are almost always ambivalent, rarely pure and simple . We can feel love and hostility at the same time, or admiration and envy. This ambivalence began in our childhood and set the pattern for the rest of our lives. If our parents were relatively attentive and loving, we remember our childhood fondly, as a golden period. What we conveniently forget is that even with such parents we tended to

• From Branded: Brainwashed Inside NXIVM (2020)

  One of those employees, 28-year-old Toni Natalie, becomes the company's top seller out of Rochester, New York. [Dr. Joseph] Toni is completely enamored by Keith. She falls for his charms. He makes her feel special. [Narrator] In 1992, Natalie leaves her husband to move to Clifton Park to be closer to company headquarters... and her new lover, Raniere. [Dr. Marie] They were a dynamic couple. She just seemed to really have her act together and be confident. Keith could make you feel like the most important person in the world. And...the women around him just loved him. He had something magical about him. [Narrator] But it's not just Raniere's romantic life that's thriving. Between 1990 and 1992, Consumer Buyline's gross receipts ballooned from $200,000 to 35 million. But like everything with Raniere, it's all just smoke and mirrors. When these people become affiliates, what are they going to do on the average? -[unintelligible] -Right. They're going to at least, at least, at least do this. [Paige] It became pretty apparent that Consumer Buyline was more about selling those memberships than actually bulk buying. It's going to perpetuate, right. It's going to go and go, 'cause on the average, this works. They were selling the opportunity to sell Consumer Buyline. And you can only do that so many times before you run out of people to sell that to. The math just does not work out, ever. [Armando] The longer that it went on, the less sustainable that it became. And suddenly you have all these government organizations breathing down your neck, investigating where's this money actually going. [Narrator] Raniere knows his scam's been exposed and cuts an astounding deal to save himself. [Armando] In the fall of 1996, Keith and Consumer Buyline settled out of court for approximately $40,000. He had defrauded all of these people, and he didn't even have to admit that he was wrong. [Dr. Joseph] Raniere was a businessman. He's gonna come back, and he's gonna try to do this again. It's a part of his genetic makeup. [Narrator] It's just another step in Raniere's meteoric rise from alleged child prodigy to renowned ladies' man to conniving entrepreneur, laying the foundation for his greatest scheme yet. In 1997, a 37-year-old Raniere and his girlfriend, Toni Natalie, pivot to their next moneymaking venture-- National Health Network, a health products store. [Paige] National Health Network is right in line with Consumer Buyline. Honestly, he learned one trick and then was like, let's do it again-- this time, with supplements. And there's a lot of multilevel marketing schemes centered around supplements. [Narrator] But Raniere has bigger aspirations. Later that year, he meets the woman who he thinks can help bring them to fruition when 43-year-old Nancy Salzman walks into his store seeking help. Salzman comes in looking for a natural remedy for a stomach issue. Apparently, she's so constipated, that she's looking for any solution to solve this issue. And that's when she gets to meet Keith.

• From The History of Christianity II: From the Reformation to the Modern Megachurch (2017)

  97Lecture 10—Eastern Orthodoxy: From Byzantium to Russia SAINTS õIn Russia, the Orthodox Church and the state worked together to recognize local holy men as national saints and fund the building of new churches and monasteries to cement the loyalty of far-f lung villages. But sometimes saints developed huge followings on their own, whether the authorities approved or not. õThese saints often lived lives of radical sacrifice. They show how the spirituality of the monastery found its way into ordinary life, especially in the form of strange, charismatic characters known as holy fools. õA holy fool was a person who rejected the comforts and standards of ordinary society in an outrageous way, perhaps by wandering around without clothes in the dead of winter, or standing in a town square and mocking aristocrats as they passed by. The point was to compel bystanders to question their own assumptions and priorities, and to ref lect on the ways that Christ himself was a holy fool in 1 st -century Palestine. õOne notable holy fool is Xenia of St. Petersburg, who was born in the 18 th century to a wealthy family. She married a colonel in the Russian army, but he died suddenly and left her a widow when she was only 26. Most Russian women of her social rank would have immediately remarried and carried on with a life of frequent teas and balls and evenings at the theater. õInstead, Xenia started selling off her husband’s estate and all her belongings to raise money to give to the poor. She saved his military uniform and developed the odd habit of putting it on and wandering the streets of St. Petersburg, living as a homeless person and speaking to anyone who would listen about Christ. Her family was so alarmed they hauled her into a hospital to have her head examined, but the doctors found her mentally sound. 98The History of Christianity II õShe spent the rest of her life—nearly 50 years—living and preaching on the streets, alternately mocked as a crazy woman and venerated as a fool for Christ. After she died, her grave became a shrine. Pilgrims f locked to her grave to pray for miracles. Xenia was a saint long before the church got around to officially canonizing her in 1988. SUGGESTED READING Gillquist, Becoming Orthodox. L ossk y, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. Shevzov, Russian Orthodoxy on the Eve of Revolution. Wa re , The Orthodox Church. QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER äWhat was at stake in Eastern and Western Christians’ debates over theology? Why couldn’t they just agree to disagree? äHow does the Orthodox Christianity we find in creeds and theology books compare to the faith as believers have actually experienced it? äDespite the interest of some American evangelicals, Orthodox Christianity has won relatively few converts in the West. What might explain this?

