December 10--Thomas Merton

The Advent mystery is the beginning of the end of all in us that is not yet Christ.

--Thomas Merton

MERTON'S most important experience in his whole Asian trip came at Polonnaruwa. He went to visit the giant Buddhas and took a series of superb photographs of them.

I am able to approach the Buddhas barefoot and undisturbed, my feet in wet grass, wet sand. The silence of the extraordinary faces. The great smi les. Huge and yet subtle. Filled with every possibility, questioning nothing, knowing everything, rejecting nothing, the peace not of emotional refutation. . . that has seen through every question without trying to discredit anyone or anything-without refutation-without establishing some other argument. For the doctrinaire, the mind that needs well-established positions, such peace, such silence, can be frightening. I was knocked over with a rush of relief and thankfulness at the obvious clarity of the figures. . . . Looking at these figures I was suddenly, almost forcibly, jerked clean out of the habitual, half-tied vision of things, and an inner clearness, clarity, as if exploding from the rocks themselves, became evident and obvious. . . . I don't know when in my life I have ever had such a sense of beauty and spiritual validity running together in one aesthetic illumination. Surely, with Mahabalipuram and Polonnaruwa my Asian pilgrimage has come clear and purified itself. I mean, I know and have seen what I was obscurely looking for. I don't know what else remains but I have now seen and have pierced through the surface and have got beyond the shadow and the disguise.

That was on December 4. . . . [On December 10, after addressing the conference in Bangkok,] Merton had lunch and did disappear to his room, commenting to a colleague on the way about how much he was looking forward to having a siesta. In a long letter later written by the delegates at the Conference to Dom Flavian what then occurred was expressed in the following words: "Not long after he retired a shout was heard by others in his cottage, but after a preliminary check they thought'they must have imagined the cry.

"He was found at the end of the meridian (afternoon rest) and when found was lying on the floor. He was on his back with the electric fan lying across his chest. The fan was still switched on, and there was a deep burn and some cuts on his right side and arm. The back of his head was also bleeding slightly."

Perhaps any death brings with it both a sense of surprise and a sense of its inevitability. There are always those, and there were many after Merton's death, who feel that it somehow "had to be like that." Merton had, from time to time, both spoken and written comments that suggested that his death might come early. Some of his friends commented on the extraordinary, almost Zen-like way that death had come to him. Fewer people than one might expect noted that he died on the same day as the great Protestant theologian Karl Barth, and it was a measure of the ecumenism in Louisville, which Merton had been instrumental in promoting, that Catholics and Protestants there united in a joint memorial service for both of them.

Many years before Naomi Burton had made the suggestion, humorously, that Merton was accident-prone. "I couldn't help noticing that it's your visitors who get locked out of the church, and your server who forgets things, and your vestments that get caught in the folding chair. . . . I find your incredible adventures with nature and with publishing extremely endearing." Perhaps Merton was accident-prone; perhaps, like many intellectuals, he tended to get lost in his thinking, and absentmindedly forgot about the dangers of touching electrical equipment with wet hands; perhaps the fan was merely faulty. Perhaps, however, he had finished his life six days before at Polonnaruwa and was called to the God he had loved and served so well.

--Monica Furlong

The sermon I gave [at the conference on monasticism the morning after Merton's death] was a moment of talkinga bout Merton's search for God.  When a monk enters a monastery, what is asked of him is "Are you truly seeking God?"  The question isn't "Have you found God?"  The question is "Is he seeking God?  Is his motivation highly involved in that search of who and what God is in relationship to us?"  It's not philosophical--its' existential.  And Merton, to me, was a great searcher.  He was constantly unhappy, as all great searchers are.  He was constantly ill at ease, he was constantly restless, as all searchers are--because that's part of the search.  And in that sense he was the perfect monk.  Contemplation isn't satisfaction--it's search.

--Rembert Weakland

Charm with your stainlessness these winter nights,
Skies, and be perfect!
Fly vivider in the fiery dark, you quiet meteors,
And disappear.
You moon, be slow to go down,
This is your fill!

The four white roads make off in silence
Towards the four parts of the starry universe.
Time falls like manna at the corners of the wintry earth.
We have become more humble than the rocks,
More wakeful than the patient hills.

Charm with your stainlessness these nights in Advent, holy spheres,
While minds, as meek as beasts,
Stay close at home in the sweet hay;
And intellects are quieter than the flocks that feed by starlight.

Oh pour your darkness and your brightness over all our solemn valleys,
Your skies:  and travel like the gentle Virgin,
Towards the planets' stately setting,

O white moon full as quiet as Bethlehem!

--Thomas Merton

"Am I my brother's keeper?"

I don't have any particular insights to add to this story.  By now the picture is familiar, and you probably know that the man without shoes is not technically "homeless" because he has an apartment in the Bronx, and he's not wearing the shoes because he could be killed for them.  The situation is, as Paul Raushenbush reminds us, complicated.

But how complicated, really?  And do we complicate it ourselves?  We have divided the world into the deserving poor, and the undeserving poor.  Maybe that's even putting it backwards, because the "deserving" may either deserve their poverty, or deserve our charity; and vice versa.  I don't know how old the attitude is.  It's impossible to read the gospels and not think of some as deserving (the blind, the lame, the beggars) and some as not ("Do you see this woman?") unless we re-imagine their stories (foot washing as an act of divine, not carnal, love). But was that the attitude of the original audience?  Or were all the poor undeserving of charity?  And have we really moved that far forward with our careful distinctions of who deserves our generosity, and who doesn't?

I actually wrote a paper on this in seminary, prompted by the selling of useless paper "flowers" as a way to raise money for some charitable purpose.  There are sociological theories as to why that works better than the simple abstraction of requesting cash for, essentially, nothing.  But the real bite is giving something to an individual, and then finding out that individual is not who you imagined him or her to be.  When I was in active parish ministry, people came to the door all the time (we lived on the church grounds) asking for help.  I knew pastors in town who would only give out coupons good for hamburgers at the local fast-food operation, or would drive with people to gas stations rather than give up "gas money."  I always figured it was hard enough asking for money; and even if it wasn't, what did it matter to me?  I wish I'd known then this quote from C.S. Lewis:

"Another things that annoys me is when people say, "Why did you give that man money? He'll probably go and drink it." My reply is, "But if I kept it, I should have probably drunk it."

When our giving still contains a moral judgment, still maintains a moral reproach, is it a moral act to give?  We are back to the problem of the gift:  is it a gift if it is given knowingly, if we give knowing who it goes to and why we gave and when we expect some moral return on our financial investment?  Can we give without expecting some moral benefit to ourselves, some accrual of points for aiding the figment of our imagination, rather than the real individual before us?

If there is gift, the given of the gift (that which one gives, that which is given, the gift as given thing or as act of donation) must not come back to the giving (let us not already say to the subject, to the donor). It must not circulate, it must not be exchanged, it must not in any case be exhausted, as a gift, by the process of exchange, by the movement of circulation, of the circle in the form of return to the point of departure. If the figure of the circle is essential to economics the gift must remain aneconomic. Not that it remains foreign to the circle, but it must keep a relation of foreignness to the circle, a relation without relation of familiar foreignness. It is perhaps in this sense that the gift is the impossible.

