The Problem of Evil

INTRODUCTION

            In May 2010, I wrote this essay for my Philosophy of Religion course in college. My professor and I hit it off immediately as the chief opposing voices in that class. In the very first class, he opened with a discussion that positioned religions as nothing more than groups who competed to bolster their ranks. I became uncomfortably aware of being in a very hostile environment. I very pointedly explained to him that the 12 disciples were not a "basketball team." They developed a very personal and intimate friendship with Jesus and their purpose was noble. Not ambitious. Well, he did make a mockery of me. People laughed. I remember being very humiliated that first day in class. In retrospect, it may have been his way of knowing who he'd have to deal with. Things mellowed out as the semester progressed, but I stood my ground in class discussion, as respectfully as I knew how, against what was a proud opposition to the existence of God. The unbelieving can be vicious. Besides myself and a few Muslims, not many spoke of their belief that God existed.
            In this essay, you will see a badly restrained sarcasm on my part which thank God found expression only in my writing. I've grown since then. It may be important to note that I was immersed in research that revealed undeniable evidence of an occult presence, of mind and in our society. It's a research that I've laid down since. New Age was one of the religions we touched on in class. My professor gave an exasperated sigh when I explained it's roots and practices.
            I finished that course well. I initially got a B for this essay, but was given a C because it was a day late. 

            I believe the existence of evil can only be reconciled in traditional monotheism for Christianity. It holds for me the most stable explanation than what other religions have put forward, and class discussions have been frustratingly short-sighted. But I will limit my explanation based on those discussions and on the readings. 

            In his essay, “The Argument From Evil”, David Hume is asking about God, “Is he (sic) willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?” (Eshleman 293). Hume is essentially saying that if there be evil in the world, then God cannot be all good and powerful. He is wrong. 

            Let me flip this. Suppose God did save us from the day-to-day drudgery of life with all of its surprise disappointments, heartaches and shrinking pleasures. Suppose God stopped every earthquake, hurricane and holocaust. What does that look like for mankind? The world hails God! Our Superman! Everything is well. But David Hume groans, “… somehow, I’m still not satisfied. Why does God allow such misery?” God hears the growing restlessness and He does double time in the granting of unlimited wishes. The world hails God! Our genie of the lamp! Everything is well. But the result is a people grown fat, super-lazy and incurably wicked. Why should people do anything, never mind reflect anymore?

            The Hip Hop entrepreneur Russell Simmons once said that out of 16 wealthy men that he knew, only 14 of them were unhappy. Why? A man meets the woman of his dreams. She's gorgeous and she makes him very happy in the bedroom. But a year later he hates her guts. Why? Because we are a people that habitually take everything and everyone for granted. It’s just never enough. We are a clamoring fast-food type generation and patience is an enemy. We talk a good game about fairness, integrity and justice, but all of our actions demonstrate that we think character is a waste of time. It’s very chic to be rebellious as long as we put a self-righteous spin on it. This is the hidden evil. David Hume, a malcontent cynic who wants to live his life without accountability and is offended by people who do.

            But let’s continue. God has created “perfect life” on very imperfect earth. David Hume is wracked with boredom. He shakes his fists and curses, “How could You do this to us!?” Man cannot bear this "perfect life" and losing his mind with frustration, he slides fully into his primitive self and shows the meaning of his misery upside the skull of his neighbor. Like a drug addict, he feeds off of his emotions. To find peace again, he begins to savor with abandon the simple pleasure of blood lust. But wait! Out of the ashes of the interrupted holocaust arises a new crop of Hitlers taking advantage of the great discontent of the nations. Now God must again satisfy Hume by working quadruple time to stop the violence and “demonstrate His omnipotence.”

            It should be clear that my illustration of an all-powerful and all-moral God according to David Hume does not assuage the problem of evil at all. The world hails God! Our wimpy celestial maid! All… is not well.

            God may demonstrate firmness and wisdom in what is best for His children. The adult man steps out and finds his life easier because of tough lessons; his selfishness and childish beliefs burned out of him in the fires of the difficult trials he endured. He's better for it. History has shown that men failed when they tried to engineer a utopia, having nothing but horror to show for it. It’s not what we were intended for. One might insist that heaven on earth could be had if God wills it. But how do you upload the magnificent, holy and higher state of heaven into this terrestrial, decomposing mess that we have around us? Man remains fallen on this plane and the world and everything in it is subject to corruption. Everything dies here. A utopia on earth is impossible without the return of Jesus Christ as it is prophesied in the Book of Revelations.

