Is that a wrap?

Can we now bring down the curtain on the current year? I think so. If you've been following, I think you'll agree, that we've managed - perhaps in spite of ourselves - to reconcile the spirit of the season with the reason for the spirit.

The individual whom we know as Jesus of Nazareth - for some, Jesus Christ - whose birthday celebration is the occasion for this holiday, really didn't bring us anything new. (Let's leave all the theology and all the Christology out of this for the moment.) His "message", expressed in his own words are a rephrasing, a re-living, a re-emphasis of something that humankind has known all along: Love the ones your with, the ones you encounter, even the ones that drive you to distraction. If you do, it is a whole lot easier to not do to others what you wouldn't want them doing to you. It's really not all that complicated. Jesus gets a whole lot of points in my book, of course, because, if you read the stories of his life, what strikes one - regardless of what or who you think he might be - is the fact that he practiced what he preached. He took a lot of heat for it, to be sure ... more heat than any of us would be willing to risk, but he did what he said, and that's why he's at least a role model for me.

I don't mind ... in fact, I enjoy ... partaking in his birthday celebration. It's an opportunity to remind myself of what I should be doing, even if I must admit that I don't do it often enough. It's a time to reflect on how I might "improve my game" (it's sort of like golf: the only one you really have to beat is yourself). It's a time to think about opportunities passed and what might be possible if I could really put my mind to it. In the end, at least for me, that makes for an uplifting, rewarding, and encouraging time. To me, that's what Christmas is all about.

A new year, by our reckoning, is upon us. It will be a lot like the old one in many, many ways, and that's reason enough to be sad. We all know that we're not living up to our own potential. We know that there is more than each and every one of us could do to make this world a better place. We also know - at least if you've been following the last few posts, you should know - that we can do better, as individuals and as a species.

It's not complicated; it's rather simple. It's easily said, even if it's not easily done. But, we have to start somewhere sometime, so why not here and now? Love your neighbor (or whoever you're dealing with at any given moment) as yourself and don't do to anyone (neighbor or stranger) anything you wouldn't want them to do to you. I can assure you, if you persevere, the rewards are great, and to top it all off, life for all of us will be brighter, warmer and more fulfilling.

Now you know. Just do it. Just go for it.

Where did that get us?

So, what did you come up with? Did the world go down in flames or become reborn in a new tomorrow? Probably neither; most likely, somewhere in between.

Regardless of what you might have come up with in detail, I'm pretty sure that we can agree that the only instance to whom we may appeal for order and justice is ourselves ... we humans. Of course, depending on how you see this, you've got a vision of hope or despair. Without Gd, as most non-believers feel right now, there is just us. We have to figure it out.

I realize that believers don't like to think these thoughts, but if we're honest with each other, we all know, as Hans Küng so cogently argued, we can't prove that Gd exists, any more than we can prove that He doesn't. In the end, it is a matter of belief, or perhaps better, a matter of faith. Since we can't know for sure one way or the other, it is perhaps worthwhile to think about how we could/should act if He weren't there. Is it even possible to organize our societies such that things might even "work"?

Oddly enough, there is one principle that has been found in every religious belief system and in every society. A principle that has been derived even in the absence of Gd (for it will be remembered that this notion is alien to Buddhism), namely what we most generally recognize as the "Golden Rule". This most basic principle, don't do to others what you wouldn't want them to do to you transcends time, place, culture and any other separatist classification we've come up with so far. It would seem, then, that there just might be a part of human nature itself that desires what everyone else desires, but rejects what anyone else would reject as well. A principle of balance. A principle of fairness. A principle that works, provided we allow each and every person to be what s/he is: a person. Race doesn't matter, we've eliminated creeds in our experiment, social status doesn't matter, nor does class or place in some hierarchy, for without Gd, let's face it: there's just us. There is no "natural order", no "natural hierarchy", only that which some might like to impose, but always at the expense of others.

My point is very simple: while things (at least for some) might be easier with Gd in the scenario, it is nevertheless possible, even if all there is is us, to find a way toward a reasonable and just world. A world in which fairness is important because it simply reflects how we are. This one principle, this rule ... the Golden Rule ... if applied, is really all we need. And, we are capable of grasping it, all on our own. Each and every one of us.

Time for a thought experiment?

Maybe it's time for a thought experiment again. There are only a couple of days left in the year, and I'd like to make a point before I start of on the other side of this coin. This particular experiment may strike some as odd at this particular time of year, but in reality there is no better time to try it.

