| Figures on government spending and debt (last six digits are eliminated). The government's fiscal year runs Oct. 1 through Sept. 30. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One of the commentators I appreciate is Larry Kudlow. Larry is only a man and is often wrong when he begins prognosticating about what to "buy" or "sell", but philosophically he is a generally a "reasonable" voice.
This post is for my friends who struggle this time of year with whether or not to celebrate Halloween with their kids. It's a good read whatever your opinion. Watch for me and my kids Halloween night. Williams will be a little horse (2nd year in a row), Thomas an X-man, Sarah a ballerina, Caroline Hannah Montana, and me, I'll be holding the flashlight and eating way too much sugar!
OPEN BOOK, Views & Reviews, No. 28
Copyright (c) 1996 Biblical Horizons
August, 1996
It has become routine in October for some Christian schools to send out letters warning parents about the evils of Halloween, and it has become equally routine for me to be asked questions about this matter.
"Halloween" is simply a contraction for All Hallows’ Eve. The word "hallow" means "saint," in that "hallow" is just an alternative form of the word "holy" ("hallowed be Thy name"). All Saints’ Day is November 1. It is the celebration of the victory of the saints in union with Christ. The observance of various celebrations of All Saints arose in the late 300s, and these were united and fixed on November 1 in the late 700s. The origin of All Saints Day and of All Saints Eve in Mediterranean Christianity had nothing to do with Celtic Druidism or the Church’s fight against Druidism (assuming there ever even was any such thing as Druidism, which is actually a myth concocted in the 19th century by neo-pagans.)
In the First Covenant, the war between God’s people and God’s enemies was fought on the human level against Egyptians, Assyrians, etc. With the coming of the New Covenant, however, we are told that our primary battle is against principalities and powers, against fallen angels who bind the hearts and minds of men in ignorance and fear. We are assured that through faith, prayer, and obedience, the saints will be victorious in our battle against these demonic forces. The Spirit assures us: "The God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly" (Romans 16:20).
The Festival of All Saints reminds us that though Jesus has finished His work, we have not finished ours. He has struck the decisive blow, but we have the privilege of working in the mopping up operation. Thus, century by century the Christian faith has rolled back the demonic realm of ignorance, fear, and superstition. Though things look bad in the Western world today, this work continues to make progress in Asia and Africa and Latin America.
The Biblical day begins in the preceding evening, and thus in the Church calendar, the eve of a day is the actual beginning of the festive day. Christmas Eve is most familiar to us, but there is also the Vigil of Holy Saturday that precedes Easter Morn. Similarly, All Saints’ Eve precedes All Saints’ Day.
The concept, as dramatized in Christian custom, is quite simple: On October 31, the demonic realm tries one last time to achieve victory, but is banished by the joy of the Kingdom.
What is the means by which the demonic realm is vanquished? In a word: mockery. Satan’s great sin (and our great sin) is pride. Thus, to drive Satan from us we ridicule him. This is why the custom arose of portraying Satan in a ridiculous red suit with horns and a tail. Nobody thinks the devil really looks like this; the Bible teaches that he is the fallen Arch-Cherub. Rather, the idea is to ridicule him because he has lost the battle with Jesus and he no longer has power over us.
(The tradition of mocking Satan and defeating him through joy and laughter plays a large role in Ray Bradbury’s classic novel, Something Wicked This Way Comes, which is a Halloween novel.)
The gargoyles that were placed on the churches of old had the same meaning. They symbolized the Church ridiculing the enemy. They stick out their tongues and make faces at those who would assault the Church. Gargoyles are not demonic; they are believers ridiculing the defeated demonic army.
Thus, the defeat of evil and of demonic powers is associated with Halloween. For this reason, Martin Luther posted his 95 challenges to the wicked practices of the Church to the bulletin board on the door of the Wittenberg chapel on Halloween. He picked his day with care, and ever since Halloween has also been Reformation Day.
Similarly, on All Hallows’ Eve (Hallow-Even – Hallow-E’en – Halloween), the custom arose of mocking the demonic realm by dressing children in costumes. Because the power of Satan has been broken once and for all, our children can mock him by dressing up like ghosts, goblins, and witches. The fact that we can dress our children this way shows our supreme confidence in the utter defeat of Satan by Jesus Christ – we have NO FEAR!
