That winter night when snow upon the ground
lay thick, we joined our hands, exchanging vows.
And now five winters gone the sixth comes round,
and winter’s snow begins to gather on our brows.
The winter wind that froze Big Cedar Creek
beside the church five years ago still blows,
but now its creeping fingers try to sneak
and snuff the love that warm within us glows.
It’s bitter cold, that wind that blows without;
more bitter still with cold our hearts become
when gusts blow through the chinks and swirl about.
But still I will rejoice; for fingers numb
from cold will ever thaw before the fire,
and He who lit and keeps our flame will never tire.
Theodore Parker: Gendarme of the Revolution
Note: This was my final paper for EN 841B: Transcendentalism, a seminar I took in the Fall of 2005 with Laura Dassow Walls, now of Notre Dame. It was a fascinating class with an excellent professor and a great text. I enjoyed writing this paper and in the process learned a lot about a topic that was of great personal interest at the time–America’s ideological history. The Fall of 2005 was a crazy semester in which I bit off far more than I could chew, so I took an Incomplete on this course and didn’t finish this paper till a year later in the Fall of 2006.
In recent years the ongoing revolution in American cultural life has become increasingly apparent. Best-selling books like Robert Bork’s Slouching Towards Gomorrah and Bill O’Reilly’s Culture Warrior (and the controversy surrounding them) have underscored the increasing secularization and liberalization of a culture that was once decidedly Judeo-Christian in moral tone and worldview. And while this revolution has dramatically increased in rapidity and scope in recent decades, any student of American letters knows that cultural controversy and change is not a new phenomenon in America. Indeed, between the 1631 ruling of the general court of the Massachusetts Bay colony “that no man [should] be admitted to the freedom of [the] body politic, but such as [were] members of some of the churches within the limits of the same” and the 2003 ruling of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court “that barring an individual from . . . marriage solely because that person would marry a person of the same sex violates the Massachusetts Constitution,” one can trace an almost regular series of controversial moments that have become landmarks in the history of America’s cultural revolution: the Half Way covenant of 1662, the print debates between Jonathan Edwards and Charles Chauncy in 1743 and the accompanying schism in Congregationalism, the 1805 appointment of Henry Ware as Hollis Professor of Divinity at Harvard, Emerson’s 1838 address at the Harvard Divinity School, Charles Briggs’ 1891 inaugural address at Union Theological Seminary and his subsequent heresy trials, the 1925 Scopes trial, and the Supreme Court rulings on the Bible and prayer in the public schools in 1962-3. It is no coincidence that almost all of these controversies have been wholly religious in nature; before cultural practice can change, ideology must change. Change in belief paves the way for change in behavior. Neither is it a coincidence that the conservative faction in most of these crisis moments has espoused an ideology virtually identical to that of the Puritan divines of 1631 Massachusetts. For in a real sense, the history of America’s cultural revolution is the story of how the conservative Christian orthodoxy[1] of Massachusetts Bay (with its concomitant rules of behavior) has been gradually moved from the halls of power to the margins of society, challenged in each new generation by new foes in new spheres until finally those who will and can claim their ideological inheritance from the original Puritan divines are a fringe few, increasingly seen as narrow and extreme even in Christian circles.
Continue readingQuantitative Metrical Experinment
Note: I wrote some time in October during the semester I took LATN 504: Horace at Carolina. Poetic meters in English are typically qualitative. That is, they establish a rhythm by arranging syllables based on their quality (stressed or unstressed). They do this because stress accent is a primary characteristic of all English syllables. (Compare “hunger” and “afloat”; both are two syllable words, but they have opposite stress accent.) Classical Greek and Latin poetic meters by contract are typically quantitative. They establish a rhythm by arranging syllables based on their length in time–how long they take to say. They can do this because their long vowels literally take twice as long to say as their short ones. Because quantitative meter is time-based, it’s much more a proper, music-like rhythm than quantitative meter. Many poets have tried to replicate quantitative meter in English, but because there’s no true time-based distinction between our long and short syllables, it’s hard to do. This is in an Alcaic stanza. (DL, Dec. 10, 2022)
Boy, sound your hornsong clearly across the field.
Man, raise your swordblade high and your brilliant shield.
Fix fast your bright helms; fierce your might wield.
Stand in the breech for your homes and don’t yield.
