So I think up and commit to these 'entry series' generally in the worst possible times of my life. There is too much on my plate already. However, I will plod through it, since this is my sort of 'rough draft' attempt at making cases of this sort - cases like, for instance, the Nazarene Theses project on Facebook. Hopefully I will have some time to work on that before the 2008 General Assembly (seriously doubtful at this point).
Hard as I try, these entry series - geez, entries in general - end up being my setting out with a vision in mind and (typically) ending up somewhere else. It obviously helps (as with the Nazarene Theses project) to have other voices to add context. In this case, I approached hypocrisy as the least challenging of the arguments; RomanIbis's Catholic reflection on Catholic hypocrisy/falling-short, however, helped me to remember that this is indeed an issue just as detracting for some as the 'Mary-worship' arguments are for others. Actually, in considering the entry, it occurred to me that several of my acquaintances who would convert to Catholicism with relative theological ease are disenchanted by Catholic behaviour. I hope I'm being fair to both parties involved here; some reports of 'Catholic hypocrisy' are far too vague, focused, or sensationalised to take seriously, whereas completely overlooking the reality of hypocrisy in the Catholic Church is dishonest and detached.
With that said, I don't felt I gave hypocrisy enough weight in the entry.
-a-
06 February 2008
31 January 2008
The Primaries
My landlady told me:
'-But not third-party!
Pick a poison / Pick a poison!'
So . . .
Turpentine, tar, or
Oil or
Hemlock, or gridlock, or
Jams and stockpiles?
My landlady told me
It's a civic duty.
So . . .
In Rome vote as a Roman,
Vote as a Roman votes.
Yes! mend the needs:
Send the freedom missionaries
To save the world through groves of crucifixion stakes
To seed the freedom heaving us our Coliseum,
And thus spake God,
'Make ye the greater Gun than bad-guys'
-In short, vote like a Roman would vote.
(. . . Oh God
Oh God somebody help someone God
Save The Queen.)
-rick
'-But not third-party!
Pick a poison / Pick a poison!'
So . . .
Turpentine, tar, or
Oil or
Hemlock, or gridlock, or
Jams and stockpiles?
My landlady told me
It's a civic duty.
So . . .
In Rome vote as a Roman,
Vote as a Roman votes.
Yes! mend the needs:
Send the freedom missionaries
To save the world through groves of crucifixion stakes
To seed the freedom heaving us our Coliseum,
And thus spake God,
'Make ye the greater Gun than bad-guys'
-In short, vote like a Roman would vote.
(. . . Oh God
Oh God somebody help someone God
Save The Queen.)
-rick
26 January 2008
Reasons to Not Become Catholic, Part II: Hypocrisy
Let's take a swing at the first paper tent:
Objection #1: Hypocrisy
'Oh, you know how Catholics live: they can do whatever they want and confess it to the priest and everything is good.'
This is often tacked onto the next phrase for consideration, tacked on as a sort of acerbic chuckle. I mention this one first because it's easy to address; it's probably one of the most ridiculous things I've ever said or heard as a rational human being. 'Catholics can just confess it to their priest and go on' ... as opposed to, what? just confessing it to 'God alone' in silence and moving on? What absolute nonsense. Even on a threadbare 'psychological' scale, whose confession of sin seems to be the more painful and memorable? Of course, this little jewel is said with the understanding that Catholics are lawless hogs, unlike those of us who are shining, pious Protestant people. ...Which is also revealed to be either sheer nonsense or a contradiction when the time comes to denounce those Catholics for their overbearing legalism. (...Ring around the rosey...)
'Catholics have a horrible reputation in the world. They cheat, smoke, drink, cuss, and generally live horrifically hypocritical lifestyles. How can this be the one and only "Church"? Why associate with these people?'
Well, okay - this really isn't an objection to converting. Actually, most of our Protestant objections to converting aren't, strictly speaking, 'objections.' They are nit-picking doubts to pit holes in the substance of the Church. However, out of all the objections, this seems to be the first and most tightly-clad/clung-to grenade intended to keep that damned Catholic Church at Her distance from our position on the field.