I don’t have the resources to check the historical origins of all Halloween customs, and doubtless they have varied from time to time and from Christian land to Christian land. "Trick or treat" doubtless originated simply enough: something fun for kids to do. Like anything else, this custom can be perverted, and there have been times when "tricking" involved really mean actions by teenagers and was banned from some localities.
We can hardly object, however, to children collecting candy from friends and neighbors. This might not mean much to us today, because we are so prosperous that we have candy whenever we want, but in earlier generations people were not so well o_, and obtaining some candy or other treats was something special. There is no reason to pour cold water on an innocent custom like this.
Similarly, the jack-o’-lantern’s origins are unknown. Hollowing out a gourd or some other vegetable, carving a face, and putting a lamp inside of it is something that no doubt has occurred quite independently to tens of thousands of ordinary people in hundreds of cultures worldwide over the centuries. Since people lit their homes with candles, decorating the candles and the candle-holders was a routine part of life designed to make the home pretty or interesting. Potatoes, turnips, beets, and any number of other items were used.
Wynn Parks writes of an incident he observed: "An English friend had managed to remove the skin of a tangerine in two intact halves. After carving eyes and nose in one hemisphere and a mouth in the other, he poured cooking oil over the pith sticking up in the lower half and lit the readymade wick. With its upper half on, the tangerine skin formed a miniature jack-o’-lantern. But my friend seemed puzzled that I should call it by that name. `What would I call it? Why a "tangerine head," I suppose.’" (Parks, "The Head of the Dead," The World & I, November 1994, p. 270.)
In the New World, people soon learned that pumpkins were admirably suited for this purpose. The jack-o’-lantern is nothing but a decoration; and the leftover pumpkin can be scraped again, roasted, and turned into pies and muffins.
In some cultures, what we call a jack-o’-lantern represented the face of a dead person, whose soul continued to have a presence in the fruit or vegetable used. But this has no particular relevance to Halloween customs. Did your mother tell you, while she carved the pumpkin, that this represented the head of a dead person and with his soul trapped inside? Of course not. Symbols and decorations, like words, mean different things in different cultures, in different languages, and in different periods of history. The only relevant question is what does it mean now, and nowadays it is only a decoration.
And even if some earlier generations did associate the jack-o’-lantern with a soul in a head, so what? They did not take it seriously. It was just part of the joking mockery of heathendom by Christian people.
This is a good place to note that many articles in books, magazines, and encyclopedias are written by secular humanists or even the pop-pagans of the so-called "New Age" movement. (An example is the article by Wynn Parks cited above.) These people actively suppress the Christian associations of historic customs, and try to magnify the pagan associations. They do this to try and make paganism acceptable and to downplay Christianity. Thus, Halloween, Christmas, Easter, etc., are said to have pagan origins. Not true.
Oddly, some fundamentalists have been influenced by these slanted views of history. These fundamentalists do not accept the humanist and pagan rewriting of Western history, American history, and science, but sometimes they do accept the humanist and pagan rewriting of the origins of Halloween and Christmas, the Christmas tree, etc. We can hope that in time these brethren will reexamine these matters as well. We ought not to let the pagans do our thinking for us.
Nowadays, children often dress up as superheroes, and the original Christian meaning of Halloween has been absorbed into popular culture. Also, with the present fad of "designer paganism" in the so-called New Age movement, some Christians are uneasy with dressing their children as spooks. So be it. But we should not forget that originally Halloween was a Christian custom, and there is no solid reason why Christians cannot enjoy it as such even today.
"He who sits in the heavens laughs; Yahweh ridicules them" says Psalm 2. Let us join in His holy laughter, and mock the enemies of Christ on October 31.
Sometimes when this happens, that formerly big tough guy gets emotional. Such was the case this morning after finishing my viewing of the new, sure-to-be controversial documentary, Lord, Save Us From Your Followers. I was so moved by knowing that I am on the right journey, and have come to some of the right conclusions, that I found myself weeping. It wasn’t so much for me; I would say it was for the hurt I feel for a Church which has forgotten about the mission of Jesus, and especially about those who have been hurt. There were also tears for those who get it and are being Jesus to a hurting world.