Form and Structure in The Rape of Lucrece
Note: In July of 2001 after finishing my MA in English at Bob Jones University, my parents sponsored my attendance at Cambridge University’s International Shakespeare Summer Program, a non-credit continuing education program for anyone above 18. There I had the privilege and delight of learning from a brilliant scholar-teacher, Charles Moseley. Dr. Moseley fit every ideal I had for the perfect literary scholar–breadth of learning, erudition, stylish good looks (complete with coat and tie and a white goatee), and a British accent. It was like learning from someone from the same circle as Tolkien and Lewis, and it was mesmerizing. He said kind words during our interactions about my suitability for doctoral study and validated the quality of the literary education I had received at BJU that left a lasting mark of encouragement. I wrote this paper for his three-week class on Shakespeare’s poetry. A major portion of the argument is a direct response to something he had said in class about the structure of Shakespeare’s Rape of Lucrece. The paper was written with him as the primary audience. Looking back, it is typical of an approach I used often in my literary analyses–direct analysis of the structure and purpose of the text, a method similar to that used in explicating the meaning of the Bible. (DL, Sept. 19, 2021)
To discuss the importance of form and structure[1] in The Rape of Lucrece we have to know what we mean by “importance.”For our purposes here, importance signifies how large a role form and structure play in getting the poem to do what Shakespeare wanted it to do; it is a measure of how integral they are to the poem’s success as Shakespeare would have defined success. I begin, therefore, with a brief statement of what Shakespeare wanted Lucrece to do.
It is clear from the poem’s dedicatory epistle and from the historical context surrounding the poem’s composition that Shakespeare wrote Lucrece to impress an educated, courtly audience already very familiar with his subject matter—to impress them with his skill as a poet. In addition, it is reasonable to assume based on the Renaissance uses for poetry and modes of reading poetry that Shakespeare was also trying to say something significant. If accomplishing these two goals is taken as the measure of the poem’s success, it is to be expected that form and structure will be important insofar as they are avenues for impressive technical display and/or communicative tools.
Continue readingVirtual Morality (2)
Making real choices in a virtual world
Note: This is the second of two papers on similar themes. (Read the first here.) I wrote both in the second year of my MA in English at Bob Jones University, the fundamentalist Christian school I attended for my BA and MA. Both capture well the moral tenor of my upbringing and of my beliefs at that time. I was raised in evangelicalism and on a diet of Rush Limbaugh. But since that time and these writings, some of my views have changed in important ways. At the time I wrote this paper, the term “sexual preference” was still commonly used throughout society to refer to a person’s sexual orientation, and it would be ten more years before reading Andrew Sullivan opened my eyes to the reality of sexual orientation as an innate characteristic of a person rather than a preference chosen willfully. This piece mischaracterizes that reality completely in ways that are homophobic. Very strong condemnatory language about sin was common in my sphere and vocabulary then (and for some time afterwards), and I believed the traditional Christian teaching that homosexual behavior is sin. For that reason, this paper will no doubt be offensive to some readers. Although I no longer think or speak of homosexuality in the homophobic terms I used here, there’s no doubt that I did for a long time. This piece is a reflection of that fact about my past. In regards to the piece more broadly, some of the core philosophical thesis still resonates with me. I still believe America suffers the social effects and disruption that come from lack of a shared moral center or objective foundation for shared morality–we have spent decades growing increasingly divided over morality. But I’m no longer certain to what extent such an objective foundation exists or how to find it if it does, and lacking that certainty, I find it harder to be a moral dogmatist on many matters, not only sexuality. In addition, having been thoroughly disillusioned by many right-wing sex scandals since and also more historically informed, I no longer see Bill Clinton as uniquely bad in his behavior or the GOP as ingenuous in its moral outrage. But for the record, I still think he abused his power in immoral ways and that Esquire’s cover photo was an inappropriate, sly celebration of his ‘prowess.’ As a side note, after researching for this paper, one of the dean of men’s staff confronted me about my late-night Internet searches on my work computer that were apparently related to homosexuality in some way. Looking back, amusing, but awkward at the time. (DL, Sept. 18, 2021)
Perversity is acceptable in America; it’s the new freedom. Our honorable President has underscored this sobering reality yet again with his cover appearance on the December issue of Esquire magazine (a glossy purveyor of trendy American hedonism). The photo has been unofficially titled “Monica’s View,” and as incredible as it would have seemed to me two days ago, Clinton has indeed suavely offered his crotch to the American people.
Continue readingVirtual Morality (1)
Making real choices in a virtual world
Note: This is the first of two papers on similar themes. (Read the second here.) I wrote both in the second year of my MA in English at Bob Jones University, the fundamentalist Christian school I attended for my BA and MA. Both capture well the moral tenor of my upbringing and of my beliefs at that time. I was raised in evangelicalism and on a diet of Rush Limbaugh. But since that time and these writings, some of my views have changed in important ways. In regards to the argument of this paper, the most significant change is that I have lost my former confidence in the Bible as the absolute, objective moral frame of reference for humans. As a result, the core imperative of this paper no long works for me. However, I still to this day embrace and affirm the central observation that a person’s moral decisions in a virtual space or video game are not without implications for their real-world thinking about morality. I still believe what we pretend to think or do can affect what we actually think and do in the real world. (DL, Sept. 18, 2021)
In September 1987, Captain Picard’s Enterprise-D embarked on its maiden voyage. Captain James T. Kirk and his cronies had been replaced by a new crew with a new ship and new gadgets. Perhaps the most memorable of those new gadgets was a new kind of shipboard recreation chamber: the holodeck. A virtual-reality chamber featuring cutting-edge 24th-century technology, the holodeck used holograms, force fields, and semi-stable matter to create alternate realities indistinguishable from the real thing. It was a room where dreams came to life, and it quickly captured the imagination of Trekkers everywhere. Before long, the “holodeck” became verbal shorthand for the supreme realization of virtual reality.
