I Understand, Jack

This is one of my favorite . . . supervillains, for lack of a better term.



I REALLY UNDERSTAND!

MY Teletubbies!

TINKY WINKY!

"Eh-0h!"

DIPSY!

"Eh-Oh!"

LAA-LAA!

"Eh-Oh!"

POE!

"Begone, foul spirit!"

BIIIIG HUUUUG!

or . . .

Not.

August 29, 2007

THE BEHEADING OF JOHN THE BAPTIST

An odd feast, but a feast nonetheless.

And, here's the relic in Rome. Supposedly, this is John, himself.

The connotations of the story are obvious: weak king, conniving wife, malleable young person, and the usual "orthodox" dislike of women being allowed to "intefere" in a man's world.

Undoubtedly, Herod was weak. Unlike his ruthless predecessor, he kept John alive. We're told he liked to listen to him. We know what he was telling Herod, "You divorced your wife and married your brother's . You're an adulterer until you put her away from you." There was power in what John was saying, so Herod feared him. Herod - as tetrarch - had pretty much shot his bolt, powerwise, by having John arrested, so power in another was something he feared. But, he feared losing face, even more, and Herodias, the wife John would have him put away, played on that by having her daughter, Salome, wheedle an enormously open-ended promise from him in front of the "great and the good" of the day, then springing the trap - give me John the Baptist's head. So, John died.

John and Herod, both, interest me less than Herodias. Salome, I suspect, entertains popularity because of the obvious prurient aspect of a young girl being promised so much for a dance - indeed, that is evidenced by the legend that she danced the dance of 7 veils, or whatever - there is certainly an unhealthy eagerness in Herod's desire to see her dance, but that's mere lust, so uninteresting to me, as well (perhaps if it had been a handsome son of Herodias, I'd feel differently, but it wasn't).

Herodias is generally depicted as an archetypal scheming woman, her daughter a femme fatale. Yet, I think Salome was a girl who simply wanted to do what her mother asked. Certainly, Salome is mentioned only in this context. Herodias is the "brains of the outfit." Obviously, she wanted John dead; he called here a whore in his preaching. Yet, more than that, she wanted to make herself, and her children secure. If Herod put her away, as John said, she'd be nothing and nowhere. I doubt John thought of that with any regret. He never struck me as particularly compassionate, honestly. But, the important thing is, Herodias had a reason that seemed good and, possibly, right to her; it wasn't mere malice or hurt feelings. It wasn't a threat to Herod's power - he had none, except through Rome's indulgence, and they wouldn't have cared about a backwater preacher throwing epithets around. Most of Roman society wouldn't have batted an eyelash at Herod's divorce and remarriage, anyway. However, Herod's weakness made Herodias vulnerable, she believed. As long as he listened to John, she was in danger, so, silence John permanently. She never realized that Herod's weakness would never have allowed him to divorce her than he would have willingly killed John.

So, what does it mean? I just offer these reflections for your own context. For me, immediately, it makes me think of the current "crisis" in the AC -- two sides speaking to a frightened, weak, and vacillating figurehead. If I am John, will I be so cold-hearted as to simply have Herodias sent away, with no hope, no shelter? But, what if I'm Herodias, disposing of another to advance what I believe to be good? Finally, too, what of the poor person in between, frightened, confused, powerless, in truth. What of him? Keeping it all in mind is good for what little humility stirs in me.

Tired

Once again, I've overreached myself. I thought I am more than I am.

I had envisioned TEC being able to do something amazing, to turn its back on a distinctly inward-looking type of Christianity, to become something greater, something that realized that God transcends our religions, while still maintaining the realization that we need our traditions, our separate and established modes of worship, because, while God is transcendent, we are not. Yet, even as things seem to be headed toward settling, I hear people I respect arguing the old narrow "One True Religion" arguments -- Jesus is the Way! As if Jesus were somehow different from God, and God separated or "not really present" in other faiths. Then, we have the other side arguing that liturgy means nothing, that it's all about how it's making us "feel" at the moment -- add this, take that -- and that the structures of the ecclesial body means nothing -- why sure a Christian priest can be a Muslim laywoman!

Yet, both are narrow. On one hand, narrowing God to one real expression, on the other denying any need to recognize human limitations in a sort of "universalized" religious mishmash. I've always hoped that we could come to see, even while maintaining the beauty of our Chrisitian praxis, is that the importance of Jesus was as the Christ, not as Jesus.

I had hoped we would realize that we had so many different religions, not to deny their forms, but as a gift for our human limitations. I don't want Orthodox, or Catholics, or UU or Buddhism or Islam or Neo-Paganism or any of it to disappear -- each has a separate place, as there are so many types of people all looking for the One, that religions and theologies and cosmologies were tools for Man, not the boundaries of God. I had hoped we'd realize that, by our boundaries, we could, paradoxically, draw a circle wide enough for all of us.

I was full of Pride. It was never my view to share, and I was a fool to expect it of anyone. I am small, not great enough to be heard, and I've done nothing to contribute.