• From In the Dream House (2019)

  Laura looked like an old-fashioned movie star: wide-eyed and ethereal. She was dry and disdainful and wickedly funny; she wrote poetry and was pursuing a degree in library science. She felt like a librarian, like the wise conduit for public knowledge, as if she could lead you anywhere you needed to be. John, on the other hand, looked like a grunge rocker-cum-offbeat-professor who’d discovered God. He made kimchi and sauerkraut in huge mason jars he monitored on the kitchen counter like a mad botanist; he once spent an hour describing the plot of Against Nature to me in exquisite detail, including his favorite scene, in which the eccentric and vile antihero encrusts a tortoise’s shell with exotic jewels and the poor creature, “unable to support the dazzling luxury imposed on it,” dies from the weight. When I first met John, he said to me, “I got a tattoo, do you want to see?” And I said, “Yes,” and he said, “Okay, it’s gonna look like I’m showing you my junk but I’m not, I swear,” and when he lifted the leg of his shorts high on his thigh there was a stick-and-poke tattoo of an upside-down church. “Is that an upside-down church?” I asked, and he smiled and wiggled his eyebrows—not lasciviously, but with genuine mischief—and said, “Upside down according to who?” Once, when Laura came out of their bedroom in cutoffs and a bikini top, John looked at her with real, uncomplicated love and said, “Girl, I want to dig you a watering hole.” Like a picara, I have spent my adulthood bopping from city to city, acquiring kindred spirits at every stop; a group of guardians who have taken good care of me (a tender of guardians, a dearheart of guardians). My friend Amanda from college, my roommate and housemate until I was twenty-two, whose sharp and logical mind, flat affect, and dry sense of humor witnessed my evolution from messy teenager to messy semiadult. Anne—a rugby player with dyed-pink hair, the first vegetarian and lesbian I ever met—who’d overseen my coming-out like a benevolent gay goddess. Leslie, who coached me through my first bad breakup with brie and two-dollar bottles of wine and time with her animals, including a stocky brown pit bull named Molly who would lick my face until I dissolved into hysterics. Everyone who ever read and commented on my LiveJournal, which I dutifully kept from ages fifteen to twenty-five, spilling my guts to a motley crew of poets, queer weirdos, programmers, RPG buffs, and fanfic writers. John and Laura were like that. They were always there, intimate with each other in one way and intimate with me in another, as if I were a beloved sibling. They weren’t watching over me, exactly; they were the protagonists of their own stories. But this story? This one’s mine.

• From Paul and Matthew Among Jews and Gentiles: Essays in Honor of Terence L. Donaldson (2021)

