Late Night Haiku
I
Hear fountain babble,
Time for sleep has grown past due.
Winter dooms crickets.
II
PowerBook hums softly,
The keyboard clicks under fingers.
Look! Ideas form now.
III
My foot numb, asleep.
Pins and needles arise inside.
Sleeping birds care not.
QOTW: Memory
Memory is a funny thing. I turned on my PowerBook with a definite idea for a blog entry and now I have forgotten it completely.
Fortunately, this leads logically into this week's QOTW meme: Do you find yourself forgetting things frequently? Do you usually recall these things are have they disappeared into the abyss? What's the last thing you can recall forgetting (no, that is not any oxymoron)?
Post your remembrances of forgetting below or post the answer to your blog and then trackback to this post.
Writer's Block
I have a bad case of writers block. I haven't been able to make any progress on my opinion pieces that need to be written for OfB. I can't get any of my ideas onto paper for Sakamuyo. It's frustrating for someone who normally can do this kind of stuff.
To make the compound the situation, I had the need to write approximately 52 researched, documented pages for courses as well. Perhaps fortunately, business has been slow the last few weeks, so I've been able to pretty much dedicate myself to the writing of those pages. As it stands, I've written 53 pages in the last few weeks, although some of those are cases where I took more than the required amount of pages, which means I still have about four to five pages to go to meet the requirements for one topic that I lumped in that grouping of pages.
At any rate, even if those pages had flowed, none of them actually provide anything I can put on OfB — which is, bad news. One of my biggest flaws is that I need to be “inspired” to write even technical reviews, probably because I'm not really a technically minded person despite the fact that I can make people's eyes glaze over with technical facts at times. It might sound silly, but that's why I call it a “flaw.”
I guess my Muse decided to take a trip off Mt. Helicon to go see some “sights.” Maybe that will mean better inspiration in the long run… but, alas, for now, it may mean continued struggles.
The Question of God Revisited
Well, I finished the four hour PBS special The Question of God with Dr. Armand Nicholi, which follows the lives of two very bright, but very different men: Dr. Sigmund Freud and Clive Staples (C.S.) Lewis. The biographical sections and the debates between Freud and Lewis are well done, complete with photos, interviews and reenactments with actors who bear an uncanny resemblance to the two historical figures.
The panel of “smart people” that was assembled to discuss the segments was wanting, however. Dr. Frederick Lee did a pretty good job of representing the orthodox believer, although he was stumped on a few issues that I thought he probably should have been able to answer. One other gentleman representing the believing side seems to be a bit too into seeing faith as adjusting “power dynamics,” and the two women on the theist's side both seemed to be mystics, albeit of a Christian flavor (despite the one rejecting miracles and the other rejecting the existence of the devil as a component of dualism). The skeptics were represented by only three men, but they seemed to be more on Dr. Lee's level than the other believers were.
They could have, and probably should have, left the panel out. On the other hand, it strikes me that one could make an excellent small group or Sunday School class out of the Freud/Lewis segments. They make great conversation starters, and obviously, given the panel, they were divided up in a way meant to encourage discussion. Dr. Armand Nicholi's lead in questions were good starting points as well.
On a merely aesthetic point, the two part series was done in a very slick fashion. It “felt” well done, rather than the cheap, cheesy feel that goes with many religion-focused documentaries. I just saw one with Houston Smith the other day, and I think the video technicians must have taken the day off when they produced it. Good production might not save a doomed piece, but it does allow a good piece to thrive by avoiding distracting the viewer with annoying camera angles, bad sound and so on.
As a whole, I liked the series, and I think I'll recommend that my church library purchase a new copy (we are presently working on getting some DVDs as we phase out VHS tapes). The series could have been vastly improved had the panelists been better, but as it stands it was still probably the most thoughtful discussion of the “Question of God” to hit the airwaves in a long time. Lewis would probably be quite pleased.
Rating: ***+
Tired
Today was a day of catching up on stuff that needed to get done… I stayed busy almost all the day doing stuff I had hoped to get done earlier this week. Now I am tired, so no big blog post will be coming today.
How about you?
A Thanksgiving Medley
Yum. First off, happy Thanksgiving to all of my friends in the blogosphere, y'all are the best, and I hope you had lots of turkey today and pumpkin pie today.
