A Day of Infamy

On December 7, 1941 at 7:53 a.m., Japanese warplanes launched a surprise attack on the U.S. feet at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. The battle lasted slightly longer than two hours, and after it was over, 2,403 Americans were dead, 8 American battleships were damaged or destroyed, and the Pacific Fleet was crippled. The next day, President Roosevelt asked congress to declare war and proclaimed that December 7, 1941 would be a day that would live in infamy. 

Next year will mark the seventieth anniversary of this day that shall live in of infamy. But as the years roll by, that day becomes more and more of a distant memory. The world that existed then no longer exists today. The only threat that Japan represents is in terms of trade imbalances. As the world of 1941 fades into history, it would be so easy to forget the horror, the sacrifice and the bravery of December 7, 1941. I checked most of the main news websites this morning—CNN, MSNBC, ABC, FOXNEWS. While all the news sites reported that the date was December 7, none of them mentioned the anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack. (Google News did have several articles). I guess there have been so many more days of infamy in the intervening 69 years that we don’t focus on one day 69 years ago. 

If you visit Pearl Harbor today, you will see an imposing and impressive memorial that is there to ensure that we never forget. There the U.S.S. Arizona still lies in its final resting-place at the bottom of Pearl Harbor where it has been since December 7, 1941. And there 1,102 of the men who died on the Arizona still lie; their ship has become their tomb. Spanning, but never touching, the mid-section of the sunken battleship is a 184 foot-long memorial. All of the names of all of the men who died on the Arizona are engraved there on the ship. I visited the memorial once and stood there as Dad videotaped each and every name inscribed on the memorial. My Aunt Laverne’s fiancé, a man who would have become my uncle were it not for that day of infamy, is one of those 1,102 names. That memorial is there to make sure visitors to Pearl Harbor never forget the horror and the sacrifice of that day so long ago.

Each Sunday, the church gathers today to remember another day that lives in infamy. At the center of Christianity is a story of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is easy to forget that this is the part of our faith that is “of first importance” (1 Cor 15:3). The sacrifice of Jesus took place so long ago; there have been so many other days of infamy that have taking place between that time and today—infamy in our world and in our own lives. We have heard the story of the cross so many times that we can become dumbed to its power and importance. We can forget that this story is the very heart of our Christian faith. It is still the greatest story ever told. And it is our story.

It is a story we must never forget. So on the night before the story, Jesus created a memorial to himself. The Christ memorial is not nearly as imposing as the one in Pearl Harbor, but it is a memorial which has endured for two thousand years… and it will endure until Jesus returns again. By eating bread and drinking wine/ juice, we remember a day that lives not only in infamy, but in hope and in salvation. Each week we are called to gather around the table to remember Jesus cross and recommit to living in the way of the cross throughout the week and throughout our lives.

Can You Legislate Morality?

The following is a partial thread on a discussion on the question, "Can you legislate morality?" My original position stated that we can't help but legislate morality. That is explained further in my response to Steve W. 

Personally think that the law is, from a pragmatic stance, more effective at encouraging good behavior than prohibiting poor choices. The bad moral choices, I've found, tend to be dissuaded by community opinion, not by law--more people refrained from drunkenness because their neighbors disapprove than because of prohibition, for example. I do agree that the law always has a moral component to it, but on the whole, I'm an advocate of shame (public opinion) rather than punishment as a restraint on human evil. -- Steve W.

Steve,

As I look at your post, I appreciate your nuanced thoughts, and I do agree with the idea that shame can bring a restraint on individuals in a society. I'm posting my response in my blogspot account since it is so lengthy. Also, I have wanted for some time to write on this issue so my response is as much to my daughter and the issue at large as it is to you. 

However, it is a tragedy that our society has taken its queue on the interaction between morality and law from a caricature of the history of alcohol prohibition. The failure of prohibition is sort of told like one of Aesop's Fables, the moral of the story is that "you can't legislate morality." The phrase seems to me to have multiple meanings as people weave it through debates and discussion. It seems to be used because it serves multiple masters and can sort be difficult to rebuttal against.