This film by Dan Merchant should be required viewing and discussion for any church. The good thing is that some churches will take up this task; the sad thing is, most churches will ignore the challenge. It is a shame; it is why the Church (as perceived by many) has become more like the whore of Hosea than a beautiful bride that loves her husband, Jesus Christ.
Lord, Save Us is a documentary that explores the Church, specifically in America. In the exploration we see not only the perception of the Church from various segments of society, but also how many within the Church view themselves. It is a road trip of sorts where discussion takes place not only on the streets of various cities, but with certain public individuals. From Al Franken to Ann Coulter, and from Bono of U2 to Anthony Campolo, numerous views are presented and challenged. The movie, while quoting and using the Bible at various points, depends largely on common sense.
The central thrust is looking at how the Church and Christianity would be viewed if they did one simple thing, act like Jesus. The effects, the challenges that come about are not only eye opening; they are concepts that are effective. We see the effectiveness of this approach in various places it seems the Church has been at war with, from the media to the gay community and from the public sector to the homeless and poor. We see this by practical applications of trial and error by the makers of the film, and we see it from the reality of the impact of parachurch organizations like World Vision in their work with the poor in Ethiopia.
One of the amazing points in showing the power of being like Jesus comes not through the mouths of the religious, but those who are outside of the institutional Church, or mainstream Christianity. It is here that, if those individual people who make up the Church choose to listen and learn, a great deal of effective work can be done. Now don’t get me wrong; one of the reasons I loved this movie is that it doesn’t ask us to do these things to make projects out of people: we do it because we love them, just as Jesus loved them.
One of the things I think some within Christianity and the Church will become critical of is that the movie doesn’t address the “salvation” concepts required by some within Christian circles. On this point I would simply state, I don’t believe that is the purpose of the film. In the Bible, Jesus tells the story about one who is planting or sowing seeds. Some fall on good ground, some bad ground; there are some that come and help some along to grow and be effective; and some… well, some seeds die. It all starts with sowing seeds, a concept that I believe the Church, and many with Christianity have forgotten about.
I love this movie, though, because it addresses the idea that the building of relationships, the showing of unconditional love, of universal acceptance of the person, compassion for their hurts, is a starting point of showing a person the very love that Jesus showed them. It is in taking on the characteristics of Jesus that we genuinely learn to love others to the point that this love ultimately becomes a natural part of our persona. Jesus loved all people; so should we, including the child dying of AIDS, the hurting in a hurricane-devastated city, the homeless on the street, even those we may disagree with: the Democrat, the Republican, the Homosexual, and the Ultra Conservative. Love is patient, love is kind, love is… well, love is many things, but it is seldom confrontational, angry, hateful, and disrespecting.
Those of us who call ourselves followers of Jesus, or Christian, often think we have all of the answers; yet we don’t understand those we are communicating with. In theological terms, getting to know people, showing people you love them where they are at, is a concept we know Jesus illustrated; it is a concept called incarnation. Followers of Jesus understand what it means to love even those they may hate; so what does this say about our ability to love those we simply disagree with on various points? While there is certainly the need for talking about the specifics of what Jesus said, that discussion has to start with respect and understanding.
Unfortunately, many who call themselves Christian represent in name all of us who say we follow Jesus. The consequences of that has been devastating; and in many ways, it is likely those individuals who are so dogmatic in their need to “confront sin” have damaged the possibility of some people rejecting Jesus based solely on the behaviors and actions of those most outspoken in the name of Jesus. When religious leaders call for the assassination of political leaders, or political leaders say we should kill all of the godless in a nation and make that nation a Christian nation, is it any wonder people are confused?
When Jesus says to love your enemy, to pray for those that would do you harm, where do His followers get off saying and doing the exact opposite? When we do, is it any wonder people are confused? When taking these questions, our methods, and our results seriously, is it any wonder that real followers of Jesus would say about many in Christianity, Lord, Save Us From Your Followers?
"Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland. I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people. The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events. Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth. [Wednesday] the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie. ... To those who refused to come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you brought honor to your countries. But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame? Have you no decency? A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state. What a disgrace! What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations! Perhaps some of you think that this man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews. You're wrong. Dead wrong. ... I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history -- that we can prevent danger in time. In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good courage. Let us confront this peril, secure our future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for generations to come." --Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu
If you were to meet ten average Americans on the street, nine of them would say they believe in God. So why is the Gospel of Love dividing America? It certainly shouldn't be.
Jul 28, 2009, 12:01 a.m. EST
By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch
ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- In his 2008 bestseller, "Wealth, War and Wisdom," hedge fund manager Barton Biggs warns that investors must "assume the possibility of a breakdown of the civilized infrastructure."
And to prepare for a breakdown of civilization, "your safe haven must be self-sufficient and capable of growing some kind of food ... It should be well-stocked with seed, fertilizer, canned food, wine, medicine, clothes, etc." Bloomberg Markets suggested that by "etc." he meant guns, as Biggs added "a few rounds over the approaching brigands' heads would probably be a compelling persuader that there are easier farms to pillage."
Chapter Three: This final chapter of the crisis on Wall Street tells the story of the $700-billion bailout, as seen through a reporter's eyes, and looks at what's ahead for the global economy.
That warning's not from a hippie radical. Biggs was a respected Wall Street guru at Morgan Stanley for 30 years. As the chief global strategist Institutional Investor magazine put him on its "All-America Research Team" 10 times. Smart Money said: "Biggs is without question the premier prognosticator on the international scene and a mover of markets from Argentina to Hong Kong."
Biggs is advising America's wealthy elite. But what about Main Street Americans? Investors often ask me where to invest today, even Bogleheads and investors committed to the Lazy Portfolio strategy. They see the Goldman Conspiracy manipulating this rally. That worries many.
What do you believe? What value do you give to "the future." First, answer these three questions: What's your investment strategy if you know you might die on Dec. 21, 2012, or possibly this year after getting a negative diagnosis from an oncologist or maybe not till 2050 when the United Nations says global population will be 50% higher (from 6 billion now to 9 billion), while demand for energy, oil, gas and coal doubles and the global supply of those commodities remains relatively constant.
Behavioral economists have answers. But your gut's also good at predicting. So here's what you'll likely do:
You'll go see the new disaster film, "2012" about the end of the Mayan calendar. After all, it's by the same director who "destroyed" the earth in "The Day After Tomorrow," "Independence Day" and "Godzilla." No new investment strategies, but a must-see film, a great catharsis and distraction.
If you had a terminal illness, the future is here, now. There's no tomorrow. You're concerned about protecting loved ones and future generations with what you have, and enjoying time with them.
But how to invest for the "End of Civilization" coming around 2050? The next 40 years will be confusing: Accelerating struggles between aging populations and disenchanted youth, soaring commodity prices, global warming, peak oil, food shortages, famine, blackouts, rationing, civil disorder, increasing crime, worldwide jihads, riots, anarchy and other dark scenarios of a tomorrow with "warfare defining human life."
Yes, that's how doomsayers label the worst-case scenario. It also must be what Ultra-Conservative-Guru Biggs worries about in his darker moments.
So back to the question: What will Main Street investors do? Here again, even with the planet's survival threatened, they'll go watch "2012," be entertained, experience a catharsis, feel relieved, and afterwards, have dinner, slip back into denial. And later, they'll vote against anything that offers solutions to future problems, especially if it raises taxes.
Why? Very simple: Our "Brains Aren't Wired to Fear the Future," writes New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. We're wired to respond to crises, while pushing off the real big problems (health care, Social Security, etc.)
That's basic behavioral economics: Over tens of thousands of years, evolution has programmed our brains so that collectively we will behave counter-productive with the future, making an "End of Civilization" scenario inevitable, a foregone conclusion, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why? Because our brains are handicapped, we are literally incapable of acting soon enough to solve the problem.
But there must be a very small percentage of you out there with a desire to make your remaining days on Earth as pleasant as possible for you and your loved ones. So here are "Six New Rules till the End of Civilization 2050." If they don't scare you, hopefully they'll amuse you. Or better yet, wake you up, maybe get you into action ... before it's too late ... before your grandkids are fighting over what little is left:
Yes, if you are going to follow the same advice as the rich, you and your family always come first. Grab more than your share, many times what's fair. No remorse, because 2050 is coming sooner than you think. Create a protective wall of money and resources that will make whatever time's left as comfortable as possible.
