It's the birthday of Thomas Merton, born in Prades, France (1915). Merton was a Trappist monk, but he was also the author of more than 50 books, 2,000 poems and a personal diary that spanned much of his lifetime.
Merton was educated in France and the United States before beginning his university career at Cambridge University. But he left after only one year and returned to America to attend Columbia University and live with his grandparents. Merton decided to write his master's thesis on William Blake, and he found himself deeply influenced by Blake. He converted to Christianity, and in 1941 he entered a Trappist abbey in Kentucky, where he remained for most of his life. In his diary from this time, Merton wrote, "Going to the Trappists is exciting. I return to the idea again and again: 'Give up everything, give up everything!'" Merton had become well-known throughout the world, in part because of his writing, in particular his autobiography The Seven Story Mountain (1948).
He said, "An author in a Trappist monastery is like a duck in a chicken coop. And he would give anything in the world to be a chicken instead of a duck."
Merton was also known for his dialogue with other faiths, and for advocating non-violence during race riots and the Vietnam War. Merton was encouraged to write at the abbey, but he was not allowed to leave. And so a new abbot allowed Merton to leave the abbey in 1968 for a tour of Asia, where he met the Dalai Lama, and where he died accidentally, touching an electric fan as he stepped from his bath.
The Everlasting Gospel (excerpt)
by William Blake
The Vision of Christ that thou dost see
Is my Visions Greatest Enemy
Thine has a great hook nose like thine
Mine has a snub nose like to mine
Thine is the Friend of All Mankind
Mine speaks in parables to the Blind
Thine loves the same world that mine hates
Thy Heaven doors are my Hell Gates
Socrates taught that Melitus
Loathd as a Nations bitterest Curse
And Caiphus was in his own Mind
A benefactor of Mankind
Both read the Bible day & night
But thou readst black where I read white
Showing posts with label book worm; religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label book worm; religion. Show all posts
Monday, January 31
Tuesday, July 14
Blue Like Jazz in Review
So I just finished reading the Don Miller book Blue Like Jazz. I know that this was a big smash when it first came out in 2003, but when I tried to read it then, I don't think I got past the first chapter. It wasn't my fault really. Even though I managed to finish it this time, I only did so by constantly repeating the mantra "he has to be going somewhere with this." I was sure that, given the things I had heard people say, there had to be something wonderful on just the next page. But then I ran out of pages to read.
I have heard people say that this book was "mind blowing". That Miller had presented something never seen before in Christian literature. That his words would make you think of your entire life in a different way. After waiting through every page of the book, even those stupid cartoons, I can honestly say that the book sucks.
For one it reads like a series of blog post or worse, my high school diary. There is nothing wrong with blog posts of course, but reading them in book form just doesn't work for me. When words are bound together and sorted into chapters there is an expectation that those words go together in someway that lead to something. That there is at least one major point that the author is trying to make. Maybe Miller does make a point somewhere in his collection of journal entries, but if he did it was lost on me.
Another thing I didn't care for was his voice in general. He comes off as very arrogant. Very self oriented (which is odd since most of his book talks about how he cares about others), but worst of all, very fake. He is like those older camp counselors who are trying way to hard to fit in with the teenagers. It seems like every conversation he had with his friends took place while he was smoking his "pipe", in a coffee house somewhere or else listening to Patty Griffin. He tries to give his friends cool names like "Tony the beat poet" *barf*. After a while I had to check the copyright date thinking this must have originally been published in the 1990s. It was all very nauseating, but I was trying to give him a pass on that kind of thing. Until I read one of the last chapters and he mentioned Ani Difranco. Let me just say that I love Ani Difranco. When my friend "Tiffany the poet" (I call her that because she is a poet) introduced me to Ani when we were in college it changed my life. Literally. I think that is probably why I took great offense we he started out by saying "If Ani Difranco wasn't a lesbian I'd marry her." Well Miller, you are in luck because Ani isn't a lesbian. Anyone who has spent an ounce of time listening to her music and reading her poetry would know that she is Bisexual. Not only that be he quoted her to make the point that everyone just wants other people to understand them. The point he made is valid, but Ani's song he used to make that point is all about how she is going to be and do what she wants to do whether or not anyone else cares to take notice. So with that I concluded that he was, in fact, just trying to play the cool card all a long. After that, all his previous condescending musing just seemed like a pile of crap that I spent a good 4 hours of my life waiting through.