I think a common way I hear the phrase interpreted is that "one cannot instill a sense of morals by simply passing a law." Of course passing a law without a social context will not educate the public. In that sense, there is a truth, but not one that is complete in the sense that in making laws we do several things. In a free and democratic society, one would hope that a good deal of deliberation is done while pushing for the passing of a law. Though this process at its worst cases is a far cry from this idealization, it is also a hope that through deliberation that our society can learn and grow. The deliberation should identify what is just and what is not just. The deliberation should bring an eventual consensus that one would hope brings a higher appreciation of right and wrong. Positive examples of this type of community growth of conscience happened in England by an extended debate regarding the need to end slavery. William Wilberforce and others presented the issue before parliament and eventually there was a change of opinion as well as the law. These are rare and glorious events in history when consensus is reached for a good and right cause by a society. Today, if anyone mentions that slavery exists somewhere in the world, we are all appalled. Law does not do change public opinion by itself but can be a component of change in the society. Of course mothers and fathers teaching morality is the primary way morals are to be taught with the help of other social institution such as the schools and church. However, in all societies there are evil mindsets, evil cultural practices, and evil institutions. Often a mother and father teaching the child are ill equipped teach against these components of a culture and possibly they are a part of the culture that passes on the evil mindset, cultural practice or support the evil institution. Simply passing a law on an issue may not convince a society as to the moral issues germane to the passing of a law, but the deliberation regarding that law may be a formidable force in swaying the conscience. The deliberation is key. A law professor I was listening to once said, "Law embodies our highest ideals."

The second usage of the phrase "you can't legislate morality" that I hear in conversation is that we should not attempt to make laws on moral issues but simply stick to laws regarding pragmatic issues.Having said that, I would critic this idea that one should leave moral issues out of legislation by saying that this really not a proposal to leave morality out but a certain type of morality. While I disagree with the position, it is a common approach to understand right and wrong from a functional or utilitarian ethic. Some people who seem to profess a utilitarian or functional view of ethics would say "you can't legislate morality" to mean that you can't legislate morality from some source such as divine revelation. This seems to be an attempt to replace morality from divine revelation with a sense of public right and wrong from secular sources. For instance such thinking I have heard proposed, if we regulate prostitution to limit the public health risks, why not allow it? If the law require health checkups for the prostitutes and condoms to be used, could not the risks be minimized for spreading disease? The proposal also said we should legalize prostitution and tax it to provide another source of revenue for the state. (I am not saying all ethicists who follow a utilitarian model wish to legalize prostitution.) The debate in such a proposal is not one of right and wrong but of how do we minimize undesirable results from our actions. Of course a utilitarian ethicist could cite other pragmatic risks to society from prostitution and make a stronger case against prostitution than those who follow a natural law or teleological approach to ethics since the utilitarian model of ethics can make a stronger appeal to statistical studies. So when I say "we can't help but legislate morality," I'm saying that even if we attempt to drop the morals of Christianity or other religions from the public debate, we are still picking up utilitarian or some other model of ethical teaching.Just because we drop the word morality from our vocabulary when discussing a law does not mean we are capable of decision making without a sense of what is right and wrong. Inherently we have a sense of justice and rightness that we desire to be a part of our laws.

I will return to the often cited pseudo-parable of prohibition.Prohibition is a well established national mistake. The solution to the disgrace of the mistake is "don't let religious people get involved in law making." The solution is to allow religious people to practice as they wish, but never again shall they impose a religious view on the rest of society through law. I would say this sort of thinking leads to several unintended consequences. The first being that those who do not hold to secular belief system may find themselves as second class citizens in the democratic process. I do not think any one wishes that to happen, but if the rules of a debate say that only certain people or types of arguments will be heard, it does have a lot effect on the debate. This can lead to a lot of frustration by those who have lost their voice in society. The second unintended outcome is that our society's ability to reach a consensus on complex issues is greatly hampered.