Seriously, these guys are the poster boys for the word "greed." The Goldman Gang, Goldman Conspiracy, whatever you call them, these guys just took control of Washington and the Treasury; their rapid recovery is proof that "greed is great." Do what they do. Amass as much capital and goods as possible, ignoring the rest of us, then cruise to the finish line.
"The Millionaire Next Door" says it's very simple: "Frugal Frugal Frugal! ... Millionaires live well below their means ... Being frugal is the cornerstone of wealth-building." That way you can stash away lots more for later when the going gets rough, when others attack to get what you've stockpiled.
Remember Biggs' advice about subsistence farming. Survival instincts and personal ingenuity will be your best investment. Your family could be without electricity, water, gasoline in the final days, so keep "well-stocked with seed, fertilizer, canned food, wine, medicine, clothes, etc. Think Swiss Family Robinson."
Five years ago Fortune did report on the "Pentagon's Weather Nightmare." Yes, the military warned of "the mother of all national security issues" as "the planet's carrying capacity shrinks, an ancient pattern reemerges: the eruption of desperate all-out wars over food, water, and energy supplies." So invest in the defense industries America needs as the rest of the world reacts more to our greed.
Back in 1973, my first year at Morgan Stanley, I read Ernest Becker's brilliant Pulitzer Prize winner, "The Denial of Death." Today his message is even more powerful: Yes we will all die, tomorrow. But to enjoy the days left, you must accept death today ... accept even now as behavioral economists warn us that our brains are our own worst enemy, as well as the planet's, for we are on a self-destruct path of no return.
Too macabre for you? So you don't miss the satire, here is a final message, in the spirit of Milton Berle's classic movie, "Always Leave Them Laughing." It's from USA Today, told by that great comedian Carol Leifer:
"Mother Teresa died and went to heaven. God greeted her at the Pearly Gates. 'Be thou hungry, Mother Teresa?' asked God. 'I could eat,' Mother Teresa replied. So God opened a can of tuna and reached for a chunk of rye bread, and they began to share it. While eating this humble meal, Mother Teresa looked down into hell and saw the inhabitants devouring huge steaks, lobsters and pastries. Curious but deeply trusting, she remained quiet.
"The next day God again invited her to join him for a meal. Again, it was tuna and rye bread. Once again, Mother Teresa could see the denizens of hell enjoying lamb, turkey and delicious desserts. Still she said nothing.
"The following day, mealtime arrived and another can of tuna was opened. She couldn't contain herself any longer. Meekly, she asked, 'God, I am grateful to be in heaven with you. But here in heaven all I get to eat is tuna and a piece of rye bread, and in the Other Place, they eat like emperors and kings! I just don't understand it.' God sighed. 'Let's be honest, Teresa,' he said. 'For just two people, it doesn't pay to cook.'"
So, cheer up, maybe the "End of Civilization" won't be all that bad, even for Wall Street, if you take Barton Biggs advice and stock up on something other than tuna and crackers. END
I propose there is greater poverty in Paul Farrell's world view than the one that would come for the men and women who follow the Golden Rule which is the antidote to this poverty of life and thought.
Like that bewildered savage who has picked up a strange object… perhaps something thrown up by the sea, perhaps disinterred from the sands or dropped from the heavens…an object intricate in its convolutions, which shines first with a dull glow and then with a bright shaft of light…who keeps turning it over and over in his hands in an effort to find some way of putting it to use, seeking some humble function for it, which is within his limited grasp, never conceiving of a higher purpose…
 |
Chad Kyojun Kleitsch |
So we, too, holding art in our hands vaingloriously considering ourselves to be its master, undertake brazenly to give it direction, to renovate it, reform it, to issue manifestoes about it, to sell it for money. We use it to play up to those who possess power. We employ it at times for amusement—even in music-hall songs and night clubs—and also at times, grabbing hold of it however we can, for transient and limited political and social needs. But art is not desecrated by our carryings-on. It does not lose sight of its own origins because of them. And each time and in each mode of use it sheds on us a portion of its secret inner light.
