Sunday, December 31, 2023

Tretton

from Uncle Albert's notebook (cahier)

They left late this afternoon, Roz and Ted,  for New York City to spend a week, through Three Kings Day, with Roz's son, Bart, his significant other, Dominga, and her son, Alfredo, the pocket Junot Diaz.* I was invited but declined. So, I am staying home, but I will not be home alone: They have arranged for Nils Sundstrøm to stay with me while they are gone.
        What he gets in return, I don't know. My company?

Apparently, not only mine, for he has just asked me if he could have a friend over to spend the night New Year's Eve.

And I recall:
        One of my colleagues at Bretagne, a diminutive, always dandy Austrian with thick black hair, neatly trimmed Van Dyke, and, at the time, a young bride that no one ever saw. He taught both German and Spanish, having lived growing up six months with his father and his paramour in Vienna and six months with his mother and hers in Valencia. He also wrote pornographic novels under the pseudonym Guillaume Vibescu. I call them novels though, while the settings were lush, the sex scenes particularly graphic, every protuberance and every orifice in play and overflowing into heart-stopping orgasms, there was no plot. Not that plot was required, I suppose; but there was only a series of scenes coming to conclusion (apparently always) in a railway station.

Nils brings him, my former colleague to mind, for in the only of his many efforts, successes actually, I read, one of the characters is, like Nils, a failed Lutheran pastor though in Stockholm. The hero of the story, I suppose, seduced by one after another of fresh-faced, merrily amoral sisters and cousins (daughters and nieces of his landlady), a dozen in all, until both raw and chastened, he sets off penitent for a hermitage outside Boden in the far north. He is on his way, when a note from another of the girls' relations, Tretton ( Swedish for Thirteen, also the name of the novel), catches up with him (we have no idea how) at Centralstation, as he is about to embark. We leave him standing there, head bowed,  suitcase in right hand and note in left.
                                                         12/30/23
_______________
* See here.

Friday, December 29, 2023

The trick - or one trick

from Uncle Albert's notebook (cahier)

The trick - or one trick - is not to need help too often, which involves a second trick: patience, allowing the time it takes to will your body to do the things it used to do without thought and to put up with how (howlingly) long it takes the will to complete its work. Also to be satisfied - at least to put up with - the shoddy job it does, trusting, for example, that your underwear will fall into proper, comfortable place eventually, preferably before the day is out. Also, it does no good to complain to yourself about what your self can do only so well. That is, unless you can laugh the complaint off, imagine a crabby complaint-desk in a cartoon or a clueless complaint-desk in a sketch: Tim Conway managing it on "Carol Burnett."

I mentioned Polly.* She comes over early on Boxing Day. She leaves our pan of lasagna and picks up Roz to deliver a dozen more. She wears a Santa hat and brings one for Roz. They will be gone all day.
        When they return, they brew cocktails, a blenderful of something white and foamy, and they sit at the kitchen table and . . . . Surprise! - they are talking politics in the dining room, though more about how useless it is to follow them, since there is no changing the "clown minds" of politicians (or pundits). It is Roz's phrase, "clown minds."

When Polly left, I asked her what it meant. She'd doffed her Santa hat for her jovial friend to take home for next year. Her hair was slightly mussed. She looked at me looking at her from the front-room doorway and raised a hand as if to smooth it, but stopped, opened her hand to the air and dropped back onto the table.
        "You overheard?" She isn't accusatory, but curious. Still:
        "I was listening. Sorry."
        "No. It's okay."
        "So?" Meaning "What does it mean, then?" She gets that.
        "You can't stop them from cramming themselves to beyond full into that little car,"
she said.                                                                                                                                   12/27/23
_______________
* About Polly. (Editor's note.) These are two posts almost worth re-reading: "Dateline: Pangloss, CA" and "The Friday Before" (and its conclusion, "A bit of everything.")

Wednesday, December 27, 2023

350th Birthday

 from Uncle Albert's notebook (cahier)