Though I am no expert regarding prohibition, I would say that lessons learned from that failed national experiment are more nuanced than simply, "you can't legislate morality." I would propose that we could begin to write a more comprehensive list of lessons learned from prohibition. Here are a list of lessons learned that I would propose and maybe you can think of others.

1. Be careful as you propose solutions to a problem.

It seems that alcoholism was a serious problem before prohibition.The solution seemed simple to those who did not drink. Just get rid of it. Of course it was wrong to drink all ones pay check so that our dependents went hungry. Of course it was wrong to get drunk and come home and physically abuse one's family members. These injustices cause wives and children to suffer. Understanding the problem may not lead one to a successful solution, wisdom is needed.By the way, not all domestic abuse can be blamed on alcohol. Perhaps domestic abuse would have been a better issue to think about. I could be that society did not allow the issue to be brought up. I understand there is a lot of shame in these sorts of situations and the drink was easier to blame than discuss the issue.

2. Be sure you gain consensus before you ask for big changes.

While certain circles saw alcohol consumption as the problem, it seems that other circles did not agree. I suspect that it was difficult for families where wine or beer was a part of the normal diet to accept prohibition. If everyone in your family drinks a glass of wine with their meal with little problems, why all the effort to completely prohibit it? I suspect that Catholic immigrants to America found the Protestant who insisted on complete abstinence from alcohol to be non-sense.

3. As Christians involved in public debate about law, be sure one has correctly interpreted the Bible.

The Bible never forbids drinking alcohol, but does say Proverbs 20:1"Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise". Even though a good portion of people in the pews would support the church's teaching against consumption of alcohol, I think many would have said that they can't see the prohibition against consuming alcohol in the Scripture.

4. Do not count on having influence or power forever; leave a legacy that will be cherished.

I'm not sure of the attitude of those who pushed for prohibition, but their legacy is not appreciated in this regard. Consensus is an important tool for long term good.

I would be open to hearing other opinions or your own list of lessons learned from the US prohibition era that could replace the "moral of the story" that "you can't legislate morality."

TOO ACCURATE

Enough is enough - you feel frustrated and rejected. You are fighting back and the going is tough. It would be just wonderful if you could be left in peace.

You enjoy taking part in anything that may constitute fun and excitement. You need to be stimulated and need to feel that 'Life is worth living' and you are awaiting that stimulation and you don't particularly care where it comes from!

The way things are, you feel that you are stuck in a rut and there is not much you can do about it. You feel frustrated and inhibited but if you can find a way to let yourself go, you may find that things aren't quite so bad as perhaps you thought they were. One consolation is that since you are an extremely emotional individual, with the right person you may be able to release some of that frustration and tension with some mutual tender loving care.

You are feeling full of uncertainty and worrying over what you consider as missed opportunities. This is causing considerable stress and tension. You feel that there must be more to life than the constant pressures and anxieties - that surely life must hold far more opportunities than that which it has to date presented to you. You sincerely believe that there must be a simpler way to tap life's hidden recourses and should you be able to find that way - you could achieve your hearts desire. It's the not knowing 'how' that is affording you the constant worry. You are constantly probing and seeking - trying to ensure that at all times you are on your guard against missing any opportunity. 'Enough is enough'. You are anxious to avoid further setbacks. You are strenuously trying to make sure that you will not be overlooked and you badly need security.

There is that inherent fear that you may be prevented from attaining the better things in life - those things that you consider essential to your well-being. So you are prepared to try everything to prove to yourself that whatever you do or try will go wrong. This destructive attitude could come under the heading of 'a self fulfilling prophesy'. This belittling yourself is your method of disguising how hopeless and what a waste of time you feel that everything is. So now turn it about. As you 'think', so you are... So 'imagine' yourself successful. 'Pretend', 'act it out' and you may be pleasantly surprised at the outcome.