In answer to the objection: Yes, I've noticed hypocrisy among Catholics, and I will address this. However, to begin with, maybe it would help for the Protestant to consider a few overlooked inconsistencies in the hurled indictments. Basically, in the first place, the Protestant (I've found) automatically assumes that her/his definition of Christianity - in all its large and minute details - is the prism through which Catholicism should be viewed. The result is a few true snowballs developing into an overwhelming and self-fulfilling avalanche. For example, the Protestant assumes that (in the endangered event of the Catholic faith ever being lived out) there will be some kind of a cohesion between a largely Protestant-based mindset (i.e. American Christianity) and the Catholic faith lived out - and alcohol is a good example of why this is a false assumption. Alcohol is generally (and generally subconsciously) understood by American Protestants (specifically: those traditions based in Puritan and pietistic traditions) to be good for one thing: getting drunk. Even if the denomination of the hypocrite hunter isn't thoroughly 'against' alcohol as a concept, the teachings against consuming alcohol (at least in how I've experienced Nazarene abstaining) creates a huge stigma around consumption of any kind. Hence, many of the 'hypocrite sightings' I hear are from Wesleyan-Holiness types generally involving someone with a cigarette or a glass of beer ... and that's pretty much the extent of the evidence. And perhaps the hypocrite was behaving 'impolitely' - getting loud with her/his friends, etc., which is obviously sin. Again, I don't deny that there are actual hypocrites in the Church, but let's get serious and push aside some of the fluff that puffs up our cases against the Church.
Furthermore, who is this 'they' category that the entire Church is subsumed under? The Protestant should seriously consider the fact that everyone who calls herself/himself a Catholic might not be on the same terms with the Catholic faith as, say, the Pope might be. At this particular juncture, I'm often amused and frustrated. The examples acquaintances/friends give for 'Catholic hypocrisy' are typically those nominal Catholics who have strayed so far from the Faith to be within the line-of-sight of Protestants deep in the hinterlands of Christianity; that is, what I've noticed is that most Protestants encounter Catholics who are, shall we say, in 'deep orbit' around the Church. Unless the Protestant is actually active in leaving strictly Protestant circles, he/she encounters what could be considered the 'free radicals' of the Church. It has apparently never occurred to the hypocrite hunter that, before passing judgment, perhaps someone should take some kind of meaningful step into the Catholic community and really observe.
Now, here's the shocker: both Jew and Gentile have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. However, double-standards abound. If I were to use hypocrisy as a reason to avoid converting to the Church, I would have left the Nazarene denomination a long time ago. There are plenty of hypocrites everywhere. The shocker is as follows: strictly speaking, from the dictionary definition, 99% of us are hypocrites; and among all of us who fall short of the mark we aspire to live up to, there are blatant hypocrites scattered like so many weeds throughout the one Church and (horrifying, but true!) even the immaculately white-washed communities of Protestantism. I've noticed that Catholic hypocrisy is more easy to observe than Protestant hypocrisy, but that seems to be because (at least in my particular tradition of Protestantism) we've all but equated good visible behaviour/manners with holiness. Pornography and gossip may be running rampant, but at least we're not like those heathens having a beer with friends at the tavern.
So what about the hypocrites that actually do exist - those blatant hypocrites? Again, I don't deny they exist. Furthermore, I offer no defence for them; the Church and Holy Scripture makes it clear that they are reaping judgment for themselves. However, notice the use of the word 'they' there; there's a lot of distancing in that sort of language that tends to help us forget that we, too, are sinners saved by God's grace alone. Also, please regard the fact that the Catholic Church believes God has vested His Spirit's doctrinal/governmental guidance in the bishops of His Church; this does not mean that the layperson is 'scott free' in regard to hypocrisy, but how can the Protestant use the individualised context of her/his community to condemn the Church? I would toss out this little bit of flippancy: let's look at Christ's ministry on earth before we start railing against the existence of hypocrites in His Church. In relation to this, I would also offer one tiny insight I've noticed about human behaviour: the closer one gets to the Truth, the harder it is for the human to approach it. ...The Light pierced the darkness, and the darkness did not understand/comprehend it, etc. etc. As Chesterton wrote in his The Catholic Church and Conversion, 'Christianity was not tried and found wanting; it was found difficult and left untried.' If a scientific study showed that more persons baptised into the Catholic Church were (in percentages) more hypocritical than those baptised (or given a handshake or whatever) into other communions, it would not surprise me. Being a good Catholic is so much more treacherous and full than being a good 'saved by my personal decision' Christian. The stakes are very much higher.