Uncle Albert in his La Rochefoucauld
at Cannes in 1963 sweater vest
I was still in bed after nine. I was sitting up but wondering if I was going to get up. A gentle rap on the door. Ted came in, dressed for Boxing Day, meaning not at all: he isn't going out from the manor to deliver boxes; the manor is coming to him, Roz's crazy friend What's-her-name, who brings all her minions a pan of lasagna each year. Faded jeans and a ragged-at-the-sleeve-ends Bretagne College sweatshirt, once gray, the logo once maroon: In luctando lux.
          "Can I show you something?" He meant could he help me get up if I needed it, help me get dressed if I needed that? Who said this?: Discretion is the better part of valor. Discretion, meaning in this case accepting help when needed, is the better part of valor, meaning being stubbornly independent when you cannot be.
          What he wanted to show me (he said) were quotes Gaspar Stephens sent to him from commonplace book he found in the back of drawer, which he was compiling in one of his years in sub-Saharan Africa, whose god-forsakenness I have avoided even as I have admired the French spoken by the former-colonists there. (And it isn't, truth be known - and admitted - any more god-forsaken than the rural-Virginia county we live in. But it lacks the amenities we have, central heat and air, dental care, and a church on every third corner, many with a sign out front compiling its own commonplace book.)
          He  doesn't share, my adoptive grand nephew, as many do - to impose their views. He has no views, no more than a cat has views. He shares out of a genuine good nature (if there can be such a thing in this god-forsaken world.) (The depths of my despair are deep today; but I only pretend. I don't truly despair, I only wish I could because I do know there is no hope.)

There is this (from Emil Cioran to Gaspar Stephens to Ted to me):

Even the skeptic in love with his doubts turns out to be a fanatic of skepticism. Man is the dogmatic being par excellence; and his dogmas are all the deeper when he does not formulate them, when he is unaware of them, and when he follows them.
      We all believe in many more things than we think, we harbor intolerances, we cherish bloody prejudices, and, defending our ideas with extreme means, we travel the world like ambulatory and irrefragable fortresses. Each of us is a supreme dogma to himself; no theology protects its god as we protect ourself, and if we assail this self with doubts and call it into question, we do so only by a pseudo-elegance of our pride: the case is already won.

Which reminded me of this sentence of La Rochefoucauld: Il n'y a point de gens qui aient plus souvent tort que ceux qui ne peuvent souffrir d'en  avoir. - Nobody is more often wrong than the one that cannot bear being wrong.
          Because of the way certainty and wrong-headedness must accumulate together.
                                                                                                                                            12/26/2023                                                                                                  

Saturday, December 23, 2023

Abelard and What's-her-name

from Uncle Albert's notebook (cahier)

In his worn jeans and ancient Norse sweater, on one of those days more than others, when he looks like a cross between a ghost (Casper) and one of Peter Pan's boys, friendly and lost, Ted was showing me two of his posts from Advent two years ago.* I'm not sure why, except that he was looking for a few clucks of approval. I gave him three: "Cluck, cluck. Cluck." But what he doesn't get, as he squints at life, always a little out of focus, is that religion doesn't want to be as thoughtful as he thinks it ought to be. At one time maybe, for a long time - from the Council of Nicea until the death of Calvin and even a little after - but even his friend Axel Sundstrøm, bless his heart as they say in Alabama, wants to read mysteries in the evening and watch football on Sunday afternoons. He doesn't really want to talk about "hypostatic union," whatever he pretends (or I will be).
          Because I will have to say this for Ted's Advent argument: the preacher has finally to make a choice between the love of Sweet Jesus and the judgment of Cosmo Christ. Or so it looks to me, too.

I am standing before the Judgment Seat; or I am sitting at my pupil's desk with the Final Examination before me, and the question is multiple choice on theories of the atonement - defend your choice. And I am going with Abelard, not the most thoughtful of the theories (or hypotheses, I'd say) but the closest to what I think Jesus, who will lay aside his outer garment and wash his followers feet, who laid aside his equality with God to become human, would come up with.
     "The Kingdom of God is like a teacher that had one good idea in his life, and it wasn't seducing one of his students when she was fifteen and he was almost forty. It was about
the love of God. Who have ears, let them hear."                                                                     12/23/23

* (Here and the one following.)

Wednesday, December 20, 2023

Eleven in the morning

from Uncle Albert's notebook (cahier)

"How long have we been taking him to Dr. Feight?" I asked Roz, as if we had been taking him - he can drive. "I think I took him first in January '17," Roz said. "Why?"
          I shook my head. I didn't want to say, "Do you think it's done any good?" because I knew we couldn't tell. It wasn't as if we had two identical Teds, one seeing Dr. Feight and the other not. Then, the question could just as well be, "Do you think it's done any harm?"
          But it has been twice a week since then, I think, though I have trouble keeping track. Sometimes twice, sometimes once, sometimes three times maybe. Sometimes not at all because everyone, even psychiatrists, must take a vacation now and again.
          And how do "we" afford it? A combination of Ted's disability and Roz's insurance and Dr. Feight's good graces is what I imagine. I write this tonight because we went again today.
          Eleven in the morning. I read the magazines in French in the waiting room, the ones Dr. Feight subscribes to for me
- Paris Match, Charlie Hebdo, L'Express, an ever-changing array. "We" are paying him too well, je crois. Then, we go home to a lunch which Ted fixes, or sometimes we go out. 