Okay, but beyond the horrible writing (the man can't write a conversational exchange to save his life) and the attempts to seem above it all, the book just seemed hollow. It left me wondering who the hell Miller is and what exactly it is that he believes. He loves to talk about how he is all liberal, and how he hates Bush, but theologically he seems to be one of the most fundamentalist liberals I have ever read. Its hard to tell though. The only thing I'm am really certain about his faith is that he thinks we should all be proselytizing, men are inherently evil and there is a Satan out to get us. But then he never tells us where those ideas come from or why he thinks those things. I guess he felt like he didn't have to explain his theology because his subtitle was "Non-religious thought on Christian Spirituality." He seems to take that as a pass to just muse about how being a Christian makes him feel good. He likes to throw around the term "Christian Spirituality" but he never defines what he means by that exactly. Not everyone is a theologian and I get that. But if you are going to talk about being a Christian and "falling in love with Christ" you need to give some sense of what you think that means.
Honestly, I'm not sure who this book appeals to. I think the only thing I got out of it was a vote of confidence for my writing skills. Hell, if this dribble can become a best selling novel... why aren't we all in the business of writing books?
So no, it didn't blow my mind. It didn't change the way I think about anything. I'm not sure what I was suppose to get out of having read the book, but any sense of Christian spirituality isn't one of them. I'm not sure what demographic this book appeals to. It was (is) a best seller so there must be a lot of people out there recommending the book to there friends. I don't know who I would recommend it to though.
*If you read this book and feel differently about it, I would love to know what it is that I missed.*
I have heard people say that this book was "mind blowing". That Miller had presented something never seen before in Christian literature. That his words would make you think of your entire life in a different way. After waiting through every page of the book, even those stupid cartoons, I can honestly say that the book sucks.
For one it reads like a series of blog post or worse, my high school diary. There is nothing wrong with blog posts of course, but reading them in book form just doesn't work for me. When words are bound together and sorted into chapters there is an expectation that those words go together in someway that lead to something. That there is at least one major point that the author is trying to make. Maybe Miller does make a point somewhere in his collection of journal entries, but if he did it was lost on me.
Another thing I didn't care for was his voice in general. He comes off as very arrogant. Very self oriented (which is odd since most of his book talks about how he cares about others), but worst of all, very fake. He is like those older camp counselors who are trying way to hard to fit in with the teenagers. It seems like every conversation he had with his friends took place while he was smoking his "pipe", in a coffee house somewhere or else listening to Patty Griffin. He tries to give his friends cool names like "Tony the beat poet" *barf*. After a while I had to check the copyright date thinking this must have originally been published in the 1990s. It was all very nauseating, but I was trying to give him a pass on that kind of thing. Until I read one of the last chapters and he mentioned Ani Difranco. Let me just say that I love Ani Difranco. When my friend "Tiffany the poet" (I call her that because she is a poet) introduced me to Ani when we were in college it changed my life. Literally. I think that is probably why I took great offense we he started out by saying "If Ani Difranco wasn't a lesbian I'd marry her." Well Miller, you are in luck because Ani isn't a lesbian. Anyone who has spent an ounce of time listening to her music and reading her poetry would know that she is Bisexual. Not only that be he quoted her to make the point that everyone just wants other people to understand them. The point he made is valid, but Ani's song he used to make that point is all about how she is going to be and do what she wants to do whether or not anyone else cares to take notice. So with that I concluded that he was, in fact, just trying to play the cool card all a long. After that, all his previous condescending musing just seemed like a pile of crap that I spent a good 4 hours of my life waiting through.