Let's assume - just for the sake of argument and the experiment - this troublemaker Jesus was never born. Try to imagine (for the non-believers among you, it may be easier, but you're carrying more cultural baggage that you might like to admit) it is all "just a story" (whatever that means). Put slightly differently, and in order to get everyone on the same sheet of music, all those who believe in Gd should simply imagine that Nietzsche was right and He's dead. No Gd, no Jesus (and of course, no holiday, no time off, no holiday meal ... oh, right, just like most of the poor people in the world) ... what happens? What's next?

Part of what you need to imagine is that you have no Bible, no Koran, no real scriptures anymore (for they were never written). OK, one possible scenario could be that Gd died after He "published" His Book ... but that makes things too easy. What have we got to build upon? How do we organize ourselves and our society? How do we figure out what's right and wrong? How do we decide who's in charge? Is anyone in charge, or are we back to our survival-of-the-fittest routine? This isn't easy, I know, but it is necessary. If we no longer have the "Gd excuse" or the "Jesus excuse", just what do we have? Who's responsible? To whom do we appeal? How do we determine who has authority?

Do we simply descend into chaos? Are we simply left with a dog-eat-dog world? Does some misunderstood Darwinian fittest-survival mechanism kick in? I don't know, but I do know that it is worth the effort to think long and hard about it.

So, give it some thought.

December 25

Today's the day we've all been waiting for ... or at least that a lot of us have been waiting for, so in honor of the occasion and in light of the fact that I have had my own personal relationship to this holiday for quite some time, I'd like to share with you a moment of my youth. This is the first poem of which I have a record (that is, from 1968), and I would like to share it with all of you. The title is the same as today's entry:

"Good will to men!"
Choirs of angels sing,
Lifting their voices high.
Stories of gifts
The Wise Men did bring,
But I ask myself why?
Where has the love for other men
Gone in these passing days?
Why has the Christ one
Clear in Christmas
Faded to a haze?
Kettles clink with too few coins
Too many eat too well,
While all the while in some dark corner
Hungry faces tell
Of sadness, hunger, loss of hope –
Why should they rejoice?
'Cause no matter how loud they cry
No one hears their voice.
But, as all good Christians usually do
On this happy day
They turn their backs,
Sit down to eat and
Go on their merry way.

A dilemma, really?

Yes, I'm afraid we've got a full-fledged dilemma on our hands. We've got the "founder" of a religion saying one thing, and we've got all these followers saying something else. That doesn't bode well, now, does it?

What his followers are asserting is at odds with what he was saying himself. What is even more interesting is the fact that a couple of thousand of years later, his alleged followers are asserting exactly the opposite of what the founder was saying himself. Exaggerated? I don't think so.

We've got the texts that tell us what he said. We have also seen that the other folks, especially those who are what we would call "down-and-out" today - widows, orphans, the sick, the infirm, the beggars, the unemployed, those without any resources at all - are more important than oneself. Nevertheless, by some twist of thought, today's followers can assert, in tune with the mantra of modern economics, that it is "enlightened" self-interest that rules the world. If I'm doing well, maybe my "neighbor" is doing well. The man himself said, however, that if your neighbor is doing well, you are probably doing well yourself. We've turned it around. Hey, you don't have to believe me. You can read it for yourselves, if you're willing.

Once again, we've got it backwards. Modern economic theory is based on the assumption that we all act as individuals who have our own best interest at heart, that our self-interest - what's in it for ourselves - is our primary motivator. On the other hand, we have this poor hippy from 2,000 years ago telling us that whoever is in need is more important than yourself. If two positions aren't more at odds with themselves, I don't know which ones they are.

When seen in this light, though, our dilemma is easy to identify: Christ (if you will) said others first; modern economics says put yourself first. The dilemma is: how do those who call themselves Christians bring these two antithetical positions into harmony. I maintain that they can't. You've got a choice: you can actually be a follower of the one whom you claim is the son of Gd and your savior, or you can believe that modern economists have figured it out. You can't have it both ways.

As I see it, the choice is simple: you can call yourself Christian and be all about yourself, or you can actually be a Christian (in the sense of practicing what the Good Jesus actually preached). You can't be both.

It's time to decide.

You think so?

I'm sorry - I have to apologize in advance - but I can't let this opportunity slip by. We've got the story, the narrative, the evidence, if you will, and then we have the reality. How different they are!

We've got all these people running around ... and I can't help but keep repeating: about half the population of the world, about 3,000,000,000 people who claim to be followers of this Jew born in a non-descript part of the world 2,000 years ago, and yet, there are probably not more than a handful of these folks who actually take him, or what he had to say seriously.