  In the spirit of friendship and respect for a great scholar and a genuine caring human being, I, alongside other colleagues and friends, present this Festschrift to Professor Terry Donaldson with respect and admiration. I also want to thank his wife, Lois, and his adult children Graeme, Meredith, and David. Tabula Gratulatoria Robert Derrenbacker Stephen Chambers John Kampen John W. Marshal Richard S. Ascough Mark Nanos Edith Humphrey Paula Fredriksen Margaret Y. MacDonald John S. Kloppenborg Philip A. Harland Harry O. Maier Colleen Shantz Cecilia Wassen Peter Richardson Bradley H. McLean Bruce W. Longenecker Richard N. Longenecker Michael Knowles Don Garlington Catherine Jones Ho Jin Nam Murray Baker Joan Campbel John Bertone Luke Amoussou Robert Jewett Steve Notley N. T. Wright 6 6 7 Part One Paul 8 9 1 Paul without Judaism: Historical Method over Perspective Steve Mason Looking back on Pauline research in the last decades there is one trend which is general y accepted in international scholarship, namely that Paul is a Jew, and that he must be understood on the background of Judaism and the O.T. Johannes Munck1 A nomenclature which is thrust upon the past will always end by distorting it, whether by design or simply as a consequence of equating its categories with our own, raised, for the moment, to the level of the eternal. There is no reasonable attitude toward such labels except to eliminate them. Marc Bloch2 When I left a chair in ancient history to take up a New Testament (NT) post (2011), my world changed in many ways. What struck me most about the graduate-student cadre in the new setting was their fascination with “the new perspective on Paul” (hereafter NP). This impressed me, first, because the “new” perspective was older than most of them. Second, it seemed a tiny boat, lashed to the already small ship of Paul’s corpus, for so many researchers. Third, most seemed at least as concerned about alignment with a Paul-guru or theological tradition as with the open-ended project of understanding the historical Paul. This last impression was strengthened during research for an SBL panel on part of N. T. Wright’s Paul and the Faithfulness of God (2013).3 I found the internet heaving with debates about whether Wright’s Paul fit the NP and, more earnestly, whether Wright was sound in relation to a theological standard. Any distinction between Wright’s own theology and that of Wright’s Paul was hard to detect. I could not help thinking: “Some of you say I belong to Sanders, 1 Johannes Munck, “Pauline Research since Schweitzer,” in The Bible in Modern Scholarship (ed. J. Philip Hyatt; Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1965), 166–77 (174). 2 March Bloch, The Historian’s Craft (trans. P. Putnam; New York, NY: Vintage, 1953 [manuscript ca. 1943]). 3 N. T. Wright, Paul and the Faithfulness of God (London: SPCK, 2013). 10 10 Paul and Matthew among Jews and Gentiles some to Dunn, some to Wright, some to Campbell (Douglas or William). What about me, Paul?”

• From The Laws of Human Nature (2018)

  ambivalence and mistrust, we have not changed as much as we think. Throughout history, however, certain notable leaders have been able to erect a bulwark against this volatility, to earn a type of solid respect and support that allowed them to accomplish great things over time. We think of Moses, or the ancient Indian emperor Asoka, or Pericles (see chapter 1), or the Roman general Scipio Africanus, or Queen Elizabeth I. In more modern times we can think of Abraham Lincoln, or Martin Luther King Jr., or Warren Buffett, or Angela Merkel, or Steve Jobs. We shall call such power authority , reverting to the original significance of the word, which comes from the Latin auctoritas , the root meaning “to increase or augment.” To the ancient Romans, those who had founded their republic possessed tremendous wisdom. Their ancestors had demonstrated this wisdom by how strong and long-lasting were the institutions they had established, and how they had transformed their provincial town into the preeminent power in the known world. To the extent that Roman senators and leaders returned to this basic wisdom and embodied the ideals of the founders, they had authority —an augmented presence, an increased prestige and credibility. Such leaders did not have to resort to speeches or to force. Roman citizens willingly followed their lead and accepted their ideas or advice. Their every word and deed seemed to carry extra weight. This gave them greater leeway in making hard decisions; they were not judged merely by their latest success. The Romans were notoriously fractious and mistrustful of those in power. Their politics could easily descend into civil war, which in fact happened on several occasions. Having leaders who exuded authority was a way to control this combativeness, to get things done, to maintain a degree of unity. And it required that such leaders embody the highest of ideals, ones that transcended the pettiness of daily political life. This Roman model, which represents an adherence to a higher purpose, remains the essential ingredient for all true forms of authority. And this is how we must operate if we wish to establish such authority in the world today. First and foremost, we must understand the fundamental task of any leader—to provide a far-reaching vision, to see the global picture, to work for the greater good of the group and maintain its unity. That is what people crave in their leaders. We have to avoid ever seeming petty, self-serving, or indecisive. Showing signs of that will stir up the ambivalence. Focusing on the future and the larger picture should consume much of our thinking. Based on this vision, we must set practical goals and guide the group toward them. We need to become masters of this visionary process through practice and experience. Attaining such mastery will give us tremendous confidence in ourselves, as opposed to the fake confidence of those