The Pursuit of Happiness

The Pursuit of Happiness

The girl told her grandma,
whom she loved and felt deep
connection to, that she wasn’t
happy in her marriage. There
was abuse and some days
it was hard to crawl out of bed.
The grandmother in her wisdom-
lessness said, “you made your
bed, now lie in it.” The girl
decided to make her bed
differently and lie in it she did.
The girl never told her grandma
how hurt she was and how there
was a different way to make that bed.

The Dark is Rising by Susan Cooper

The Dark is Rising by Susan Cooper

It is Midwinter’s Eve, the night before Will’s eleventh birthday. But there is an atmosphere of fear in the familiar countryside around him. Will is about to make a shocking discovery – that he is the last person to be born with the power of the Old Ones, and as a guardian of the Light he must begin a dangerous journey to vanquish the terrifyingly evil magic of the Dark.

I thought I'd do a review of one of my favourite books to read at Christmas time. The cover I've posted is the one that I've got. It was handed down (or perhaps I pilfered it) from my brother and I think that my mum passed it on to him. Mine looks a little dog-eared now and has the odd page hanging out of the binding. You can get a much more up-to-date cover now and I'm glad that this is still in print.

Will discovers that he is one of the Old Ones and it is his job to help the others hold back evil from taking over civilisation. Will is the seventh son as was his father and up until his eleventh birthday he'd lived a normal life but things start to get very odd as his birthday approaches and beyond it. Evil has already got the country in its grip. Snow begins to fall and soon it gets deeper and deeper cutting off the village where Will and his family live. Will is given the first sign of power and it is this which enables him to fend off the Dark Rider, a terrifying figure of evil. He is found by Merriman Lyon who explains that he needs to find the other signs to beat back evil and loosen its grip on the countryside. To find them, Will has to pass through time and finds that the present day and that of the past is intertwined. We also meet The Lady, another of the Old Ones, who helps Will on his quest.

As the book progresses things get worse and worse for the inhabitants of the village who don't understand the appalling weather. Will begins to understand more about the Old Ones predicament, the sacrifice they've made. The stakes for some of the characters are high and retribution harsh. Although a children's story the author hasn't shied away from some serious messages. The mythology behind the book adds an extra element to it. There's Merriman, a Merlin-ish character, who appears in Over Sea, Under Stone, another of the sequence of books. I can't say more as I don't want to give away the ending but it blends together a great story with some pagan tradition.

There's so much to praise in this book. Aside from the fantasy part of the novel, Will's family is brilliant. I felt that I was in their house amongst all the bustle as they get ready for Christmas. Will is a great kid from the beginning. It's not as if he needs to improve himself or learn to care for others more - he already does. He grows in confidence as the book progresses and he learns how to be more independent but he's thoroughly likeable throughout. There's a great deal of underlying threat in The Dark is Rising and I read it the other weekend in my darkening lounge as snow fell softly around the house. Dark, atmospheric and beautiful - I can't image ever becoming tired of it. If you haven't ever come across this book or the sequence to which it belongs I'd recommend it. There's not many books that can stand being re-read, year after year for, ahem, quite a few years but this is one. I'm so glad it's now being published as a modern classic and I'm always steering kids to it at work who are looking for a fantasy series.

What Are We Doing to Our Children?

What Are We Doing to Our Children?

I had a sad conversation this morning with one of my daughters. We were talking about breast cancer (I'm a survivor which puts my daughters at higher risk). In the course of the conversation I asked her about one of her peers who was a neighbor and friend. I'll call her Cathy. Cathy had a very aggressive breast cancer in her mid twenties and ended up with a double mastectomy. I was concerned to know how she was doing. Well, Cathy divorced her husband a few years ago, not for another man, but for a woman. She and my daughter are not in touch much, but I think they have reconnected casually on Facebook.

Frankly, I'm not surprised by Cathy's story. She was a confused teen who loved being as outrageous as possible. She picked up every fad from dressing "goth" to toying with the idea she was bi-sexual. (It was all the rage at the local public high school.). Her mom had the doctor put her on the pill when she was 15 or 16 and, with that kind of approval, I have no doubt that she fulfilled mom's expectations.

