It’s about 4:30 in the afternoon Sunday as I write this. Usually by this time I’m either proof-reading a completed post for Monday or wrapping-up my work on a finished idea. What’s worse, I don’t even I care that haven’t written a post yet. I mean, I’d probably care tomorrow when I wake up and realize I failed all of you readers, but at this point I’ve had too little sleep and too much Netflix to function as my normal self.
Well, perhaps not entirely. At least I’m writing about not wanting to write. It’s a start. I’ve been writing professionally long enough to know you can’t just sit around waiting for inspiration to strike if you want to get a blog post, article, story or book written. People who do that aren’t writers.
If you aren’t a writer you can get away with not writing when you don’t want to. Hobbies and pastimes are voluntary. But when writing is what you do you don’t just stop. In fact, if you’re doing things right, most of the time it feels like you can’t stop writing. For writers, not-writing should feel stranger than writing.
There’s a myth out there that writing is easy (“Oh, so you’re a writer? That’s cool. I might write a novel in my spare time some day”). It’s not. Yes, there will be days when the words flow out and you’re convinced what you’re writing is pure genius and you just know these words have the power to touch people’s souls. But mostly you have to sit down everyday with your pen or your laptop or your typewriter and make the words move from brain to fingers.
Struggling to write is perfectly okay just so long as you don’t give up. I suppose it’s that way with most things, actually. Anything worth doing is going to be hard at some point. What’s important is that we don’t stop, at least not for long. By all means take a break, eat a little chocolate and watch some anime (my sister hooked me on Fullmetal Alchemist Brotherhood), but don’t stay there.
It’s about 7:30 in the afternoon as I finish writing this. Look at that — we’ve got a finished blog post, even with the distractions of searching for quotes about writing and playing Star Trek Online. And you know what? I think I just might keep writing. My short story collection needs one more story, and there’s a character named Taline just waiting to be discovered …
What should your heart be set on once you give your life to the Lord? Is it keeping the commandments? going to church? an active prayer life? acts of service? Those are all good things, but they should be a side-effect of our primary focus. In other words, they’ll happen because we want to keep the Law, fellowship with other believers, pray, and serve when our hearts are in the right place.
In Christopher West’s book Fill these Hearts, he quotes mid-twentieth century artist and writer Caryll Houselander as saying, “If instead of using the expression ‘spiritual life’ we used ‘the seeking,’ we should set out from the beginning and go on to the end with a clearer idea of what our life with God will be on this earth” (56). Our conversion isn’t a static state. It’s a continuous search for closeness with God. Read more →
Before Daredevil premiered on Netflix in April of last year, the closest Marvel’s Cinematic Universe came to portraying a superhero of faith was Captain America’s line, “There’s only one God, ma’am, and I’m pretty sure he doesn’t dress like that” in The Avengers three years earlier. As much as I like and admire Steve Rogers as a character, however, I’m not sure I’d describe him as a man of faith. Certainly he’s a moral man who believes in God, but his faith doesn’t play a major role that we can see on-screen.
Matt Murdock (played by Charlie Cox), on the other hand, is a character defined by his faith. The way he’s portrayed in the Netflix series leaves no doubt that Matt is a staunch Catholic and that his faith influences every decision he makes. The religious elements don’t make Daredevil any less violent (this is not a show for children or squeamish adults), but the series’ engagement with religious themes does make it one of the most intriguing things on screen right now.
It’s rare to see a character portrayed as unabashedly Christian in today’s culture, at least outside of films produced by a faith-based group such as Sherwood Pictures. It’s even rarer to see a man of faith cast as the hero of a gritty drama. Yet Matt Murdock is a practicing Catholic who proclaims his belief on-screen, as well as a seriously impressive superhero.
Quick note: I’ll be honest, I don’t know all that much about Catholicism. I’ve known Catholics and counted several my friends, read a few books written by Catholic authors (both fiction and non-fiction), and encountered some facts about Catholicism in studying British history, but I wouldn’t really consider myself knowledgeable on the subject. If you’re reading this as a Catholic and I say something stupid, please correct me with love in the comments 🙂
Quicker note: this article contains spoilers for both seasons of Daredevil. Spoilers for Season 2 will be clearly noted.