Not the Uniform Commercial Code. Thunder asked about the UCC and Unitarians in reference to my post from last Sunday. First let me clear something up, just incase there is confusion, despite the joke that the UCC stands for “Unitarians Considering Christ,” the UCC has substantial differences from the Unitarians, despite its close alliance with the same.
As far as background, the UCC draws on two separate lineage of churches: the Evangelical & Reformed church, which has its history in the Evangelical and Evangelical Lutheran movements that came to the U.S from Germany; and the Congregational Christian Church, which draws its origins from the Puritanism brought over from England by the Pilgrims (appropriate for today). Unitarianism in the U.S. draws its closest link to the Pilgrims' Puritanism (as well as Deism) rather than the German heritage that pervades many UCC churches.
Officially, at least, the UCC is also a trinitarian church and one that officially believes in Ultimate Reality (if not always the God of the Bible). I do not think that you will find a lot of United Churchpeople that are atheistic. The fifty percent figure Thunder mentions I would imagine applies to the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA), which officially declares it supports both atheistic and theistic world views (as another joke goes, being a Unitarian means that you believe in, at most, one God). What the two sects have in common are their “Sunday School materials” program (which is sickening, frankly), universalism (often times) and willing integration with non-Christian religions. Some UCC churches have witch doctors, imams and others regularly appear and lead the service.
The key distinction in reality is that it is possible for a truly Christian church to operate under the UCC, whereas I do not think that is realistically possible in the UUA. Many such churches form the Biblical Witness Fellowship, a group that provides UCC churches with an alternate source of educational materials, pastoral search tools (in partnership with the EARCCC, a group for ex-UCC churches) and so on. The Evangelical & Reformed denomination was more conservative than the Congregational Christian Church, but there are Bible believing churches in the UCC from both sides of the merger.
As a whole, however, the UCC has promoted reimaging of Jesus, Gaia and Sophia worship, and other theological heresies. Moreover, as one of the largest mainline Protestant churches, it has used its position to do political lobbying for liberal social causes. Therefore, I reject the denomination as a orthodox Christian organization, but continue to recognize the Biblical Witness that remains within the denomination. This can be seen simply by noting how many churches are, like my own did in 1998, choosing to de-affiliate with the UCC.- For more information on the UCC, I would point to my three part series on the subject, of which I only wrote the first two parts so far. Part I, Part II.
Concerning lack of a deity, Thunder's other question (if I read his question correctly), I don't think having a deity is necessary for something to be a religion — usually in such a case there is a replacement idol. I'd point to Paul Tillich's phrase that religion concerns that which one is “Ultimately Concerned” with. Outside the realm of theory, we have examples such as Theravada (Conservative) Buddhism, Philosophical Taoism and Confucianism that seem to meet the requirements of atheistic religions. Although both Theravada and Taoism have an Ultimate, albeit impersonal, Reality in the Void and the Tao, respectively.
Congrats to Flip
Well, one person guessed on my mystery quote from two posts ago, and that person — Flip — got it! I was not expecting anyone to properly guess Sir Gawain and the Green Knight on that passage… it is pretty tough considering it was in untranslated Northern Middle English. (The other quote, of course, was the opening to the Canterbury tales). That means Flip now has 10 asisaid points. Flip is going to force me to come up with an even harder challenge now!
At any rate, I always think comparing the Gawain poet's writings with Chaucer's is interesting. It is remarkable to consider that both of them were writing in “English” at the same time period and in the “same” language, and yet one is remarkably hard to read — well, Chaucer ain't a walk in the park either, but Gawain is almost too far removed from modern English to even comprehend without the aid of a translation.
Here is the current asisaid point lineup from past “point contests”:
- 20 pts. Christopher.
- 10 pts. Flip
They can redeem their points at the nearest asisaid point vendor. “It's not everywhere you want to be.”
Speaking of Languages
Writing that last post reminded me of how much I wish I had a talent for learning languages. I've always had a dismal track record in that respect. I have been somewhat successful with Koine Greek, although I have a long way to go before I can comfortably read any Greek thrown at me — inflections continue to cause me trouble (it is the curse of thinking in English, I guess).
At any rate, I got to thinking about the languages I really wished I knew. Going from my present base, I'd love to eventually extend my reach into Homeric Greek as well. With those two down, I'm fairly certain I could read anything written between the Illyad and the Book of Revelation without too much trouble. I might actually accomplish this one of these days.