            But David Hume is still not satisfied and he thunders, “No, no, how could a loving and moral God allow such a massive evil like the holocaust to happen?” I won’t deny the worthiness of that question and since no one can give a ready and good answer, certain people in class should abstain from writing that off condescendingly as “checkmate.” I say that no one on earth can really answer this question- certainly not David Hume. But would it surprise the atheist to know that it was his legacy that contributed to the rise of Adolf Hitler? Ahh, let’s briefly examine my mini-assessment of the prequel to Nazi Germany. 

            After the middle ages, there was the Renaissance which gave great weight to the study of the Greeks and the Romans, and from this came Individualism, Humanism and the delightful values of Machiavelli, effectively loosening the holds of Christianity on society (no thanks to the corruption of the Church). The Scientific Revolution came. The Enlightenment came. The Industrial Revolution won the hearts and imaginations of men, in terms of progress with a helpful dose of laissez-faire to keep them nice and numb from morality. Realism, Naturalism and Positivism enters the fray one by one like thugs taking turns beating the faith out of people… but in a subtle way, of course. Enter Charles Darwin to great fanfare, with his theory of evolution tucked under one arm and his principle of natural selection tucked under the other. Mr. Darwin effectively sounds the death knell of faith that had progressively become weaker from the profane isms that ailed it up to then- not to mention keeping people illiterate so they can’t read their bibles. Darwin: the new gospel. If I am an ape and there is no God to look to for help, what now? The insidious evil of nationalism is kicking around and gets a nice power-up boost from Social Darwinism. It gets real nasty out here. My flesh is the new religion! My clique is the new religion! Everyone is dividing up in clan, in color and in creed. Archduke Francis Ferdinand is assassinated by Serbs and the unbearable tension that’s had every nation walking on egg shells explodes into World War I. History clearly shows that the world enters the 20^th Century with a sense of high anxiety. Being a bully is the new and only philosophy. Enter Adolf Hitler, a consummate failure who tried his hand at being a soldier, an artist and a priest. He was born in a time when Germany was being bullied by surrounding nations into a demoralizing poverty and hopelessness. We know the story. But hey, cheers to Lil’ Charlie Darwin!

            So the atheist is blissfully near-sighted when he blames God or Christianity for the moral decline of modern civilization. Man was content to kick God out of his affairs in the first place and now he’s mad when he can’t find Him. Is it possible that the Holocaust was a bit of a wake up call for how low mankind had slumped in their own self-worship and their drive for material gain? That’s a gruesome conclusion, isn’t it? Well… then the next question should be, ‘does man listen to God much?’ Think about it. God is not going to bless progress in as far as it is used to deny His sovereignty by the ingrate and scornful. And it is a naïve foolishness on the part of Hume to expect God not to correct him. I am fully sympathetic about the horror that took place in Germany, but I am certain that God’s intervention in the Holocaust would’ve redoubled military monsters like Hitler and the awful lesson would not have been grasped. God is not to be mocked. If God emphasizes that this world is merely a shadow of the next one, then we must take from that a confidence that death will not be horrible for those who believe unto Jesus (as promised in the bible). But since we generally regard death as horrible, maybe God uses that misconception to wake us up from the stupors we're often prone to fall into.

            So David Hume is sorely in error. If those who are for Hume really must declare “checkmate” in class discussion as the last word about God, then in regard to the existence of God, Richard Swinburne’s teleological design argument has “checkmate” completely. David Hume is still on checkers.

            Lil’ Charlie Darwin removed the good near completely from the lives of Christians whose faith wasn’t strong enough to contain it. And when you remove the good, it’s hard to see in the dark.

            Let’s look at Augustine.

“The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.”

-Roger “Verbal” Kint in the film, The Usual Suspects.

            I will not overlook the existence of Satan. We’ve already relegated God to pale philosophy, and leaving out fallen Lucifer in discussing the problem of evil is a parallel error. If we are going to talk about God, then His angels are relative to this discussion- even the fallen ones.