--Jacques Derrida, Given Time: I. Counterfeit Money, tr. Peggy Kamuf (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1994), 7.

The gift stands outside the circle of economy, or exchange which is made in return for an exchange.  If it doesn't, is it a gift?  Or merely a purchase?  Do we give to the poor?  Do we give to be charitable?  Or do we purchase good feelings, a sense of mercy, an emotion of worthiness by our act of kindness?

Why do we give at all, if it is impossible?

My favorite story of giving comes from the gospels; but from John the Baptist, not Jesus:

And the crowds asked him, "What then should we do?"  In reply he said to them, "Whoever has two coats must share with anyone who has none; and whoever has food must do likewise."  Even tax collectors came to be baptized, and they asked him, "Teacher, what should we do?" He said to them, "Collect no more than the amount prescribed for you."  Soldiers also asked him, "And we, what should we do?" He said to them, "Do not extort money from anyone by threats or false accusation, and be satisfied with your wages."

--Luke 3:10-14

John isn't urging charity here, and the directive is not means tested.  If you have more (who can wear two coats at a time?), share with those who have less.  You give because they need; not because it earns something for you.  It isn't even a gift.  It is simple justice.  It is merely being your brother's keeper.  Or, to put it another way:

The command is clear: the hungry person is dying now, the naked person is freezing now, the person in debt is beaten now-and you want to wait until tomorrow? "I'm not doing any harm," you say. "I justwantto keep what I own, that's all." You own! You are like someone who sits down in a theater and keeps everyone else away, saying that what is there for everyone's use is your own. . . . If everyone took only what they needed and gave the rest to those in need, there would be no such thing as rich and poor. After all, didn't you come into life naked, and won't you return naked to the earth?

The bread in your cupboard belongs to the hungry person; the coat hanging unused in your closet belongs to the person who needs it; the shoes rotting in your closet belong to the person with no shoes; the money which you put in the bank belongs to the poor. You do wrong to everyone you could help, but fail to help.

--Basil, 4th century

Or perhaps we are bound by the "rule of reciprocation."  Perhaps we cannot give without getting something in return:  a paper flower, a warm feeling, a sense that we did some good, not just that we gave away our cash.  Are we truly bound by an iron rule that "thou shalt not take without giving in return"?  Perhaps we think we are; but Derrida and C.S. Lewis and St. Basil all point out that we don't have to be.  For every culture that teaches this rule, there is another part of the culture that teaches simple charity, charity as risky as that shown to Elijah.  Charity isn't defined as "giving away all you have," but neither is it defined as an economic transaction in which there must be an exchange.  But that, of course, leads us to a very difficult proposition indeed:

On what condition does goodness exist beyond all calculation? On the condition that goodness forget itself, that the movement be a movement of the gift that renounces itself, hence a movement of infinite love. Only infinite love can renounce itself and, in order to become finite, become incarnated in order to love the other, to love the other as a finite other. This gift of infinite love comes from someone and is addressed to someone; responsibility demands irreplaceable singularity.

Jacques Derrida, The Gift of Death, tr. David Wills (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), pp. 50-51.

It is that irreplaceable singularity which troubles us the most.  We want to keep that for ourselves.  We don't want to grant it to the object of our charitable impulse.  Until we can, though, we can't be charitable at all; and we continue to do wrong to everyone we could help, but fail to help.

Dec 8--The Immaculate Conception

Ne timeas, Maria.

--Monastic liturgy

OF Mans First Disobedience, and the Fruit
Of that Forbidden Tree, whose mortal tast
Brought Death into the World, and all our woe,
With loss of Eden, till one greater Man
Restore us, and regain the blissful Seat,
Sing Heav'nly Muse, that on the secret top
Of Oreb, or of Sinai, didst inspire
That Shepherd, who first taught the chosen Seed,
In the Beginning how the Heav'ns and Earth
Rose out of Chaos: Or if Sion Hill
Delight thee more, and Siloa's Brook that flow'd
Fast by the Oracle of God; I thence
Invoke thy aid to my adventrous Song,
That with no middle flight intends to soar
Above th' Aonian Mount, while it pursues
Things unattempted yet in Prose or Rhime.
And chiefly Thou O Spirit, that dost prefer
Before all Temples th' upright heart and pure,
Instruct me, for Thou know'st; Thou from the first
Wast present, and with mighty wings outspread
Dove-like satst brooding on the vast Abyss
And mad'st it pregnant: What in me is dark
Illumin, what is low raise and support;
That to the highth of this great Argument
I may assert Eternal Providence,
And justifie the wayes of God to men.

--John Milton

Hail, O most worthy in all the world!Thou purest Maiden that ever on earth
Through the long ages lived among humankind!
Rightly all mortals in blithe mood
Name the blessed, and hail thee bride
Of the king of glory.  The thanes of Christ
In heaven the highest, carol and sing
Proclaiming thee lady of the heavenly legions,
Of earthly orders, and the hosts of hell.

Thou bring they maidenhood unto thy maker,
Presenting it there unspotted of sin
Of all humankind there came no other,
No bride with linked jewels, like unto thee
With pure heart sending thy glorious gift
To its heavenly home.  The Lord of triumph
Sent forth his herald from the hosts on high
To bring thee knowledge of abundant grave;
That in pure birth thou should'st bear God's Son
In mercy to people; and thou thyself, Mary,
Remain for ever immaculate maid.

--English lyric

That man say we can't have as much rights as a man 'cause Christ wasn't a woman.  Where did your Christ come from?  From God and a woman.  Man had nothing to do with it.

--Sojourner Truth

Advent-Dec. 7

What happened to marriage and family that it should have become a travail and a sadness?...God may be good, family and marriage and children and home may be good, grandma and grandpa may act wise, the Thanksgiving table may be groaning with God's goodness and bounty, all the folks healthy and happy, but something is missing...What is missing? Where did it go? I won't have it! I won't have it! Why this sadness here? Don't stand for it! Get up! Leave! Let the boat people sit down! Go live in a cave until you've found the thief who is robbing you. But at least protest! Stop, thief! What is missing? God? Find him!

--Walker Percy

Bright mornin' stars are risin',
 Bright mornin' stars are risin',
 Bright mornin' stars are risin',
Day is a-breakin' in my soul.

Oh, where are our dear fathers?
Oh, where are our dear mothers?
 Oh, where are sisters and brothers?
 Day is a-breakin' in my soul.

Some are down in the valley prayin',
Some are deep in the mountain sleepin',
Some are up in heaven shoutin',
 Day is a-breakin' in my soul.

--Appalachian folk hymn

As to the times and the seasons, my dear people, you have no need to have anything written to you.  For you yourselves know well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. When the people say, "There is peace and security," then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pangs come upon a woman with child, and there will be no escape.  But you are not in darkness, my dear people, for that day to surprise you like a thief.  For you are all children of light and children of the day; we are not of the night or of darkness.  So then let us not fall asleep as others do, but let us keep awake and be sober.  For those who sleep sleep at night, and those who are drunk get drunk at night.  But, since we belong to the day, let us be sober, and put on the breastplate of faith and love, and for a helmet the hope of salvation.  For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us so that whether we wake or asleep we might live with him. Therefore encourage one another and build one another up, as indeed you are doing.