As to the 'associating with those people' aspect of this objection, the hypocrite hunter inadvertently raises a corollary issue (that doesn't have to do with the argument, but is indeed food for thought): am I 'too good' to associate with those dirty Catholics? Yes, the Catholics may be a bunch of curs who are hardly worthy of the Protestant hypocrite hunter's notice or association, but Jesus did say something about coming to those who needed salvation.
-Rick
Objection #1: Hypocrisy
'Oh, you know how Catholics live: they can do whatever they want and confess it to the priest and everything is good.'
This is often tacked onto the next phrase for consideration, tacked on as a sort of acerbic chuckle. I mention this one first because it's easy to address; it's probably one of the most ridiculous things I've ever said or heard as a rational human being. 'Catholics can just confess it to their priest and go on' ... as opposed to, what? just confessing it to 'God alone' in silence and moving on? What absolute nonsense. Even on a threadbare 'psychological' scale, whose confession of sin seems to be the more painful and memorable? Of course, this little jewel is said with the understanding that Catholics are lawless hogs, unlike those of us who are shining, pious Protestant people. ...Which is also revealed to be either sheer nonsense or a contradiction when the time comes to denounce those Catholics for their overbearing legalism. (...Ring around the rosey...)
'Catholics have a horrible reputation in the world. They cheat, smoke, drink, cuss, and generally live horrifically hypocritical lifestyles. How can this be the one and only "Church"? Why associate with these people?'
Well, okay - this really isn't an objection to converting. Actually, most of our Protestant objections to converting aren't, strictly speaking, 'objections.' They are nit-picking doubts to pit holes in the substance of the Church. However, out of all the objections, this seems to be the first and most tightly-clad/clung-to grenade intended to keep that damned Catholic Church at Her distance from our position on the field.
In answer to the objection: Yes, I've noticed hypocrisy among Catholics, and I will address this. However, to begin with, maybe it would help for the Protestant to consider a few overlooked inconsistencies in the hurled indictments. Basically, in the first place, the Protestant (I've found) automatically assumes that her/his definition of Christianity - in all its large and minute details - is the prism through which Catholicism should be viewed. The result is a few true snowballs developing into an overwhelming and self-fulfilling avalanche. For example, the Protestant assumes that (in the endangered event of the Catholic faith ever being lived out) there will be some kind of a cohesion between a largely Protestant-based mindset (i.e. American Christianity) and the Catholic faith lived out - and alcohol is a good example of why this is a false assumption. Alcohol is generally (and generally subconsciously) understood by American Protestants (specifically: those traditions based in Puritan and pietistic traditions) to be good for one thing: getting drunk. Even if the denomination of the hypocrite hunter isn't thoroughly 'against' alcohol as a concept, the teachings against consuming alcohol (at least in how I've experienced Nazarene abstaining) creates a huge stigma around consumption of any kind. Hence, many of the 'hypocrite sightings' I hear are from Wesleyan-Holiness types generally involving someone with a cigarette or a glass of beer ... and that's pretty much the extent of the evidence. And perhaps the hypocrite was behaving 'impolitely' - getting loud with her/his friends, etc., which is obviously sin. Again, I don't deny that there are actual hypocrites in the Church, but let's get serious and push aside some of the fluff that puffs up our cases against the Church.
Furthermore, who is this 'they' category that the entire Church is subsumed under? The Protestant should seriously consider the fact that everyone who calls herself/himself a Catholic might not be on the same terms with the Catholic faith as, say, the Pope might be. At this particular juncture, I'm often amused and frustrated. The examples acquaintances/friends give for 'Catholic hypocrisy' are typically those nominal Catholics who have strayed so far from the Faith to be within the line-of-sight of Protestants deep in the hinterlands of Christianity; that is, what I've noticed is that most Protestants encounter Catholics who are, shall we say, in 'deep orbit' around the Church. Unless the Protestant is actually active in leaving strictly Protestant circles, he/she encounters what could be considered the 'free radicals' of the Church. It has apparently never occurred to the hypocrite hunter that, before passing judgment, perhaps someone should take some kind of meaningful step into the Catholic community and really observe.