Okay, but beyond the horrible writing (the man can't write a conversational exchange to save his life) and the attempts to seem above it all, the book just seemed hollow. It left me wondering who the hell Miller is and what exactly it is that he believes. He loves to talk about how he is all liberal, and how he hates Bush, but theologically he seems to be one of the most fundamentalist liberals I have ever read. Its hard to tell though. The only thing I'm am really certain about his faith is that he thinks we should all be proselytizing, men are inherently evil and there is a Satan out to get us. But then he never tells us where those ideas come from or why he thinks those things. I guess he felt like he didn't have to explain his theology because his subtitle was "Non-religious thought on Christian Spirituality." He seems to take that as a pass to just muse about how being a Christian makes him feel good. He likes to throw around the term "Christian Spirituality" but he never defines what he means by that exactly. Not everyone is a theologian and I get that. But if you are going to talk about being a Christian and "falling in love with Christ" you need to give some sense of what you think that means.
Honestly, I'm not sure who this book appeals to. I think the only thing I got out of it was a vote of confidence for my writing skills. Hell, if this dribble can become a best selling novel... why aren't we all in the business of writing books?
So no, it didn't blow my mind. It didn't change the way I think about anything. I'm not sure what I was suppose to get out of having read the book, but any sense of Christian spirituality isn't one of them. I'm not sure what demographic this book appeals to. It was (is) a best seller so there must be a lot of people out there recommending the book to there friends. I don't know who I would recommend it to though.
*If you read this book and feel differently about it, I would love to know what it is that I missed.*
Wednesday, January 28
Book Group... Movement One
So my book group met last night for our first real discussion.
As I said we are reading The Velvet Elvis: A Repainting of the Christian Faith. I think this book was well chosen. It fosters discussion in a meaningful way. And for all that I disagreed with what a lot of my fellow readers I have to say, I appreciated their approach to the discussion. Everyone came with an open mind. Everyone came, ready to hear other points of view. I assure you we all had our own points of view.
There was a young man, new to me, who has just recently graduated from that bastion of conservatism, Texas A&M University. Not only that, but he was a member of the "Brotherhood of Christian Aggies." Then there was me. Spirituality has been a part of me all of my life, but I have always been weary of religion and "the church". I think everyone else seemed to fall somewhere in between the two of us.
So far I am not all that impressed with the book. While many in the group praised Bell and said that it "blew my mind", I felt like Bell was doing nothing more than climbing on the shoulders of the mystic tradition of the faith and watering it down for today's young adults. My view might change as I read more than just the first chapter, but as it was, I found myself adding things in the margins as I read. I wanted him to flush out his idea that "Its okay to question" and say that its not only okay to question, but we must question. I kept waiting for him to reveal that questioning is the only way we can move from simply obeying and defining doctrines and move into a fuller, richer, deeper relationship with God. I wanted to see him say what was said in the Cloud of Unknowing that "Our need to understand is our biggest stumbling block to God." He came really close to it a few times, but he never fully got there.
Still, like I said, it was a good group of people. Some of us were polar opposites, but we all listened to what the other had to say. We all articulated our points well. We were all heard and understood. On a personal note, it was nice to hear the Aggie say that he had to go home and think about some of the things he had heard.
If I were just reading this book on my own, I'm not sure I would care to move on to Movement two, but I'm excited about next week's discusstion.
As I said we are reading The Velvet Elvis: A Repainting of the Christian Faith. I think this book was well chosen. It fosters discussion in a meaningful way. And for all that I disagreed with what a lot of my fellow readers I have to say, I appreciated their approach to the discussion. Everyone came with an open mind. Everyone came, ready to hear other points of view. I assure you we all had our own points of view.