1  Thessalonians 5:1-11

Abba Poeman said about Abba Pior that every single day he made a fresh beginning.

--Desert Wisdom

CONDITOR alme siderum,
aeterna lux credentium,
Christe, redemptor omnium,
exaudi preces supplicum.

Qui condolens interitu
mortis perire saeculum,
salvasti mundum languidum,
donans reis remedium,

Vergente mundi vespere,
uti sponsus de thalamo,
egressus honestissima
Virginis matris clausula.

Cujus forti potentiae
genu curvantur omnia;
caelestia, terrestria
nutu fatentur subdita.

At whose dread Name, majestic now,
all knees must bend, all hearts must bow;
and things celestial Thee shall own,
and things terrestrial Lord alone.

Te deprecamur hagie,
Venture judex saeculi,
Conserva nos in tempore
Hostis a telo perfidi.

CREATOR of the stars of night,
Your people's everlasting light,
Jesus, Redeemer of us all,
We pray you hear us when we call.

In sorrow that the ancient curse
should doom to death a universe,
You came, O Savior, to set free
Your own in glorious liberty.

Come, Sun and Savior, to embrace,
Our gloomy world, its weary race,
As groom to bride, as bride to groom:
The wedding chamber, Mary's tomb.

At your Great Name, O Jesus, now
All knees must bend, all hearts must bow;
All things on earth with one accord,
Like those in heav'n, shall call you Lord.

St. Nicholas Day 2012

SAINT Nicholas. Day of death: (according to the martyrology) December 6, about 360. Grave: originally at Myra; since 1087 at Bari in Italy. Life (highly legendary): Nicholas was born at Patara in Asia Minor to parents who, having long been childless, had petitioned God with many prayers. Already as a youth Nicholas became noted for his zeal in helping the unfortunate and oppressed. In his native city there lived a poor nobleman who had three marriage-able daughters; he could not obtain a suitor for them because he could offer no dowry. The contemptible idea struck him to sacrifice the innocence of his daughters to gain the needed money. When Nicholas became aware of this, he went by night and threw a bag containing as much gold as was needed for a dowry through the window. This he repeated the second and third nights. During a sea voyage he calmed the storm by his prayer; he is therefore venerated as patron of sailors. On, a certain occasion he was imprisoned for the faith. In a wonderful way he later became bishop of Myra; his presence is noted at the Council of Nicaea. He died a quiet death in his episcopal city, uttering the words: "Into your hands I commend my spirit."

O you who love festivals,
Come gather and sing the praises
of the fair beauty of bishops,
The glory of the fathers,
The fountain of wonders and great protector
of the faithful.

Let us all say: Rejoice, O guardian of the people of Myra,
Their head and honored counselor,
The pillar of the church which cannot be shaken.
Rejoice, O light full of brightness
That makes the ends of the world shine with wonders.

Rejoice, O divine delight of the afflicted,
The fervent advocate of those who suffer from injustice.And now, O all-blessed Nicholas,
Never cease praying to Christ our God
For those who honor the festival of your memory
With faith and with love.
--Orthodox Liturgy

WHAT keeps you from giving now? Isn't the poor person there? Aren't your own warehouses full? Isn't the reward promised? The command is clear: the hungry person is dying now, the naked person is freezing now, the person in debt is beaten now-and you want to wait until tomorrow? "I'm not doing any harm," you say. "I justwantto keep what I own, that's all." You own! You are like someone who sits down in a theater and keeps everyone else away, saying that what is there for everyone's use is your own. . . . If everyone took only what they needed and gave the rest to those in need, there would be no such thing as rich and poor. After all, didn't you come into life naked, and won't you return naked to the earth?

The bread in your cupboard belongs to the hungry person; the coat hanging unused in your closet belongs to the person who needs it; the shoes rotting in your closet belong to the person with no shoes; the money which you put in the bank belongs to the poor. You do wrong to everyone you could help, but fail to help.
--Basil, 4th century

THE large rooms of which you are so proud are in fact your shame. They are big enough to hold crowds-and also big enough to shut out the voice of the poor. . . . There is your sister or brother, naked, crying! And you stand confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.
--Ambrose, 4th century

A voyce from heven to erth shal com:
"Venite ad iudicium."

This voyce both sharp and also shryll
Shal be herd from heven to hell;
All mydle erthe it shall fu Ifyll:
"Venite ad iudicium."
"Venite" is a blyssed song
For them that for joye dooth longe
And shall forsake paynes strong:
"Venite ad iudicium."

Glad in hert may they be
Whan Chryst sayeth, "Venite;
Ye blyssed chyldren, come to me,
Into vitam eternam.

"Whan I hongred, ye gave me meat;
Ye clothed me agaynst the heat;
In trouble ye dyde me not forget;
Venite ad iudicium.

"Ye socoured me at your doore
And for my sake gave to the poore;
Therfore wyll I you socoure;
Venite ad iudicium."

Sory in hert may they be
That hereth this hevy worde: "Ite;
Ye cursed chyldren, go fro me,
Into ignem eternum.

"Whan for nede that I dyde crye,
Comfortlesse ye lete me dye;
Therfore now I you deny;
Venite ad iudicium.

"For by me ye set no store,
Ye shall abye ryght dere therfore
In hell with devyls for evermore;
Venite ad iudicium."
--English carol, 16th century

Advent--Dec. 5

"ONE of the distinctive features of this modern anxiety is that its victims can never know nightfall. Their whole lives are spent in the glare of lights, and what bright and blinding lights they are! These lights are, as it were, the wayward eyes of our own anxiety, which instinctively try to shield themselves against God's breakthrough. But they can glimpse God's coming against the backdrop of darkness, and therefore they never know rest.

"The anxiety-ridden cannot enjoy peace and quiet either. Their words and actions go on amid the din of unceasing noise. Their songs and pleasures are loud and slapdash, as if they were afraid to catch God's alien note in the chorus. They meticulously drown out silence with incessant talk and noisy chatter, so that they can stay at peace with themselves. It is as if stillness were a threatening cloud from which God might emerge to rend their hearts.

"Patience is another quality that the anxiety-ridden cannot display. They cannot patiently cultivate those realities that require slow development and silent blossoming: love and fidelity, mutual understanding and friendship, marriage and family life. That is why these realities are in crisis today to a greater or lesser extent, riddled with an anxiety that cannot stand the slow pace of deliberate, tender care.

"Finally, the anxiety-ridden cannot enjoy any peace. From time to time it happens that this anxiety no longer feels able to put up with itself. It seeks to neutralize our imagined alienation in God's advent by arrogantly precipitating our annihilation on its own. It stirs up strife and destruction, it foments war and revolution. The continuing brinkmanship of our age, the powder keg on which we sit, is not a political problem in the last analysis. It is really a religious problem, an outgrowth of our contemporary neurosis and our flight from God's inescapable coming.