            In the essay, “Evil as a Privation of Good” by Augustine of Hippo, he writes, “For what is that which we call evil but the absence of good?” (Eshleman 291). I like this because without the sanction of God, Lucifer shrivels up in his own pride and is this living devouring void. Augustine goes on, “But if it should be thoroughly and completely consumed by corruption, there will then be no good left, because there will be no being. Wherefore corruption can consume the good only by consuming the being” (Eshleman 292). For me, this completely describes the irredeemable nature of Lucifer and the 1/3 of heaven that fell with him. In hell, there is no light and there is no peace. Again, Augustine says, “But for good to be diminished is an evil, although, however much it may be diminished, it is necessary…” (Eshleman 291).

            Unfortunately, the discussion of the existence of God using blunt logic is already a significant problem, and to take on the existence of the devil would be overwhelming. But without straying too far from the parameters of the philosophical, it’s my belief as well as my summation based in research of certain peoples, world events and biblical scripture that Lucifer is moving people away from the Word of God and setting up the world stage for the entrance of the Anti-Christ. There are educated, scholarly and well-researched men of sober and reputable dispositions who are noting the physical and metaphysical observations of this truth.

            Lucifer is a defeated enemy who was bested 2,000 years ago by Jesus Christ. His chief means of oppression is fear and lulling deception. He is very cunning. If I want to confuse you as to which path to God was the right one, I will first find you in a desolate state and introduce you to a variety of choices. You will see this as a generous luxury. In your mind, you’ll think what a liberal and flexible God we have, and you’ll regard any claim of a “one way to eternal life” with contempt. Political correctness will give you a card for coolness and be your security blanket to shield you conveniently from the wrath of an ultra liberal crowd. Look to the New Age/ New Thought Movement with its roots in theosophy and Satanism, names like Benjamin Crème, Helena Blavatsky, Albert Pike, Aleister Crowley and potentially Maitreya, the so-called World Teacher.

 

Eshleman, Andrew, ed. Readings in Philosophy of Religion. Wiley-Blackwell, May 2008.

            Print.

16 Blocks

Major Spoilers Ahead

Mos Def as Eddie Bunker and Bruce Willis as Jack Mosley

There’s a great, little movie with Bruce Willis that was released a decade ago.

    It’s about a dried-out, depressed alcoholic cop, who at the last minute is assigned to escort a witness to the courthouse for a 10am hearing. The witness is an ex-con who saw something go down with a dirty cop. The dirty cop and his friends are on the move to intercept the witness before he reaches the courthouse, so our alcoholic cop is now on the run to defend him. ‘turns out later that our alcoholic cop reveals that the witness he's protecting was going to take him down too with his testimony. Our cop has been a part of this rogue unit of police. In the end, our cop goes in to do the right thing.

    In the late 1990’s, my ex-girlfriend introduced me to the album, Black Star in a merciful attempt to expose me to a more authentic Hip Hop experience. I hadn't heard of Mos Def until then. The album was released in 1998 and it's a collaborative effort with rapper, Talib Kweli. Stand out songs are "Definition" and "Redefinition", “Brown Skin Lady” (The opening conversation is sampled from a film called, Chameleon Street) and “Thieves in the Night”. For the latter, please click play on the video above (Mos Def performs the second verse and harmonizes at the end).

    In 2002, Mos Def was cast as Booth in Topdog/Underdog, a play by Suzan-Lori Parks which he later won a joint award for with co-star Jeffrey Wright. I remember that it was a play I studied a long time as a struggling playwright. Bamboozled is a film by Spike Lee with a great concept, and the most memorable performance for me was by Mos Def. In 16 Blocks, he takes on the role of Eddie Bunker. It could've been played by another actor as a throw-away comedic role-- maybe with some tired, stray racial quips. But Mos elevates the seriousness of the story. He adopts a kind of nasal, talkative and fidgety stutter. It's just irritating enough to notice, but not enough to make us hate him. Mos Def doesn’t play him as a stereotype. There’s a sweetness in Eddie that's at just the right measure. There's a 4 part harmony type of thing going on which is what great actors do. I could see the layered thought, the honesty and respect. It's very exciting to see him working his craft. It’s one of the most wonderful performances to watch in this movie. The heart of this character-- his desire to do right is exhilarating! Roger Ebert called Mos Def's work, “a character performance completely unexpected in an action movie…”
 