I think, finally, that I no longer have it in me to struggle with what "they" do with "the church." I just hope that, whoever comes out on top, they'll leave my strange, closed-open little parish alone.

Hope Everyone is Doing Okay

I have cut my (very excessive) caffeine consumption by half in the past week -- hopefully, the irritability and exhaustion will stop soon.

However, I still stand by what I've said previously; we liberals need to learn that polity and discipline are not dirty words. The Reasserters count on our being too embarrassed by charges of exclusivity and intolerance to assert ourselves -- to tell them it's time to either get with the program or go find another. There is nothing shameful, nor even exclusive nor intolerant in expecting others to abide by the rules of the organization you've joined and its goals.

I Still Say

It's time to officially divorce TEC from the Reasserters.

I hear the same arguments for "unity" and all the same, tired cries of limiting ourselves, screening out voices different from ours. I'm sorry, but I think that those are just people afraid of being called the bad guy. Sometimes, you have to have the courage to be the bad guy, and it's time to say goodbye - forcefully, if need be - to those who simply can no longer even feign respect for us, by inhibition, deposition, excommunication, whatever.

The simple fact is there is a great deal of diversity among liberals -- don't believe it? Try to find the "party line" on what's meant by a committed gay couple. See how I react about Redding's claims to two religions, as opposed to someone else. For that matter, look at the fact that many of us believe, as opposed to other liberals, that this tedious call for reconciliation is really rather silly, a sort of angelism -- it's been made clear from the Reasserter side that they will only accept capitulation.

On top of that, we are doing violence to ourselves as well as to the Reasserters. The damage they do to us is obvious, but we do a different sort of damage to them. Holding them in this perpetual tension of monologue-masquerading-as-dialogue, we give them a focus for the pervasive fear and hate that composes their "faith" -- take that away by cutting off our continued contact with them, and they will be forced back on themselves, and ultimately forced to confront a "faith" that's actually blinding them to their better parts. And, yes, I'll say the same for us, as there is a less obvious harm. We are decent people, trying - sometimes to the point of equivocation - to see the best in our enemies. Yet, even we are becoming churlish, hurtful, cruel - and that's harm to us. Their hate and irrational villification is poisoning our own discourse.

There may be, indeed, I expect there will be, reconciliation - but not in this generation.

A New Motto For My Hometown

IF YOU'RE NOT AMBITIOUS AND HAVE A GOOD SENSE OF HUMOR, YOU'RE HOME!

Delayed Reaction Sydrome . . . by About Three Years

So, Rove thinks it's "time" to resign, does he?

"Well, I've done all the damage I can do here! Roveman Awaaaaay!"

Anybody Else . . .

. . have temps around 102 degrees today (not counting you desert-dwellers, to whom that is a balmy spring day)?

When I woke up, I had to practically swim out of my bed.

Don't Know Why I Thought of Her or This Song, But . . .

For Those Who Have Not Yet Noticed

I put a link to my own parish on the blog. Please feel free to take a look. I think it gives a feel for the motley band of misfits who make up our parish - a people who were not a people and God made a people.

The Merry Minuet

Reading MadPriest's post and comments on Senator Tancredo's own "Modest Proposal" got me in mind of this old Sheldon Harnick song, as sung by the Kingston Trio.

Enjoy . . . or . . . well . . . here it is

Coming Out in 2007

Just in time for Christmas!

Other casting, as far as I've been able to find out:

Mrs. Lovett - Helena Bonham Carter

Judge Turpin - Alan Rickman

Beadle Bamford - Timothy Spall ("Wormtail" for us Potterphiles)

Signor Adolfo Pirelli - Sacha Baron Cohen ("Borat")

And, yes, IT IS THE SONDHEIM MUSICAL!

A Modest Proposal

Want your bishops to really fly, Pete?

Reflection

It occurred to me today, because of a misdeed of my own, what the problem is with us and forgiveness. Often, we say that we repent, but we don't actually feel forgiven. Now, we're assured that it is so, so why do we still feel cut off? I think its because we repent with reservations; we know that we will do it again, not in the whole-hearted openness of kindness to our fallible nature, but because we intend to do it again. That's why Confession is often so much harder than mere restitution, and not nearly as much work.

Of course, maybe that's just me.

Flying Bishops

If it's a flying bishop, does that mean that, as far as sexual morality, it should only be concerned if it's a flying fuck? Being family men, do these flying bishops themselves take a flying fuck? And if so, the real question is, who gives a flying fuck?

Still, I'm not concerned about England holding out against them. I can see it now, bombard balloons flying high over London, the sirens howling as the bishops fly over in tight formation, then a cheer goes up as the first Spitfires appear, guns blazing! There'll always be an England!

As for me, I've decided to become a skulking bishop. It's much more suitable to my nature (even though I am now a bloody Ravenclaw!)

Many Will Be Disappointed

I retook the sorting hat ceremony, and, tragically, this happened:


I'm a Ravenclaw!

Well, at least I'm not a bloody Gryffindor!

Sorry, James.