To Kill, or Not To Kill
Everything about Matt’s choices is influenced by his Catholicism. He won’t kill because he firmly believes it is morally wrong. That is explored strongly in the first season, when we learn Matt refuses to kill his enemies and tries his best to prevent others, including his allies, from killing as well. It’s back again in the second season when
SPOILER WARNING
we learn in flashbacks that Matt’s college romance with Electra ended after she asked him to kill the man who murdered his father. A few episodes later, we find out that she has a mission to pull Matt away from the faith that was, in part,why he’s not still fighting alongside Stick. It didn’t work. Matt wasn’t a perfect enough Christian to say no to premarital sex or to leave Electra when she was stealing cars and breaking into people’s houses, but his faith runs too deep for the possibility of murder to not act as a wake-up call.
(end spoilers)
Unlike Batman, who doesn’t (typically) kill because it’s part of his crime-fighting code, Daredevil doesn’t kill because it’s part of his faith. The only way he would consider breaking the law of God that prohibits murder is if he thinks sacrificing his soul would save enough people to make it worthwhile. That’s why he considers killing Wilson Fisk near the end of Season 1. “I know my soul is damned if I take his life,” Matthew says, “But if I stand idle” people “will suffer and die.”
Daredevil S1, E9
For most action heroes, there wouldn’t even be a question of what to do — you just go out and kill the bad guys. Matt, however, cares about what taking another person’s life says about him. He doesn’t take this question to his bartender or girlfriend though (as an equally introspective but less religious character might). He takes it to his faith in the form of his priest, Father Lantom, who reminds him, “There is a wide gulf between inaction and murder, Matthew. Another man’s evil does not make you good. … the question you have to ask yourself is are you struggling with the fact that you don’t want to kill this man, but have to? Or that you don’t have to kill him, but want to?”
A Question of Motive
In the same conversation where Father Lantom talks with Matt about whether or not Matt should kill Fisk, he also says, “Few things are absolute, Matthew. Even Lucifer was once an angel. It’s why judgment and vengeance… are best left to God. Especially when murder is not in your heart.” When Matt asks how Lantom can know what’s in his heart, the priest responds, “You’re here, aren’t you?” The fact that Matt wrestles with how his faith fits into his mission to fight for justice is one thing that proves he’s a good man. Our motivations matter.
Matt works as a lawyer by day trying to right wrongs within the system, then goes out at night as Daredevil trying to bring justice to the people who were overlooked by the law. In the first episode of Season 2, Matt tells Foggy that the woman they helped as lawyers by recommending a battered women’s shelter would have been murdered by her husband before her escape if Daredevil hadn’t put the man in a hospital. Daredevil goes around fixing the problems that Matt Murdock can’t.
An article that appeared on Slade.com last year said Netflix’s Daredevil understands that Matt’s religion is “essential to his identity … which is what makes the show work.” The article continues, “Murdock’s brutal justice is more than his way of taking personal responsibility for the sins of others; it’s his way of atoning for his own. Murdock’s real superpower, and also his biggest foe, is his Catholicism” (from “Daredevil’s Greatest Superpower Is His Catholicism“). Matt’s religion is what drives him to fight for justice, yet it’s also what makes him question himself at every turn.
Guilt and Redemption
Throughout his crusade, Matt punishes himself as much as the people he’s after. In “Daredevil, Catholicism, and the Marvel Moral Universe,” Leah Schnelbach connects this with “mortification of the flesh.”While Matt Murdock does qualify as a powered-person in the MCU, his powers don’t give him fast healing or make him invincible. To fight evil, “He has to keep getting hit, keep getting wounded. Over the course of the show, we see this process–old wounds reopen, cuts heal slowly, bruises linger, and each fight seems more labored. … The point is that he keeps going anyway” (click here to read the full article). Matt’s only partly joking when he responds to Claire describing him as “blind vigilante who … can take an unbelievable amount of punishment without one damn complaint” by saying, “The last part’s the Catholicism.”
