Memorial Day

JACQUES EARL "GUS" BRUNSON

Iraq, July 2005, of an improvised explosive device.

How can I say we miss you, when you are in each heart, when you are now able to be with us as you were not in life? Eyes miss eyes, hands miss hands, but your heart has never left my own.

St. Augustine of Canterbury

Here we see Pope Gregory - with a stylin' beard - sending our poor sucker . . . uh, saint! . . . off from a fairly comfortable existence in Rome to the savages of England. See Auggie's apprehension? Could it be he'd heard of Mad Priest?

Anyway, Augustine should give us hope, in light of our own Bearded-Wonder of Canterbury. After all, Augustine was a complete failure - by his own and contemporaries reckoning - at bringing the two opposing sides of Celtic and Roman Catholic practice together, and, yet, Christianity survived and both Roman and Celt found ways to survive, often uncomfortably, even belligerently, almost always separately, but, still, if it were perfect we wouldn't need Jesus.

An Apology and Updates

I know I'm long in posting. I've noted to my friend, James, that even in the electronic era, I manage to communicate in a glacial manner. Truly an "Earth" type, I move slowly, circumspectly, and without the same sense of time as others. I apologize.

However, I do have to beg some indulgence, in that I do not have internet at home, and have to use the guest pc at work, as it's the only one fast enough to actually work with blog posting.

There is also the reality that there is little to post, most of the time! I'm terribly boring, you see, as I've said. One of my roses died, largely because I have no idea how to care for roses. I've enjoyed my azaleas, immensely, being absolutely loaded with blooms for weeks, as they were. My dill is coming up nicely, my lavender seems to be not coming up at all (as always), and my catnip is starting well, much to the satisfaction of Katzie and Miutu.

We've had two supply priests in the past couple of weeks - one was a young(ish) fellow who did all the bowing and kneeling and facing East, etc. It's lovely, but in what is, essentially, a rural parish, it's a bit excessive and off-putting, flamboyant, really, with the effect of focussing the attention on the celebrant. I was totally turned off by his sermon, which had the mixture of pomposity and earnestness of the recent seminarian, accompanied by a sort of offensive triumphalism, as he actually used the words, ". . . of course, Christianity is the only true religion!" I'm sure the Jews will be interested to know that. Even Augustine of the Hippo-sized ego was humble enough to know God expressed his truth through other religions, though we understand ours to be the perfect revelation. The idea that we move from perfection to perfection, even in death, is certainly not a novel one in Christianity, and one that, if embraced, might make us a deal more humble and a lot more attractive. The second supply priest was the retired rector of another local church (and now, member of our church), and I always enjoy his service, and he is very considerate of the individual congregation's customs and style.

Lindy asked about my profound thoughts, and, frankly, I have none right now. I do realize, now, that the Reasserters are not bad people, but badly misled. They do need a space, just as children and adolescents need space to learn and make mistakes. Of course, we could try keeping them in TEC claiming that, in that space, they need a parent to keep them from hurting themselves. The problem there is we're not the parent! There's only one parent for us and for the Reasserters, and that's God. We're just as immature and incomplete, in our way, as they are. That doesn't mean, however, that we need to be in the same space while we grow, learn and make mistakes. It is not doing any service to us, them or the Body of God to talk about "unity" and "communion" while we are, in fact, of completely different worldviews and totally opposite views of those two vital terms. This has never been about sexuality, sex, or congregationalism, but about completely incompatible worldviews.

This doesn't mean that both worldviews are not necessary, merely incompatible. Reasserters need a place in which they can move from perfection to perfection in the comfort of the familiar and the exclusive, while liberals need a place to move from perfection to perfection in the expansiveness of questioning, experimenting and accepting. That is real tolerance; to let another go, or even insist he go, his own way, rather than a neurotic attempt at cobbling a "middle way" which is non-existent.

What else?

Oh, they are making a "Prince of Persia" movie with the ever-lovely Jake Gyllenhall as the Prince.

Here is the Prince:

And here's Jake Gyllenhall:

It should be good.