• From In an Unspoken Voice (2010)

  Title : In an Unspoken Voice Author: Levine PhD, Peter A. Further praise for In an Unspoken Voice “Peter Levine’s first book, Waking the Tiger, changed the world of trauma treatment: somatic therapy, specifically Somatic Experiencing®, the name of the specific approach he developed, no longer alternative fringe practice, became a major player in the world of the mainstream psychotherapies. Like an anthropologist acquainting us with a different culture that he has made his own, Levine, in his new book, In an Unspoken Voice, systematically and engagingly initiates us into the ways of the body and the nervous system that animates it: how it works, what makes it tick, how to make friends with it, how to understand it, how to communicate with it and, last but not least, how to treat it and release it (and with it, us) from the hold of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). No longer unspoken, all that is held in the body—in trauma and in health, in psychosomatic illness and in resilience—is described, articulated and made coherent. The result is a masterful, fluent book that seamlessly moves between evolution, science, Polyvagal theory, mind-body practice, impassioned defense of our animal natures, self-disclosure and specific step-by-step guide to treating trauma and restoring resilience. It is erudite, it is impassioned, it is learned and it is accessible.” —Diana Fosha, PhD, director of The AEDP Institute, co-editor of The Healing Power of Emotion: Affective Neuroscience, Development and Clinical Practice and author of The Transforming Power of Affect: A Model for Accelerated Change “To be traumatized is to be condemned to endless repetitions of unbearable experiences. In this beautifully written and engrossing book, Peter Levine explains how trauma affects our body and mind and demonstrates how to call upon the wisdom of our bodies to overcome and transform it. The accounts of his personal and therapeutic experiences, integrated with the essentials of the sciences of trauma and healing, are highly informative and inspiring. His distinctive voice should be widely heard by survivors, clinicians and scientists.” —Onno van der Hart, PhD, Honorary Professor of the Psychopathology of Chronic Trauma, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands, and coauthor of The Haunted Self: Structural Dissociation of the Personality “Like a wise old weaver Peter Levine painstakingly blends together strands of many dense colors into ever-fresh patterns emerging from his honed intelligence and fertile imagination. These strands comprise careful reflections on his own personal healing, his work with others, insights from studies with animals, different views from indigenous peoples here and elsewhere, various scientists exploring the biologies of the body, spiritual practices in many traditions and whatever else passes in front of his sparkling eyes. His first (and now iconic) book, Waking the Tiger, is now part of the canon for the education of therapists. This major new book is a welcome landmark in his long history of creating an intricate tapestry of Somatic theory and practice.”

• From Sex God: Exploring the Endless Connections Between Sexuality and Spirituality (2007)

  But none of that is what this text is all about. The husband’s waiting for the wife to submit is actually a failure to lead. He thinks he’s the strong leader, but he’s actually weak and misguided. If he really thinks he’s the head, then he would surrender his desires and wants and plans. He would die to his need to be in control and do whatever it takes to serve her, to make sure she has everything she needs. He would die to himself so that she could live. He would lay down his life for her, like Jesus laid down his life for the church. This is submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ. How would she respond if it were crystal clear to her that her husband was placing her needs ahead of his own? What if he had a habit of this? What if she knew without a shadow of a doubt that his love for her was so great that he would give his life for her in the blink of an eye? There are those who say, “Well, yes, that’s nice now and then, but what about the tough decisions? What happens when push comes to shove and somebody has to call the shots and make the tough decisions? What then?” I’ve actually had this encounter several times with men after I’ve taught on the man dying for the woman. It’s interesting how emotional men get when this verse is talked about. And “push comes to shove” is probably not the best way to frame the question . . . Think about your friendships, the closest ones, the ones that have gone the distance. How often do you ask who is in charge? Do you ever find yourself questioning, “Where does the buck stop?” No, it’s not even on the radar. Over time you’ve built up reserves of trust and love, and power and control become irrelevant. The healthier and more whole a marriage relationship is, the less you ask these kinds of questions. When people are truly living in what’s called “mutual submission,” you lose track of who’s in charge. In a marriage, you’re talking about power and control only when something central to the whole relationship has fallen apart. And once again, poetry comes to our rescue. The woman says in Song of Songs, “I am my beloved’s and my beloved is mine.”4 Which Is It?