Daredevil S2, E10
Mortification of the flesh is a concept very much tied to penance in the Catholic version of Christianity. It’s referenced even more clearly into Daredevil in Season 2, again by Claire (mild spoiler warning). Matt’s beating himself up (metaphorically, this time) for not saving a group of people soon enough. She suggest he take off his “hair shirt” and “start thinking about climbing down off that cross of yours and spending some time with us normal people for a change.” The idea of Matt martyring himself is a theme throughout both seasons.
MAJOR SPOILER WARNING
One of the aspects of Season 2 I found most interesting was the association of Matt with Jesus Christ. He’s not portrayed as a “Christ-figure” per say, but there’s more going on here than just Claire’s overt reference to Matt crucifying himself. Much like I argued when talking about Luke and Vader in Star Wars, we can compare Matt’s insistence that redemption is possible for Electra to God “not wishing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Pet. 3:9, ASV). While Matt is willing to die for her, what’s more poignant is that he’s willing to sacrifice himself by living for her.
I struggled with this scene in the final episode. Why would Matt give up everything he’s working for in Hell’s Kitchen to run away with such a morally dark character as Electra? Upon further reflection, I realized he didn’t intend to abandon his faith by offering to take this action. While being with Electra does bring out the “devil” side of him, he’s not offering to run off with Electra just so he can be free of responsibility or guilt. He wants to do this because of his stated reason — that she “gets” the part of him that no one else understands — and because of the redemption theme running through this season. He has to believe Electra can be good and he’ll give up his own life to help make that possible.
(end spoilers)
Matt’s not a perfect Christian or a perfect Catholic. Some might even question whether or not he qualifies as a “good man” after putting so many people (criminals, yes, but still people) in the hospital. Where do we draw the line? and what is the responsibility of a moral man confronted with evils that he can fight, but isn’t sure at what cost? Those are the sort of questions that Marvel’s Daredevil offers for our consideration. It’s not interested in a sanitized version of Christianity that focuses on faultless people living lives of bliss and, quite frankly, I’m not either. And neither’s the Bible, if the struggles of David, Peter, Paul and so many others are any indication. God never tells us our walk with Him will be without wrestling. It’s how we respond to the crises of faith — the moments where we wonder if all this is worth it — that count.
I recently finished reading, and then immediately re-reading, Fill These Hearts by Christopher West. It’s a powerful rebuttal to the lie that Christianity is a joyless religion of laws and suppressed desires. West touches on many points regarding marriage and the plan of God that I hit in my book God’s Love Story, a subject you know is dear to my heart. I could probably write half a dozen posts inspired by Fill These Hearts (I already quoted from it in last week’s post), but here’s the part I want to focus on today:
Christianity is the religion of desire — the religion that redeemseros — and its saints are the ones who have had the courage to feel the abyss of longing in their souls and in their bodies and to open … all their desires for love and union to the Love and Union that alone can satisfy. … the saints have learned to open eros (their yearning for love) to Eros (God’s passionate love for them).” (p. 39)
Seeing God’s love described as Eros might make you a little uncomfortable at first (it had that effect on me). Eros is the Greek word for passionate or sexual love. This word doesn’t even appear in scripture, although erotic love is alluded to. The word we usually associate with God’s love — and rightly so — is agape.Read more →
With Captain America: Civil War coming out in just seven weeks, I thought I’d add a post on Scott Lang to my collection of fictional MBTI types. It’s also a pretty good excuse to buy and re-watch Ant-Man.
If you do a quick Google search to see how others on the interwebs are typing Scott Lang, you’ll mostly find ESTP, with a few ISTP, ISFP and one INTP guesses thrown in. One thing all these types have in common is that they’re extroverting their Perceiving process, so that’s where we’re going to start (the P/J preference in an MBTI type refers to how we interact with the outer world).