Today, we met the mordanted Axel
, the model of Norse Lutheran pain and gloom except on Midtsommarnatt, when he runs, or trots, naked through College Heights at the hinge of light and dark. (Part of the ritual: his neighbors draw their curtains five minutes before sunset. Or so I have been told.) He asked Ted how it went. Ted said, "Fine." And that was that or would have been had I not said, "Any letters from dead Moira lately?" But he said, "No." Then, that was that.
          We ate the savory lentil soup, which our waitress, not much bigger than a mouse and dressed in mousy, anti-Christmas colors, brought us in heaping bowls. We drank our oatmeal stouts, Axel and I - Ted drank water. And we spoke of other things - the frigid weather, the last-night's Eagles-Seahawks game, and the septation of the "United" Methodist Church as the pro-gays and the anti-gays fought on a bloody, muddy field for the love of their different gods.                                                                                                                                           12/19/23

Monday, December 18, 2023

Too much dress-up

from Uncle Albert's notebook (cahier)

Last night, they went to a Christmas party, Roz and Ted. And he came home complaining of eating too many bourbon balls, who should eat none with the medications he is taking. Then he woke up this morning feeling "less than well." What he meant by that only he knows entirely, but one hopes not as unwell as he looked, who always looks in his movements a bit dozy anyway. Part of what he meant, however, was that he couldn't go to church; he didn't want to be running out in the middle of it.
        Roz said she would take me if I really wanted to go, but I said that was okay. I did not say that I didn't want to go with her. But there are enough distractions - the service itself provides enough distractions - without her blowing silent raspberries, not to mention the heavy sighs she tries to muffle. Because there's too much dress-up for her, she says, the copes and capes and the chasubles and the chwhatever else they are called the priest dresses in; there's too much dress-up in the language, too, she says: the ill-doings that God prefers we his people not to walk in. That kind of stuff - a dozen words for the one, sin.

There was time, then, before the Arsenal v. Brighton & Hove Albion match, to read the passages for the Third Sunday in Advent. Which are these: Isaiah 64:1-4, 8;11; I Thessalonians 5:16-24; and John 1:6-8, 19-28. The Psalm is 126.       
          Among other things, the letter says this: "Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise the word of the prophets, but test everything." Which could be interpreted as: "Do not quench the Spirit or the prophets, but test them both." According to what, however? This is Paul, so the answer is not "the teachings of Jesus," about which he knows absolutely nothing. Is it then "the teachings of Paul"?
          This is the earliest of the letters. Still, Paul has been out there teaching for a while, the Paul that will say, "If anyone teaches you anything I haven't taught you, don't believe it." "I am that sure of it, what I have taught you. (You will note that I have not disguised anything in parables.)"

Clearly, I don't have to go to church to listen to someone wiggle around and preach what she wanted to all along. (The lectionary is no proof against that, whatever its proud claims.) I can lull myself to theological sleep by preaching my own sweet Jesus, teller of tales, enumerator of the beatitudes, healer of the sick, the one that touched the lepers and defied the leaders and the Law. The one that said that - and proved that - love is more important than law and, more especially, than the interpreters of the law. Who, like the poor preacher, and like me, will decide what they want it to mean. And that will be that, because no one escapes the Beast of Certainty.

Except Arsenal, which can be brilliantly certain but only until it is time to strike.
                                                                                                                                                 12/17/23

Friday, December 15, 2023

God's Little Acre

from Uncle Albert's notebook (cahier)

So this is the kind of thing he does, Ted. Someone, anyone, mentions Erskine Caldwell to him, just in passing, and he decides he has to reread God's Little Acre, which he's sure he has but he doesn't, though he does have Tobacco Road. But it's not Tobacco Road that he wants to read, not that he remembers much of either of them, characters or plot. But he does remember, he says, how they felt, and it is God's Little Acre he wants to read again. Because someone mentioned Caldwell to him. In passing.
         So he finds a copy online somewhere, and he shuts himself away for an afternoon and an evening.

In between, at supper, he asks me if I knew Erskine Caldwell, and when I ask "How could I have?" he says he doesn't know but "You've known a lot of people." I shrug. I have, but no one more famous than the police chief of Paradise, Michigan. But he's thinking of the picture he's going to get his alter ego mel ball to make, me with Caldwell.