At Cathy's wedding she told me she tried to talk a friend out of an abortion because of "Mrs. Kreitzer." I was touched. I liked Cathy and always tried to gently talk sense to her.. And now I'm just sad. Cathy grew from a confused little girl to a confused young woman. She paid the price of her mother's foolishness in putting her on a strong hormonal drug that contributes to earlier and more aggressive breast cancers and she paid the price for their foolish tolerance. Cathy is the poster child for the sexually permissive society.

Her story reminds me of one told by psychologist William Coulson at a home schooling convention years ago. It was about a young woman from a large Catholic family who entered the IHMs (Immaculate Heart of Mary religious order) as a naive young girl fresh out of high school. It was during the social experiment after Vatican II when Carl Rogers and his protege Coulson set about helping the nuns "find themselves" through their "human potential" workshops. This young woman ended up being seduced by an older nun and became a lesbian.

As he told that sad story, the legacy of his work, he wept. It was a public confession and repentance. And he has devoted his life to exposing the disaster. Interestingly, in an interview posted on EWTN, he discussed, not just the IHMs, but the interventions with the Jesuits and the Mercy nuns. Consider their level of dissent and perhaps it is not surprising in view of their embrace of the Rogerian philosophy. Coulson said one of the things that happened following their workshops was "Jesuit formation virtually fell apart" between 1965 and 1975. And the movement was taking place all over the country in convents and monasteries as spinoff groups from Rogers organization, some headed by priests, began implementing and expanding Rogers' theories. Are you connecting the dots yet? Coulson does. In another article titled Full Hearts and Empty Heads (1994), he links the human potential movement to the sex abuse scandals.

Of course, Rogers and Coulson are just a part of the picture of the 20th century that is such a cultural bloodbath, both literally and figuratively. We all know casualties like my daughter's young friend. The question is, what to do to turn things around? Pray certainly, but I think the recent approval of the apparitions in Wisconsin give us a firm foundation for positive change: CATECHESIS.

More on that later. But please pray for Cathy. There are many young people out there today who may be great sinners, but they were also much sinned against. No wonder the Lord said it was better to be cast in the sea attached to a millstone than to commit scandal.

A Spiritual "Tune Up" (Happy Xmas)

A Spiritual "Tune Up"

Cars have batteries that die. They cough and sputter. Backfire. Hesitate. Go a little. Jerk forward. Conk out. Start again. Die. Pull off to the side of the road.

When this happens we take them to a mechanic who does some diagnostic things (I guess) and determines a course of action. Fix this. Replace that. Scrap the whole thing. Whatever it may be.

I don't know about you, but my faith-life is more like a 1974 Dodge Dart (my first car) than a 2011 Honda Civic.

It runs well for a while, then begins to "act up." Sometimes I want to trade it in for a newer model, but I know that what it really needs is a tune up. It's a good car, afterall. It's been with me for so long. I can't just toss it in the heap with the others.

For me, spiritual direction is that tune up. It gives me the "manual" for taking care of my spirituality.

Recently I have been instructed by my spirtual director to do the morning and eveing prayers. And I have been. For the most part. And when I don't - guess what happens?

Yep, you're right. Cough. Chug. Jerk. Sputter. Die.

Time to take the car back to the shop. Confession. Mass. Prayer. Meditation. Reading the Word of God. Those morning and evening prayers.

Pray for me that I can keep my engine running. I'll do the same for you.

YOUR XMAS POET

It surprises me, talking to folks who are new to screenwriting, how many of them don't have a movie in their head. If you don't see a film, how are you going to make anyone else see it? They are telling a story, not creating a film. This often becomes clear if you ask them - what is character y doing while x and z are talking here? Or some other detail about something they put in the room and then left alone. They aren't *seeing* the scene.

Of course, I've always imagined somewhat cinematically. Even my most abstract poems (with the exception of a couple of grad-school literary cut-up experiments) run in my head as a short film. And I can tell you what every detail of each frame looks like.