Sensing vs. Intuition
The S/N preference describes our perceiving function, which is the mental process we use to learn new information. Isabel Meyers wrote that Sensing types “depend on their five senses for perception.” They want to see, touch, and test the information they’re taking in. Subjective or indirect information is less trustworthy, and less interesting, than their own direct experiences. Intuitives, on the other hand, “are comparatively uninterested in sensory reports of things as they are” (Gifts Differing, 57). Intuition is an innovative process that resembles advanced pattern recognition (in Personality Hacker’s words) and focuses on exploring possibilities.
Types that have a “P” in their four-letter name extrovert this mental process. Personality Hacker describes Extroverted Sensing (Se) as a “real-time kinetic” function that’s very in-tune with verifiable details of the outer world. Types with Se high in their function stack are typically very comfortable in their bodies and have a natural talent working with their hands.
Extroverted Intuition (Ne) is the function that ENTP Iron Man leads with. It’s very much about exploring the outer world and trying things just to see what will happen. It actively searches for patterns that haven’t been found and understood yet.
Looking at Scott Lang in Ant-Man (we’re not covering the comics here, just the film), I don’t really see much evidence of him using Intuition. He’ll still have intuition in his function stack (Introverted Intuition is the opposite of Se, so in an SP type that will be either his tertiary or inferior function) but it’s not what he leads with. Just a few examples:
Se types are typically very good working with their hands and coordinating their bodies. Scott possesses the skills to burgle houses (quite impressively) even before having the suit. He is also trained as an electrical engineer and we see him doing skilled hands-on work throughout the film.
When Scott encounters a challenging safe to crack, he doesn’t explore possibilities or try different things. He relies on what he knows will work from past experience and quickly implements it to bypass the fingerprint scanner and freeze the door. He also doesn’t forget any Sensing details (blows up air mattress for the door to land on, hangs comforter in the door to catch the flying hardware).
The “Whose pajamas are these?” question would be irrelevant to Ne, but it’s a detail Se would notice.
Scott learns to control the suit and fight fairly quickly by testing it out actively. It become natural to him and he’s soon effortlessly coordinating sensory details (like timing his jump off the servers at Pym Tech to coincide with bringing Antony into position to catch him).
Feeling vs. Thinking
The F/T preference describes how we make decisions about our behavior and what we think the world should look like. Feeling types typically prioritize how a decision lines up with their values and those of society. Feeling is concerned with the emotional impact of a decision. Thinking, on the other hand, “is essentially impersonal” (Gifts Differing, 65). This process seeks objective truth that doesn’t depend on the perspectives of other people
For “P” types, the judging process is internally focused. Introverted Feeling (Fi) types tend to check-in with the emotional impact of a decision by looking inward. They want to “determine what feels the most in alignment with oneself” (Personality Hacker). For them, decisions have to “feel right” and authentic.
Introverted Thinking (Ti) also checks in with the inner reality, but doesn’t focus on authentic feeling. Instead, it prizes things that “make sense.” Whether or not Ti types can objectively explain a decision, it has to line-up with the theory they’ve formulated about how the world works. They are interested in facts, but “chiefly as illustrative proofs” of their ideas (Gifts Differing, 78).
Scott’s infamous VistaCorp burglary was based on what he felt was right, not on logic. There’s an interesting interview on YouTube where Scott talks about this incident. He says he’s tired of having his “name dragged through the mud” by media who don’t recognize why he did what he did. He’s willing to pay the price for his choices, but he wants the world to respond according to his internal value system and recognize VistaCorp was morally culpable.
In the film itself, Scott is very careful about how he’s defined. He insists he’s a cat-burglar because “robbery involves threat” and he detests violence. This is not just about specificity and getting facts right — it’s about how he’s seen by others in society and how he feels about himself.
When Scott talks about how he sees himself and his subjective view of the world, he defines himself in relation to the kind of man his daughter wants him to be. This is also why he chooses to help Hank Pym. It isn’t about logic — it’s about a “chance to earn that look in your daughter’s eyes, to become the hero that she already thinks you are.”
Scott is certainly not suspicious of emotions or hesitant to share and talk about feelings, unlike the typical ISTP (such as Black Widow and Hawkeye, who I’ll eventually write posts about). He’s not very well in-tune with how others will respond, though (unlike an Extroverted Feeling type, such as ISFJ Steve Rogers). For example, when Pym and his daughter are reconciling Scott expresses his appreciation of their feelings, but in doing so ruins the moment.
