Entries from October 2007 ↓

Contemporary Christianity bears some unsettling similarities to that of the late Middle Ages. Today, many ostensible evangelicals have what is basically a Roman Catholic view of salvation, marginalizing the Gospel and trusting in their good works to earn salvation. Superstition and materialism abound, as in the “prosperity gospel” that dominates the bestseller lists and Christian television. Many churches and church leaders, as in the age of the late Middle Ages, seem obsessed with ostentatious wealth and political power. Immorality is rampant. The theology of glory reigns, and the way of the Cross has, in many circles, been forgotten.

Is it time for a new Reformation? How might that happen?

Is trick-or-treating dangerous now, with the threat of poisoned candy from all of the real-life monsters out there? That is the impression of many parents. Actually, though, all that talk of poisoned treats is an urban legend. It’s not true. Needles and razor blades in apples, though, have been found, though very rarely.

I know what some of you are thinking: But that happened to a friend of a friend of mine! But such second-degree sourcing is a mark of an urban legend. Nevertheless, I do think parents need to be cautious. As we literary scholars know, myths and legends often have a true theme: In this case, the legend speaks of the truth that there really are evil people in the world who are eager to harm children.

By the way, the website Snopes.com, which tracks urban legends, is an invaluable resource. Pastors need to consult it frequently, since sermons are a major way that urban legends circulate. That and the internet.

On an earllier blog post, I complained about how Halloween is getting ever more gruesome, sexualized, and taken over by adults. But now I read that companies are making–and apparently parents are buying–sexually-oriented costumes for little girls! Pre-teens! As young as 8! Read this and be appalled:

Gabby is 11.

And the Playboy Racy Referee costume was only the latest that her mother had vetoed one pre-Halloween-crazed afternoon at Party City in Baileys Crossroads as too skimpy, too revealing, too suggestive .

Bawdy Halloween costumes, however, have become the season’s hottest sellers in recent years. Not just for women, but for girls, too. And parents such as Cirenza don’t like it.

Gabby eyed the Sexy Super Girl but decided against it. A friend at her Catholic school had worn that costume for a Halloween parade and pulled the already short miniskirt way up to cover her tummy. “That didn’t look very good.” But Gabby did like the Aqua Fairy, a vampy get-up with a black ripped-up skirt, black fishnet tights and blue bustier that comes in medium, large and preteen. A medium fits a child of 8.

No.

How about the Funky Punk Pirate Pre-Teen, with an off-the-shoulder blouse and bare midriff?

No.

Gabby pointed to the Fairy-Licious Purrrfect Kitty Pre-Teen, which, according to the package, includes a “pink and black dress with lace front bodice and sassy jagged skirt with tail. . . . Wings require some assembly.”

Cheryl Cirenza shook her head in exasperated disbelief. “This is all so inappropriate. It’s really disturbing,” she said, eyeing a wall of such girl and preteen costumes as Major Flirt in army green, the bellybutton-baring Devilicious and a sassy, miniskirted French Maid, pink feather duster included. She’d just turned down her 13-year-old daughter’s request for a Sexy Cop outfit. “When I was their age, I was a bunch of grapes.”

But that was back in the days when Halloween was still a homemade kind of holiday, when an old sheet with eyeholes was a perfectly acceptable ghost and clumsily carved pumpkins on the front porch were about as elaborate as the decorations got. Now, Halloween is big business. Americans are expected to spend upwards of $5 billion this year on candy, ghoulish decorations and costumes. And the hottest trend in costumes, retailers say, is sexy. And young.

Here’s a great quotation about tolerance from Michael Gerson:

For many, tolerance does not result from the absence of moral convictions but from a positive religious teaching about human dignity.

Look what I can do with my new blog! I offer here this video on the doctrine of vocation for your edification and theological analysis.

We blogged on the old site about how the discoverer of DNA’s double helix structure, James Watson has fallen off the eugenics deep end. This articletells how his partner in the discovery, fellow Nobel laureate Francis Crick, theorized that life may have come to earth via alien spores sown by comets. (But that doesn’t even explain anything! Where did THAT life come from?) He also wanted to experiment on prisoners. Other distinguished scientists have also been, shall we say, crackpots:

Kary Mullis, after grabbing a piece of the 1993 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, dove head first off the platform, expounding on the virtues of LSD and astrology and expressing his doubts about global warming, the ozone hole, and H.I.V. as the cause of AIDS. . . .

Sometimes the wandering from one’s home turf extends all the way to the paranormal. In 2001, when officials of the Royal Mail, the British postal service, issued a package of stamps commemorating the centenary of the Nobel Prize, they sought the counsel of Brian Josephson, who shared the prize for physics in 1973 for his superconductivity research. Physicists across Britain recoiled when an official pamphlet accompanying the stamps predicted that quantum mechanics might lead to an understanding of mental telepathy.

Of course, this New York Times article also includes distinguished scientists who supported creationism. The point is, scientists are human, subject to foibles, blindspots, and confused worldviews.

Thanks for your comments and suggestions about this blog’s new look. What do the rest of you think about this Cranach self-portrait I found on the web? A little forboding? Or as tODD said, creating a sense that he is looking upon your comment with disapproval? Or as frank sonnek said, an example of “cool realism”?

