The Anchoress

“I feel,” says one of my network news-writer friends as he observes his associates in full pre-election hustle, “like I am in India during the last days of the British Empire. We’re sipping tea and admiring those quaint little brown people pulling our rickshaws, not quite realizing they are about to overthrow us.”

The networks, it seems, are feeling a momentum shift. Not toward Kerry. Or toward them.

Comes the Day of the Blogger.

I have a very good friend, a writer and all-around good-guy who is studying for the diaconate in the Roman Catholic church, and he is struggling with his vote. He’s a Democrat, but he doesn’t much find anything in John Kerry that seems worth voting for. There are aspects of President Bush he admires, but other things which trouble him. The war makes him uneasy, particularly in terms of his Christianity. Is war compatible with Christianity, he wonders? Is this war? Is any war?

He spent some time with Trappist monks recently and came away more troubled about the issue of war, how it fits or does not fit within the life of a Christian. After all, he reasons, Jesus said, “Blessed are the Peacemakers…”

I think it’s very good to wonder about these things, and I applaud his soul-searching - I think all people who worship God - no matter what their persuasion - should be thinking about these things.

I can’t speak to all religious beliefs, and I claim no wisdom - I know only what I can glean from my own reason and whatever the Holy Spirit lays upon my conscience. But I think “Blessed are the Peacemakers” cannot be the whole story, and indeed, Christ said much more than that, but he didn’t really address war with any specificity. I do believe though, that we can extrapolate those things we know about His teachings and come to one (or several) conclusions. As with everything, each person will embrace unto himself/herself that which speaks to the heart.

When I think of war - and all war is terrible, no matter how just - I think of the warrior - the soldier, the one doing the “warring”, so let’s start there. What did Jesus teach us about soldiers, and people in positions of authority? When a Centurion, a warrior who had been given authority over other warriors and servants, approached Jesus for a favor (the healing of a servant) Jesus did not spit at him, thrust him away or lecture him about how awful war is. He didn’t do anything like that. There is nothing indicating that Jesus did not see the need for soldiers, and being a scripturally educated Jew, he’d know that “to everything there is a season…a time for war, a time for peace.”

Jesus did not really talk to us about these “big questions”. People will say, “Jesus never talked about abortion!” “Jesus never talked about homosexuality!” “Jesus never talked about…(insert your single-issue obsession here)…”

What Jesus talked to us about was not the question of whether there should or should not be war, or abortion, or homosexuality, or for that matter slavery. He simply didn’t address them; he approached the world, and humanity as it was. As we ARE. He didn’t urge the release of slaves, or the end of war. He left that for us to deal with after giving us the basic outline.

Part of that outline was to tell both servant and master to be honorable, in their spheres, to God and to His Creation. He said that we must all, according to our place, love God and serve Him, to be Godly and honorable no matter what our rank, our station, our wealth, our poverty. We all have a role to fulfill. He understood (and indeed taught) that there would always be the poor among us, there would always be the sick, there would always be the rich, there would always be the lawyers, the pharisees, the whores. There would always be war. It’s not a perfect world. We have to live in it, in all its broken-ness, and strive to move forward from wherever we began. Let the slave serve the master with such honor and goodness that he is much-rewarded. Let the master see the value of the slave and be generous in his promotions.

“Blessed are the peacemakers…” In our relativistic world, who decides what a peacemaker is? In some instances, the peacemakers can very well be the soldiers. The UN has “soldiers” they call “peacekeepers”. If “to everything there is a season…” it’s possible that our warriors, and our war, are ‘peacekeepering’ trying to prevent something far, far worse - and far reaching - by attempting to contain terrorism in one place, and eliminate the terrorists.

I said earlier that all war is terrible - no one would argue differently. But not all war is dishonorable. Jesus DID say blessed are the peacemakers. He also said, “blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness.”

Is it righteous to make war if you are liberating the oppressed, freeing those who had no voice, rounding up hundreds of thousands of tons of weapons, deposing tyrants? Is it righteous to make war if you are doing so in the hopes that your actions may prevent the slaughter of millions in a single city, on a single day?