Extrovert vs. Introvert
The question now becomes what order Scott uses these functions in. Does he lead with his Extroverted Sensing process (ESFP) or with his Introverted Feeling process (ISFP)? There are very few scenes where we see Scott seeking out people so he can re-charge or where he seems focused on the outer world. His internal ides, cares, and identity are what’s important. Those are all marks of an Introvert. For a character whose entire motivation is based on doing what lines up with his internal locus of control, it makes sense for that introverted decision-making function to take center stage. This makes his ISFP function stack:
Primary: Introverted Feeling
Secondary: Extroverted Sensing
Tertiary: Introverted Intuition
Inferior: Extroverted Thinking
You can learn a lot about people by how they respond under stress, and in Scott we do see a stress-reaction consistent with Inferior Thinking rather than Inferior Intuition (as would be the case for an ESFP). When stressed out, he doesn’t lose control over sensory details or withdraw and get angry. Instead, he starts asking questions and trying to get back on familiar footing (“Who are you, who is she, what the hell is going on here, and can I go back to jail now?”). Stressed Feeling types also tend to act rather than shut-down, which is what Scott does whenever there are obstacles to his plan or when something traumatic happens (like Antony’s death).
One reason people might not like an ISFP typing for Scott is that this type is consistently stereotyped as too “artsy” to go into a field like engineering or implement logical plans. Yet, Dr. A. J. Drenth notes that SFP types “may find themselves curiously drawn to Investigative subjects like math, science, computer science, engineering, etc.” though it’s not necessarily a good fit for their type. They can do it, like Scott, but they may struggle to fit into the system, become frustrated, and even act out in some way (though not necessarily as illegally as Scott did). You can also find personal accounts from ISFPs who work as chemists, geologists, computer programmers, doctors, and engineers. Personality type describes how someone’s mind works — it doesn’t limit what they can and cannot do with those mental processes.
If you enjoyed this post, check out my other MCU typings:
There are a few verses in the New Testament that tell us we “are not under the law” (Rom. 6:15; Gal. 5:18). Though some use this as permission to act however you want so long as you’ve confessed Jesus, most Christians realize that God’s commandments are still in effect. Jesus did not come “to destroy the law or the prophets … but to fulfill” (Matt. 5:17, WEB), and Paul said his own writings “establish the law” rather than repeal it (Rom. 3:31, WEB).
So why do these passages tell us we’re not under the law? I’ve heard many explanations, and touched on some myself, but none of them really answered the question of why Paul would use this phrase. They focused more on trying to say “that’s not really what he meant” than on trying to figure out why Paul chose these words to argue his point. Recently, though, I came across the best analysis of the phrase “not under the law” that I’ve ever seen. It was just a short passage in a little book called Fill These Hearts: God, Sex, and the Universal Longing by Catholic writer Christopher West.
Image by Inbetween from Lightstock
Freed from Bondage to Sin
In Fill These Hearts, West writes about our desires, saying that we can either deny them and go on a “starvation diet,” indulge them in this life like “fast food,” or direct them toward God and partake in His “banquet gospel.” When addressing the idea of freedom in relation to desire, he says,
The Apostle Paul writes that those who “are led by the Spirit .. are not under the law” (Gal. 5:18). They’re free from the law — not free to break it (that’s license); they’re free to fulfill it because they don’t desire to break it. Christ didn’t come into this world to shove laws down our throats. He came into the world to align the desires of our hearts with the divine design so we would no longer need the laws
West, Fill These Hearts, p. 140
This isn’t just West’s own particularly theory; it’s a solid reading of the Biblical text. Basically, he’s just summarizing in modern English what Paul was explaining in Galatians 5 and putting the phrase “not under the law” in its proper context.