• From Quit: The Power of Knowing When to Walk Away (2022)

  The same grit that helped Ali become such a great champion—admired and revered almost without equal—became his undoing when it drove him to ignore signs that were obvious to anyone on the outside looking in that he should quit. That’s the funny thing about grit. While grit can get you to stick to hard things that are worthwhile, grit can also get you to stick to hard things that are no longer worthwhile. The trick is in figuring out the difference. Grit vs. QuitWe view grit and quit as opposing forces. After all, you either persevere or you abandon course. You can’t do both at the same time, and in the battle between the two, quitting has clearly lost. While grit is a virtue, quitting is a vice. The advice of legendarily successful people is often boiled down to the same message: Stick to things and you will succeed. As Thomas Edison said, “Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time.” Soccer legend Abby Wambach echoed this sentiment over a century later when she said, “You must not only have competitiveness but ability, regardless of the circumstance you face, to never quit.” Similar inspirational advice is attributed to other great sports champions and coaches, such as Babe Ruth, Vince Lombardi, Bear Bryant, Jack Nicklaus, Mike Ditka, Walter Payton, Joe Montana, and Billie Jean King. You can also find almost identical quotes from other legendary business successes through the ages, from Conrad Hilton to Ted Turner to Richard Branson. All these famous people, and countless others, have united behind variations of the expression “Quitters never win, and winners never quit.” It is rare to find any popular quote in favor of quitting except one attributed to W. C. Fields: “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. Then quit. There’s no use being a damn fool about it.” Fields was hardly a role model, creating a public persona out of characters who loved drinking, hated children and dogs, and eked out an existence on the fringes of society. That’s not much of a counterbalance . . . and Fields didn’t actually say it! By definition, anybody who has succeeded at something has stuck with it. That’s a statement of fact, always true in hindsight. But that doesn’t mean that the inverse is true, that if you stick to something, you will succeed at it. Prospectively, it’s neither true nor good advice. In fact, sometimes it’s downright destructive. If you are a bad singer, it doesn’t matter how long you stick with it. You’re not going to be Adele. If you are fifty years old and set your sights on becoming an Olympic gymnast, no amount of grit or effort will make it possible for you to succeed.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  PSEUDO-CHRYSOSTOM. As the proof of the husbandman’s industry lies in the abundance of his crop, so the fulness of the Church is the evidence of an industrious teacher; so it is here said, And as they departed from Jericho, a great multitude followed him. No one was deterred by the toilsomeness of the journey, for spiritual love feels no fatigue; no one was kept away by the thought of sufferings, for they were going into possession of the kingdom of heaven. For he who has in very deed tasted the reality of heavenly good, has nothing to attach him to earth. In good season these blind men come before Christ, that having their eyes opened, they may go up with Him to Jerusalem as witnesses to His power. They heard the sound of the passers by, but saw not their persons, and having nothing free about them but their voice, because they could not follow Him with their feet, they pursued Him with their voice; When they heard that Jesus passed by, they cried out, saying, Have mercy on us, O Lord, thou Son of David. AUGUSTINE. (de Cons. Ev. ii. 65.) Mark relates this miracle, but speaks of only one blind man. This difficulty is thus explained; of the two blind men whom Matthew has introduced, one was well known in that city, as appears by Mark’s mentioning both his name, and that of his father. (Mark 10:46.) Bartimæus the son of Timæus was well known as having sunk from great affluence, and now sitting not only blind, but a beggar. For this reason then it is that Mark chose to mention him alone, because the restoration of his sight procured fame to the miracle, in proportion to the notoriety of the fact of his blindness. Though what Luke relates was done after the same manner, yet his account is to be taken of another though similar miracle. (Luke 18:35.) That which he gives was done as they drew near to Jericho; this in the other two as they came out of Jericho. And the multitude rebuked them that they should hold their peace. PSEUDO-CHRYSOSTOM. For they saw how mean their clothes, and considered not how pure their consciences. See the foolish wisdom of men! They think great men are hurt when they receive the homage of the poor. What poor man dare salute a rich man in public? HILARY. Or, They bid them hold their peace, not from reverence for Christ, but because they were grieved to hear from the blind what they denied, namely, that the Lord was the Son of David. ORIGEN. Or; Those that believed rebuked them that they should not dishonour Him by styling Him merely Son of David, but should rather say, Son of God, have mercy on us.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  AUGUSTINE. (in Verb. Dom.) Let us recollect the Old Testament account. Jacob saw in a dream a ladder reaching from earth to heaven; the Lord resting upon it, and the angels ascending and descending upon it. Lastly, Jacob himself understanding what the vision meant, set up a stone, and poured oil upon it. (Gen. 28:12.) When he anointed the stone, did he make an idol? No: he only set up a symbol, not an object of worship. Thou seest here the anointing; see the Anointed also. He is the stone which the builders refused. If Jacob, who was named Israel, saw the ladder, and Nathanael was an Israelite indeed, there was a fitness in our Lord telling him Jacob’s dream; as if he said, Whose name thou art called by, his dream hath appeared unto thee: for thou shalt see the heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man. If they descend upon Him, and ascend to Him, then He is both up above and here below at the same time; above in Himself, below in His members. AUGUSTINE. (Tr. vii. in Joan. c. 23) Good preachers, however, who preach Christ, are as angels of God; i. e. they ascend and descend upon the Son of man; as Paul, who ascended to the third heaven, and descended so far even as to give milk to babes. He saith, We shall see greater things than these: (2 Cor. 12:2. 1 Cor. 3:2) because it is a greater thing that our Lord has justified us, whom He hath called, than that He saw us lying under the shadow of death. For had we remained where He saw us, what profit would it have been? (c. 17.). It is asked why Nathanael, to whom our Lord bears such testimony, is not found among the twelve Apostles. We may believe, however, that it was because he was so learned, and versed in the law, that our Lord had not put him among the disciples. He chose the foolish, to confound the world. Intending to break the neck of the proud, He sought not to gain the fisherman through the orator, but by the fisherman the emperor. The great Cyprian was an orator; but Peter was a fisherman before him; and through him not only the orator, but the emperor, believed. CHAPTER 2 2:1–41. And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: 2. And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. 3. And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. 4. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. xxi. [al. xx.] 1) Our Lord being known in Galilee, they invite Him to a marriage: And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee.