Now, here's the shocker: both Jew and Gentile have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. However, double-standards abound. If I were to use hypocrisy as a reason to avoid converting to the Church, I would have left the Nazarene denomination a long time ago. There are plenty of hypocrites everywhere. The shocker is as follows: strictly speaking, from the dictionary definition, 99% of us are hypocrites; and among all of us who fall short of the mark we aspire to live up to, there are blatant hypocrites scattered like so many weeds throughout the one Church and (horrifying, but true!) even the immaculately white-washed communities of Protestantism. I've noticed that Catholic hypocrisy is more easy to observe than Protestant hypocrisy, but that seems to be because (at least in my particular tradition of Protestantism) we've all but equated good visible behaviour/manners with holiness. Pornography and gossip may be running rampant, but at least we're not like those heathens having a beer with friends at the tavern.
So what about the hypocrites that actually do exist - those blatant hypocrites? Again, I don't deny they exist. Furthermore, I offer no defence for them; the Church and Holy Scripture makes it clear that they are reaping judgment for themselves. However, notice the use of the word 'they' there; there's a lot of distancing in that sort of language that tends to help us forget that we, too, are sinners saved by God's grace alone. Also, please regard the fact that the Catholic Church believes God has vested His Spirit's doctrinal/governmental guidance in the bishops of His Church; this does not mean that the layperson is 'scott free' in regard to hypocrisy, but how can the Protestant use the individualised context of her/his community to condemn the Church? I would toss out this little bit of flippancy: let's look at Christ's ministry on earth before we start railing against the existence of hypocrites in His Church. In relation to this, I would also offer one tiny insight I've noticed about human behaviour: the closer one gets to the Truth, the harder it is for the human to approach it. ...The Light pierced the darkness, and the darkness did not understand/comprehend it, etc. etc. As Chesterton wrote in his The Catholic Church and Conversion, 'Christianity was not tried and found wanting; it was found difficult and left untried.' If a scientific study showed that more persons baptised into the Catholic Church were (in percentages) more hypocritical than those baptised (or given a handshake or whatever) into other communions, it would not surprise me. Being a good Catholic is so much more treacherous and full than being a good 'saved by my personal decision' Christian. The stakes are very much higher.
As to the 'associating with those people' aspect of this objection, the hypocrite hunter inadvertently raises a corollary issue (that doesn't have to do with the argument, but is indeed food for thought): am I 'too good' to associate with those dirty Catholics? Yes, the Catholics may be a bunch of curs who are hardly worthy of the Protestant hypocrite hunter's notice or association, but Jesus did say something about coming to those who needed salvation.
-Rick
23 January 2008
Mandatory Interruption
Though he's tremendously dense reading, I'm really enjoying Milbank's explorations/lines-of-thought more and more as I read him. This is part of the provocative, no-prisoners introduction to what is turning out to be one of the best books I've ever read:
'Contemporary "political theologians" tend to fasten upon a particular social theory, or else put together their own eclectic theoretical mix, and then work out what residual place is left for Christianity and theology within the reality that is supposed to be authoritatively described by such a theory. Curiously enough, theologians appear specially eager to affirm both the "scientific" and the "humanist" discourses of modernity, although one can, perhaps, suggest reasons for this. First, the faith of humanism has become a substitute for a transcendent faith, now only half-subscribed to. Second, there is a perceived need to discover precisely how to fulfil Christian precepts about charity and freedom in contemporary society in an uncontroversial manner, involving cooperation with the majority of non-Christian fellow citizens. Purportedly scientific diagnoses and recommendations fulfil precisely this role. ... I wish to challenge both the idea that there is a significant sociological "reading" of religion and Christianity, which theology must "take account of", and the idea that theology must borrow its diagnoses of social ills and recommendations of social solutions entirely from Marxist (or usually sub-Marxist) analysis, with some sociological admixture.'
-John Milbanks, Theology and Social Theory, p.3
'Contemporary "political theologians" tend to fasten upon a particular social theory, or else put together their own eclectic theoretical mix, and then work out what residual place is left for Christianity and theology within the reality that is supposed to be authoritatively described by such a theory. Curiously enough, theologians appear specially eager to affirm both the "scientific" and the "humanist" discourses of modernity, although one can, perhaps, suggest reasons for this. First, the faith of humanism has become a substitute for a transcendent faith, now only half-subscribed to. Second, there is a perceived need to discover precisely how to fulfil Christian precepts about charity and freedom in contemporary society in an uncontroversial manner, involving cooperation with the majority of non-Christian fellow citizens. Purportedly scientific diagnoses and recommendations fulfil precisely this role. ... I wish to challenge both the idea that there is a significant sociological "reading" of religion and Christianity, which theology must "take account of", and the idea that theology must borrow its diagnoses of social ills and recommendations of social solutions entirely from Marxist (or usually sub-Marxist) analysis, with some sociological admixture.'