If the answer is yes, then one could argue that our men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan, and our president, are therefore among the blessed as they work, from their perspective, for “righteousness.” Obviously, one’s individual perspective will shade ones response. A leftist may say, “war is never acceptable, therefore these people are NOT peacemakers; they are murderers.” A rightist may say, “war is always to be a ready tool, and these people are saviors!”

Most, I suspect, fall somewhere in the middle. Most people understand that in World War II there were events like the bombings of Dresden and of London, and hideous loss of innocent lives on every side. But they also understand that when an enemy will stop at nothing, then something must be done, ugly as the task might be.

It’s always dangerous to become to narrow in one’s views on these “big questions”, especially if one is trying to form those views from a Christian perspective that leans heavily to the right or the left. To my mind, a rightwing Christian who wants to bomb the world, bomb Mecca and “kill all the Muslims” isn’t helpful. But a leftwing Christian who doesn’t want to recognize the need to fight a resolved and ruthless enemy is not helpful, either. Balance. St. Benedict taught us to seek balance.

So, what did Christ really tell us about war, since he did NOT really address the subject directly? We can take a guess. If both the slave and the master are to be honorable and Godly, we can interpret that broadly to mean, “let each in his or her role do their jobs in honorable, Godly fashion.” So we can presume then, that he is also telling soldiers to be honorable soldiers - not to NOT be soldiers - but to be honorable good ones. Everyone honorable within their station.

Perhaps my pal’s Trappist friends are TOO vehemently against the war, and my Christian friends are TOO vehemently for it. But to everything there is a season, and we’re taught to do our best within the events unfolding around us.

Balance. We need it badly.

I have a very good friend, a writer and all-around good-guy who is studying for the diaconate in the Roman Catholic church, and he is struggling with his vote. He’s a Democrat, but he doesn’t much find anything in John Kerry that seems worth voting for. There are aspects of President Bush he admires, but other things which trouble him. The war makes him uneasy, particularly in terms of his Christianity. Is war compatible with Christianity, he wonders? Is this war? Is any war?

He spent some time with Trappist monks recently and came away more troubled about the issue of war, how it fits or does not fit within the life of a Christian. After all, he reasons, Jesus said, “Blessed are the Peacemakers…”

I think it’s very good to wonder about these things, and I applaud his soul-searching - I think all people who worship God - no matter what their persuasion - should be thinking about these things.

I can’t speak to all religious beliefs, and I claim no wisdom - I know only what I can glean from my own reason and whatever the Holy Spirit lays upon my conscience. But I think “Blessed are the Peacemakers” cannot be the whole story, and indeed, Christ said much more than that, but he didn’t really address war with any specificity. I do believe though, that we can extrapolate those things we know about His teachings and come to one (or several) conclusions. As with everything, each person will embrace unto himself/herself that which speaks to the heart.

When I think of war - and all war is terrible, no matter how just - I think of the warrior - the soldier, the one doing the “warring”, so let’s start there. What did Jesus teach us about soldiers, and people in positions of authority? When a Centurion, a warrior who had been given authority over other warriors and servants, approached Jesus for a favor (the healing of a servant) Jesus did not spit at him, thrust him away or lecture him about how awful war is. He didn’t do anything like that. There is nothing indicating that Jesus did not see the need for soldiers, and being a scripturally educated Jew, he’d know that “to everything there is a season…a time for war, a time for peace.”

Jesus did not really talk to us about these “big questions”. People will say, “Jesus never talked about abortion!” “Jesus never talked about homosexuality!” “Jesus never talked about…(insert your single-issue obsession here)…”What Jesus talked to us about was not the question of whether there should or should not be war, or abortion, or homosexuality, or for that matter slavery. He simply didn’t address them; he approached the world, and humanity as it was. As we ARE. He didn’t urge the release of slaves, or the end of war. He left that for us to deal with after giving us the basic outline.

He understood (and indeed taught) that there would always be the poor among us, there would always be the sick, there would always be the rich, there would always be the lawyers, the pharisees, the whores. There would always be war. It’s not a perfect world. We have to live in it, in all its broken-ness, and strive to move forward from wherever we began. Let the slave serve the master with such honor and goodness that he is much-rewarded. Let the master see the value of the slave and be generous in his promotions.