This verse in Galatians is preceded by a discussion of two covenants. The Old Covenant is described as one that “gives birth to bondage” (Gal. 4:24, NKJV). When the people broke that covenant, they bought a death penalty on themselves. Jesus paid the price of that broken covenant and freed us from sin with His sacrifice, then mediated and established the New Covenant (Heb. 8:6).
Stand firm therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and don’t be entangled again with a yoke of bondage
Galatians 5:1, WEB
Paul is telling us that if we go back to studiously keeping every aspect of the law as if that will save us “Christ will profit you nothing … You are alienated from Christ, you who desire to be justified by the law. You have fallen away from grace” (Gal. 5:2, 4, WEB). We can’t treat the Old Covenant as our way to salvation. That does not, however, grant license to sin.
For you were called to freedom, brothers and sisters; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity to indulge your flesh,but through love serve one another.For the whole law can be summed up in a single commandment, namely, “You must love your neighbor as yourself.”
Galatians 5:13-14, NET (bold italics mark a quotation from Lev 19:18)
“Love” in this verse is agapao–the divine, selfless love of God. When we start becoming love as God is love, we will keep His laws from the heart instead of by compulsion to an external system.
But I say, live by the Spirit and you will not carry out the desires of the flesh.For the flesh has desires that are opposed to the Spirit, and the Spirit has desires that are opposed to the flesh, for these are in opposition to each other, so that you cannot do what you want.But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
Galatians 5:16-18, NET
That is, we’re no longer held in bondage to a cycle of sin and death. Christ pulled us out of that and set us on a path of walking in the Spirit. If you keep reading verses 19 through 21 you get a list of the “works of the flesh.” All these works are sins under the Old Covenant and under the New Covenant “those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God!” (Gal. 5:21, NET). Someone walking in Jesus won’t act like this. They will shun things prohibited by God’s law because those things are anathema to God’s character. We get a list of God’s character traits and the “fruit” He’s looking for in our lives in verses 22 through 25.
Image by Pearl from Lightstock
Freed to to Fulfill the Law Through Love
The early chapters of Romans discuss this same subject with slightly different wording. First, Paul sets up a connection between sin and the law. He explains that “all have sinned” (Rom. 3:23), but we wouldn’t know that without the law to tell us about sin (Rom. 4:15; 5:13; 7:7). The law let us know we were enslaved to sin.
We know that our old man was crucified with him so that the body of sin would no longer dominate us, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. … So you too consider yourselves dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its desires.
Romans 6:6, 11-12, NET
When Jesus died, He paid the penalty for all sin, which was exposed by the law. When we accept Him, are baptized, and commit to walking in relationship with God, we also “die” in a figurative sense. We’re freed from sin. It’s not supposed to shackle us anymore, and we don’t have to obey its pulls.
For sin will not have dominion over you. For you are not under law, but under grace. What then? Shall we sin, because we are not under law, but under grace? May it never be!
Romans 6:14-15, WEB
Here’s Paul saying the same thing West was about freedom not being license to sin. Those who are “not under the law” still aren’t allowed to break the law. In fact, the more we become like God the less we’ll want to break His rules.
Image by Anggie from Lightstock
In Romans 7, Paul draws an analogy between being under Old Covenant law and a marriage. Marriages end when one of the married people dies (Rom. 7:1-3). The Old Covenant represented the first marriage between God and His people. That Covenant ended at Christ’s death and, through Him, we died to it as well.
So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you could be joined to another, to the one who was raised from the dead, to bear fruit to God.
Romans 7:4, NET
Now, we are betrothed in marriage to Jesus Christ. We’re being transformed on the inside to become like Him and our heavenly Father. We’re not “under the law” because we’re becoming like the Lawgiver (Is. 33:22; Jas. 4:12; 1 Jn. 3:1-3). We’re marrying the One who fills the law to its fullest extent.
God is love. As we become like God we learn to “be love” as well, and that leads us toward fulfilling the law (Rom. 13:8-10). We’re not freed from the law so we can do whatever our fleshly nature urges, but rather so that we can live-out the fullest expression of God’s divine law by imitating His character. The law isn’t how we receive eternal life, but because we love God we still keep His law on our way to eternity.
Like An Anchor 