A song reflects abstract emotions well
If deftly played by masters of the art;
If poorly, melody’s ungainly swell
Will rend the ear, when meant to rend the heart.
Medieval bards believed an evil chord
Diabolus in musica would bear.
If pregnant tones can vile birth afford,
They carry better perfect birth as rare.
My theme is holy love in certain terms,
A verse my heart would sing without a tongue,
My corpse will feed the chorus to the worms.
Though not a master yet, I am still young,
But angel, grace a troubadour in wing,
In time you’ll hear the host of heaven sing.
[7]
I just bought a myself a MacBook and am back online. It’s been about half a year since my last computer went missing, and now I get to see what I’ve missed in the Wide World of Webs. After a quick perusal I conclude this consists of:
About 25 pages of prozac and viagra spam on Coal, and several million homemade videos on Youtube.
~~
Summer impairs my reading faculty. The heat accumulates like vegetable matter in my brain, but I’ve snuck a couple of good reads in through the undergrowth anyway.
Mere Christianity is one of the heavily referenced ‘must-reads’ of thinking and unthinking Christianity alike. Most of my friends are surprised when I admit my ignorance of its contents. I was never in any hurry to read it, partly because it’s so popular, partly because of false impressions I’ve accumulated over the years – these may have been my fault, may have been the fault of it’s advocates, I’m not sure.
I’m finally reading it, and of course, enjoying it thoroughly. There are the obvious reasons for this: Lewis’ great respect for institutional religion, his insistence that talking about what is common to Christianity in no way pre-empts the need to go further along a particular path in searching for the truth (to choose a denomination, as it were, rather than limit Christianity to it’s Lowest Common Denominator, as if that were all that mattered), his 3 part discussion of the structure and functioning or morality, and return to the 7 virtues as a format for breaking down the demands of personal morality.
But the bubbles in the beer, for me, is Lewis as linguist’s adept use of language underlying every argument, and in the direct linguistic points he scores on appropriate occasions through the book.
Apologetics are often highly readable but linguistically coy, ignorant (in keeping with our culture), or lacking in precision. Lewis is readable, and terribly precise. One might contrast him with his literary and apologetic predecessor, G.K. Chesteron, who was precise, and readable, but not always clear (for the average reader, at any rate), partly because although he was linguistically precise, he was always shifting gears without warning: changing his apologetic audience or target from chapter to chapter, indulging his opponent’s philosophical views and their merits on one page before making an about face to show how deficient they are once you step outside of their fabricated borders, and so on. Unlike Chesterton, Lewis is the penultimate guide. Chesterton dares his reader to keep up with him. Lewis takes him by the hand and guides him along, step by step. Both have their place, but I now understand why Lewis is often recommended to young or new Christians, while Chesterton usually gets the more obscure, literary types.
I think a small study group that looked at books like Mere Christianity would be a riot. We could start with that, then move on to things like Chesterton’s Heretics/Orthodoxy, Bonhoeffor’s Cost of Discipleship, perhaps with a more advanced read, like Alistair MacIntyre’s After Virtue, thrown into the mix from time to time. If anyone’s interested, let me know. I might just get something started.
[2]
I had to post this link:
http://climatedebatedaily.com/
A great little site bringing together the issues and debates surrounding climage change and related ethics.
[2]
My intentions were good. I have a large number of things to write about, but no computer to write them with. Mine is gone. I’m sorry to say that gone with it are four years of college papers, several pages worth of poetry, and 10GBs or so of above average quality music. I’m posting this from work.
This means that the Newman report isn’t coming, nor is anything else any time soon. This update is a warning. My apologies. If I get a chance to resume these updates, I will.
Later.
[6]
When I started Coal we brainstormed what the name could mean. I gave my reasons for using it, some readers gave theirs. They were exclusively positive, if I remember.
With time, I’ve come up with a couple more, less positive. ‘Just coal in the furnace’ signaled a modest contribution to some kind of intelligent discussion, considered much larger than the people involved or anything they had to say. Under pressure, coal’s main ingredient (carbon), turns to diamond, something truly valuable. But coal itself is only valuable for other, less aesthetic reasons. At the same time, take a look at unprocessed Coal and you’ll find a strange, dark beauty there. A dirty beauty. If beatniks had a gemstone, I’d put my money on Coal.
What struck me recently are a few related facts: in the modern world, coal is still used but it’s somewhat outdated, and used primarily because it’s cheap. But it’s less efficient than modern fuels, and more importantly, it doesn’t burn clean. Coal is a hazard for its environment.
Metaphorically speaking, you can go a couple of ways with that. One way is positive. Mostly, I’m thinking that coal’s messy, damaging, and by comparison to modern alternatives, a waste of resources. It’s mostly used in developing countries (namely, China and India), who don’t give a damn at the moment about any harm they might do, so long as they make it where they’re going economically. You can’t blame them: the first world already did the same thing.
I still think the name is a good one. I should write an in depth exploration. Word explorations in general are a riot.
There’s no conclusion to read here other than the literary one. I just found these thoughts, in part, interestingly applicable.
[8]
The blog. I like to speak in the abstract, because it creates a sense of personal absolution. Alfred Kinsey argued, “Everyone’s sin is no one’s sin. And everyone’s crime is no crime at all.” It’s a misleading bit of rhetoric, and patently poor logic, but with a little twist, you have the implicit formula for moralizers of all stripes, times, and ages.
More
[2]
It’s been a long, dry spell, but the big story of early 2008 is not apocalyptic climate change or third world political meltdown, as perhaps you thought. No, it’s the return of Coal and it’s skittish author.
I’m going to ease into things today by posting, not my words, but as in many previous posts, the words of Vatican media correspondent John Allen. He offers some badly needed observations in a speech delivered on “Cathedrals and the Media”.
More
[2]
“Computers have enabled people to make more mistakes faster than almost any invention in history, with the possible exception of tequila and hand guns”
—Mitch Ratcliffe
[7]
I was sitting around wondering why I don’t care anymore when I began to wonder why it is that I spend so much time pretending and convincing myself that I don’t care anymore. Someone close to me recently, and not for the first time, pointed out that in fact I do obviously care, and care a great deal. Others have said the same, all too frequently, as I try to convince them otherwise.
Do I really? It would certainly seem so. I spent four years studying theology, and hardly intend to use that degree at the moment (due largely to my lack of conviction). Yet even a few hours ago today I was thinking that I should pick up some John Wesley and Thomas Merton at the library tomorrow. I probably will.
There is a part of me that wants to figure out what is actually going on here. This is not easy to do. As I am both constantly occupied with questions of religion, ethics, God, life, death, the void, and the bloody golden souls of man, and simultaneously trying to convince myself that I don’t really give a damn about any of it, it is difficult to face the issue directly. What am I doing? What is this struggle? Why do I care? Why can’t I just let it go?
And why, for Christ’s sake, did I decide to write about it at 3 in the morning?
What’s done is done. Go forth into the world, my little entry, and be gone with you!
[10]
You’ve probably noticed several changes to the sidebar recently. Just one more thing to note, Kakistocrat is back. Since the link is now there I decided I’m too lazy to bother posting it here.
And yes, I am aware that probably none of our computers utilize cathode ray technology. It just sounds so good. Plus I’ve been thinking a lot about Videodrome lately. I have nothing to say about it. It’s just hanging in the closet of my mind like a musty shirt or something.
~~
Edit: In addition to this I have now added a haven for all those with weary soles, ready to dig up a little lore, or embark on a journey into the unknown. This is your starting point: Amon Sul.
[4]
Previous