But can we embrace all that light? Who is there so bold as to proclaim that he has defined art? That he has enumerated all its facets? Yet perhaps in ages past someone did comprehend and define it for us, but we grew impatient: we listened in passing and paid no heed and discarded it immediately in our eternal haste to replace even the very best with something else just because it is new! And then later on, when what is old is restated, we forgot that we heard it before.
One artist imagines himself the creator of an independent spiritual world and takes on his shoulders the act of creating that world and its population, assuming total responsibility for it—but he stumbles and breaks down because there is no mortal genius capable of bearing such a load; just like man, who once declared himself the center of all existence but was incapable of creating a balanced spiritual system. And then, when failure occurs, it is all blamed on the external disharmony of the world, on the complexity of the shattered contemporary soul, or the stupidity of the public.
Another artist realizes that there is a supreme force above him and works away gladly as a small apprentice beneath God’s heaven, even though his responsibility for everything he draws or writes and for the souls which perceives it is all the more strict. But still: it was not he who created this world, nor is it he who provides it with direction, and he has no doubts of its foundations. The artist is only given to sense more keenly than others the harmony of the world and all the beauty and savagery of man’s contribution to it—and to communicate this poignantly to people. And even in the midst of failure and down at the lowest depths of existence—in poverty, prison, illness—the sensation of a stable harmony will never leave him.
However, all the irrationality of art, its blinding twists and turns, its unpredictable discoveries, its soul-shaking impact on people are too magical to be contained within the world-outlook of an artist, in his conception or in the work of his unworthy fingers.
 |
| Harrison Mitchell |
Archaeologists have not yet discovered any stage of human existence without art. Even in the half-light before the dawn of humanity we received this gift from Hands we did not manage to discern. Nor have we managed to ask: Why was this gift given to us and what are we to do with it?
And all those prophets who are predicting that art is disintegrating, that it has used up all its forms, that it is dying, are mistaken. We are the ones who shall die. And art will remain. The question is whether before we perish we shall understand all its aspects and all its ends.
Not all can be given names. Some of them go beyond words. Art opens even the chilled, darkened heart to high spiritual experience. Through the instrumentality of art we are sometimes sent—vaguely, briefly—insights which logical processes of thought cannot attain.
Like the tiny mirror of the fairy tale: you look into it and see—not yourself—but for one fleeting moment the Unattainable to which you cannot leap or fly. And the heart aches…
Dostoyevsky once let drop the enigmatic phrase: “Beauty will save the world.” What does this mean? For a long time it used to seem to me that this was a mere phrase. Just how could such a thing be possible? When had it ever happened in the bloodthirsty course of history that beauty had saved anyone from anything? Beauty had provided embellishment certainly, given uplift—but whom had it ever saved?
It is vain to affirm that which the heart does not confirm. In contrast, a work of art bears within itself its own confirmation: concepts which are manufactured out of whole cloth or overstrained will not stand up to being tested in images, will somehow fall apart and turn out to be sickly and pallid and convincing to no one. Works steeped in truth and presenting it to us vividly alive will take hold of us, will attract us to themselves with great power- and no one, ever, even in a later age, will presume to negate them. And so perhaps that old trinity of Truth and Good and Beauty is not just the formal outworn formula it used to seem to us during our heady, materialistic youth. If the crests of these three trees join together, as the investigators and explorers used to affirm, and if the too obvious, too straight branches of Truth and Good are crushed or amputated and cannot reach the light—yet perhaps the whimsical, unpredictable, unexpected branches of Beauty will make their way through and soar up to that very place and in this way perform the work of all three.
And in that case it was not a slip of the tongue for Dostoyevsky to say that “Beauty will save the world,” but a prophecy. After all, he was given the gift of seeing much, he was extraordinarily illumined.
And consequently perhaps art, literature, can in actual fact help the world of today.
Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn is the author of major works of fiction such as Cancer Ward and The First Circle, and of several works of history, above all the volumes of the Gulag Archipelago.
Excerpted from Beauty Will Save the World: The Nobel Lecture on Literature by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. Copyright © 1970 by the Nobel Foundation. Reprinted by permission of the Nobel Foundation.