“Blessed are the peacemakers…” In our relativistic world, who decides what a peacemaker is? In some instances, the peacemakers can very well be the soldiers. The UN has “soldiers” they call “peacekeepers”. If “to everything there is a season…” it’s possible that our warriors, and our war, are ‘peacekeepering’ trying to prevent something far, far worse - and far reaching - by attempting to contain terrorism in one place, and eliminate the terrorists.

Is it righteous to make war if you are liberating the oppressed, freeing those who had no voice, rounding up hundreds of thousands of tons of weapons, deposing tyrants? Is it righteous to make war if you are doing so in the hopes that your actions may prevent the slaughter of millions in a single city, on a single day?

If the answer is yes, then one could argue that our men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan, and our president, are therefore among the blessed as they work, from their perspective, for “righteousness.” Obviously, one’s individual perspective will shade ones response. A leftist may say, “war is never acceptable, therefore these people are NOT peacemakers; they are murderers.” A rightist may say, “war is always to be a ready tool, and these people are saviors!”

Most, I suspect, fall somewhere in the middle. Most people understand that in World War II there were events like the bombings of Dresden and of London, and hideous loss of innocent lives on every side. But they also understand that when an enemy will stop at nothing, then something must be done, ugly as the task might be.

To my mind, a rightwing Christian who wants to bomb the world, bomb Mecca and “kill all the Muslims” isn’t helpful. But a leftwing Christian who doesn’t want to recognize the need to fight a resolved and ruthless enemy is not helpful, either. Balance. St. Benedict taught us to seek balance.

Had a chat with a person from Australia who insists that Kerry will be a better president than Bush, although he admits that he cannot tell me anything Kerry has done in the last 20 years that suggests he would be good presidential material or - more importantly - CIC material. “Elections are about the incumbent,” he insisted, “if the incumbent has done a good job, you retain him; if he has done poorly, you fire him.”

Well.

Firstly…I just can’t understand how anyone can say they have no idea about Kerry’s record, no clear sense of him, and yet believe he is up to the job. On the basis of…what, air?

An election is NOT only about an incumbent. The challenger must be vetted; he must be scoped out to discover if he is up to the job.

I’m a former Democrat and at one time I admired John Kerry, mostly because I believed what I read about him. I’ve looked at him now for over a year, and I have come to the conclusion that he is without core, without spine and without conscience. Moreover, I have some serious concerns about his mental health, given some of the whoppers he’s told and his “magic hat.”

For this reason, it has become very important to me to get a chance to view his release papers from the US NAVY. I want to see his fitness reports. I want to see what his superiors thought of him, and I am interested - very interested - in discovering exactly what was the status of his original discharge. These are not irrelevancies.

John Kerry’s votes in the senate tell us a great deal about his sense of the importance of the military, and in these times, such information is crucial. The fact that he suggested cutting intelligence by 6 BILLION dollars after the first WTC bombing is very telling. All of it is relevant.

I am no class warrior, and no hater. My concerns about Kerry are not simply that he is “not Bush”. There are legitimate questions here that the press (still curious about Bush’s ANG service, yet completely incurious about Kerry’s own military records) will not ask, questions that an informed electorate MUST ask.

Is this election about keeping or firing an incumbent? I have managed people. I know that if I had an employee who, early into his stint, found himself managing crisis situations not of his own making and who had performed imperfectly but effectively, had still managed to bring in a spreadsheet showing growth instead of stagnation or loss, had shown a propensity for stability and a doggedness to get the job done, and who had remained steadfast in the face of enormous personal disregard, name-calling, distortion and outright hate from those in surrounding offices, I’d have to take a DAMN CLOSE LOOK at anyone who might replace him, and the fact is, the new applicant would have to be pret-ty impressive for me to let the first employee go.

John Kerry does not allow, will not allow me to take that close look. And he has the press standing in front of him, making sure I don’t get too near. My difficult or awkward questions are not brought forth and so they cannot be answered. He has refused to allow me to look at the record of his work - his resume - if you will. He has refused to supply me with references from superiors. He has had people from those “other offices” come in to tell me he would be great for the job, but they cannot tell me WHY he would be great for the job, only that he is “not the other guy.”

