I think it was Monday when I turned on the TV first thing, as I always do to get the weather, and the weather guy was warming up with his “what happened on this date in history” shtick. He mentioned famous dead people and wars and such, but then got to the high point: on this date in history, the Beatles got their first #1 hit on US radio, “I Wanna Hold Your Hand.” Oh yeah, I remembered that week and once wrote an essay about it, which can be read by those who go to Amazon and buy my book of essays, Beneath the Turning Stars. Besides this chance for a shameless plug, in recalling that time I also remembered the forever-used phrase, “Those were simpler times.” And yes, they sure seemed to be. We had teeny - bopper girls fainting in the audience as the Beatles sang about, good Lord, only wanting to hold someone’s hand; we had hula hoops and the British Invasion in general, bringing other songs like “I’m Henry the 8th” by Herman’s Hermits; we had silly James Bond movies where good always prevailed; we were sure that we would cure cancer “In our lifetime” and that we, the kids, would be zooming around in flying cars and living the good life until age 140 or more; and we in America knew that the Good Life was the American life, and that soon everyone in the world would join us, and we would evolve as a race of freedom-loving techno-angels, living exciting lives on other planets, made safe from ugly aliens through our ray-guns and true grit. Ah yes, simpler times, sweet even, our dreams child-like in their pure optimism.
Of course, I was a child, kept apart from the real world of the grown-ups, where nuclear war was ever imminent and financial disasters were always possibilities just around the corner. More to the point, in the grown-up world, people had not really evolved that much since the days of the ‘wrath of Genghis Khan,’ and had not lost their already-evolved Machiavellian genius for manipulating others, even whole societies, in their lust for sex, wealth, and power. Simpler times? Was the rape of Nanking simple? Was Jim Crow childlike? Did Jimmy Hoffa disappear forever due to a puckish joke by The Mob?
Simpler, no; different, yes. What is all too apparent in history is that old ways, from fashion to espionage, are figured out sooner or later, which then sparks the need for a new approach. Once old notions are more thoroughly examined, they seem childish: picture little Billy lying about eating the chocolate chip cookies while failing to wipe away the chocolate from his mouth. If we continue to observe the comings and goings of fashion and culture, then, we begin to realize that much of what we assumed to be true or chic was a lie, or at least a subterfuge. From that we can abstract that those things that we have not yet figured out are not more complex or evolved; rather, they simply have not been examined enough to expose the same old tired and simple motivations behind their making. Platform heel shoes? How stupid; why not be cool and cover yourself with tattoos! Political opponent got you down and the old methods of political assassination don’t seem to work? Well, why not call him and all his supporters racists! Yes, regardless: agendas are pushed forward for the same old reasons, only masked by different approaches.
So it is, then, that life is and must always be constantly refashioned and seemingly made more complex by those who desire some selfish or ignoble goal. It is only after time and with hindsight that such subterfuges come to light, at which point they seem simple. Would McCarthy’s Red Scare work today? Will the scream of “racism” work tomorrow? The shifting tactics of those in power cause much of the movement of history and culture. Such movement will be with us for as long as the seven deadly sins tantalize us. That is why we need, as Jesus said, “new wineskins for new wine.”
What the heck does that mean? I was bothered by that metaphor at first until I realized that the ancients actually used the wineskins as containers to ferment the juice. Wine skins were made of leather, and leather gets stiff and inflexible with age. When wine ferments, it produces carbon dioxide; this gas then expands anything that encloses it like a balloon. If whatever is holding it is old and stiff, it bursts, ruining both the wine and the skin.
And so it is with a truly new agenda. If it is packaged in the old container – let us say, the old cultural model – it will burst both the old cultural order as well as its message or desired effect. Jesus knew (knows) this, as do revolutionaries, especially Marxists. That is why the latter are actively attempting to thoroughly change Western culture by altering the familial base. Gender has now become negotiable and natural parents are told that they no longer need to stay together, or even know each other, for the good of the child; rather, the ‘village’ will take care of them. In his days on Earth, Jesus also tirelessly tried to change the world’s view of justice – to change it from an “eye for an eye” perspective to one of limitless forgiveness. To get close to God, Jesus knew, we the people had to become more like God, who, according to belief, is an infinitely loving and forgiving being. While we could never fully achieve this goal on our own, it was, and is, incumbent on us to try; that is, we have to willfully try to replace our old habits – our old wineskins – for this new one, or we will burst on the day that we stand before the Infinite.