"The anxiety-ridden secretly hope that their self-instigated destruction will ease the pressure that weighs down upon them. But even our self-wrought destruction passes away, and the anxiety remains. Its mournful cry can be heard amid the debris. It remains because we ourselves remain, because God's advent remains, and because the former cannot fight off the latter. "

--Johannes Baptist Metz

Ecce rex veniet Dominus terrae,
et ipse auferet jugum captivitatis nostrae.

See!  The ruler of the earth shall come,
the Lord who will take from us the heavy burden of our exile.

--Monastic Liturgy

But  very little while,
and Lebanon shall be changed into an orchard,
and the orchard be regarded as a forest!
On that day the deaf shall hear
the words of a book;
and out of gloom and darkness,
the eyes of the blind shall see.
The lowly will ever find joy in the Lord,
and the poor rejoice in the Holy One of Israel,
For the tyrant will be no more
and the arrogant will have gone;
Therefore thus says the Lord,
the God of the house of Jacob,
who redeemed Abraham:
Now Jacob shall have nothing to be ashamed of,
nor shall his face grow pale.
When his children see
 the work of my hands in his midst,
they shall keep my name holy;
they shall reverence the Holy One of Jacob,
and be in awe of the God of Israel.
Those who err in spirit shall acquire understanding,
and those who find fault shall receive instruction.

--Isaiah 29:17-20, 22-24

"Expectation--anxious, collective, and operative expectation of an end of the world, that is to say, of an issue for the world--that is perhaps the supreme Christian function and the most distinctive characteristic of our religion.

"Historically speaking, that expectation has never ceased to guide the progress of our faith like a torch...We persist in saying that we keep vigil in expectation of the Master.  But in reality we should have to admit, if we were sincere, that we no longer expect anything.  The flame must be revived at all costs. At all costs we must renew in ourselves the desire and the hope for the great coming.  But where are we to look for the source of this rejuvenation?  From the perception of a more intimate connection between the victory of Christ and the outcome of the work which our human effort here below is seeking to construct."

--Pierre Tielhard de Chardin

Advent--Dec. 4

Though the Lord has established the signs of the coming, the time of their fulfillment has not been plainly revealed.  These signs have come and gone with a multiplicity of change; more than that, they are still present.  The final coming is like the first.

--Ephrem, 4th century

On that day they will sing this song
in the land of Judah:
"A strong city have we;
[the Lord] sets up walls and ramparts to protect us.
Open up the gates
To let in a nation that is just,
one that keeps faith.
A nation of firm purpose you keep in peace;
in peace, for its trust in you."

Trust in the Lord forever!
For the Lord is an eternal rock.
[The Lord] humbles those in high places,
and the lofty city [the Lord] brings down;
[The Lord] tumbles it to the ground,
levels it with the dust.
It is trampled underfoot by the needy,
by the footsteps of the poor.

--Isaiah 26:1-6

APOCALYPSE is the cry of the helpless, who are borne passively by events which they cannot influence, much less control. The cry of the helpless is often vindictive, expressing impotent rage at reality. Apocalyptic rage is a flight from reality, a plea to God to fulfill their wishes and prove them right and the other wrong. Apocalyptic believers could hardly think the saying, "Go, make disciples of all nations," was addressed to them. Had apocalyptic believers dominated the church since the first century, there would have been no missions to unbelievers, no schools, no hospitals, no orphanages, no almsgiving. The helpless cannot afford to think of such enterprises; they can only await the act of God, and then complain because that act is so long delayed. The gospels and epistles rather tell the believers that they are the act of God. 

--John L. McKenzie

Return, O God of love, retun,
Earth is a tiresome place;
How long shall we thy children mourn
Our absence from thy face?

--Early American hymn

There were some who spent the savings of several generations on one last spree. Many insulted those they could not afford to insult and kissed those they shouldn't have kissed. No one wanted to end up without confession. The parish priest gave preference to the pregnant and to new mothers. This self-denying cleric lasted three days and three nights in the confessional before fainting from an indigestion of sins.

When midnight came on the last day of the century, all the inhabitants of San Jose de Gracia prepared to die clean. God had accumulated much wrath since the creation of the world, and no one doubted that the time had come for the final blowout. Breath held, eyes closed, teeth clenched, they people listened to the 12 chimes of the church clock, one after the other, deeply convinced that there would be no afterwards.

But there was. For quite awhile now the twentieth century has been on its way; it forges ahead as if nothing had happened. The inhabitants of San Jose de Gracia continue in the same houses, living and surviving among the same mountains of central Mexico--to the disenchantment of the devout who were expecting Paradise, and to the relief of sinners, who find that this little village isn't so bad after all, if one makes comparisons.

--Eduardo Galeano

Advent-Dec. 3

Take heed, watch; for you do not know when the time will come.  It is like someone going on a journey, who leaving home and putting the servants in charge of their work, commands the doorkeeper to be on the watch.  Watch therefore--for you do not know when the lord of the house will come, in the evening, or at midnight, or at cockcrow, or in the morning--lest the lord come suddenly and find you asleep.  And what I say to you I say to all:  Watch.

--Mark 13:33-37

You, O Lord, are father to us,
our Redeemer from of old is your name.
O Lord, why do you make us err from your ways
and harden our heart, so that we fear you not?
Return for the sake of your servants,
for the tribes of your heritage.
O that you would rend the heavens and come down,
that the mountains might quake at your presence--
as when fire kindles brushwood
and the fire causes water to boil--
to make your name known to your adversaries,
and that the nations might tremble at your presence!
When you did terrible things which we looked not for,
you came down, the mountain quaked
at your presence.
From of old no one has heard
or perceived by the ear,
no eye has seen a God besides you,
who works for those who await you.
You meet those who joyfully work righeousness,
those who remember you in your ways.
Behold, you were angry and we sinned;
in our sins we have been a long time,
and shall we be saved?
We have all become like one who is unclean,
and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment.
We all fade like a leaf,
and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.
There is no one that calls upon your name,
who arises to take hold of you;
for you have hid your face from us,
and have delivered us into the hands of our inquities.
Yet, O Lord, you are father to us;
we are the clay, and you are our potter;
we are all the work of your hand.
Be not exceedingly angry, O Lord,
and remember not inquity for ever.

--Isaiah 63:16-17, 19-64:7

1. Have thine own way, Lord! Have thine own way! 
 Thou art the potter, I am the clay. 
 Mold me and make me after thy will, 
 while I am waiting, yielded and still. 

2. Have thine own way, Lord! Have thine own way! 
 Search me and try me, Savior today! 
 Wash me just now, Lord, wash me just now, 
 as in thy presence humbly I bow. 

3. Have thine own way, Lord! Have thine own way! 
 Wounded and weary, help me I pray! 
 Power, all power, surely is thine! 
 Touch me and heal me, Savior divine! 

4. Have thine own way, Lord! Have thine own way! 
 Hold o'er my being absolute sway. 
 Fill with thy Spirit till all shall see 
 Christ only, always, living in me! 