To me, this self-portrait has a kind of postmodern self-referential feel: The image is of the artist looking into the mirror as he tries to paint his own face. I like how his head is tilted and how he is biting his lips in concentration, peering out with that intent artist look that tries to see everything.

tODD misses the dragon, that scribble of Cranach’s seal that the artist used to sign his works, which is the logo of the Cranach Institute. I have seen versions of that winged dragon bearing the ring that are less abstract and that require less explanation. I’ve been looking for the image on the web but to no avail so far. If anyone knows where I could find it, please let me know.

The release of a DVD anthology of the first 19 Three Stooges episodes is the occasion of some much-deserved critical commentary. The funniest part of the article is the juxtaposition of the expert’s title with the topic that he is expounding:

“I call it their ‘triadic dynamic,’ ” says Jon Solomon, the Robert D. Novak professor of Western civilization and culture at the University of Illinois.”

But the commentary, with its background information, is quite revealing, such as this on the typical plot structure of a Stooge episode:

The basic premise of many a Stooges comedy wasn’t complicated: The three down-on-their-luck schmoes take on some job for which they are completely unqualified, making a complete mess of it. For example, after happening upon some wealthy homeowner with leaky pipes, Moe will declare, “Sure, we can do your plummin’, Toots. We’ll have you fixed up in a jiffy!” Typically, this is followed by more broken pipes, pipes clobbering heads and, of course, a flood.

See, even the Three Stooges are all about the doctrine of vocation!

Well, the Colorado Rockies were STILL blessed to come as far as they did, even though the Red Sox swept them in the World Series. (This is a reminder too that God’s blessings are to be found in the Cross, not in Glory.) Nevertheless, the Rockies will be greeted by their hometown fans as heroes and their season will become part of the team’s legend.

When a team makes the World Series but loses, the home city (unless it is New York) usually feels pretty good anyway. The Brewers lost in their only trip to the series in 1982, but that didn’t really seem to matter so much. But when the Packers lost in the Superbowl to the Denver Broncos (a rematch being tonight on Monday Night Football), the whole state of Wisconsin was in an agony of depression, to the point that it seemed better not to get into the big game at all than to be there but to lose.

This is another example of how baseball and football have a different ethos. (No time limit vs. the pressure of the clock; rain delays vs. play no matter what nature does; relaxation vs. excitement; making contact with the ball vs. making contact with the player. . . .What else?)

As I had said was going to happen, WORLD’s sub-blogs have had to find new homes. It’s kind of a good feeling, in this era of virtual real-estate to have my own domain! (Seinfeld jokes, at this point, are not allowed.) I went ahead and gave it my own name, for various reasons, but it’s still the Cranach blog, independent and unbound!

This means that this old dog has to learn a new system, so please be patient. Yes, I’m working with a template so the design might be a little clunky at first. I’m not REALLY Lucas Cranach, so my artistic gifts are lacking. But I’m going to ask for help. And I need to, as they say, “populate” this new site, re-doing the blogroll and (most importantly) moving the archives here. The site also apparently looks different on different browsers. The point is, please be patient as we move into our new home.

This new site has some advantages. It looks like I’ll be able to do more with images than I could before. The software seems better and easier to use, once I figure it out completely. I’m hoping the comments work smoothly for you. I believe you have to “register,” but that is really not a big deal and I hope that doesn’t inhibit anyone from joining our conversations.

The old site at WORLD will still be up for awhile, as discussions there continue to rage, but please set your bookmarks to this site and we’ll start some new ones.

And a big tip of the hat to Rich Shipe for helping me do this.

Halloween used to be a holiday that centered on little kids getting dressed up and going trick-or-treating. Now, adults have taken over the day, knocking down the children and turning Halloween into a gore-fest. Adults have injected both sex and violence into the day, with one-up-manship centered on how to outdo one’s neighbors in images of sado-masochistic horror.

That’s not just me talking, it’s “The Washington Post.” Read Terri Sapienza’s article entitled When Did Halloween Get So Gruesome? A sampling:

Next to the standard witches, ghosts and black cats, many specialty stores and catalogues are selling creepily realistic corpses, severed limbs and butchered body parts. One catalogue advertises an animated ghoul who can vomit into a barrel on cue (special order only, $2,750). An online company sells a Tortured Torso Prop (for $149) you can lean near your front door to welcome trick-or-treaters. . . .

Horchow, the high-end Neiman Marcus affiliate, sells fake buzzards and chocolate coffins. Target sells a 15-piece cemetery kit, a hanging grim reaper and an oversize maggot. Spirit Halloween, a Spencer’s specialty store, sells the Tortured Torso Prop and a child’s costume called Sailor of Death. Fright Catalog, seller of the Vomit Barrel, also serves up John Doe, a latex corpse with a hollow chest cavity for displaying a food buffet inside.. . .

Halloween has become much more adult-driven and sexualized, according to Paul J. Donahue, a clinical psychologist and the founder and director of Child Development Associates, a group practice that works primarily with children and families in Scarsdale, N.Y. Costumes sexual in nature have become more popular.

“We’re a culture of extremes,” Donahue said. “We have to push things. At Halloween it becomes a competition among adults to outdo and go further and further.”

The technical term for this is “decadence,” a sign of a culture in dissolution.