Continue readingThe Primary Consideration?
The bearded craftsman smiled wide and ran
his hand across a burnished silver bowl
enriched with many gems a wealthy man
might never buy. A member of a guild
applauded for its art, he held a brand-
new, nearly finished, piece. (So skilled
was all its workmanship, that many new
apprentices would study it with care.)
Selecting from a dirty pouch a few
anemic leaves of grass, he placed them with
fraternal care into the empty pan;
on top of grass he added earth and then
opossum hair. His work complete, he cried,
“Let’s celebrate!”, and gloried in his can.
Taxes: more than duty
Note: This article was the staff commentary piece published in the Bob Jones University student newspaper The Collegian (Vol 12, No 12) on tax day, 1999. To this day I believe in and celebrate the citizen’s duty (and, especially in a democratic context, honor) to pay taxes. I find libertarian statements like ‘Taxation is Theft’ to be ridiculous and (especially when coming from a Christian) deeply disappointing. Historically speaking, we enjoy unheard of prosperity and freedom in America. Surely we should expect to have to pay for it. (DL, June 6, 2023)
It’s April 15, and many people have been thinking about what happens to their tax dollars. Some taxpayers are quite vocal in their disgust with government economic policy. Some criticism of the government is necessary to ensure accountability, but sometimes valid criticism can degenerate into an un-Christian, complaining spirit. When this happens, Christians commit a sin that resembles the Israelites’ grumbling in the wilderness.
When the Lord commanded men to “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” (Mark 12:17), He made it clear that Christians are duty-bound to pay taxes. But paying taxes is more than a duty; it is actually an opportunity for Christians to serve God with their money. Paying taxes is equated with serving God in Romans 13. Paul says in verse six, “For this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually about this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due.”
Governments are instituted by God. They are worthy of our tax dollars not because they are righteous, but because they do God’s work of governing. The Roman government did not spend tribute money entirely on enterprises that were pleasing to God. Tiberius, the Caesar to whom Christ was referring in Mark 12, used his fortune to support a perverted lifestyle. Yet Christ said to pay.
Obedience to Christ’s command requires more than an outward conformity to IRS policy. It requires a heart that joyfully submits to the Lord’s will. Moses referred to this principle of joyful service in his final message to the Israelites. He was admonishing them to serve the Lord. If you do not, he warned, curses will come “because thou servedst not the LORD thy God with joyfulness, and with gladness of heart, for the abundance of all things” (Deut. 28:47). Moses said it was important to both serve with joyfulness and be glad for the Lord’s abundant blessings.
A complaining spirit is not only a failure to obey joyfully, but it also overlooks the benefits that our tax dollars bring us. Government money pays our firefighters, police officers and soldiers, Uncle Sam built the interstate system that helps many BJU students get home so quickly. “Your tax dollars at work” means air traffic controllers and effective sanitation. It means technology too. Thanks to the billions of dollars poured into NASA, we have everything from computers and communication satellites to velcro and solar-powered calculators.
We have so much to be thankful for. Let’s not forget our blessings and sin by grumbling as we pay our taxes.
I Do Love
You know, I know a guy who doesn’t like
his wife at all. He gets home Monday night
from making cars; she greets him. “Hello, Mike—”
He sort of nods at her and settles right
into his Laz-E-Boy to watch the game.
While Denver loses twenty-four to six
he heaves a sigh and places all the blame
for his unhappiness on her. A mix
of dirty shirts and unwashed pants is all
she really gets to see of him. She knows
he’d rather have some twenty-something (tall
and wrinkle-free) with fingers on his clothes.
Her husband trapped her on her wedding day.
She always folds his laundry anyway.
Christian, consider what you read
Note: This article, my first ever piece of published commentary on any topic, appeared in the Bob Jones University student newspaper, The Collegian (Vol 12, No 7), for which I was a staff writer my third and final undergraduate year. I don’t remember writing the piece, and if I had not had the opportunity recently to peruse the bound back issues of The Collegian at the university library, it would have remained forgotten. It is a good snapshot of my mindset during that period in my life, and the core issue of avoiding moral poison while interacting with fictional worlds has continued to be of interest to me, especially in the context of video games and shows. My current feelings toward shows like Game of Thrones and The Idol closely track my feelings then towards Anne Rice and Stephen King. (I have reduced the number of paragraphs in the original to better suit the wider columns of this format.) (DL, June 6, 2023).
Almost everybody likes to settle in with a good book every once in a while and forget the frustrations of the day. A well-written book paints a picture for our imagination in a way few things can. Unfortunately, while enjoying the pleasures books have to offer, we sometimes drop our guard and forget to consider what we read. As Dr. Bob pointed out in chapel recently, the world likes to hide its philosophy in sentimental packages that even Christians may find appealing. While this is an often-noted problem with Hollywood films, it’s equally so with worldly books.
Continue reading