Fear-Conqueror, Fear-Bearer and Fear-Miner

By Eric H. F. Law

We are approaching the 10 year anniversary of September 11, 2001. Osama bin Laden is dead. Going after him and his organizations were the stated reason for the U.S. to enter into war in Afghanistan. Now that we “got him,” why don’t I feel safer? The TV news constantly reminded us that his death might cause retaliations which mean potential increase of terrorist activities against the U.S. This triggered an old feeling of powerlessness that I felt 10 years ago and then a few years later when the U.S. invaded Iraq.

In my book, Finding Intimacy in a World of Fear, I wrote about how we, as a nation, dealt with our fear through two primary images – fear-conqueror and fear-bearer. Fear-conquerors deal with fear through acts of aggression against an “other” seen as enemy. Fear-bearers are taught to treat fear as a warning tactic that says: Go no further. If you are a fear-bearer and you do not use fear to limit yourself, there is an implicit threat of violence.

Immediately after the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center, we went into fear-conqueror mode. Bathed in patriotic and religious rituals, new rules were being defined to justify aggression; later, the doctrine of preemptive strikes was born. As long as we were striking back, it did not matter how it was justified—we were conquering our fear.

Meanwhile, everyday people were made to conform as fear-bearers. President Bush, in his address to Congress on September 20, 2001, invited us, the people, to continue to participate in the American economy and have patience in facing the inconveniences of tighter security when we traveled. In the months that followed, the call for patience for many came to mean: keep your mouth shut and endure the new rules. Certain types of people were being singled out and searched in airports, even though President Bush said explicitly, “No one should be singled out for unfair treatment or unkind words because of their ethnic background or religious faith.” While persons from the historical dominant group said that they were willing to give up some of their rights for the sake of security, the historical minorities and powerless groups experience this as an extra burden put on those already perceived as fear-bearers. Systemic prejudices and discrimination against the historical minorities were practiced openly all in the name of security.

Fear-conquerors and fear-bearers are often presented to us as the only two options in dealing with our fear. If I cannot fight like Rambo to conquer my fear, the only other option is for me to be a fear-bearer, stepping in line in support of the fear-conquerors in order just to survive. While I agree that the U.S. should not become fear-bearers by submitting to the control of the terrorists, I have trouble with the fear-conquerors’ course that the nation has taken to conquer its fear. But if these were the only two options, being fear-conquerors was the only choice. By becoming fear-conquerors, the U.S. basically was insisting that the terrorists be the fear-bearers and step in line to our demands. When both sides insisted that the other be fear-bearers, violence would be sure to escalate. When the wars were going badly and the people in the United States were beginning to question the fear-conquerors’ approach, the fear-conquerors turned inwards on their people—forcing those who questioned the validity and legality of the wars into fear-bearers. This is the problem with having only two options in dealing with fear.

Jesus refused to be a fear-bearer. He did not stay within the safe boundaries set by the religious and political institutions of his time. He crossed the line again and again and as predicted, violence would visit upon him. Jesus refused to be a fear-conqueror either. He rejected the assumptions that the Messiah was supposed to be like a rebel, using aggression to liberate the oppressed. Jesus offered a third alternative - the fear-miner. He took us on a journey to face our fear through his betrayal, suffering, death and resurrection. In facing the ultimate fear – death, he exposed the unjust application of rules and rituals that oppressed and divided people so the fear-exploiters could maintain the status quo.*

Jesus showed us the greater story of life, which was not about conquering our fear with aggression, nor simply surviving out of our fear of punishment. We are to approach fear as an opening; when we dig down we can mine from fear the God-given gift of wisdom, courage, dignity and self-esteem with which we can face any adversity that comes our way. Buried below our fear is the seed of ministry. Beyond our fear is the hope of resurrection, with new visions for us, our communities, and our nations.

So, Osama bin Laden is dead. Does this mean the wars will soon be over? I doubt that. Does this mean we have no more fear of terrorists? I doubt that too. Getting bin Laden only represents a victory of our fear-conqueror mindset. It does not help us look deeply into our fear, mining gifts from it. Without the learning from truly addressing our fear, we will find another “enemy” to go after soon continuing our fear-conquerors’ way. That includes turning inward against our own people. In that sense, prejudice and discrimination against Muslim Americans probably will continue. Anti-immigrant movements that had been on the rise before will continue. Many of them had nothing to do with bin Laden but target non-English-speaking immigrants in the name of security.

Will we continue to be cast as fear-conquerors and fear-bearers? Yes, of this I am sure. So the questions for us are: How can we resist being cast as the fear-conquerors targeting the less powerful ones in our midst? How can we refuse to be fear-bearers and speak up against the systemic prejudices? How can we expose the fear-exploiters who seek to gain politically and financially by exploiting our fear? Finally, we need to learn from Jesus. We need to become fear-miners and create gracious places where people can share and face their fear in order to mine from it directions for ministries because this is the only faithful way to address our fears finding intimacy with ourselves, others and God.

*For full exploration of fear-exploiter, see Chapter 5 of Finding Intimacy in a World of Fear by Eric H. F. Law.

** Rev. Eric H. F. Law, MDiv ’84, is the Founder and Executive Director of the Kaleidoscope Institute for Competent Leadership in a Diverse Changing World (http://www.kscopeinstitute.org/) and author of 6 books including Finding Intimacy In A World of Fear. He is the author of The Sustainist (http://ehflaw.typepad.com/blog/), a weekly blog on Spirituality for Sustainable Communities in a Networked World.