Mos Def and Jeffrey Wright in the play, Topdog/Underdog

    16 Blocks wasn’t a big hit. Labels that are given by critics like, "chase movie" cheapens the overall quality. Detective Jack Mosley is a guy who is reaping what he has sown. It seems he's having a worse time with it than his colleagues. So it's a very good sign of a live conscience in him. One of the great scenes of this movie is when the dirty cops catch up to Jack and Eddie in the bar. They’re going to kill Eddie and make it look like self-defense. David Morse plays Frank Nugent. Frank chews his gum in smooth, small bites. His hand gestures are cool. He's running things. He leans over the bar in distracting banal guy talk with Jack. Then BAM! A shotgun hole takes out the leg of one of the cops about to kill Eddie. The cops are stunned and reaching for their weapons. Jack pulls the shotgun from behind the stand, cocks it and aims pointblank at Frank's head. The tense gaze between the two-- the wordless defiance. This is Jack's turning point. He's not down with the dirty anymore. It is one of the most exciting scenes of the movie! This is the crux of the movie. This is what quickens the righteous heart. There’s no unearned musical flourish and there’s no super cocky clichéd talk. He’s just a man who is dog gone tired of being a villain and he’s willing to die to do the right thing rather than stay the coward. And I love it. But I suspect most people didn't get it.

Eddie Bunker is caught at the bar

Not strong,
Only aggressive,
cause the power ain't directed
That's why, we are subjected to the will
of the oppressive

David Morse as Detective Frank Nugent

    Jack Mosley and Eddie Bunker are too unlikely people who have to team up for the right thing. It's a believable pursuit. There aren’t any gratuitous speeches about right and wrong, but it’s clear that both men want to change. They want to repent. For Jack, the cost is greater. It means losing respect, friends, his job and maybe his life. Bruce Willis is always a favorite; he plays the role with an aching manhood. His shame is great, but he still looks like a man. When I first saw the film, I was pleasantly surprised to see that Richard Donner had directed it. Richard Donner did directorial duties for Superman, The Goonies, and Lethal Weapon. I don’t think many ticket goers went home pondering too hard about the morality of the movie, but I like to think that it left enough of an impression to cause real reflection in people's lives. That comforts a vague disappointment I have about the box office.
 

    The second greatest scenes are at the end when Jack is confronted by Frank again in the underground courthouse parking lot. He's alone. Eddie is gone. Jack is going to testify. The exchange between these two is charged. Jack is going to do the right thing, but Frank isn't having it.

"He was gonna take down our case."

"He was somebody's husband."

"He was gonna take down our case!"

"He was somebody's father."

"He was gonna take down our case. What were we supposed to do?!"

"If you wanted to, tell the truth."

"F*** THE TRUTH!!"

    I was on the bus going home last night and I remembered spotting Frank's mouth quiver when he screamed that line. I saw it for the first time a few nights ago. This may be hard to conceive, but I saw him as a little child. It's not a flowery statement and it doesn't do away with the lies and the murder, or the consequences he must face. But I had a gush of compassion in my heart. All that hard exterior gave way to a scared child trying not to cry. A man standing in a scary world without someone to help him and being expected to do the right thing. I saw him the way God sees everyone of us. I saw him-- and people like him-- as lost, messed up folks who God wants to forgive, clean up and change. It made me think differently on the bus about my own enemies. Personally, I know that's not a passing thing. A struggle, but not a passing thing.

Not strong
Only aggressive
Not free
We only licensed
Not compassionate, only polite
Now who the nicest?
Not good but well behaved
Chasin' after death
So we can call ourselves brave?
Still livin' like mental slaves

Manchester by the Sea

Michelle Williams as Randi and Casey Affleck as Lee Chandler

    There are different ways that people resign themselves to the horror of the way life happens to them. It's a basic human thing everywhere. People generally pick a corner and adopt a life view. They gather around people that feel the same way. Casey Affleck plays Lee Chandler in Manchester by the Sea. He's a quiet and reserved janitor living in his corner. He left Manchester for Boston to escape the reminder of how his children died. But his brother has a heart attack and names him the guardian of his son, Patrick (Lucas Hedges). Now, a delayed funeral and brotherly duty keeps him bound in Manchester longer than he wants to be there.