Text: Adelaide A. Pollard, 1862-1934

These words from Isaiah are altogether too much.  Any four of them would do.  Take the first four.  What a question to put to God!  We do the wandering, we do the evil-and God gets the blame!  And then God gets invited to solve it all as the reading goes on to its "Rend the heavens!" day.  Some people have "Rend the heavens!" lives.  What would that be?  Hunger?  Fear?  Weakness?  Depression?  Addiction?  Discrimination?  How many lives shout to God to tear up the skies and put an end to this unhappiness on the tiny planet Earth!  Read Psalm 88 for an extreme example.  What reason could anyone have to speak this way to God?

Look a a few December leaves, the old ones blowing around the ground.  Isaiah did.  What did he see?

"Yet," he says.  Yet?  Yet, what?

A character in one of J.D. Salinger's short stories says that the most important word in the Bible is "watch."  That person would love Advent and especially the gospel:  "Be on the watch!  Stay awake!  Watch with a sharp eye!  Look around you!  Be on your guard!"  Why would "watch" be anyone's favorite notion?  How do we watch?  What are we watching for?  Take the question to Isaiah; take it to a saint you have known and one you wish you had known.

What would help us stay awake and watch?

--Gabe Huck

Truthfully, I shouldn't care; but if I have a stake in the "war on Christmas," this is it:

Costa agreed and said that the war on Christmas is not only impacting Rhode Island. "I've been getting emails, calls and letters from all over the country," Costa said. "Why does Christmas have to be attacked? We don't attack any other religion."

Saying "Merry Christmas" is not a Christian blessing.  It isn't even a Christian sentiment.  Putting up a Christmas tree does not make you a Christian, any more than buying Christmas gifts does.  Whether or not you have sponsored a manger scene on a public way since 1945 doesn't make you religious or even a "defender of Judeo Christian traditions."  As the Pilgrims understood, there is nothing particularly Christian about the observance of Christmas; much less about the symbols that identify it.

I know a lot of this is ancient history, and the traditions the Puritans tried to establish are not the traditions we want to protect today, any more than we really want to protect the traditions of Christmas from 1832:

 Christmas day is no religious day and hardly a holiday with them: New-year's day is perhaps a little, but only a little more so. For Twelfth-day, it is unknown; and the household private festivals of birthdays are almost universally passed by unsevered from the rest of the toilsome days devoted to the curse of labor."

 And you thought Wal-Mart invented working on a holiday.

Preserving silly things like the label "Christmas tree" is really not a fight anyone needs to have.   I understand if some Jews or Muslims or Buddhists or atheists consider the word "Christmas" to be a religious term.  I'm happy to be diverse enough to call the tree with the glass ornaments or plastic cartoon and TV celebrity figurines a "holiday tree."  But if we're really going to say these things are essentially religious and as such must be removed from the public sphere, or given special protection, then I'm going to declare Christianity dead and the cause of death neglect and ignorance and rampant stupidity.

Because the fundamental teaching of Christianity is not:  "HANDS OFF!  THAT'S MINE!"  And if we're going to insist that it is, we might as well chuck the whole mess and abandon all pretense to caring one whit what Christians believe and hold important.


When ordinary people are running about claiming persecution for their religious beliefs because of "holiday trees," it's kind of hard to lay all the blame on Fox News.  It's also kind of hard to take their claims of "religious persecution" seriously.


Need I remind you, to this good day, that Christmas day is no religious day at all, even when it's on Sunday?

Concluding Unscientific Postscript:  We are so over that "war on Christmas" stuff!

It's a dessert topping! It's a floor wax!

This argument is threatening to become completely silly.

Oh, wait; I'm already too late to say that.

Best I can figure the chronology on this, Bill O'Reilly had an atheist on to argue about the "war on Christmas."  Who is fighting this war, of course, is always vague.  Apparently it's conducted by stateless terrorists, because while FoxNews complains about "holiday trees" being put up by government entities, they seem to place the blame for the name on people who...complain about the name!

And they said irony is dead.

Anyway, in the course of that "argument," the atheist said Christmas trees are religious symbols because "Christ" appears in the word.  Increase Mather couldn't have said it better (irony!  Again!).  Except, of course, it is the use of the symbol, not the derivation of the word, that really matters.  Easter is a Christian holiday, but is anybody really going to argue that the "Easter bunny" is a religious symbol?

Really?

So let's set that nonsense aside.  As I said before, I don't know of a church that allows a "Christmas tree" into its worship space, and the ones I know that did were very careful to label them "Chrismon trees," even if they stayed outside the worship space proper.  A Christmas tree is a secular symbol.  Many a non-Christian non-atheist puts up a Christmas tree and never thinks twice about the baby Jesus or even Joseph and Mary, or the doctrine of atonement or the Incarnation or anything else peculiar to Christianity.  Is the famous Rockefeller Center tree a symbol of religious belief?  Or belief in mammon?  So far as that goes, O'Reilly and the atheist deserve each other.

But O'Reilly said, in defense of Christmas trees, that Christianity is not a religion, it's a philosophy.  When that wasn't clear enough, (and hence my reference to a chronology), he doubled down on it, declaring those who don't understand what he's saying  "so stupid it's painful."

Um...right.  Yes, Bill, you can focus solely on the teachings of Jesus, and derive from those some valuable moral insights.  That's what Thomas Jefferson did, but no one has ever accused Jefferson of being a Christian (not even in his lifetime).  And most of the "Founding Fathers" were Deists, and more or less followed Jefferson's lead (with notable exceptions).  Remove Christ from Christianity, and you remove the religious claims from Christianity; in fact, you remove Christianity!  You are left with either humanism or (some say) Unitarianism.  What you aren't left with, is Christianity.

It's not really a point worth arguing, of course.   Apparently O'Reilly went on to argue that churches are religious, but that Christianity is just a philosophy.  How this works is truly anybody's guess.

This is also truly the point where taking up this "argument" means you are wrestling with the pig:  the pig likes it, and you only get dirty.

On the other hand:  can we now say the "war on Christmas" is clearly so patently absurd we should all just point and laugh whenever it is mentioned seriously?  Because if it hasn't reached that point with this, I don't know when it ever will.

Like punching somebody in the nose....

I'm not a critic of Rick Warren, at least not in the sense that I wait for him to say something I can pounce on.  I'm not a fan, either; so I just try to leave him alone.  But once in a while I am reminded, through the example of Rick Warren, why pastors should stick to tending their own garden, as Candide advised, and avoid making public pronouncements they have to walk back at the first sign of challenge:

JOHN BERMAN (HOST): [Tyler Clementi's] parents wrote that they left their Evangelical church recently because they felt the beliefs on homosexuality estranged them from their son, which meant he could not come to them. His mother said this, she said, ‘at this point, I think Jesus is more about reconciliation and love. He spoke more about divorce than homosexuality, but you can be divorced and join a church more than you can be gay and join churches.’
WARREN: Very good point. You know, Jesus taught, as a Christian, I am not allowed to hate anybody. I’m not allowed to do that. In fact, I am commanded by Jesus Christ to love everyone, to show respect to everyone. There’s a difference between acceptance and approval. God accepts me, accepts you unconditionally. He doesn’t approve of everything we do.
BERMAN: But pastor, don’t you think some of our churches are responsible for some of the attitudes towards gays in America, the negative attitudes?
WARREN: Probably, yeah. In fact, there are some people who are extremely violent or hateful. And hate is never of God, never.

