Significant Pursuit by Renaissance Guy

e e cummings

     I have always been intrigued by the poems of e e cummings.  I enjoy the unconventional, which his poems certainly are, even now.  Many of them are only intelligible by studying them very carefully.  Others are not necessarily intelligible in the normal sense, but give only impressions and suggestions–but very strong ones.

     When I was in high school and college, I wanted my instructors to teach me more about cummings.  Most of them were unwilling, and I think it is because they neither appreciated nor understood his work.  I had to go to the library and learn about him and his poetry on my own.  I’m gald that I did.  I already felt that there was something significant and beautiful there, and I was right.

     Please give cummings’ poetry a chance.  He has a lot to say about life and death and love, just as all great poets have had a lot to say on those subjects.  Mostly his poems capture glimpses of the beauty and sublimity of the world around us.

Spring is like a perhaps hand

(which comes carefully

out of Nowhere)arranging

a window,into which people look(while

people stare

arranging and changing placing

carefully there a strange

thing and a known thing here)and

changing everything carefully

spring is like a perhaps

Hand in a window

(carefully to

and fro moving New and

Old things,while

people stare carefully

moving a perhaps

fraction of flower here placing

an inch of air there)and

without breaking anything

     For further reading:

Biography at Poets.org with links to some poems

Biograrphy at Poetry Foundation with links to some poems

Wikipedia article

 Tons of resources at Modern American Poetry

     Mike Gallagher and Ann Coulter were discussing the current presidential election process on Gallagher’s  radio program the other day.  Gallagher mentioned something that one of his callers said, which was that it’s possible McCain will pick Hillary Clinton as his running mate.  Think about it.  Everybody is touting bipartisanship, and he would certainly pick up more than a few votes with such a maneuver.

     When Gallagher asked Coulter what she thought, she was speechless for a moment.  Then she said that “McCain is just stupid enough to do it.”  She also pointed out that he has said that Hillary Clinton would make a good president and that Clinton is the most conservative candidate in the race.

     Check it out:

Editorial by Mike Gallagher about the Ann Coulter interview

Radio clip of Mike Gallagher and Ann Coulter

     You should read a post called “Conservatives Are Happier People” over at American Elephants.  In the post, American Elephant [correction:  Elephant's Child] astutely analyzes the two basic approaches to government:  imposition of values by our leaders and freedom to choose our own values. 

     I have often had the impression that my liberal friends and acquaintances don’t understand that the main difference between us is how we view freedom.  Whenever I try to discuss freedom with liberals, I usually get a response that is off topic–such as how privileged I am as a white man or how I lack compassion for poor people.  They want to avoid the talk of freedom at all costs–unless it is the freedom to have an abortion or to receive a benefit check.

     I wrote a post on freedom back in October.  I invite you to read it and share your thoughts.  Here are a few excerpts:

During the time that the idea of less government and more individualism has arisen and spread, folks have felt compelled to go back to a system that concentrates power in the hands of a few and denies freedom to the “common people.”  I understand why it appeals to the power-holders, but I don’t understand why so many people acquiesce in it. 

. . . . .

Some of our current candidates for president would “step on the gas” and help us catch up with our neighbors across the Atlantic and to the north [in terms of government limits on freedom].  Why do so many people want to go back to a Feudalistic system in which the Lord of the Manor lives off the labor of the peasants and throws them back a few crumbs or to an Imperialistic system in which the Emperor gives us bread and circuses?

. . . . .

The trouble with seeing the government that way [--as a family--] is that it allows the government to override the sovereignty of the actual family units and it creates a situation in which adults, who see themselves anoninted for the purpose, are parenting other adults. 

     Do you want freedom, or do you want to be controlled?  Do you think that the Lord of the Manor (or the Emperor or Big Brother) loves you and wants to take care of you?  Do you believe that you have the rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” or do you believe that your happiness is dependent on a government’s imposition of values on you and your neighbors?

     We often divide everything into the categories of sacred and secular.  Music, calendar items, places, and events all go into one of those boxes or the other. 

     We consider a church building a sacred building and a movie theater, a secular one.  For many of us,  Sunday is a sacred day, but the other six days are secular.  “Amazing Grace” is a sacred song; “I’ve Been Working on the Railroad” is a secular song.

     The only problem is that the Bible doesn’t teach Christians to divide everything that way:

• “. . .whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.”  Colossians 3:17
• “Whether, then, you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.”  I Corinthians 10:31

     We are to do everything we do in the name of Jesus and to the glory of God, which would include those things that we call secular, as well as the things that we call sacred.  Looking at life that way, a mother’s act of cooking a meal for her family on Saturday can be just as sacred as her attending a worship service on Sunday.  In fact, cooking for the family might be more sacred than attending a worship service, if the act of cooking is done in love and for God’s glory while the act of attending worship is done grudgingly or for self-promotion.