"What did you think of the book?" I ask him.
          "It's funny about these books I've read before, even the ones I bought for under two bucks in the seventies and eighties. I remember every word as soon as I read it again, but I never know what's going to happen next."
          He is the sweetest guy, but he's absolutely nuts. Or, not absolutely, not dangerously. As I said, he is "sweet." But his brain was set in his head or, I think, at some point it was reset - I don't remember his being an odd kid . . . . In any case, it's now askew. The hemispheres are out of line.
          "What's it about, the book?" I ask him.
          "Three things, at least: looking  for gold where there is none, shooting people who might be getting in your way, and religion." Then he paused. He was thinking. "No four: oral sex."
          He looked away and looked back again. "Cunnilingus." Once more he paused. " Why does that word sound so nasty?" he half-sang under his breath, turning away again, heading into the next room, probably thinking that anyone that might have had his picture "taken" with Erskine Caldwell wouldn't catch the reference.

                                                                                         12/15/23

Tuesday, December 12, 2023

Monday, Monday.

Uncle Albert in his E for Eucharist
letter vest, crudely imagined by Ted Riich

from Uncle Albert's notebook (cahier)

Today I called the church to ask Miss Virginia why we could eat the bread and wine and then drink the wine but couldn’t dip the bread and wine into the wine and take both and then (at the same time) both. [See here.] But she wasn’t in. So, I asked the secretary, whose name is Kaylee (or Kaileigh or Caleigh or another of the 84 variants, all pronounced K long a, L long e with the accent variously distributed); I asked her since she must have asked Father Susan when she typed it into the bulletin in red: Don't do this!, but she (K-Lee) didn’t know because she hadn’t. Asked.
          “Do you want me to have her call you?” she did ask.
          “No,” I said. “But if you find out, please call me. Thanks,” I found myself saying because I found myself thinking this was another of those things better to learn second-hand, if at all.
                                                                                                                                                        12/11/23

Monday, December 11, 2023

Yesterday once more.

from Uncle Albert's notebook (cahier)

Ted took me to church this morning. He is good about that even when it’s difficult, as this morning because it was raining. And Miss Virginia will carry the Gospel down into the congregation as she always does, even when the eight o’clock congregation is only seven because of the rain; and she will carry it back up into the chancel and replace it on the lectern. She’ll come back down, producing the envelope she has written her sermon on the back of from a pocket in her regalia one cannot see. It is not as magic as the Eucharist when she changes the accidents into essences though the accidents remain the same; but it is a mystery nevertheless.
          Since sometime near the end of COVID, the church has had wafers “marked” with wine, so you can take the body and the blood together, or you can take both, the body and the blood together then a sip from the cup (more of the blood). But you cannot dip your wafer into the cup (intinct it) as you used to, as I did two weeks ago, though the guest priest said the cup was already in it, the wafer. He whispered it, but he didn’t stop me because I said, “I know”; then I had already done it before he could pull the cup away. But last week there was an announcement in the bulletin in red: “Don’t do that!” Or, exactly:
RECEIVING COMMUNION: all are welcome at the Lord’s Table. Communion is available in both kinds (bread and wine), but please do not dip (intinct) the consecrated bread in the wine (each wafer has already been marked with consecrated wine).

The sermon on the back of the envelope was about the wilderness, which appeared in both the Old Testament reading from Isaiah 40 and the Gospel reading from Mark 1. It (the envelope) wanted us to know how it is this word in Hebrew and that word in Greek, as if any of the seven of us truly cared — not even Ted truly cared — also how it can be a place where the waste howls, or it can be utterly abandoned, a place of desolation.
          (I say I didn’t care if the Greek was one thing and the Hebrew was another, but I was remembering that the French was désert from the Latin desertum from desero, deserere, deserui, desertus, meaning ‘abandon’.)
          Where are we as we move through Advent, the envelope went on, as we move through Advent in a rush? Aren’t we buffeted back and forth between howling chaos — ostriches, satyrs, owls, and night hags — and feelings of abandonment, emptiness? So, John the Baptist calls to us as well: Make way, clear a path in our too-full or too-empty lives. Make way, the Savior is coming.
          Or something like that.
                                                       12/10/23

Saturday, December 9, 2023

  from Uncle Albert's notebook (cahier)

Ted has a (another) letter from his sister, Moira. The dead sister. He gets these from time to time—he doesn’t explain how. He doesn’t show them to me, or to anyone else, that I am aware of. We are to take them at his word.
          In this one, she describes even heaven as not ideal because “like earth, it is a creation of God and man between them and neither knows exactly what he wants. Moreover, they can’t agree. Moreover moreover, among men it seems to be theologians that will have the greatest say, and they are the least practical of all men—look how they struggle with Jesus’ parables, with paperclips, and with women, none of them as complicated as they would wish.”