-John Milbanks, Theology and Social Theory, p.3
22 January 2008
Reasons to Not Become Catholic, Part I
'Most modern freedom is at root fear. It is not so much that we are too bold to endure rules; it is rather that we are too timid to endure responsibilities.'
-G.K. Chesterton
'One of the signs of modernity is a craving for generality...'
-Ludwig Wittgenstein
I will try my best to speak in specifics and avoid generalities; I have a fetish for dwelling in generalities - or at least I tend to speak in them. It is so delightfully easy to speak in generalities.
In the particular cultural manifestation of America 'over here,' the ideal seems to have scrawled itself on everything available for scrawling: 'Freedom means not being hindered.' The unspoken (and generally unjustified) superstition reeks everywhere: 'God did not design us to be burdened ... at least,' comes the Christian response to American Christianity, 'at least not burdened unjustly.' Yet what 'unjustly' means is highly not debated. How does the song go? -'I am free to...'? Yes. The Christian 'freedom from sin' stands curiously related to the American 'freedom of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.'
This is a culture that has stood as witness to the 60's, 70's, 80's, and (yes, even the) 90's. We have a Constitution and inalienable rights. I have heard and felt the revolt blooming in the alleys, so to speak: 'what about responsibility?'
I've mumbled and fumbled over my reservations. I've turned my 'outsider' and 'oddball' societal status into something somewhat satisfying and profitable; being true to West Coast survival instincts, I've generally avoided tying myself too tightly to any one institution or group. As the Church eventually began crashing in on me, even still I held onto the infatuation with being a 'Catholic Nazarene' ... embracing Catholicism but not committing to the Church herself.
Yet I'm not alone, and it's not just 'West Coast mentality.' There are many reasons for resistance - expressed by family, friends, professors, acquaintances - concerning the idea of converting to Catholicism. It is not so much that we are all in the process of making that decision; it is that the idea of converting to Catholicism - of 'picking up all that baggage' - is highly controversial, apparently. I would say that we're all in the process of converting, but that is not the foremost issue in most of the minds of those I've encountered; most are concerned with why anyone else would convert. I don't pretend that these people are fools, nor fools to recognise that there is indeed something stark, intensely jarring, and holy in the Church of which it is natural to be afraid at first glance.
Not at all to be haughty or flippant, but (I merely speak from personal experience): don't have anything to do with this entry series if you are not interested in having your world turned upside-down. Furthermore: don't read any of the writings of the saints, don't read or listen to the whole Bible, don't touch Church history, don't study theology, don't discover anything about the history of music. I may utterly fail in proprely representing Catholicism here, but indulging in this sort of stuff will get your heart and mind in motion. And that is ultimately my hope: to use this silly little outlet to address different issues that have arisen in conversations, correspondence, and debates. Frankly, I'm not doing this to make an airtight case for conversion; but I hope to begin publicly mulling over what are (for many of us) the numerous 'reasons' for not converting so as to show how content we've been with insufficient and ironic objections. Converting is indeed something radical, but it is not nearly so illogical as I've heard it made out to be. Conversion - submitting to an actual authority - may in fact be found to be freedom.
-rick
-G.K. Chesterton
'One of the signs of modernity is a craving for generality...'
-Ludwig Wittgenstein
I will try my best to speak in specifics and avoid generalities; I have a fetish for dwelling in generalities - or at least I tend to speak in them. It is so delightfully easy to speak in generalities.
In the particular cultural manifestation of America 'over here,' the ideal seems to have scrawled itself on everything available for scrawling: 'Freedom means not being hindered.' The unspoken (and generally unjustified) superstition reeks everywhere: 'God did not design us to be burdened ... at least,' comes the Christian response to American Christianity, 'at least not burdened unjustly.' Yet what 'unjustly' means is highly not debated. How does the song go? -'I am free to...'? Yes. The Christian 'freedom from sin' stands curiously related to the American 'freedom of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.'
This is a culture that has stood as witness to the 60's, 70's, 80's, and (yes, even the) 90's. We have a Constitution and inalienable rights. I have heard and felt the revolt blooming in the alleys, so to speak: 'what about responsibility?'