Churches that commune

By Brett Donham

Winston Churchill once said, “Initially we shape our buildings and then, thereafter, they shape us.” This is never truer than with our places of worship. By and large, these buildings, as beautiful as they can be, frustrate the purpose for which they were built, or the purpose for which they should have been built. They can stifle the formation of fully engaged Christians.

Today, in many places, church buildings are being built and existing ones remodeled to serve a new model of “church” (the people gathered), that harks back to the early days of Christianity. In these places people gather in community to offer praise and thanksgiving, to reflect on scripture, to share stories about Jesus Christ and his impact on their lives, to share a commemorative meal, and through this to come into communion with Christ, and with one another. These are communal activities, with many players, several centers of action and movement, and require the ability to see one another and feel as a gathered body.

The traditional forms of church buildings, with everyone facing in the same direction and with the “expert”; the intermediary or interpreter, on a raised stage addressing an audience is the antithesis of gathering in community. The ministry of all the baptized, the gift of the Holy Spirit that says we all have something to contribute, has no acknowledged place in this style of church building. Church as a spectator activity doesn’t engage people in the ongoing work of formation. Only buildings that encourage a sense of community and participation can create the apostles necessary to invigorate the Church.

One such church building is St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Brookline, Massachusetts. Originally designed by Richard Upjohn at the high point of the Oxford Movement, that sees the Holy as dark, mysterious and unapproachable; the building was reconstructed after a disastrous fire that left only the four walls and the tower standing. [See the 1849 plan].
1849 Plan
After two years of mourning, reflection, planning and discernment, the building was reconstructed in a centralized form. The former chancel was closed off to make a chapel. The altar which had been set against the east wall was moved a third of the way into the space. Dormers were added to the roof to flood the altar area with natural light, and the seating was wrapped around the altar on three sides with the choir seated on the fourth. [See the new plan].

New Plan

All the congregants are in close relationship to the altar area and members easily come forward to read scripture, assist with Communion and healing prayer, and offer announcements of mission opportunities and parish activities. Intercessory prayer is offered from the seated congregation, but because of the close seating arrangement, all can hear them. The altar, which is movable, sits on a platform around which the congregation gathers for Communion. As worshippers leave the circle to return to their chairs, others take their place. The priest and chalice bearer move around the platform, serving the bread and the wine, until all have received.


My last eight years as a trustee of Episcopal Divinity School, interacting with students and faculty, participating in worship and the classroom, have taught me the centrality of community in forming apostles and faithful people. I believe we need to rediscover our first century roots. Our theology demands it; the future of the Church demands it; creating the Kingdom here on earth demands it. Our designs of spaces for worship need to support it.


*Brett Donham is an architect whose practice includes churches. He is a trustee of Episcopal Divinity School.
(The photo shows St. Paul's Church Brookline, MA)

We need to recommit ourselves to non-violence

By Kwok Pui-lan

We need to end the violent and incendiary language in our national political discourse.

The shootings in Tucson, Arizona, cannot be separated from the culture of vitriolic rhetoric we hear on talk radios and some TV programs. Since the election of President Barack Obama as the first black president, such rhetoric has escalated, especially during the health care debate last year.

The comments of Clarence Dupnik, the sheriff of Pima County have resonated across the world. He spoke on Saturday after the shooting outside a Tucson supermarket left Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords critically injured along with 14 others injured and six dead.

Dupnik said: “When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous. And unfortunately, Arizona I think has become sort of the capital. We have become the Mecca for prejudice and bigotry."*

In this month when we ponder the lives of two leaders slain by assassin’s bullets, Martin Luther King and John F Kennedy, it is time we considered these issues anew.

In 1965, Episcopal Divinity School student Jonathan Daniels heeded the call of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr and went down to Alabama to take part in the Montgomery March. He stayed behind to work for the Civil Rights Movement and to integrate the Episcopal churches. On August 20, he was shot while trying to protect a black teenager at a grocery store. He is considered a martyr of the Church and an icon of him hangs in St John’s Chapel at EDS.

In my teaching, I and other faculty members are careful to promote tolerance and critical engagement with those whose opinions are different from ours. One important guideline used from Visions Inc, is “it is OK to disagree, but it is not OK to blame, shame, and attack.”

In worship and meditation, many of us involved in theological education invoke the words and prayers of spiritual leaders, who have dedicated themselves to non-violence: the Rev Martin Luther King, Jr, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and the Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh. Amid riots and police brutality, King said, “I am convinced that for practical as well as moral reasons, non-violence offers the only road to freedom for my people.”

Most importantly, we take to heart the message of Jesus Christ: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the children of God” (Matt. 5:9). Jesus has modeled for us the courage of pursuing justice, while affirming the radical love of God for all. He said that the sun rises on the evil and on the good, and rain falls on the righteous and on the unrighteous.

Today as a nation we kept a moment of silence to honor the victims of the tragedy, Arizona Representative Gabrielle Giffords, Federal Judge John Roll, 9-year-old Christina Taylor Green, Dorothy Morris, Gabe Zimmerman, Dorwin Stoddard, Dorothy Morris and Phyllis Schneck.

I recommit myself to work for peace, to the non-violent resolution of conflict, and a democratic future in which diverse opinions can be expressed with respect.

* Editor’s note: Dupnik has already come under attack from some in the media, with one talkshow host calling for his resignation.

**Kwok Pui-lan is William F Cole Professor of Christian Theology and Spirituality at the Episcopal Divinity School. She has written for Episcopal News Service and her blogs also appear in Religion Dispatches and Patheos.