Ted says to me, “What do you think?” “About?” “Who creates heaven and earth—let’s start there.”
          “It depends on which has the greater imagination,” I say (or should have, I forget which), “who is imagining whom.”
                                                                  12/09/23

Thursday, December 7, 2023

And Kamala.

from Uncle Albert's notebook (cahier)

I had coffee with Nils Sundstrøm this morning. He comes to pick me up in his brother’s car—he doesn’t have one, he gets around town on an electric bike. How he gets out of town, I don’t know.
          He was telling me that Biden said sometime earlier this week something to the effect that he might not be running again if it were not for Trump, but Trump had to be defeated! “And no one said to Biden?—‘But you—and Hillary—are the only ones that can’t defeat him. Don’t you see that?’” This is Nils speaking.
          “To which he could have replied, I suppose,” Nils went on, “‘Well, and Kamala.’”
                                               12/07/23

Tuesday, December 5, 2023

Speaking of prophets.

 from Uncle Albert's notebook (cahier)

“The sun will be darkened and the moon will not show its light, and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be  shaken in those days.” (Mark 13:24b-25).
          Soon after, the world and all that is in it will cease to be. And no one will care because there will be no one left to care — did you think of that, Doomsday God (and your prophets)? The effect of all the fireworks of destruction will be no effect at all?

Speaking of the prophets and their “righteous zeal”: as if “righteousness” existed out there somewhere, ideal, unattached, not belonging to a self, as if there were any zeal that wasn’t self-righteous.
                                                                  12/05/23

Monday, November 6, 2023

On leave, continued

  On leave, continued 

So many writers and so few readers. - André Gide, The Vatican Cellars

I tried to write this, about the Western Christian Church, in capital letters, but they were too big for me. When you are ill then continue to be ill after everyone thinks you should be better (because the doctor assures them you are; she assures them that she has assured you that you are) —  it is a time to think about matters of religion. But not in caps. You are not a bishop, a doctor of theology, or a popular philosopher or historian; you don’t belong to any of the public intellectual or opinion-making classes.
     You can think that the church is in its last days, even here in one of its last strongholds. But it’s hardly an original thought, it’s not your thought, you know that. But, you can see with your own eyes that if it is declining, it is still a place for funerals, actually more and more of them as those that came of age or into their thirties in the church’s 1950s heyday succumb. Its bells are tolling, you can hear with your own ears.
     It is decreasingly a place for baptisms, even with grandparents wanting to insist
they find they cannot. Then, do they look into their hearts and ask themselves how important it is, baptism, and do they ask themselves then, “What do I believe finally?”

One of the bells tolling
To that question, my friend, John Woodstain, says that he doesn’t know anymore. There was a time he could say; but that time has passed: he’s become both more addled and less certain. Still, he’s in his damn (his word) — his damn — Presbyterian church practically every Sunday.
     He says “damn,” but he doesn’t regret going — or if he sometimes regrets the going, he doesn’t, he insists, regret the having gone. He leaves with a “satisfied” sense of having been part of the church in its last days, part of a story that, after a long and adventurous life, is coming to a relatively peaceable end. Someone has to enjoy, even treasure, the old as it’s being run over by the new. At least, the old knows what it is, John believes,  even if he can no longer say. The new, whatever it believes, is only becoming.

                                                                         
10.29.23

Sunday, October 29, 2023

On leave

‘ankles crossed’
phone drawing by m ball

 On leave 

Yes. I have been absent, but not without leave, which I granted myself after plans gang agley.
     The surgery, I was assured, was minor: that which was to be removed was small — a toenail, a tooth, a testicular something-or-other — it doesn’t matter which. Fade to dusk under light anesthesia and swim back into the light of day soon enough, though: “You’ll need someone to drive you home.”
     Be driven home. Take your antibiotics (
amoxicillin — pot clavul 875) until you run out and your small oxy (oxycodone hcl 5 mg) until it does. Rest, but don’t skip any meals. Plenty of liquids. And: All will be well, and all manner of thing will be soon well. Come back in two weeks; you can drive yourself.
     Nothing can go agley but what will: We live in the air, not in a lab; we live through unrecoverable time, not in repeatable experiments.
     Still, that we can measure them (the air and time) does not mean they can’t expand and contract — and multiply and divide — and, even asleep, blow raspberries at our barometers, and our clocks and calendars.
     “Selah,” Roz says. “Yes,” I agree.
                                                                           10.29.23