I've mumbled and fumbled over my reservations. I've turned my 'outsider' and 'oddball' societal status into something somewhat satisfying and profitable; being true to West Coast survival instincts, I've generally avoided tying myself too tightly to any one institution or group. As the Church eventually began crashing in on me, even still I held onto the infatuation with being a 'Catholic Nazarene' ... embracing Catholicism but not committing to the Church herself.
Yet I'm not alone, and it's not just 'West Coast mentality.' There are many reasons for resistance - expressed by family, friends, professors, acquaintances - concerning the idea of converting to Catholicism. It is not so much that we are all in the process of making that decision; it is that the idea of converting to Catholicism - of 'picking up all that baggage' - is highly controversial, apparently. I would say that we're all in the process of converting, but that is not the foremost issue in most of the minds of those I've encountered; most are concerned with why anyone else would convert. I don't pretend that these people are fools, nor fools to recognise that there is indeed something stark, intensely jarring, and holy in the Church of which it is natural to be afraid at first glance.
Not at all to be haughty or flippant, but (I merely speak from personal experience): don't have anything to do with this entry series if you are not interested in having your world turned upside-down. Furthermore: don't read any of the writings of the saints, don't read or listen to the whole Bible, don't touch Church history, don't study theology, don't discover anything about the history of music. I may utterly fail in proprely representing Catholicism here, but indulging in this sort of stuff will get your heart and mind in motion. And that is ultimately my hope: to use this silly little outlet to address different issues that have arisen in conversations, correspondence, and debates. Frankly, I'm not doing this to make an airtight case for conversion; but I hope to begin publicly mulling over what are (for many of us) the numerous 'reasons' for not converting so as to show how content we've been with insufficient and ironic objections. Converting is indeed something radical, but it is not nearly so illogical as I've heard it made out to be. Conversion - submitting to an actual authority - may in fact be found to be freedom.
-rick
20 January 2008
Houston and ILS LA FAISAIENT
To keep up the habit...
01/02/08
[Synchronicity I believe they call it . . .
Yes, Houston! crude refinery plumes,
Port Authority, rising monument Star,
imports, factories, factions, risings,
sweat, tears, blood,
Bud Light entrails entreat into
Deluges deluges of
Everlasting
oil
refining
oil
refining
oil
refining
Oil refining oil refining oil refining oil refining oil
(In Houston, city of my birth]
refinery towers fume agape-
Fester, rise, plume, Olympian flame-
Agape, agape before us, in vapours bathed,
Everlasting deluge of
Crude refining Crude refining
Cabarets and Cabarets and
Bud Light strobe-lights, lightnings,
Budding abroad the waves and heights
Of this city.)
...Refineries and recent readings render
Synchonicity of sorts;
' "Tread gently please," plead, whisper
Skeleton refineries
,' Says my rising blood amidst this city,
City of my birth;
Houston plumes, inflamed, say in
So much sodium and crude:
'My child, tread gently on my girth.'
1/19/07, 'Et les soldats faisaient la haie?'
Said he to the waiter,
'Garçon:
Save me some bacon, no fat;
Deal me some veal, no death.'
'Sir!' tried the waiter but floundered;
Gave the man bread; took it
Away when he spit
It out.
('-Dry and stale.')
'Sir,' tried the waiter again, but froze when
The man spit the wine
And said, 'I prefer Eagle.
Bring me the Eagle.'
'How many eagles, sir?
How many trumpets?
How many festivals, feasts, and atonements?'
'-Nay! Eagles have talons
And eyeballs their own
-I want the EAGLE:
Pour me, abort thee the course;
Fork me divorce from the Whore, not the Child;
Embody me Body, but no Corpus Christi.'
'Sir,' said the waiter at last,
So he said:
'You ask not for bacon.
You ask not for veal.
You ask not for bread.
You ask not for wine.'
-rick
01/02/08
[Synchronicity I believe they call it . . .
Yes, Houston! crude refinery plumes,
Port Authority, rising monument Star,
imports, factories, factions, risings,
sweat, tears, blood,
Bud Light entrails entreat into
Deluges deluges of
Everlasting
oil
refining
oil
refining
oil
refining
Oil refining oil refining oil refining oil refining oil
(In Houston, city of my birth]
refinery towers fume agape-
Fester, rise, plume, Olympian flame-
Agape, agape before us, in vapours bathed,
Everlasting deluge of
Crude refining Crude refining
Cabarets and Cabarets and
Bud Light strobe-lights, lightnings,
Budding abroad the waves and heights
Of this city.)