I also wish I knew Latin. Yes, it isn't terribly practical, but it has a certain mesmerizing elegance that surpasses other languages and I wish I could truly enjoy it. Quid quid latine dictum sit, altum videtur. 1 And, let us not forget carpe carpeum. 2 I also wish I knew Italian. Dante's Divine Comedy is quite possibly my favorite piece of literature of all time (outside of the Bible) — I'd love to be able to read it in its original magnificence. That's not terribly practical either, I know… I can probably justify Latin far more easily… but, hey, its not like I'm actually running out to learn it right now.
On a more practical front, I recognize, as I noted in my last post, the coming importance of Spanish. It is said that Spanish is easy to learn, although I'm not jumping in just yet to do so. However, it would probably wise in the future to do so. It would be pure icing on the cake that I could read stuff like Pablo Neruda's poetry and Jorge Borge's short stories in their original tongue.
Given, as I noted above, my poor track record on this, I'll be lucky just to expand my Greek vocabulary, but I do hope someday I have the time and determination to become multi-lingual. It would be nice.
1: Anything said in Latin sounds profound.
2: Seizing the carp.
English on the Edge?
Imagine if fifty or a hundred years from now those living in your hometown spoke a tongue alien to yours. It is, in my estimation, something extremely possible in the United States.
I think back to the language my distant ancestors must have spoken. Anglo-Saxon is as alien to me as perhaps American might be someday. It is not until well after the Norman invasion that the dialect of well connected London (which was absorbing the Normans' Latin-based French) that things start to be readable. For instance, I can understand:Whan that aprill with his shoures soote The droghte of march hath perced toBut I cannot process this nearly as easily, although I can assemble the meaning, despite it being written approximately the same time:
And bathed every veyne in swich licour
Of which vertu engendred is the flour…
— You Know the Source, Don't ya?
SIÞEN þe sege and þe assaut watz sesed at Troye, Þe bor brittened and brent to bronde and askez,
Þe tulk þat þe trammes of tresoun þer wrot
Watz tried for his tricherie, þe trewest on erthe….
— 10 Points to the Person who knows what this is.
While I'm taking the long way around here, it is all aimed at a simple point: presently, we have a massive immigration into this country from Mexico. Unlike the Anglo-Saxons, we are not being “invaded,” but we are having a major influx of people who speak a Latinate language come into this country. These days, it isn't unusual to be walking around a store and hear people some speaking Spanish rather than English.
I suspect it will soon be hard to do business without knowing some Spanish (something I really should learn one of these days). Eventually, one of two things could happen: (1) Spanish could supersede English completely or at least among the lower and lower-middle classes; or (2) we could end up with a hybrid language. I tend to think the latter is the most likely, considering that English speakers who learn Spanish for the sake of communicating with the increasingly large non-English speaking minority would take English syntax and phrases with them and mix them in common dialogue.
This could be a good thing, considering that English has been rather stagnate in the last 500 years compared to the 500 prior to that, although as a whole I think it is a sad scenario to consider (with no offense intended to my Spanish speaking friends). English is — I admit bias here — beautiful partially because of its simple, mostly inflection free system of grammar. It is something different. It is not, by any means, the most technically elegant language, but none the less, it serves its purpose well. It is odd to think that someday not that far from now people might have trouble reading this message, much less any of the classical English works.
Is the US alone in this? No, not at all. Consider the massive immigration of Muslims to Europe. At the rate it is going, the day is not far away when the continent, and likely the UK as well, will have more Middle Eastern Muslims (the majority of which would probably prefer their native Semetic and Iranian languages over the Romantic and Germanic ones) than Europeans. I'll lay off on bets as to the longevity of languages in Europe, but I tend to think we are on the cusp of a massive change.
Alas poor English, I knew it, Horatio.
At the Library Today
I was at the library today looking for some books when I ran across an early history of the United Church of Christ (from 1962, if I recall correctly). That being just five years after the merger of the E&R and Congregational Christian Churches, I doubt the author had any idea just what the organization he was so pleased to see come about would amount to. Despite being outside the UCC for six years now, I still feel connected to it and saddened by its decent into heresy. The UCC is the decedent of the very churches of the Pilgrims (literally) and some of the very earliest Evangelical Germans to come into the United States.
It could have tapped this rich heritage to do great things for God in the U.S., but instead it continues to sink in the theological swamp it willingly entered. I wonder if that author ever would have imagined the UCC would become most closely aligned with the Unitarians or if he thought it would promote goddess worship. I doubt it. I doubt most of its founders would have guessed that.