Sure is fun to do, though, isn't it, Rick?  Sure is fun to say that being gay is like wanting to punch somebody in the nose. I'm sure it was fun saying that until somebody said "Pastor" and recalled you to your public position and all the obligations that entails, huh?  And when John Berman confronted you with a real-life example of something that sounds so easy in the abstract, you had to crawfish on it.

Happens to pastors all the time, doesn't it, Rick?  We take a firm and bold stance we are sure some portion of our congregation will agree with, and then the individual case steps up and challenges us to put our money where our mouth is, and suddenly that principle that felt so good to boldly proclaim, doesn't feel so good anymore.

My point is this, Rick; Mr. Warren; Pastor Warren:  you speak for a lot of us when you speak.  Not just for evangelical Christians (and some of us in the UCC would still like that word back, thank you very much; you guys have done more harm than good with it), but for Christians generally.  You even speak for religious people generally.  The wide world rather inconveniently divides groups into atheist or religious, in Christian or Muslim or what-have-you, and it doesn't make fine distinctions between evangelicals and fundamentalists and "liberal" Christians and "mainstream" Christians, and the like.  It lumps, and it lumps me in with you, and while it's my responsibility to distinguish myself from you, you've got a burden in this, too.

Because one of the things you and I do agree on is that hate is never of God.  Never.  So why you gotta be so hateful, Pastor?  Why you gotta pop off the easy anger stuff, the easy "Hate 'em 'cause they're different" stuff?  Like the Taylor Swift song says:  "Why you gotta be so mean?"

'Cause, in the end, her song is right:  all you're gonna be is mean.  But you keep making the rest of us look that way; and you make your congregation look like a bunch of knuckle-dragging yahoos who just get together to congratulate themselves on being so rich they could make you rich, too, and their binding principle is not the Gospels, but how much fun it is to hate people who they don't want to like.

I know you want to say there's a distinction between your private opinions and your public statements:

WARREN: I would not have. I would not have made that statement. Because I wanted to talk to my own people. As a duty, as a shepherd, I’m responsible for those who put themselves under my care. I’m not responsible for everybody else.

But honestly, who are you trying to kid?   I was never more than the pastor to a few hundred in a church building most people drove by without seeing, and I knew I could never casually discuss my personal opinions with anybody; that every statement I made was a public utterance subject to misinterpretation.  I was never a best-selling author or a pastor famous enough to host a Presidential discussion, or to give the invocation at a Presidential inauguration.  Do you seriously believe you have a private thought anymore, or that what you say to your congregation stays solely within the confines of your congregation? Then might I advise you stop going on CNN and stop releasing new versions of your book?

You're a publicity hound.  You can't excuse yourself by saying what I heard was not meant for my ears.

There is, as you say, a difference between acceptance and approval.  I accept you as a Christian and a person called by God to preach the Gospel, even if I don't approve of the way you do it.  But I gotta tell you, that's not a shield for doing whatever you want and calling it accepted if not approved.  Some things just aren't acceptable, and really shouldn't be.  Paul was actually pretty clear on this; it's why he called his church in Galatia "stupid."  Besides, this isn't the first time you've made a really dickish statement you had to walk back, is it, Pastor?  Like it or not, you're the most recognizable Christian pastor in America today.  More people know you as a Christian pastor than know who Jim Wallis is, or who Barry Lynn is.  Maybe it's time you step away from the microphone and consider what purpose it is that drives your life; and what that purpose should be.

Just a suggestion.  The rest of us are getting tired of bearing the burden of your loose mouth.

The War on the War on Christmas

The "War on Christmas" has started with another "controversy" in Rhode Island over whether to call  it a "Holiday tree" or a "Christmas tree."  A controversy I might understand if the word "Christmas" in this context had anything to do with Christianity; but it doesn't.  I'm just going to link to Media Matters, by the way, because it's easier on me, and I don't mind linking there anyway.  MM also tells me this "War on Christmas" is, as well, a war on Christianity.  Which is where the whole thing starts to get weird.

First, the "Christmas tree" is no more Christian than the Easter bunny and easter eggs.  Yes, I do know a lot of churches that sponsor Easter Egg hunts on Easter Sunday, and that's a good thing.  Kids love it, anyway.  And yes, I do know a lot of churches that put up Christmas trees; some even put them in the sanctuary (the same ones that put up national flags somewhere in the choir, usually).  But even those churches usually only put them up because they are covered with "Chrismons" rather than glass pickles, Star Wars and Star Trek figurines, and other items from popular corporate culture that reflect the true meaning of the season.

Even then, they are not "Christian," any more than the national flag is Christian because it is given pride of place behind the pulpit.

I'm guessing Fox's "War on Christmas" has failed to get any traction over the years, so they'd had to escalate this year and make it an explicit war on Christianity.  Gretchen Carlson all but goes there in the videotape, which ends with her seeking reassurance they aren't nuts, that there really is a war on a holiday.  I think, however, Dick Hughes is right:

No, government isn’t waging a war on Christmas. The American people already have. And, unfortunately, they’ve won.

Were we to rewind the time machine, we would be reminded that Christmas is about neither Christmas trees nor holiday trees. Nor is it about how many baubles can be purchased at bargain prices or how many festive decorations can adorn a home or how many times the cash register will ring. Stripped to its essence, Christmas is the gift of God’s Son to the world.

It is dangerous to imply what Jesus might think if he were walking the streets of Salem today. But may I humbly suggest that he wouldn’t care one whit whether decorated Douglas firs were called Christmas trees or holiday trees. He might, however, have a few words about those who sought to profit by keeping that false controversy alive.

He likely would question how one of the richest nations in the world could allow so many people to remain hungry and homeless. He probably would grieve that humankind has achieved centuries of technological advances yet remains unable to conquer the traits — ambition, envy, greed, mistrust and the like — that rend families and breed conflict.

May I suggest that instead of debating a phony and irrelevant War on Christmas, it would be more beneficial for us to wage peace within our communities.

Which is the real irony of this "war;" it's being conducted the name of the Prince of Peace, but has nothing to do with him or what he taught, at all.  But then, by and large, neither does our celebration of Christmas. 

Personally, I think Lawrence O'Donnell pretty much had the last word on the subject.  Well, and Ricky Gervais, who wished:  "Peace to all mankind, Christian, Jew, Muslim, and Atheist."  I'd include all non-Christians and all non-believers in that, but it's a good sentiment either way.

Christmas is about gifts, and about giving; but its not about squabbling over vocabulary, or about getting the best bargain on the best items in the stores.  It isn't really about those gifts at all, but if it is, that's fine; it just really can be about much more than that.  What it can't be much less about are the adjectives used to modify certain nouns in the last month of the year.  If there is a "war on Christmas," it's because we fight it, and ignore the poor and the desperate even more heartlessly than Ebenezer Scrooge ever imagined he could.  "War on Christmas"?  No; Christmas should be a time of war on our complacency, and our lack of compassion.  Or at least the moral equivalent of war; in the name of the rebel Jesus.

A long time ago in a manger far, far away.....