So what of innocence? Yes, innocence in adults and in society at large truly is possible. Many of those who listened to the Beatles’ early love songs did not know that the lads were having their way with groupies from Liverpool to Berlin; rather, they thought only of innocent first love. They were new wineskins, even though the wine they were being given was in most ways as old as the hills. So it is that true innocence in the person and in the culture can exist, if one or many people in aggregate have open – soft - hearts. But innocence can only be maintained if the “new wine” that is given does not have a usurious agenda.
That is always the rub: the agenda. Marxist believe that they are making new wineskins for their new wine, but they are still using trickery to get their way. To make new wine skins, they believe they must throw out not only the corrupt in society, but also the good and the natural. In so doing, they antagonize the very people they wish to help – the more innocent and purer of heart. They then must resort to force, and then to outright violence to achieve their goals. This causes resentment and counter-violence, destroying the very innocence - hardening the wine skins – that they came to fill. The new wine then bursts the skin, destroying both the skin and the wine.
That is not The Way. Rather, the heart must be made supple to contain the new wine, and for that, people have to be put at ease. To that end, both we and our enemies must lay down our arms, and the only way that this will happen is if we forgive each other our transgressions. The need for retaliation and for suspicion are then ended, and we are enabled to become innocents again, no longer fearful that we will be taken advantage of. The need for complexity will end, and we will be able to see the world more clearly, our vision free from the layers of lies that history has given us. We will still sin, but we will be sorry for it, we will try not to do it again, and we will no longer need to hide our transgressions from our forgiving neighbors behind more lies.
Layers upon layers. We must learn to forgive. That is what I wish that I had heard in the latest inauguration of our president, so that the wineskins might be made new and supple again, ready for a new and better vintage. Instead, I believe I heard more complexities and power plays. Instead, I believe I saw an old, hardened wineskin being filled with old, bitter wine.
May it be that we quickly turn from the book of Machiavelli to another book whose words restore our innocence and return us to a simpler time.
I think it was Monday when I turned on the TV first thing, as I always do to get the weather, and the weather guy was warming up with his “what happened on this date in history” shtick. He mentioned famous dead people and wars and such, but then got to the high point: on this date in history, the Beatles got their first #1 hit on US radio, “I Wanna Hold Your Hand.” Oh yeah, I remembered that week and once wrote an essay about it, which can be read by those who go to Amazon and buy my book of essays, Beneath the Turning Stars. Besides this chance for a shameless plug, in recalling that time I also remembered the forever-used phrase, “Those were simpler times.” And yes, they sure seemed to be. We had teeny - bopper girls fainting in the audience as the Beatles sang about, good Lord, only wanting to hold someone’s hand; we had hula hoops and the British Invasion in general, bringing other songs like “I’m Henry the 8th” by Herman’s Hermits; we had silly James Bond movies where good always prevailed; we were sure that we would cure cancer “In our lifetime” and that we, the kids, would be zooming around in flying cars and living the good life until age 140 or more; and we in America knew that the Good Life was the American life, and that soon everyone in the world would join us, and we would evolve as a race of freedom-loving techno-angels, living exciting lives on other planets, made safe from ugly aliens through our ray-guns and true grit. Ah yes, simpler times, sweet even, our dreams child-like in their pure optimism.
Of course, I was a child, kept apart from the real world of the grown-ups, where nuclear war was ever imminent and financial disasters were always possibilities just around the corner. More to the point, in the grown-up world, people had not really evolved that much since the days of the ‘wrath of Genghis Khan,’ and had not lost their already-evolved Machiavellian genius for manipulating others, even whole societies, in their lust for sex, wealth, and power. Simpler times? Was the rape of Nanking simple? Was Jim Crow childlike? Did Jimmy Hoffa disappear forever due to a puckish joke by The Mob?