Sunday, October 15, 2023

Shaggy-dog story

 Shaggy-dog story 

My brother-in-law, Ike, declares there is no such thing as bad pizza. There is great pizza, very good pizza, good pizza; there can be mediocre pizza. But there is no bad pizza. My sister, Hannah, adheres to a similar stance with regard to costume melodramas: the worst are not bad at all if they have the primary ingredients, their crust and toppings: that is, a plot of some sort though it may meander (crust), and costumes and sizzle; villains, rogues, and heroines that overcome, cinderellas, or at least younger sisters, that emerge from the ashes, or the embers, to wear the best dresses of all the dresses and off camera, and sometimes even on, will pee in the pure-goldest of golden pots (toppings). In her most recent, set in 18th-century Spain, the King is going mad and the Queen is going mad and everyone is sleeping with everyone else except for the chaste wife of Don Diego. In bedrooms the size of the Great Salt Lake in castles the size of Utah with grounds swallowing up Nevada, Idaho, Colorado, Wyoming, and New Mexico, everyone, everyone is sleeping with and blackmailing everyone else, upstairs and downstairs, male and female, the birds of the air and the fish of the sea, and the beasts of the field and the forest. This is the way she talks about her shows, like an Evangelical priest on color TV; it always amazes me. But ...

Melodrama Pizza, delivery
Since they live in a small town on the Upper Peninsula, where the truly poor get enough casino money to live in houses with modern appliances, maybe even pizza ovens, with security cameras, and with flat-screens the size of one wall — at least so Ike and Hannah see it — they think, “Such is life.” It can be anywhere from grand to mediocre, but if you don’t eff up, it will never be bad. Even if you do eff up, county and/or tribal mental health will catch you, and the one or the other will wrap you in a blanket until you are ready to come home again.
     It may not be a sophisticated social philosophy, but it arises the way social philosophies arise even for the “more sophisticated,” out of observation and temperament. It doesn’t matter how widely you read, Uncle Albert says, it doesn’t whether you graduated from Harvard or Muskrat High, you end up thinking what you think based on what you think you see and what you think you are feeling. And you are also likely to think that whoever disagrees with you is either an uninformed cretin or an ivory-tower snob.
     “Who said this,” Uncle Albert says, “because I don’t remember: ‘Everyone has his prejudices, but thanks be to God, mine are the right ones’?”
     “Or hers,” Roz adds, “her prejudices.”
     “I don’t know,” I say.
     Roz: “You don’t know what?”
     “Who said it,” I say.
                                                                           10.14.23


Thursday, October 5, 2023

VA-effin'-R

 VA-effin’-R 

“Are you still writing about forgiveness?” Nils asked me from the other end of the phone. “I read what you wrote about the parable.”
     “Yes, I am,” I said. “Even today when I am writing about Premier League soccer.”
     “Well, that should be good!” Nils said.

“If it is, it’s because I am getting help.”
     “From?”
     “Rory Smith.”*
     “I’m impressed,” Nils said. I could have said, “Don’t be,” but I didn’t. But it’s not as if Rory called me, or I could call him. But he was writing about soccer as “entertainment.” And I was reading it, with interest. He was saying that it’s “an existential tension within soccer — in all sports — . . . . Is it, primarily, a form of entertainment? Or is that more accurately depicted as a byproduct of the activity? Is its actual aim to establish which team is better and which worse, and the fact that people seem to find it compelling just a happy accident?” I can answer that, “It’s entertainment. Not only primarily but secondarily as well. All of it: soccer, tennis, basketball, water polo, beach volleyball. Especially beach volleyball.” Or, it’s all entertainment except baseball.

     But Rory goes on to frame it in what he calls “less theoretical terms. This season, the all-knowing, all-seeing referees of the Premier League have decided that there is no greater threat to the well-being of the most popular leisure pastime the world has ever known than time-wasting.” So, “referees have shown a blizzard of yellow cards to players deemed guilty of time-wasting.” They agree with me that “players are entertainers, and therefore have a duty to provide as much entertainment as possible . . . . [And not] being sufficiently entertaining has now been turned into an offense.”
     What they haven’t cottoned onto: that they and their use of effing VAR are the guiltiest of all time-wasters; by far the least entertaining moments in any match are when it is stopped to consult someone watching a bank of cameras miles away from where anything we are interested in is happening. We can’t get rid of the referees — I don’t want to — but can’t we show the all-time red card to the damnedest time-waster of all-time time-wasting time? VA-effin’ R, if that wasn’t clear! Please.
     It’s a game. It’s imperfect. Don’t waste my time with a pursuit of perfection, when it can’t take you any closer to it than 15 to 18 takes you closer to infinity. *#//@&%*! I’d say if I said that sort of thing.
                                                                           10.05.23