     I came into Manchester by the Sea 20 minutes late. The movie resonates with me, though it was much easier to appreciate it after the credits finished. The Oscar nods are deserving, I think. Lee is like a wounded animal that keeps getting bumped and knocked by people in a crowded Times Square street. He doesn’t snarl, he just kinda limps on with his tail between his legs. Lee is not an abusive guy. In fact, he’s an extraordinarily patient guy. That's the aspect about this character that makes his wound easier to listen past for 2 1/2 hours. In one scene, Patrick and his friends are being loud and obnoxious in the next room. You can almost feel how this company grates on Lee. Like clanging cymbals. But mostly, he overlooks his nephew’s irritations. There is so little to nourish Lee. There was no life or healing in the words of his world. I know most people have no problem with the profanity in the movie, but it made the character’s suffering harder for me. I couldn't help but note how the characters around him were all medicating in their corners too. It made me desire their joy. But still, it's the hint of courage in Lee that resonates with me. I think now that it was a humility that was in slow bloom in the wasteland of his life. If he really was brought to ruin, I wonder if he would’ve been as long-suffering as he was. When he runs into his ex-wife Randi (Michelle Williams) and she seemingly wants to reconcile with him. He stops short. On the night his house burned down, Lee was high and his actions led to it being engulfed in fierce flames with his children inside. She cursed him for it. He has a chance to curse her back. He doesn't. I think he might've been trying to protect her. That kind of grace only comes from God. I don't know how to explain the mechanics of that. Clearly, he was a man who didn't place very much faith in God.   

  

Lucas Hedges as Patrick

     But I still wondered at how people raved about this film. It pulsates with sadness. I thought of what God has to say about darkness. My mind raced back to films like Leaving Las Vegas or even The Crossing Guard-- all really great stories about mournful humanity seeking resolution. Why was this such a big film? I think, in part it's an embrace of death. It's in our culture. We can be very masochistic. We can take such pride in our pain and make it identity. Even the most strong can refuse to let go for the sake of health and the peace of loved ones. Not really because one can't. But because there are those who deep down know they would lose their perceived self-importance. That is the pride that kills over and over. In our day and age of picking corners and of choosing gods that suit us, we have learned to celebrate an ill choice and call it good. It's like a silent atom bomb that even kills generations later. We've stopped teaching our children to reject that. The people around Lee Chandler are all pleasant smiles and gestures, but for many of them it's just a cover-up. 

Jack Nicholson in The Crossing Guard

    On the other hand, there is the worthy part of these kind of movies that benefits mankind. It's the catharsis. The honesty of how these characters are played and how it does something for the aching souls of those who see it. How they can see themselves and even in some cases decide to make a change. That’s valid too. I’m not implying that Kenneth Lonergan, the writer and director of the film should’ve injected inspiration and light for a movement toward restorative health. You can’t force that. Even God has perfect timing. There's hope, I think. I think that it's worthwhile to note what could be hope in how Lee responds to the people around him. He’s just trying to live and I think he inadvertently finds the first buds of humility. Humility is not something you learn from a book. Humility in pretense gives off a bad smell. Humility is serving and loving someone else more than yourself. It’s ordained and driven by the fingerprint of God. It's rare and the cost is always huge. 

Elisabeth Shue and Nicholas Cage in
Leaving Las Vegas

    The following is a PBS covered film review that gives an interview with Kenneth Lonergan:

Learning to walk

    Watching The Pursuit of Happyness. Remember how Will Smith manages to get his first appointment that he has to make in 20 minutes--- traffic gets in the way, and he's just running down the street in a suit like his life depended on it? Stevie Wonder singing, "... till I reach my highest ground." That scene has left an indelible mark on my mind for years. My favorite Stevie Wonder song now. Not that my "happyness" depends on these things... but I understand. All the odds are stacked against what you believe you can do, and you're running down the street in a suit and folks' looking at you like you're crazy. I understand.

Ephesians 6:16

    "Jesus said to him, 'If you can believe, all things are possible to him who believes.' Immediately the father of the child cried out and said with tears, 'Lord, I believe, help my unbelief!'"

Mark 9:23-24, NKJV

   

The Integrity of Sully

During the course of the movie, Sully is often distracted. In those moments, he's searching. Did he do the right thing? Was he ever a legitimate pilot? The movie really is a portrait in the sense that it doesn’t move forward so much as it goes back a lot. It all marks with subtlety that he’s uncertain about what he did-- so much so that he can’t fully grasp yet that he saved 155 lives because he still pictures the horror of the worst scenario. The subtlety is perfect. I emphasize that. I think that’s the aim because even the music in the movie is subtle and effective. Tom Hanks is well-armed for this portrayal and for the tone of the movie. So much of it is wordless and much more was said in the few words given. The common Hollywood clichés that could’ve candy-coated and in effect marred this film are avoided by Todd Komamicki who writes the screenplay like a gifted surgeon. He writes dignity in nuances. That is inspiring work!

    Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger III is the airline captain that successfully executed a water landing of his plane in the Hudson River on January 15^th, 2009. All 155 passengers survived. He was- and still is- hailed a hero. Take a look at the trailer.

    I saw the movie for the second time last night. The first time I was near tears, but the second time was like enjoying the company of honorable and good men. I want to talk a little bit about these kinds of men as tends to be my habit on this blog. I don’t think anyone of us-- especially men-- can be honorable and good without God. Sully is a remarkable guy. The kind of genuine character that’s mostly uncommon in our time. I think his personal character was integral to hold through an unprecedented water landing and the ensuing scrutiny and fame that followed. But I can’t give him or the brave people that helped all the credit. It wasn’t called the Miracle on the Hudson for nothing. I think people are more than just enthralled with Sully and what happened. I think they know there’s more to it. It can’t often be spoken aloud in our time without people withdrawing their love. People are so thirsty for this because it indicates something that flies in the face of what they’ve been taught, and what they’ve been discouraged to embrace. It’s pure like a thick gush of cold water on a hot day and it hints at something so much greater and so much more wonderful.  Take the inevitable water-landing scene. I’ve sold tickets to people for this movie. I’ve overheard patrons anxious to catch the water-landing scene. I shake my head at that. It is a great scene—a sharply executed scene and no movie about Chesley Sullenberger would be complete without it— but this movie was more than a cinematic water landing. In fact, in that particular scene, the overwhelming outreach of gracious rescuers played by actors perfectly casted is a near-tears moment. That moment in particular is the gathering of the Coast Guard at the downed, floating plane, watching, as the passengers standing on the wings with 30 below waters lapping at their ankles are pulled up. The accents. The air of tough New York pulling together with rough hands and heavy pats for the sake of people in need. It was the best of what New York is and can be. There was nothing gratuitous in its presentation. There really is no justification to deny that God was not orchestrating the entire rescue on January 15^th, 2009.  

    In our day and age you can’t talk about truth without that “inner guard” that expects someone to dismiss what I’ve said as mere religion.

From left, Tom Hanks and the real Captain Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger III

    I’m more involved with the character of the man in the movie. Character is not our strong suit in this city. Character is not pursued or coveted. You get your degrees, your knowledge and your references; you get a job and you just wing it. You flatter. You smile. You’re relieved to still go home a thief. But character comes with practice, learning to say no for the right reasons. Character is seasoned; it has a wonderful fragrance. It effortlessly increases the timbre of your voice. It makes you truly unique. Whether people want to admit it or not, what Sully did was borne out of a certain character. People gravitate to it because it is so palatable. It is refreshing. It is agreeable. That’s not by accident. What we do and what we say is genuine consumption for all of those people around us. No word we say returns to us void. Nothing we do is throw-away. Only very accomplished foolish people believe otherwise.

    Imagine a parallel situation where the stakes are high. Put in today’s average 20 or 30 something. Very likely then some lives might be lost. The attitude is a hyper self-entitlement and loose morals. Fame might be indulged. Movie opportunities. Magazine cover: face swollen with false humility. Or imagine the same perilous situation with a 40 year old teenager. I’m not trying to be mean. I’m trying to illustrate how far we are in terms of integrity, consideration and God.

    According to his Wikipedia entry, Captain Sullenberger was an active member of the Methodist church. I don’t know how accurate that is or what Sully’s view of Christ is today. But if it’s true, then it tells me a little something more.

    Sully is a welcome change of pace about the kind of hero that doesn’t seem to know that he is one. I have superhero fatigue. In the last 8 months I have gorged myself on nearly every DC and Marvel live action property from the cinema to Netflix.  This was such a blessing to watch. It was true heroism.

    Sully is a great example of what manhood should be like. No matter what age you are. You don't have to be a pilot to exhibit that manhood. You can do that by being a husband, a father or a man who demonstrates right conduct at home or at work. Christ will always be the ultimate example of manhood.