I have no argument with the Pope's newest book, but I have to say, the idea that we don't know the date of Jesus' birth ain't exactly news:

In the Apostolical times the Feast of the Nativity was not observed....It can never be proved that Christ was born on December 25....The New Testament allows of no stated Holy-Day but the Lords-day...It was in compliance with the Pagan saturnalia that Christmas Holy-dayes were first invented. The manner of Christmas-keeping, as generally observed, is highly dishonorable to the name of Christ.

Increase Mather, 1687.  He was wrong about that "Saturnalia" connection, by the way; but it has become a staple of Christmas criticism among the cognoscenti, who have no idea where it came from, but are convinced it's true.  It isn't.

Mather is right, otherwise, and his observation predates historical Biblical criticism by about 200 years.   Christmas itself wasn't observed by the church until the 11th century, with the first appearance of the "Christ Mass."  The date of birth is highly conjectural (most scholars agree we don't know when the birth occurred; the Gospel accounts are too different, and written for very different reasons than historical accuracy.  The idea of such accuracy is, in fact, a Greek notion, not a Hebraic one.  Greek culture suffused the culture of Palestine in the first century (when the Synoptic Gospels were written), but not so much as to make the Gospel writers consider themselves heirs to Herodotus.)  Matthew's nativity story places Jesus firmly in line with Hebrew history and prophecy; Luke's nativity story places Jesus firmly at the bottom of the Palestinian social ladder, down among the shepherds and the ptochoi.  Only Matthew's story, by the way, rests on the idea of a "virgin" birth.  The two accounts, in fact, are reconcilable on only three facts:  the names of the parents, the place of birth in Bethlehem, and the baby's name:  Joshua, or, in the Greek transliteration:  Jesus.

I think the animals at the birth is a bit less poetic license than the Pope does.   But the take away from this seems to be:  now that the Pope has said it, it's true.


Maybe we should ask Sen. Rubio if the theologians are still arguing about it.


 (it's a caganer, by the way.  You could look it up.)

Thanksgiving 2012

One of these is simply too good a sentiment not to reuse.  But before we get there, a blast from the past:

Kelly Groehler, a BestBuy spokeswoman, noted that CEO Brian Dunn, once a store employee himself, "fully appreciates" the feelings of Melaragni and others, adding that Dunn will miss much of the holiday himself as he helps stores in Minnesota gear up for Black Friday. In a statement on the matter, the company said, "This year, customers have told us -- and our competitors -- that they plan to shop on Thanksgiving Day, and earlier than ever on Black Friday. We therefore made the difficult decision to move our opening Black Friday to midnight. We know this decision changes Thanksgiving plans for some of our employees, and we empathize with those who are affected."

This is, of course, the year of no Thanksgiving, because we are a nation of shopkeepers and the stores must be open!  On Diane Rehm this morning an apologist for retailers everywhere noted the steady progression from 3% to almost 25% (expected) in the number of "holiday shoppers" who turn out as early as possible to "get good deals."

Which REALLY brings Christmas close to a person.

In local news, people are already queing up at a Best Buy to get good deals.  They've been there since last Friday.  One woman said she's been doing this for 17 years; that this is how she spends her vacation.  The store manager speculated some of the waiting customers had no jobs, so they could stand outside a store for 7 days.    I'm sure that "If you open it, they will buy" is a truism, especially in America.  What I'm not so sure of, is that I want to relinquish my culture to the lowest common denominator, that being the shopper looking for a deal.  Isn't there some way we can bring back the concept of "shame," or at least of "holiday?   I'm sure there is.  Anyway, for the day itself:  

"We're all forgiven at Thanksgiving, and everybody's welcome at the feast."--Garrison Keillor

PRAISE AND HARVEST

Almighty God, our Heavenly Father, from whom cometh every good and pefect gift, we call to remembrance thy loving-kindness and the tender mercies which have been ever of old, and with grateful hearts we would lift up to thee the voice of our thanksgiving,

For all the gifts which thou hast bestowed upon us; for the life thou hast given us, and the world in which we live,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For the work we are enabled to do, and the truth we are permitted to learn; for whatever of good there has been in our past lives, and for all the hopes and aspirations which lead us on toward better things,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For the order and constancy of nature; for the beauty and bounty of the world; for day and night, summer and winter, seed-time and harvest; for the varied gifts of loveliness and use which every season brings,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For all the comforts and gladness of life; for our homes and all our home-blessings; for our friends and all pure pleasure; for the love, sympathy, and good will of men,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For all the blessings of civilization, wise government and legislation; for education, and all the privileges we enjoy through literature, science, and art; for the help and counsel of those who are wiser and better than ourselves,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For all true knowledge of thee and the world in which we live, and the life of truth and righteousness and divine communion to which thou hast called us; for prophets and apostles, and all earnest seekers after truth; for all lovers and helpers of mankind, and all godly and gifted men and women,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For the gift of thy Son Jesus Christ, and all the helps and hopes which are ours as his disciples; for the presence and inspiration of thy Holy Spirit, for all the ministries of thy truth and grace,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For communion with thee, the Father of our spirits; for the light and peace that are gained through trust and obedience, and the darkness and disquietude which befall us when we disobey thy laws and follow our lower desires and selfish passions,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For the desire and power to help others; for every opportunity of serving our generation according to thy will, and manifesting the grace of Christ to men,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For all the discipline of life; for the tasks and trials by which we are trained to patience, self-knowledge and self-conquest, and brought into closer sympathy with our suffering brethren; for troubles which have lifted us nearer to thee and drawn us into deeper fellowship with Jesus Christ,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For the sacred and tender ties which bind us to the unseen world; for the faith which dispels the shadows of earth, and fills the saddest and the last moments of life with the light of an immortal hope.

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

God of all grace and love, we have praised thee with our lips; grant that we may praise thee also in consecrated and faithful lives. And may the words of our mouth and the meditations of our heart be acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, our Strength and our Redeemer.

AMEN.

THANKSGIVING

Almighty God, our Heavenly Father, from whom cometh every good and perfect gift, we call to remembrance they loving-kindness and they tender mercies which have ever been od old, and with grateful hearts we would lift up to the the voice of our thanksgiving.

For all the gifts which thou has bestowed upon us; for the life that thou hast given us, and the world in which we life,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For the work we are enabled to do, and the truth we are permitted to learn; for whatever of good there has been in our past lives, and for all the hopes and aspirations which lead us on to better things,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For the order and constancy of nature; for the beauty and bounty of the world; for day and night, summer and winter, seed-time and harvest; for the varied gifts of loveliness and use which every season brings,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

For all the comforts and gladness of life; for our homes and all our home-blessings; for our friends and all pure pleasure; for the love, sympathy, and good will of men,

WE PRAISE THEE, O GOD.

Now stay outta the stores and stay near your family.  At least until Friday, when you may well want to escape them for the sanity of the shopping frenzy.

In our end is our beginning

I woke up with this thought, and rather than develop it into a full-blown blog screed redolent with insight-that-usually-isn't, and also rather than lose it to too much contemplation in too many stolen moments, leaving a shattered bowl on the floor before it had the chance to hold anything, I'll just post the basic ideas and (maybe) come back to it.