The problem is, I have come to distrust the people in those “other offices” because they have been behaving so very strangely toward my employee, George W. Bush. I have caught them lying, several times, about him and about his close friends and associates, and because I can no longer trust them to tell me the truth, I have become suspicious of John Kerry, whom they advocate.

There is no way, no WAY I would consider hiring a man who will not let me check his references over a man who has performed well for me in the face of huge odds. There is no way I would consider hiring a man who looked over my employee’s work exclaiming, “I have a plan; I can do a better job!” while refusing to tell me what those plans might be, or why I should BELIEVE he would do a better job. There is no way I would ever hire a man who will not step up to the plate and take a risk by telling me something specific.

No way.

This is not wing-nuttery. This is plain old logic and sanity. That so many in the left can’t see it makes me understand even more why I am no longer a woman of the left.

Since I am home tending to a sick teenager today, I’ve had time to think, catch up with some email and chat a bit with friends. Many of the commentators in my last entry on my brother’s illness left lovely thoughts, prayers and poems, and I am very thankful and moved (and quite humbled) by the generosity of these people who don’t know us from Adam and yet offer comfort. Bless you. (And belated public thanks to Andrew Sullivan for his unexpected and kind linkage).

One poem stood out to me - it was familiar but I couldn’t place it:

and when he shall die, take him and cut him out in little stars, and he shall make the face of heaven so fine that all the world shall be in love with night and pay no worship to the garish sun.”

Very, very lovely lines that I may use on my brother’s behalf. My pal Greg reminded me that the line was from Romeo and Juliet, and recalled that Robert F. Kennedy had used the very same lines at the 1964 Democratic Convention, when referring to his slain brother, the President. That got us chatting about how much we had admired RFK. For those of you who read me and think “Brain-Dead-Nazi-Right-winger!” believing you have my number, you might be surprised to learn that I was, until pretty recently, a left-leaning Democrat, and that Robert Francis Kennedy was and still is a hero of mine. Were there anyone of his caliber still in a leadership position within the Democrat party, I might still be there.

Greg then reminded me of RFK’s particular grace and gift for speaking “off the cuff”, that it was Kennedy’s remarks to the campaign crowds immediately upon the murder of Martin Luther King that quite possibly prevented rioting, bloodshed and more tragedy. I re-read the speech and had to marvel, after wiping my eyes. A remarkable and moving tribute, given extemporaneously, it is brilliant in its scope, its personal revelation and historical appreciation and context. In a few short minutes, the man managed to gather himself together (and think of just how shocking it must have been, how un-nerving, to in an instant re-live his own trauma at the slaying of his brother, and then manage to be both wise and re-assuring. How courageous!). Here is just a bit of it:

For those of you who are black and are tempted to be filled with hatred and mistrust of the injustice of such an act, against all white people, I would only say that I can also feel in my own heart the same kind of feeling. I had a member of my family killed, but he was killed by a white man. But we have to make an effort in the United States, we have to make an effort to understand, to get beyond, or go beyond these rather difficult times. My favorite poem, my favorite poet was Aeschylus. And he once wrote: “Even in our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, until, in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God.”
[…]
So I ask you tonight to return home, to say a prayer for the family of Martin Luther King — yeah, it’s true — but more importantly to say a prayer for our own country, which all of us love [emphasis mine - admin] — a prayer for understanding and that compassion of which I spoke.

We can do well in this country. We will have difficult times. We’ve had difficult times in the past, but we — and we will have difficult times in the future. It is not the end of violence; it is not the end of lawlessness; and it’s not the end of disorder.

But the vast majority of white people and the vast majority of black people in this country want to live together, want to improve the quality of our life, and want justice for all human beings that abide in our land.

And let’s dedicate ourselves to what the Greeks wrote so many years ago: to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world. Let us dedicate ourselves to that, and say a prayer for our country and for our people.

Go read the speech (or you can listen to it if you like), and you will be amazed that Bobby Kennedy was able to so quickly draw on his own resources, to speak from his own experiences, and also to bring in the ancients. The benefit of a quick and gifted mind that has been well-educated, absolutely. But there had to be something in the man’s character, too, that allowed his thoughts to move toward what was good not for his party, or his own benefit, but for the country. I cannot think of anyone in public office right now who could pull this off today.