_______________
* Tomorrow, Rory will write more cogently if less pungently about VAR here.

Tuesday, October 3, 2023

Excursus: Matthew 20:1-16

 Excursus: Matthew 20:1-16 

Uncle Albert mentioned this passage in last week’s post. Later, Roz asked me what the parable really meant, as if I could say. So, “I couldn’t say,” I said.
     “Well, think about it then,” Roz said. “Then say.” She was serious, I could tell. So, I did; and I read about it, and I talked to Axel about it, and I talked to Uncle Albert about it, and I even talked to Nils about it. I called our rector, Susan, the former Miss Virginia, to see if she had anything to say about it she hadn’t said the Sunday before, but I couldn’t reach her.
     Then, I wrote this, which I gave to Roz, who said, “What does it say?” — handing it back to me. And I read this (below), until she said, “Don’t read it to me. Tell me.” Then, I read it anyway mostly but in a telling voice: “One of the more difficult of Jesus’ parables, often called ‘The Workers in the Vineyard,’” I started.

It’s easier to think about what a story might mean if we know the circumstances in which the story is being told. You know that. It’s one thing to read a story in the newspaper; it’s another to hear it over the telephone from a friend. 
     Jesus is in four different, but related, conversations in chapter 19. The first, with the Pharisees about divorce, need not concern us here. In the second, he is telling his disciples to let the children come to him. “Do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven.” And he lays his hands on the children that come.
     The third is with the so-called “rich young ruler.” He wants to know what he needs to do to inherit eternal life. He should keep the commandments, Jesus suggests. “Which?” the young man asks. “You know: You shall not kill. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal or bear false witness. You shall honor your father and your mother. Finally, you shall love your neighbor as yourself.” He has, the young man answers, all of them. He keeps the commandments. But he senses that isn’t all that’s involved, so he asks one more question, “All these I have observed; what do I still lack?” “If you would be perfect,” Jesus answers: “Go sell all that you have. Give it to the poor. Then, come follow me.” But the young man can’t accept Jesus’ invitation; he has too much to leave it behind. Unlike the children, who do come to Jesus, who have nothing to leave behind, just something to look forward to, meeting the rabbi, sitting on his lap, feeling his hand on their heads.
     In the last conversation, Jesus tells the disciples how difficult it will be for the rich to enter the kingdom. “Who will enter, then?” they want to know. Who knows? Jesus suggests. But we do know that with God nothing is impossible. “Will we?” the disciples ask. Yes, they will, for they have accepted Jesus’ invitation and left their homes to follow him.

Workers in the field.
Photo by Justin Russell

 So, to the parable of the workers in the vineyard. 
     If it is difficult, it is because it doesn’t go as we might expect or hope or want, because it isn’t complicated.
     This is what the kingdom of heaven is like: A landowner goes out early in the morning to hire workers to work in his vineyard. He finds some; they agree on an amount for their work, a denarius. (However much that is: we’re not entirely sure, incidentally.) And the landowner says, “Come, then”; and they do. The landowner goes out again—we don’t know why; interestingly, we don’t even know what season it is, whether he is planting or reaping or tending or what he is doing besides hiring workers. But the landowner goes out again—three times. He goes out at mid-morning and at noon and in the early afternoon, and he hires more workers each time. But, these don’t make an agreement with regard to an amount they will be paid. Instead, when the landowner says he will pay them whatever is right and says, “Come, then,” and they do.
     The landowner goes out yet again, in the late afternoon. The day is almost over. Still, he is hiring workers. Again, we don’t know why. But of these, he wants to know, “Why are they idle? Don’t they want to work?” They answer, “No one has hired us.” Again, we don’t know why, though it is often assumed that they haven’t been hired because they’re not hirable. But our landowner is still hiring. “You come into the vineyard as well,” he says. And they do. Nothing is said about payment. Nothing at all.