Kierkegaard identified the Socratic purpose as an ironic undermining of knowledge, but an irony with an acidic edge, as it undermines all knowledge, including the knowledge of the position of the ironist.  A solvent that dissolves all, in other words, leaving no solution (I'm sure I'm mixing chemical metaphors and rather than producing a crystalline cleverness rendering only the kind of sludge my home chemistry experiments used to produce.  So it goes.).

Socratic irony:  Socrates is the source (admittedly through Plato, but without Plato we don't have Socrates) of Western metaphysics.

Derrida worked somewhat like Socrates.  He sought to undermine certainty by deconstructing it, forcing the contradictions inherent in reason (and especially in rhetoric) to the surface, to expose the limitations in what we thinks we discuss.  Both philosophers working that area of epistemology best identified by the Firesign Theater:  "Everything you know is wrong."

And yet Derrida ends as a philosopher of religion trying to construct a negative atheology.

Forster was right:  only connect.

Of doughnuts and holes.....

Alright, one last thing political.

Josh Marshall says everyone wants Mitt Romney to leave the national stage yesterday; except for Democrats happy to have him to kick around a bit more as representative of the GOP.  TPM bolsters that opinion with two articles:  one quotes David Frum, Ana Navarro, Matt Lewis, and Bobby Jindal, all disapproving of Romney's comments about the "gifts" Obama gave voters who voted for him.   The other points out Kelly Ayotte isn't happy with Romney, either.

Think Progress concurs, quoting Jindal and Scott Walker, and headlining the article that "Republican Governors Condemn Romney's Claim...."  Which sounds like all the GOP Governors stood foursquare with Jindal and Walker and Sen. Ayotte and some pundits.

Not quite.

According to Wade Goodwin on NPR, the GOP governors (at the same meeting TP is talking about) are very happy with where they are.  And he starts the report quoting Bobby Jindal; who really is just delivering good ol' Southern Louisiana populism, not a radical shift in GOP direction.  Listen to the quotes there; there isn't any despair over what Romney did; it's more over what Obama did.  Romney's remarks may not be very smooth, but the GOP idea that we are divided between "movers" and "takers" is still "widely accepted" among the GOP governors.

This is, of course, good news; just not necessarily for Republicans.

Meanwhile, watch the doughnut, not the hole.

Since I seem to be into bumper stickers

I saw this on the back of a car just now.  I've seen some like it several times before, but post-election it carries a certain poignancy.  It's practically the motto of the Romney campaign, of FoxNews, of the "conservative entertainment complex". (Yeah, I couldn't resist using NewsBusters for that last link.)

I wanted to stop that car and ask the driver how that attitude was working for him (or her) now.

I'm tellin' ya, this is like McGovern won in '72 in that alternative universe.

Well, I have to post this, don't I?

Border Patrol

 

I don't want to wear that donkey picture out, but nothing else fits. And I would leave the politics alone, but I haven't had this much fun since Nixon resigned.

Three people who've never been near the Texas-Mexico (or the rest of the country) border, starting with Mr. 9/11:

Giuliani: The reality is, we just need the political will to do it. It's a 2,000-mile border. It isn't that big. If you took about 20,000 border patrol agents and you put them in substations about every fifty miles, you'd be able to cover the border -- maybe even every twenty-five miles -- and then you'd use photographic equipment, nighttime photography, heat-seeking equipment, motion-detection equipment. You'd alert the people at the stations, they'd go there and stop people from coming in.
Hannity: It's that easy! It really is, that, it's --
Giuliani: It's a matter of political will. When I was running for president, I said that it would be easier to control illegal immigration than it was to reduce homicide in New York by fifty percent.

Okay, to be fair, that was well before Tuesday, well before the GOP realized they had a "demographics problem.".  Since then Sean Hannity has seen the light on immigration:

"I think you control the border first," he said on his radio show Thursday evening. "You create a pathway for those people that are here — you don’t say you’ve got to go home. And that is a position that I’ve evolved on."

And so has Charles Krauthammer:

For the party in general, however, the problem is hardly structural. It requires but a single policy change: Border fence plus amnesty. Yes, amnesty. Use the word. Shock and awe -- full legal normalization (just short of citizenship) in return for full border enforcement.

Let me start with that river, because of the 1900 mile border, almost 2/3rds of it is with Texas (yes, the state is that big).   If you saw "No Country for Old Men," you know how literally impossible it would be to put a fence and guards along it, a la the Berlin Wall.  It isn't just the distance, it's the (in some places) mountainous terrain.  But the other problem is, people live along that border; and they cross it everyday.

This should come as no surprise to people living near a state border.  When I lived in southern Illinois, I crossed into Missouri daily.  It's no different for people living on the Rio Grande.  They cross into Mexico, or into Texas, on a daily basis.  Turn that into Berlin during the Cold War, or Gaza and the West Bank, and do you expect the Hispanics on this side of the fence to thank you?

Logistically, it's ridiculous.  Politically, it's condescending.  Look, you Hispanics who are here are okay, and just as soon as we keep any more of you from coming in, we can arrange amnesty!  Now help us shut this gate, will ya?  In fact, why don't you shut it for us?

You people are so much better at that sort of thing than we are.

I bet we could even get 'em to enforce the border!

Honestly, this is better than Nixon resigning.  This is almost like George McGovern winning.

The morning after the morning after....

 

 I don't know what this will mean in the future, but the crazies didn't lose everything on Tuesday night.*  Ted Cruz is now the junior Senator from Texas:

Cruz is a conspiracy theory character. He is convinced billionaire George Soros is funding a secret agenda to shutdown golf courses because they harm the environment and is conspiring with the United Nations to eliminate national sovereignty and private property. Cruz is convinced sharia law is an enormous problem in the U.S. and that extending unemployment benefits creates more unemployment and that churches ought to be able to keep their tax exemptions even as they endorse candidates from the pulpit.

Cruz came out of nowhere as a first-time candidate with little money and no name identification with voters. Texas establishment Republicans acquired him as their political problem as a consequence of their own behavior. They gerrymandered legislative districts so profoundly during redistricting that a court case challenging the new lines dragged out the primary election day from early March to late May, which gave Cruz time to polish his ranting points and fire up the Tea Party. If the election had been held as scheduled, Dewhurst, a former CIA agent, would have handily won. But he simply isn't conservative enough or sufficiently crazy for the radicals taking control of the Texas GOP.

Partly this is a cautionary tale about being careful what you wish for (redistricting) and learning that you gotta dance with the ones what brung you (the Tea Party).  Moore goes on to the note the Texas GOP is foursquare against critical thinking, which is no exaggeration.

Ted Cruz is Allen West, except in the Senate.  Which means he's there for six years, and probably for as much longer as he likes.

He's also the guy Richard Viguerie thinks can be the new Hispanic face of the GOP.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

*Actually, this is probably a good thing.  Keeping a few crazies in the public eye will make it easier to remember we don't want to return to that again.  When the Dems swept the Congress along with Obama in 2008, it only took two years to forget how bad the GOP could be; and we're still stuck with them.  Having a few crazies around might make us appreciate the regulars a bit more.