...Refineries and recent readings render
Synchonicity of sorts;
' "Tread gently please," plead, whisper
Skeleton refineries
,' Says my rising blood amidst this city,
City of my birth;
Houston plumes, inflamed, say in
So much sodium and crude:
'My child, tread gently on my girth.'
1/19/07, 'Et les soldats faisaient la haie?'
Said he to the waiter,
'Garçon:
Save me some bacon, no fat;
Deal me some veal, no death.'
'Sir!' tried the waiter but floundered;
Gave the man bread; took it
Away when he spit
It out.
('-Dry and stale.')
'Sir,' tried the waiter again, but froze when
The man spit the wine
And said, 'I prefer Eagle.
Bring me the Eagle.'
'How many eagles, sir?
How many trumpets?
How many festivals, feasts, and atonements?'
'-Nay! Eagles have talons
And eyeballs their own
-I want the EAGLE:
Pour me, abort thee the course;
Fork me divorce from the Whore, not the Child;
Embody me Body, but no Corpus Christi.'
'Sir,' said the waiter at last,
So he said:
'You ask not for bacon.
You ask not for veal.
You ask not for bread.
You ask not for wine.'
-rick
13 January 2008
Ladies and Gentlemen, Please Find Your Agnostic
Or, 'Before You Shame You with the Worst of You'
In Advent,
Oars in hand and
Bark at hand and
Oak oars gripped within my hands,
I peeled the Ocean back
I peeled the Ocean back
I peeled sea back
Until I thought
I saw Her face;
I saw as through a mist the sea as districts
, Chiseled borders in the ripples...
'Aha!
At last,
I see You.
I see myself.
I see You.
I see You.'
She moaned reply to me,
'Romantic fool:
What seems to you so easy is not
All that Is - not
What is to you as what you seem to see.'
(...Um, what?)
Sea spoke to lower sea,
And each spoke all to each in glimmers,
And each saw all of each as though two lovers,
...And only then I glimpsed a glimpse of Her;
I dropped the bone within the my mouth within the sea
And found a fullness in my folly in Her,
For the self itself is each a sea;
These oars I've held for so long so confidently
As though I were a Herculean king
Amid this gentle stream of me
Have hardly held my bark on what I call this Course,
Have hardly held my bark in neatness and predictability upon the glass.
-In fact, (says heart of hearts,) this isn't neatness, isn't glass:
Whispering currents deep within me
Whispering currents deep beyond me take my bark abroad,
And titan waves with glorious titan waves crash
All around me, for
The self itself is sea.
The Ocean showed Herself to us-
Unveiled in beauty, unsuspected freckles on Her thighs-
But Her native tongue is thunder.
-rick
In Advent,
Oars in hand and
Bark at hand and
Oak oars gripped within my hands,
I peeled the Ocean back
I peeled the Ocean back
I peeled sea back
Until I thought
I saw Her face;
I saw as through a mist the sea as districts
, Chiseled borders in the ripples...
'Aha!
At last,
I see You.
I see myself.
I see You.
I see You.'
She moaned reply to me,
'Romantic fool:
What seems to you so easy is not
All that Is - not
What is to you as what you seem to see.'
(...Um, what?)
Sea spoke to lower sea,
And each spoke all to each in glimmers,
And each saw all of each as though two lovers,
...And only then I glimpsed a glimpse of Her;
I dropped the bone within the my mouth within the sea
And found a fullness in my folly in Her,
For the self itself is each a sea;
These oars I've held for so long so confidently
As though I were a Herculean king
Amid this gentle stream of me
Have hardly held my bark on what I call this Course,
Have hardly held my bark in neatness and predictability upon the glass.
-In fact, (says heart of hearts,) this isn't neatness, isn't glass:
Whispering currents deep within me
Whispering currents deep beyond me take my bark abroad,
And titan waves with glorious titan waves crash
All around me, for
The self itself is sea.
The Ocean showed Herself to us-
Unveiled in beauty, unsuspected freckles on Her thighs-
But Her native tongue is thunder.
-rick
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)