• From Reading the Bible from the Margins (2002)

  Furthermore, these two sisters are portrayed in the Gospel of John as well-known apostolic figures of the early church who were beloved by Christ (11:5). Parallel to Peter's confession of Jesus’ messiahship (Matt. 16:15–19), Martha also served as a spokesperson for the early church according to John 11:27. Additionally, through Mary's evangelism, many came to believe in Jesus (John 11:45).19 These women were hearers, servers, and proclaimers of the word. Let's now reread the story through the eyes of women. The rabbi Jesus was received in the home of one of his apostles named Martha, who also served as founder and deacon of the house-church in Bethany where she proclaimed God's word. On this day her sister Mary the evangelist sat at the feet of Jesus to study Torah. Martha asked the rabbi to have his student help with the duties required by the deacon, but the rabbi responded that studying Torah was just as important as serving. The radicalness of this narrative affirms leadership positions assumed by women during Jesus’ earthly ministries, even though it was considered blasphemous by the more legalistic religious leaders of his time. Such a reading should not lead the reader to assume that Christianity's treatment of women was more liberating than the Jewish treatment of women, only that Jesus’ actions attempted to dismantle patriarchal structures. However, the men who led the post-Pentecost Christian church were quick to forget Jesus’ example and reverted to patriarchal models. Regardless of how we interpret Jesus’ solidarity with women, for several feminists, as long as Christ remains a male, it is difficult for women to find a Savior who has experienced the trials and tribulations distinctive to women. What then does it mean to have a female Christ? This does not imply an androgynous Christ, for Jesus was born male, with masculine sexual organs. What is meant by a female Christ is that he was symbolically female. In the same way that we can talk about an economically marginalized Christ, a Hispanic Christ, an Amerindian Christ, an Asian American Christ, and a black Christ, we can also talk about a female Christ. But is Jesus’ symbolic femaleness enough? For some feminist theologians, like Mary Daly, the maleness attached to Jesus makes the problem of finding salvation in a male Savior overwhelming.20 Other feminist scholars, like Rosemary Ruether, insist that in spite of Jesus’ male gender, he stood against all forms of hierarchal systems that privileged one group at the expense of another. These systems include patriarchal structures.21 Because Jesus continues to be incarnated among “the least of my people,” Jesus is a woman. He can be understood as being female because there is no distinction between male and female in Christ and because at times he referred to the Deity's characteristics in the feminine. First, Jesus can be perceived in the feminine because the biblical text teaches that in Christ there is no male or female.