President Bush might have the right “instincts” insofar as thinking first of the nation…but he’d not have the words - he’d move quickly to action, and while action is good, the words need to come first. John Kerry could might or might not have the words, but his first instincts would be to exploit, rather than heal, and nothing in his record indicates he would take action. Bill Clinton, with his rhetorical gifts and quick mind might come closest, but I think even he - as smart as he is - would fall too quickly into his ingrained habits of sly self-promotion, and - Walt Whitman aside - he was never much for poetry. Hillary, when off-script lapses into schoolmarmish lectures punctuated with ‘”you knows”. She couldn’t do this. I think Condoleeza Rice would have all of it in her brain, but would not be able to bring it forth, not on the fly, not coherently.

Rudy Giuliani could approximate it; he could convey the “gist” of it, but not with this language, or with this history. John McCain is a rhetorical plodder; he couldn’t come near it. Ted Kennedy never had his brother’s mind, or his sensibilities.

RFK was just extraordinary. I can’t think of any member of the “black leadership” who could do this. I can’t think of anyone in journalism who could do it, either - no current man or woman of letters. Limbaugh, who can often be both extemporaneous and eloquent, could not approach what Kennedy did.

One reads this and one understands benefit of a vigorous and substantial education in the classics, as opposed to my son’s English class, which spent 4 weeks (!) on Tuesdays with Morrie. But RFK also must have had the gift of introspection, as well, and also a love of reading and poetry. I know he committed a great deal of poetry to memory; I’ve read that about him.

That speech was the speech of a man who habitually spent time alone in reflection and contemplation and -dare I say it - prayer. It’s all there; the evidence of it is there.

Perhaps he was a man of his time, a time when life moved a little bit less quickly, and down-time was not at such a premium, and so introspection was not such a luxury. Perhaps we simply do not take enough time for reflection and contemplation, anymore. We turn on Hardball, or Hannity, or Survivor, and it’s our loss.

How about it, can you think of anyone on the national scene who could pull this off, today?

Was discussing this report of a bin Laden sighting with my pal and dearest little brother in Christ, Greg. He sighed in exasperation and said, “What is this guy, Bigfoot? Sightings? Don’t they realize Bush is going to trot him out on The Tonight Show this Monday?”

I needed that laugh. We’re all too edgy these days, and I’m not meaning simply my family and our situation with S. I have friends - both Republicans and Democrats - calling me up in various stages of hysteria because the polls are coming too fast and furious - they cannot be digested quickly enough and people’s heads are spinning with numbers and possible scenarios. My response: Turn off the television, stop listening. Stop looking at the polls. They’re meaningless. No one is going to predict this election. The Father of Confusion has well-obfuscated this silly season; the media are - to my everlasting grief - barely coherent and no longer trustworthy and these strange, shifting polls, which seem to reflect nothing but bi-polar disorder in the masses, are merely one more manifestation of that.

I’m of the opinion that only news and political junkies are listening to or looking at any of this any longer. It’s too overwhelming and for most of the population it matters more to get supper on the table, oversee homework, meet a deadline, make sure there are clean clothes for work tomorrow, or somesuch. They’ve decided who they are going to vote for, and they’ve stopped listening. The pundits are spinning away and the folks still watching are zoned out, but can’t look away because this whole election has become such a freak show. It’s all white noise, which should always be turned off and at this point I honesty believe it’s harmful to one’s mental heath to focus too much on these final, furious days. Hopefully there will be no terror attack. If there is, Kedwards will say it’s Bush’s fault for not personally guarding an ammo dump that may or may not have had explosives in it sometime in the past 18 months, in between the time when Iraq was, then was not, then was a dangerous and threatening place. The Bush team will wonder if the Kedwards weren’t used by some larger forces as part of the attack, since their strangely synchronized media and UN co-ordinated campaign just ‘happened’ to start talking about these explosives just ‘before’ an attack. (Scroll down to Synchronized Spinning).

In the end, of course, finger pointing will not serve the nation a bit. I’m a simple middle-class American woman with a family; my husband is flying across the country tomorrow on business, and I am not liking this whole idea of a threat one bit. If either side decides the correct response to an attack is finger-pointing or blaming anyone but the terrorists, it will tear the nation apart. I pray there is no attack. And if there is, and anyone tries to make political hay with it - damn them.