The Voice Claims Another Victim
Tribune Media Services
The first thing that should be acknowledged about South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford’s admission to an extramarital affair is that it could happen to any of us. That is not an excuse (and no, it has not happened to me, or to my wife). Every married person has heard the voice; the one that says you deserve something “better.”
Gov. Sanford should have been familiar with the voice because of the Bible studies he attended. The voice began seducing humanity a long time ago. It told our first parents that they needed more than the perfection of Eden. The voice told them that God knew that if they ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil they would be like God. But they already were like God, because they were made in His image.
Stick with me you secularists and non-literalists, because there is a point to be made for you, too.
Psychiatrists explain that married people tire of one another after 10 or 20 years (it used to be seven years, as in that Marilyn Monroe/Tom Ewell film “The Seven Year Itch.” Must be inflation.). Good marriages are the result of hard work. Forsaking all others is more than a wedding promise. It is a daily denial of one’s lower instincts. Temptation is everywhere. The key to overcoming it is to realize you are fighting an adversarial force that wants to destroy you, embarrass you and cause ridicule to be heaped on the God you claim to worship.
One can make excuses about power and loneliness and starting out as a friendship that develops into something else, as Gov. Sanford rambled on about, but one can’t explain adultery. It is what it is and the person who commits it should be calling on God for mercy, not the voters for understanding.
I once asked evangelist Billy Graham if he experienced temptations of the flesh when he was young. He said, “of course.” How did he deal with them? With passion he responded, “I asked God to strike me dead before He ever allowed me to dishonor Him in that way.” That is the kind of seriousness one needs to overcome the temptations of a corrupt culture in which shameful behavior is too often paraded in the streets.
There was a time when a divorce would disqualify someone from public office. Now people admit affairs and expect to stay in office. “It’s just sex,” said defenders of Bill Clinton. One might as well say, “it was just a gun” that killed my spouse. Adultery wounds in ways a bullet cannot. One can potentially heal from a bullet wound, but a shot to the soul and to the trust that must be central to any marriage is nearly impossible to repair. The wounded spouse always wonders, “Will he/she do it again?”
A relationship most promise to venerate “until death us do part” is damaged by adultery, whether it’s a TV evangelist, a politician or a regular Joe who violates the marriage bed. In fact, we rarely even use the word “adultery” anymore because it sounds so, uh, biblical, and those teachings and commands long ago fell out of fashion, though they work for those who embrace them.
Any man who claims never to have had thoughts of straying is a liar. Any man who has sought the help of God and other men in helping him to honor his marriage promises to his wife and children is a hero, especially in today’s morally exhausted culture.
I miss Paul Harvey and his acknowledgement of those who had been married 50, 60, even 70 years. Those people are my role models. I’m sure they heard the voice, too, but they told it to get lost and it did. Pushing against weights builds up the body, pushing against the voice builds up the soul and improves a marriage. You can never take a marriage — or the voice — for granted; it’s always on the prowl looking for new people to destroy.
When I’m not reading history or theology I am often reading economics. I find the interplay between Christian commitment and economics fascinating, and filled with misunderstandings. If you’ve ever had questions about capitalism, and in particular whether or not a generous Christian can really support capitalism, I would encourage you to read Jay Richards’ new book Money, Greed, and God: Why Capitalism is the Solution and Not the Problem. Whether the title makes you say “Amen” or makes you want to roll your eyes into the back of your head, I would recommend this book as the best, most easily accessible, defense of capitalism from a Christian perspective.
“...the chief purpose of life, for any one of us, is to increase according to our capacity our knowledge of God by all the means we have, and to be moved by it to praise and thanks. To do as we say in the Gloria in Excelsis: ...We praise you, we call you holy, we worship you, we proclaim your glory, we thank you for the greatness of your splendour.” —JRR Tolkien (OH)
As a young man in the 1970's it seemed like everything in my world was focused on bigger and better. Bigger engines in cars and the "big cadillac" were all the rage. The 80's and 90's seem to have been a building on those excesses and desires to accumulate for much of the culture. In the 2000's we found ourselves living high on credit and the vapors of several decades of increase and excess in our standard of living (at least in much of the West).
Finding Life's Balance - Together