Then there's the other sticking point - once you have the movie in your head, knowing how much to put down on paper to evoke those images in another person's head. Most of us have been told enough times not to overwrite that it's less common to see an overly florid screenplay than one which chooses such generic descriptions/dialogue that they flatten out and the flavor of the imagined story is lost. You can do a lot with the flavor of the language, rather than endless description - something I learned from poetry. 

Yes, the language of a screenplay is stripped down, basic and straight-forward. That doesn't mean it can't be evocative. Your hero can walk down a wet street, or they can splash through the wet grime of rain-slicked asphalt. 

My signature on Triggerstreet is: "Don't tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of light on broken glass..." (Chekhov) and it illustrated perfectly what I mean. The moon may be shining, but what we see is the glint of light...and that piece of glass can add to a threatening or a down-trodden tone, depending on context. 

Every word matters, every word is a chance to evoke the movie you see, in your reader's head.

Your Daily Poet

It surprises me, talking to folks who are new to screenwriting, how many of them don't have a movie in their head. If you don't see a film, how are you going to make anyone else see it? They are telling a story, not creating a film. This often becomes clear if you ask them - what is character y doing while x and z are talking here? Or some other detail about something they put in the room and then left alone. They aren't *seeing* the scene.

Of course, I've always imagined somewhat cinematically. Even my most abstract poems (with the exception of a couple of grad-school literary cut-up experiments) run in my head as a short film. And I can tell you what every detail of each frame looks like.

Then there's the other sticking point - once you have the movie in your head, knowing how much to put down on paper to evoke those images in another person's head. Most of us have been told enough times not to overwrite that it's less common to see an overly florid screenplay than one which chooses such generic descriptions/dialogue that they flatten out and the flavor of the imagined story is lost. You can do a lot with the flavor of the language, rather than endless description - something I learned from poetry. 

Yes, the language of a screenplay is stripped down, basic and straight-forward. That doesn't mean it can't be evocative. Your hero can walk down a wet street, or they can splash through the wet grime of rain-slicked asphalt. 

My signature on Triggerstreet is: "Don't tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of light on broken glass..." (Chekhov) and it illustrated perfectly what I mean. The moon may be shining, but what we see is the glint of light...and that piece of glass can add to a threatening or a down-trodden tone, depending on context. 

Every word matters, every word is a chance to evoke the movie you see, in your reader's head.

Shadow of the Wind

 "Shadow of the Wind"

I had been reading "Shadow of the Wind" about a year ago and it was great, captivating reading.
This year I have chosen "The Angel's Game" - designed as a prequel to the first novel. The reading experience was just great. Literally, you devour page by page and you just can not stop until you reach to the end.

"The Angel's Game" is set in Barcelona in the beginning of XX century. Theprotagonist of the novel is a writer who, at some moment in his life iscommissioned to write about (or rather create) a new religion.

But the fantastic Zafon's narration is not the only value of the book.

As it was in "Shadow of the wind", in the background, the novel is about books and their value and importance. In the Act I we meet the problem of an author who, while writing under his own name fails, while he is highlyacclaimed when doing it under other names.
In Act II we are exposed to the dilemmas of the author whose writing power greatly exceeds the notion of literature. Together with the hero, we ponder upon the role of religion...

The entire novel is full of relations to the books and their specific existence. It describes the world in which book's physicality is so important. The plot takes us to the "Cemetery of forgotten books" (direct connection to SOTW)- where we literally feel how important this physicality of books was.

Good for reflections today, when with all these electronic books we no longer have such "physical" bonds between the words and the book as an object.

However, I have some reservation and small issues to the book. At some moment in the narration, we loose this fantastic Zafon's soul-searching tone about books, religion, love and we are overwhelmed by the action, action, action. As in good thriller. In particular, I missed that thread about the very content of the book commissioned in Act II. It was extremely interesting, yet it disappears from the book under the heavy matter of plots.

Also, the very end of the story was not satisfactory and a bit exaggerated.

But - I do not want to spoil it for you !!! All-in-all - it was a very good reading !!!