Being a bit edgy myself, I’ll go for another laugh. I like this video. After spending ten minutes watching Edwards comb his hair a few weeks ago, Bush’s short and sweet response to primping is refreshing.

Not much time for blogging today. On top of the norm, I have a teenager down with strep and a high fever, but I wanted to direct your attention to this remarkable column by James S. Robbins at NRO, wherein he recounts the numerous and remarkably downplayed instances of US or coalition troops finding WMD componants. Read it. Send it around. To everyone.

Likewise, the spirit also comes to the aid of our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. Romans 8:26

Inexpressible groanings seem to be the stuff of my life these days.
My groans mingle with tears at the bedside of my brother as he slowly, slowly retreats into himself in these last days.

I watch my brother, now in hospice as we have reached that point, and I realize how small our lives are, and how a prolonged death makes them ever smaller. A few months ago it became clear that S could no longer drive, and so the car became meaningless to him, and the world began to shrink. Then he couldn’t go out, and so his clothes were irrelevant, and the world became four rooms and a bath. Then he could no longer cook and his staggeringly well-equipped kitchen became so-much excess. (When one is only eating soup or soft-boiled eggs, a simple hotplate will do; when you’re mostly drinking Ensure, all you need is a cooler.)

And meds. Bottles and bottles of meds. You need them, and they begin to take over. The world is smaller, but the nightstands are not large enough. The object d’arts are put away and replaced with bottles of multi-colored pills, retractable needles with pre-measured doses, large bottles of pasty yellow stuff that is supposedly liquid…the world becomes your bedroom and your bathroom, your tv and your meds. You pop opium-based painkillers while watching Emeril cook with your Kitchen Aid mixer and wonder how he got into your stuff. Then, when your brother hurts his back lifting you because you are literally too weak to move, your world shrinks again, until it is only your bedroom, and then only your bed. Emeril is silent. The burners are turned low. The whole large world, which you had launched yourself into recklessly, with abandon, the world you had yourself enlarged with your art and your playfulness and your noise has become compressed and concentrated and hushed.

This is not merely a matter of space and proportion, of physical layout. When you are admitted to hospice, you land in an open, airy, colorful room with a lovely view of the autumn leaves, and the heartening, kind and cheerful chatter of nurses and nuns, but you are still inward and small. Your physical space has expanded but your body and mind have moved further away. My brother’s world now is reduced to an hourly hit of pain meds and an occasional lucid moment. I watch him move to a fetal position, and wonder if the process of dying is taking him not only inward but backward. He converses, but his conversations are interior. His lips move but he says nothing. His agitation is soothed by the merest touch. He opens his eyes and announces he is going. I ask him where he is going and he replies that he is going to Florida. I bid him a safe journey and Godspeed, and he closes his eyes and fades back out.

But he is still here, lingering. S has his things about him, his own quilts and pictures and tshochkes, and he is suspended between two worlds, half in and half out of heaven. I lean in and tell him he’s got his boarding pass and is cleared for take-off whenever he’s ready to leave…and he stays, and he groans and we groan and pray. Evening comes and morning follows. The next day.

The support is heartening. The family is rallying, even the cousins are coming to help, to take a shift, to give S a manicure or a back rub or a flower. But with all of that, I think to myself so often, where would we be without prayer? And I thank God for those inexpressible groans which have the effect of enlarging our view, and giving our spirits some room to breath, of giving our souls some respose. As the world becomes the road to and from hospice and the room and the bed, prayer expands our breath, keeps us from suffocating. It brings balance.

Hugh Hewitt’s latest blogger symposium asked the question: Why Vote for Bush and What’s Wrong with Kerry?

This photo essay from the American Digest is an effective and affecting answer.

Hat tip to Mrs. Falconer’s Cabana Boy at the Pajama Pack.

Sleepless and surfing, I stumbled upon these really exquisite seasonal landscapes (I’m especially taken with the autumnal shots) from The Dominican Monastery of the Mother of God in West Springfield, MA.

They look like a swell buncha gals, but what I really want to know is what sort of camera did they use for these eye-popping pictures! The pictures on the homepage are downright gorgeous, too!

Sometimes you just need to stare at beauty for a while. Enjoy!