• From Paul and Matthew Among Jews and Gentiles: Essays in Honor of Terence L. Donaldson (2021)

  Israel, does not.24 She is faithful when Judah is not. By her faithfulness to the law, Jacob’s prophecy to Judah is fulfilled. 25 Tamar does not speak, anymore than does Judah or anyone else in the genealogy. But by her faithful action the word of God to Judah is “uttered,” brought to fruition in the history of Israel. Does Matthew intend all this in the mere mention of her name? It is worth noting that elements of her story find a complement later in the birth narrative in the episode of Mary’s pregnancy and Joseph’s righteousness; indeed, Clements notes, righteousness is “a key discipleship virtue” in Matthew’s gospel.26 Thus there are thematic parallels between Tamar’s story and Matthew’s gospel that lend credence to the supposition that Matthew has Tamar’s scriptural story in mind. External corroboration, however, is also at hand. In Pseudo-Philo, a first-century Jewish text, Tamar (like several other biblical women) plays a starring role.27 In Pseudo-Philo’s story of the exodus, Tamar serves as crucial scriptural reference point, model of faithfulness to God’s covenant people and purpose. When Pharaoh commands the Egyptians to throw the sons of the Hebrews into the river and make their daughters slaves, the Israelites despair. In their despair, they propose to cease having children altogether.28 Amram protests: this is, he suggests, an act of unfaithfulness to the God who has both commanded and covenanted with Israel that they “be made many on the earth” ( L.A.B. 9:2; cf. Gen 1:28, 12:2, 15:5, 17:4–7; Exod 1:8, etc.). Precisely here, Amram appeals to Tamar: Tamar who hid her dangerous pregnancy until the third month; Tamar who was willing to die in order that her son might be a son of Israel ( L.A.B. 9:5); Tamar who believed that it is with Israel that the Lord God has made a covenant. Tamar’s pregnancy serves as an example of righteous faith over and against the Israelites’ failure of faith—a righteous faith that allows the necessary begetting to continue, so that God’s promises to Israel might be fulfilled. Pseudo-Philo’s appeal to Tamar in the context of the genealogical fulfilment of God’s covenant promises—an appeal to which her scriptural story is essential background— provides a parallel to Matthew’s appeal to Tamar in the same context. Thanks to Amram’s appeal to faithful Tamar, in Pseudo-Philo, the Israelite line continues and 24 Cf. A. J. Levine, “Rahab in the New Testament,” in Meyers et al., Women in Scripture, 141–2, here 141: Rahab and the women of the genealogy were seen in contemporary Jewish and Christian literature “not as sinners but as manifesting righteousness.” Indeed, they “may also indicate the higher righteousness that Matthew frequently endorses” (142). 25 Cf. A. J. Levine, Social and Ethnic Dimensions of Matthean Social History (Studies in the Bible and Early Christianity 14; Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen, 1988), 85: Tamar shows greater faith than Judah through her “fidelity to the tradition of Levirate marriage.”

• From The Boys of My Youth (1998)