Simpler, no; different, yes. What is all too apparent in history is that old ways, from fashion to espionage, are figured out sooner or later, which then sparks the need for a new approach. Once old notions are more thoroughly examined, they seem childish: picture little Billy lying about eating the chocolate chip cookies while failing to wipe away the chocolate from his mouth. If we continue to observe the comings and goings of fashion and culture, then, we begin to realize that much of what we assumed to be true or chic was a lie, or at least a subterfuge. From that we can abstract that those things that we have not yet figured out are not more complex or evolved; rather, they simply have not been examined enough to expose the same old tired and simple motivations behind their making. Platform heel shoes? How stupid; why not be cool and cover yourself with tattoos! Political opponent got you down and the old methods of political assassination don’t seem to work? Well, why not call him and all his supporters racists! Yes, regardless: agendas are pushed forward for the same old reasons, only masked by different approaches.
So it is, then, that life is and must always be constantly refashioned and seemingly made more complex by those who desire some selfish or ignoble goal. It is only after time and with hindsight that such subterfuges come to light, at which point they seem simple. Would McCarthy’s Red Scare work today? Will the scream of “racism” work tomorrow? The shifting tactics of those in power cause much of the movement of history and culture. Such movement will be with us for as long as the seven deadly sins tantalize us. That is why we need, as Jesus said, “new wineskins for new wine.”
What the heck does that mean? I was bothered by that metaphor at first until I realized that the ancients actually used the wineskins as containers to ferment the juice. Wine skins were made of leather, and leather gets stiff and inflexible with age. When wine ferments, it produces carbon dioxide; this gas then expands anything that encloses it like a balloon. If whatever is holding it is old and stiff, it bursts, ruining both the wine and the skin.
And so it is with a truly new agenda. If it is packaged in the old container – let us say, the old cultural model – it will burst both the old cultural order as well as its message or desired effect. Jesus knew (knows) this, as do revolutionaries, especially Marxists. That is why the latter are actively attempting to thoroughly change Western culture by altering the familial base. Gender has now become negotiable and natural parents are told that they no longer need to stay together, or even know each other, for the good of the child; rather, the ‘village’ will take care of them. In his days on Earth, Jesus also tirelessly tried to change the world’s view of justice – to change it from an “eye for an eye” perspective to one of limitless forgiveness. To get close to God, Jesus knew, we the people had to become more like God, who, according to belief, is an infinitely loving and forgiving being. While we could never fully achieve this goal on our own, it was, and is, incumbent on us to try; that is, we have to willfully try to replace our old habits – our old wineskins – for this new one, or we will burst on the day that we stand before the Infinite.
So what of innocence? Yes, innocence in adults and in society at large truly is possible. Many of those who listened to the Beatles’ early love songs did not know that the lads were having their way with groupies from Liverpool to Berlin; rather, they thought only of innocent first love. They were new wineskins, even though the wine they were being given was in most ways as old as the hills. So it is that true innocence in the person and in the culture can exist, if one or many people in aggregate have open – soft - hearts. But innocence can only be maintained if the “new wine” that is given does not have a usurious agenda.
That is always the rub: the agenda. Marxist believe that they are making new wineskins for their new wine, but they are still using trickery to get their way. To make new wine skins, they believe they must throw out not only the corrupt in society, but also the good and the natural. In so doing, they antagonize the very people they wish to help – the more innocent and purer of heart. They then must resort to force, and then to outright violence to achieve their goals. This causes resentment and counter-violence, destroying the very innocence - hardening the wine skins – that they came to fill. The new wine then bursts the skin, destroying both the skin and the wine.
That is not The Way. Rather, the heart must be made supple to contain the new wine, and for that, people have to be put at ease. To that end, both we and our enemies must lay down our arms, and the only way that this will happen is if we forgive each other our transgressions. The need for retaliation and for suspicion are then ended, and we are enabled to become innocents again, no longer fearful that we will be taken advantage of. The need for complexity will end, and we will be able to see the world more clearly, our vision free from the layers of lies that history has given us. We will still sin, but we will be sorry for it, we will try not to do it again, and we will no longer need to hide our transgressions from our forgiving neighbors behind more lies.
Layers upon layers. We must learn to forgive. That is what I wish that I had heard in the latest inauguration of our president, so that the wineskins might be made new and supple again, ready for a new and better vintage. Instead, I believe I heard more complexities and power plays. Instead, I believe I saw an old, hardened wineskin being filled with old, bitter wine.
May it be that we quickly turn from the book of Machiavelli to another book whose words restore our innocence and return us to a simpler time.
RSS Feed