Not too long after the last-hired workers arrive, it is time to “reckon up.” The landowner instructs his steward to pay the workers, beginning with the last. He pays those (who have just arrived) first; and he pays them the denarius the first workers had agreed to. So, when the first workers come to be paid, they clearly expect more. And they are paid a denarius as well. They gripe. As we would. Fair is fair. If you pay someone who works an hour a denarius, then someone who works eight . . . ?
     But here is our problem. We have certain expectations about how work works: there is to be a clear connection between worker, work accomplished, and wages. If there isn’t, well, there ought to be. But not in our story. The connection becomes more and more tenuous, more and more questionable, as the story goes on. It begins with workers working for a specific wage, but their employer hires more and more and more and more workers, some at an indeterminate wage, some without talking about payment at all.
     So, maybe the story isn’t about wages after all, though you’ll never convince those who are convinced they worked the hardest. Because hard work ought to pay.
     It is worth noting that Jesus does not denigrate “work.” When the rich young ruler asks him what he should do, Jesus tells him. He tells the disciples that they will enter the kingdom because they have done this: they have come to follow him. But that isn’t work exactly, is it? Following Jesus. It isn’t always easy, but it isn’t exactly work, is it?
     But, again, the parable isn’t about work. It’s about following; it’s about accepting an invitation. That’s what the disciples have done—“Come, follow me,” Jesus has offered; and they have accepted the offer. “Come to me,” Jesus tells the children. (“Don’t stop them,” he tells the disciples.) The children, too, accept his offer. The rich man, sadly, declines. 

Come into the vineyard. Come into the kingdom, the landowner says, again and again and again, and again at the end of the day. The kingdom of heaven isn’t like where the early bird gets the worm and the later gets nothing at all. The kingdom of heaven isn’t like where the best and the brightest get the best and the brightest spots and the duller get the lower and the duller. But the kingdom is like a landowner who keeps going out and going out and going out and forever inviting in.
     It is like the father in the parable of the prodigal son. We get so focused on the spendthrift son and the angry older brother that we forget to watch the father. But, what does he do when he sees his younger son is coming home? He goes out to meet him and invites him in. What does he do when he hears his older son is outside sulking? He goes out to invite him in.
     This is what the kingdom is like, then. This is the nature of it in Jesus’ stories. God is always inviting us in. Morning, noon, and night. “Come,” Jesus says. “Come in. Follow me. All of you. Please.”

“I know you were reading that,” Roz said. “But thanks for trying.”

                                                                           10.03.23

Wednesday, September 27, 2023

Forgiveness, part 2

 Forgiveness, part 2 

“So,” Roz said. “How many learned about forgiveness this morning?”
     I had been delegated to church while she and Uncle Albert stayed home to tune in the (what would be massively disappointing) Arsenal-Tottenham fixture. (The match ended in a draw after a certain amount of luck on Tottenham’s behalf and the usual fussy shillyshallying from Arsenal: sixteen passes, advance an inch and a half, retreat.)
     “7,” I said. “I’ve had some grief about that post, incidentally,” meaning last week’s on forgiveness. “Apparently, at least according to many, forgiveness is not a virtue belonging to Christians as if no other could possess or exercise it.”
     “Oh!” Roz said, drawing it out, making the long-o as long as she could.

Uncle Albert has the good for-
tune to nap while Arsenal pass
the ball around going nowhere.
“Oh, indeed!” Uncle Albert shortened it considerably. “But did any of those many others read today’s lessons?” Which he had apparently, because he went on to enumerate, “the warnings against elevating fairness above . . . well, unfairness. How Jonah can’t stand it that God forgives the Ninevites, who don’t even believe in him, not to mention all the wickedness they — and their animals — are always up to. And how the diligent workers from morning to night can’t stand it that the dozy late-comers are paid as much as they are: generosity should have its limits, to be fair.”
     “So,” Roz said, picking up where she left off, ignoring Uncle Albert. “Only seven heard the lessons. Are the rest, however many billions, unable to forgive because they didn’t hear them?”
     “8.1,” Uncle Albert said. “8.1 billions minus 7 . . . individuals. And no, they aren’t unless they are willing to give up fairness for . . . .” He hesitated.
     “Unfairness?” Roz asked.
     “Yes,” Uncle Albert said. “Exactly. As I said.”

Later, before the half but after Roz had disappeared, he said to me, “Unless they can embrace unfairness. Be as unfair as God is unfair both to the Ninevites and to Jonah.”
     Later still, as the match was drawing to its untidy close: “After Christianity — even now — the obsession is with Justice. Capital-J. And It — capital-I — can’t let anything go because It has to take Everything into account.”
     (The capital E is mine though it is what I heard.)

At the close of the match, he blew a raspberry. Then he said, “What’s for lunch, do you think? And when?”
                                                                           09.26.23