  Beard finds, always and perfectly, the heartbreaking poetry in everyday speech.” — LIESEL LITZENBURGER, Detroit Free Press “This engaging collection records both wrenching and riotous episodes in the life of a keenly observant character named Jo Ann, whom we follow from babyhood to marriage and beyond.... Humor, terrific insights, and not a little rue make these stories shine, each one a jewel loaded with sparkle and grit.” — Elle “Beard pulls off a neat trick: She shows tragedy for what it is in life — plain old moment-to-moment misery.” — JANET STEEN, Time Out New York “Exquisitely crafted autobiographical essays that have the arc and thrust of good fiction.... Beard’s high-wire trick is that despite such grievous subject matter, she hangs on to her squinty, skinny-girl-on-the-sidelines sense of humor and never lapses into mawkishness.” —SARAH TOWERS, Mirabella “Jo Ann Beard’s work impresses me no end. Funny without being sitcomish, self-aware without being self-absorbed, scrupulous without being fussy, emotional without being sentimental, pointed without being cruel — I could go on and on with these distinctions, all in Beard’s favor, but instead I’ll just say that Jo Ann Beard is a fantastic writer, an Athena born fully formed out of her own painstaking head.” — JEFFREY EUGENIDES, author of The Virgin Suicides PRAISE FOR Jo ANN BEARD’S The Boys of My Youth “Reading Jo Ann Beard’s prose feels as comfortable as falling into step beside an old, intimate friend. She’s the sort of writer whose charm lies in the voice — a kitchen-table drawl entirely uncontaminated by sentimentality.... Beard remembers (or imagines) her childhood self with an uncanny lucidity that startles.” — LAURA MILLER, New York Times Book Review “Utterly compelling... uncommonly beautiful.... The writing lifts the book into the stratosphere.... The key is a voice of equal parts curiosity and vulnerability. Life in these pages is an astonishment.... The Boys of My Youth speaks volumes about growing up female and struggling to remain true to yourself.” — DAN CRYER, Newsday “Jo Ann Beard sustains an almost miraculous level of detachment as she describes the stuff of nightmares... and how she, and by implication all of us, survive them.... Beard evokes the dizzying sensation of tragedy, but she also provides weird, sparkling moments of grace and stillness. The Boys of My Youth evokes the mundane, the hilarious, the horrific, and the redemptive all taken together, the very rhythm of life.” — ELLEN KANNER, Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel “Beard remembers with beautiful simplicity the feeling of youthful longing, and combines those memories with the pains that accompany adult life.” — Marie Claire “These stories do it all. They are smart, funny, and moving. They are personal and unique and also universal.... There is not a false note or wrong word.” — BARBARA FISHER, Boston Globe “Smart, funny, and moving....A gifted and gutsy writer.... This is what a first collection of stories should be.” —Barbara Fisher, Boston Globe Cousins, mothers, sisters, dolls, dogs, best friends: these are the fixed points in.

• From Sex God: Exploring the Endless Connections Between Sexuality and Spirituality (2007)

  The word submit is the Greek word hupotasso, and it’s actually two words stuck together: the word upo, which means “under,” and the word tasso, which is translated “to place in order.” To submit means “to place yourself under, to give allegiance to, to tend to the needs of, to be responsive to.” Some scholars believe it originated as a military term, in the sense that when soldiers submit, they place themselves under their commanding officer. The passage says we are to place ourselves under one another out of reverence, or respect, for Christ. This reference to Jesus calls us to follow his example, his sacrifice, his giving his life for ours. As it’s written in the book of John, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son.”2 At the heart of the worldview of a Christian is the simple truth that people are worth dying for. I was in New York City last week and took some friends to see Ground Zero. It’s hard to explain what it’s like to be there. A haunting sadness seems to linger in the air. But the actual site where the towers collapsed is not the most powerful thing for me about visiting the site. What moves me is to walk several blocks in any direction and pass the firehouses, where there are memorials to the firefighters from those neighborhood stations who lost their lives climbing up the towers to save people. Why do the flowers and plaques and mementos out on the sidewalk stir us like they do? Why do we hear stories of people risking their lives to save others and we often tear up, even if we don’t know any of the people involved? Because people are worth dying for. We know it to be true deep in our bones. And when we see someone actually do it, it’s overwhelming. Jesus said in one of his teachings that there’s no greater love a person can have than to lay down their life for another.3 We know this to be true. People are worth dying for. The You’s Are Plural So the teaching of the passage in Ephesians is to love and serve the people around you, placing their needs ahead of your own, out of respect and reverence for Jesus, who gave his life for us, the ultimate act of love and sacrifice. Die to yourselves, so that others can live. Like Jesus. This passage is being written to a church, to a group of people. The “you” here is plural, meaning many people are being addressed with these words. This church is being taught how to live together in such a way that when people observe their lives together, they will see what Jesus is like. In Greek, the passage continues with verse 22: “Wives, to your husbands as to the Lord.” Did you notice that a word is missing?