James is working on some Batman concepts I'm really excited about.

I'm looking forward to The Venture Bros., Season 3, beginning Sunday.

Other than that, same ol' same ol'.

A Request for Clarification

I had posted, at Fr. Jake's, a statement to the effect that we have to be careful not to fail to recognize what is the source of the actions of the Rejectionists that may drive us to despair. I later received an e-mail asking me what I meant.

I was referring to the following post I made on this thread:


This, to me, is the thing that clinches it. I am not always pleased at the way we on the liberal side handle things, especially the way I handle things, but I can't sit on the fence when things like this are going on.

Why? Quite simply, because it is Evil (capital "E") working through the world and against the Lord. Worst of all, it's working through otherwise decent people - as I've said elsewhere - twisting the impulse to Holiness to mere legalism and spiritual desolation.

How do I know this? These words, the violence we see coming from Nigeria, the sheer duplicity and obfuscation, are in direct contradiction both to Scripture and Holy example. The martyrs laid down their lives, refusing to return violence for violence. The spiritual martyrs suffered exile, destitution and banishment, but did not threaten or incite.

How do I know it's an attack from the Deceiver? These words, even the constant abuse of Rejectionists, drives me closer and closer to leaving, and, if I left, there would be no other place in Christianity for me. Catholicism and Orthodoxy offer more of the same abuse, Reform Protestantism offers no - or a pared down - liturgy. I would go to Buddhism or Judaism, and not look back. Even then, were it just me, it would be my weak faith. Yet, I see so many others questioning the efficacy, the very reality of Christianity because of these Rejectionists and other extremists of their sort, and I realize that this is the way the Enemy would destroy us from the inside: not just a slow rot of corruption (Rowan's condescension and ineffectualness and our own leadership's continued "appeasement" and indulgence of that), but the quick-burning fires of a perceive ultra-holiness and right to sit in the seat of God's judgment. I then turn back, and hang on, because otherwise the Enemy has won.

Again, I am not always pleased with the anger that flares up in us. I am sure I will fail in this, but Jake's graciousness in addressing the issue of LLE should be an example. If I am right, then these people are deceived, confused, spiritually sick and need care. It is true that a raving patient may need isolation or restraint, however that should be done only with intent to love and heal.

Here endeth my lesson, and thank you for indulging a man with more typing skill than wit.

I hope that clarifies a bit.

The constant attacks, denying of our humanity, denial of the attacks and the hatred motivating them aren't the ends, but the means to the end of driving us to despair, to give up on Christianity and religion, on the goodness that can be found in others, the means of the Enemy to break the Church, just as the twisting of the impulse to Holiness into a self-righteousness on the part of the Reasserters is an attack, not on them, but the efficacy of their faith and witness and, thus, the Church.

Latest From Excitementtown

Heard from the Abbey in Three Rivers. Was told should come to stay a couple of weeks in summer.

Why is it that it seems so difficult for monasteries to understand that you can be quite serious about pursuing a possible vocation while still being unable to simply pick up and take off for a few weeks. There are no religious communities near Georgia, unless I want to become RC, and it is a massive expense to travel anywhere these days. It seems that monasticism - at least in the Anglican tradition - is like the priesthood; set up to attract those who have money.

I suppose it could be argued that one has to be willing to sacrifice for a real vocation. This isn't a question of sacrifice, but possibility. It isn't just travel expenses, but the fact that that's two weeks of paycheck-to-paycheck that won't be there, and I've got to go back to my old life while they make the call!

As for sacrifice, look; if I were successful and well-off, then, I go into the novitiate, it doesn't work out, I go back to the possibilities a previously succesful career offer, and whatever I might've laid aside against the possibility of a failed vocation. For me, I fail, I've got nothing to go back to. To get rid of my debts I will have to liquidate everything I own - house, furniture, everything - and will have to start over, in a poorly-paid industry in a declining(failing?) economy, all while in my forties.

It's allergy season, and I'm really pissy these days, but I just don't think this is what the original monastics intended.