     This idea has several implications:

1. Members of the clergy are not more “holy” than laypeople. 
2. Every job, if it is not inherently sinful, is a  calling–not just professional ministry.
3. We should worship God out of church as well as in church.
4. We should strive to be as godly on Monday as we are on Sunday.
5. We should do everything we do to the best of our ability, because we are doing it to bring honor to God.
6. We should not do anything that cannot bring honor to God.
7. Every aspect of our lives–our work habits, our political activities, our interactions with our neighbors, our choice of reading material, our spending, etc.–should be influenced by our desire to honor God.

     Some of Christianity’s detractors want to keep the distinction between the sacred and the secular clear and strong.  They tell us that we can pray at church or at home, but not in public.  They tell us that we should not bring our faith into the political arena.  They do not want us to let our faith guide what we think about how the government should spend our money or what students should learn in school.

     Unfortunately we do not have the option of ignoring what we believe.  In fact, how can we say we believe it, if it doesn’t actually mean something to us?

     I remember one time when I was visiting my family during a college holiday.  My little sister was still a chlid at home.  When it came time for me to return to school,  my sister and I shed a few tears as we said goodbye.  As I took my seat on the airplane, I happened to reach in my pocket and pull out a note that my sister had written to me.  It said, “I will miss you.”

     It has been a week since my sister passed away.  The day that it happened her husband gave me a letter that she wrote to me before she died.  It was happy torture to read it.  I relished every word she wrote, but I cried like a big baby.  I cried because I felt my own loss intensely.  I also cried because I realized that I  could not answer the letter.  She surprised me again.

     The funeral is over, and now life is heading back to normal.  Except that it’s not normal.  I cannot imagine a world without her in it.  I wish I could call her on the telephone and talk to her.  I want to thank her for the letter and reply to what she told me in it. 

     My sister is in heaven.  Perhaps she knows how her friends and family feel without her today.  Perhaps she knows the things I would say if I could reply to her letter.  I look forward to seeing her again after my own departure from this world.  Until then I will cherish her letters and my memories of her.  I will honor her by trying to be as kind and joyful as she always was.

     I’m trying to figure this out.  Is the Reverend Jeremiah Wright purposely doing a huge service to John McCain and his candidacy?  Or does he sincerely believe that somehow he is helping Obama?  Is he stung by Obama’s denunciation of his anti-American preaching and now lashing out at his parishioner?  I don’t get it.

     Maybe he is secretly working for Hillary Clinton.  Maybe he just wants to promote his book, and doesn’t care about any of the political candidates.  What do you think?

FOR FURTHER READING:

“Wright Controversy Affects the Polls” by Michael Barone

“The Right Stuff” by Paul Greenberg

“The Way That Seems Wright” by Henry R. Jackson, Jr.

     John Hagee, a controversial pastor, has endorsed the candidacy of John McCain.  Jeremiah Wright, another controversial pastor, has endorsed the candidacy of Barack Obama.  Some people think that those two facts are equivalent.

     The headline of the linked article calls John Hagee and Rod Parsley “McCain’s Pastors.”  But what is a person’s pastor?  Is it somebody who supports them unsolicited from a distance?  Or is it the person who is the spiritual leader of one’s church?

     Obama attended Wright’s church for twenty years and entitled a book after one of his sermons.  Moreover, Wright performed his wedding ceremony and baptized his children.  I would say that makes the relationship between them a little stronger than an endorsement from the sidelines.

     Should McCain denounce the endorsements from the two controversial preachers?  Maybe.  I think I would.  But are they his pastors, and should we worry that what they teach is what McCain believes?  I don’t think so.

     When it rains it pours, and I mean that literally.  As I already posted, my sister passed away from cancer after a four-year battle.  The day before she died, so did my computer, and I really need it for work.  This morning I was going to get it from the repair shop, and we were under a tornado warning.

     We weren’t hit with a tornado–just a few thunderstorms.  My hard drive was completely bad and had to be replaced. 

     C’est la vie.

     I have mentioned on this blog that my sister has cancer.  She has been in hospice care for the last four months.  Yesterday she went into a hospice room at the hospital, and it looks like she is now in her last few days of life in this world.  She’s ready for the world that transcends this one, and I am praying that God will take her gently there at just the right moment. 

     If you are a  praying person, please say a quick prayer for J and for all her loved ones.

UPDATE:  Thanks, everyone.  I appreciate the support.  My sister died early this morning, April 30.  She died knowing the Lord and very peacefully.  It was a blessing to see the beautiful look of peace on her face.  I am confident that I will be reunited with her in glory.  Keep praying for her loved ones, as we grieve our loss (which is her gain).

     Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels thinks that we should let Ronald Reagan go.  Rebecca Hagelin disagrees in a recent editorial.  So do I.

     Why should we let go of one of the greatest Presidents we’ve ever had?  Why should we let go of ideas that we need now more than ever?  John McCain would do well to emulate Reagan.  We would all do well to hold on to our memories of him and seek leaders like him.