There was a young man, new to me, who has just recently graduated from that bastion of conservatism, Texas A&M University. Not only that, but he was a member of the "Brotherhood of Christian Aggies." Then there was me. Spirituality has been a part of me all of my life, but I have always been weary of religion and "the church". I think everyone else seemed to fall somewhere in between the two of us.
So far I am not all that impressed with the book. While many in the group praised Bell and said that it "blew my mind", I felt like Bell was doing nothing more than climbing on the shoulders of the mystic tradition of the faith and watering it down for today's young adults. My view might change as I read more than just the first chapter, but as it was, I found myself adding things in the margins as I read. I wanted him to flush out his idea that "Its okay to question" and say that its not only okay to question, but we must question. I kept waiting for him to reveal that questioning is the only way we can move from simply obeying and defining doctrines and move into a fuller, richer, deeper relationship with God. I wanted to see him say what was said in the Cloud of Unknowing that "Our need to understand is our biggest stumbling block to God." He came really close to it a few times, but he never fully got there.
Still, like I said, it was a good group of people. Some of us were polar opposites, but we all listened to what the other had to say. We all articulated our points well. We were all heard and understood. On a personal note, it was nice to hear the Aggie say that he had to go home and think about some of the things he had heard.
If I were just reading this book on my own, I'm not sure I would care to move on to Movement two, but I'm excited about next week's discusstion.
Thursday, January 22
I joined a book group...
...and to tell you the truth I'm not entirely sure why. I like to read. The book sounds interesting. For some reason I always feel like I should be hanging out with more people my age.
But I am sceptical. For one, this book group is pulling from the same mix of people who attended the bible study I frequented before I lost my Wednesdays to karate. I like these people. They are all really nice. They are easy to talk to. They are welcoming to everyone that walks in the door. We differ. Our life styles don't match. Our world views are sometimes at odds.
On the one hand this kind of annoys me. Its a lot more fun to sit with people who are all in the same place. Then you can all nod approvingly at each other and soak up every word that is said. Even if you are with people you have nothing in common with outside of your faith, its always wonderful to know that your faith is shared. You aren't a lone nut job. Someone else gets it.
On the other hand, I realize that it takes all kinds. I don't believe that there is one set way to experience God. Its not wrong its just different. Still, battle grounds of dogma aren't as fun as kumbaya circles. The book we are reading rushes into battle.
Velvet Elvis by Rob Bell. If you google it, like I did, you will find that there are a lot of people who are really vocal about their dislike of Bell and his book. I know that there will be people in this group who are just as vocal. I'm excited about reading what seems to be a book on contemplative theology written for people of my generation. I'm excited because I know that the person who chose this book did so because she read it and loved it. It gave her a "whole new way to think." I'm waiting to see how this evolves.
But I am sceptical. For one, this book group is pulling from the same mix of people who attended the bible study I frequented before I lost my Wednesdays to karate. I like these people. They are all really nice. They are easy to talk to. They are welcoming to everyone that walks in the door. We differ. Our life styles don't match. Our world views are sometimes at odds.
On the one hand this kind of annoys me. Its a lot more fun to sit with people who are all in the same place. Then you can all nod approvingly at each other and soak up every word that is said. Even if you are with people you have nothing in common with outside of your faith, its always wonderful to know that your faith is shared. You aren't a lone nut job. Someone else gets it.
On the other hand, I realize that it takes all kinds. I don't believe that there is one set way to experience God. Its not wrong its just different. Still, battle grounds of dogma aren't as fun as kumbaya circles. The book we are reading rushes into battle.
Velvet Elvis by Rob Bell. If you google it, like I did, you will find that there are a lot of people who are really vocal about their dislike of Bell and his book. I know that there will be people in this group who are just as vocal. I'm excited about reading what seems to be a book on contemplative theology written for people of my generation. I'm excited because I know that the person who chose this book did so because she read it and loved it. It gave her a "whole new way to think." I'm waiting to see how this evolves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)