I'm not picking on them, really, after all they're only human. But, I can't help but find a certain fascination in the thought that although they call themselves followers of this particular individual, when it comes right down to it, they want as little to do with him as possible.

Let's be real: who wants to put others first? How realistic is it to turn the other cheek, or love our enemies, or help those who just happen to be around? I mean, what would become of the world anyway? That's a good question. A very good question.

Let's face it: we exchanged our society - our lives, actually - for an economy, and we all know what that means: everybody acts in their own self-interest. Economists have even tried to ease the blow and call it "enlightened" self-interest, but in the end, our world, as we experience it today, is all about, it is only about us. Others have to fend for themselves. We live and move and have our being in the fact that we act in our own self-interest.

I hate to be the one to break it to you all, but it just doesn't work that way. The guy who is the alleged founder of the world's largest, most widespread religion said himself that others are more important than you. If you subscribe to the assertion that we act in our own self-interest - enlightened or not - than you are simply at odds with the boss' own idea of how things ought to be working. This isn't a simple misunderstanding, it's a full-fledged dilemma.

We'll need to take a closer look at this the next time, though. It's too big an issue to take care of here.

What's the issue ... really?

Some of you are asking yourself, I'm sure: "What's the big deal?" or "Just what is he going on about?" Those are good questions, really. And I have to tell you, it's a cultural thing.

I hail, originally, from a country in which they think there's a War on Christmas. This isn't really all that surprising when you consider just how warlike this country is. They can't really do anything very well anymore, but they still wage war. That Christmas would eventually become a target of this aggression should be no surprise to anyone.

Once we all get off our high horses and realize that historically this has been a time of year for celebration, and for whatever reason another religion has a big holiday around the same time, then there really shouldn't be such a fuss when one uses the more inclusive "Happy Holidays" as a greeting, instead of "Merry Christmas". There are, however, more than a few people in my home country who find this offensive. It's important for them that they be Number 1 (whether they mean themselves, their own groups, their country or their religion ... being Number 1 is very, very important to them). They believe that they have every reason to be first, and everyone else should come after. I can understand that ... to a point.

It turns out that the individual whom they hold in such esteem - allegedly - that they can't bear being number-anything-but-1 turns out to be an individual who proclaimed that at best, you're Number 2, if you buy into the system he's propagating, you're Number 3. Bummer, isn't it? Yes, a real downer. How do you deal with that?

For those of you who have been following, I decided to take him at his word: the individual about whom we're all excited at this time of year laid out very clearly the order of things: Gd-Others-Self. Believe me, I'm anything but a fan of hierarchy, and that's what the "list" sounds like, but when considered a bit of closer, it's simply a matter of priorities, that's all. I even went to some effort to point out that you don't have to take him to be what others claim he is to see there's a lot to be said for putting others (regardless of whether you include Gd or not) first. And it's this simple fact that is the source of a whole pile of problems.

It's no wonder - at least not to me - that there is all kinds of distractions at this time of year: gifts, shopping, circuses, events, singing, spending money, outdoing the neighbors with decorations, you name it. It is absolutely essential that we divert our attention from what this whole thing is supposed to be about, namely rethinking how it is that we approach life.

Yes, that's what it boils down to: asking ourselves if we're really acting the way we should. The simple truth is "no".

That's what it's all about?

Alright, even those of you who are so aware of what is going down at this time of year, let me see if I can't condense it all in a nutshell:

Christmas is the holiday we celebrate to honor the birth of a person we call Jesus. For many people, he is the founder of the Christian religion, at least insofar as his "followers" tend to claim that they revere him as the son of Gd and the savior of everyone. That's a big deal to a lot of people. About half of all the people on the planet at the moment claim, in one way or another, to be an adherent to this religion, which is called Christianity.

The word "Christmas" is a term that derives from "Christ" (a borrowed translation from the Hebrew, Meshiach, meaning "the anointed one") and "mass", what the Catholics call their worship service. Christmas is the day on which a particular mass was celebrated to honor the birth of the one they consider to be the Messiah, the Redeemer of the World, or thereabouts. This birth took place, according to our time reckoning, about 2012 years ago. Yes, we've been at this for a very long time.

Over the past few posts - especially for those of you who may just be joining us - I've been taking a closer look at this individual. This part of the Christmas season is called "Advent" (the coming) and we have been considering just who or what is on the way. That's what all of the current hub-bub is about ... everything else, including Santa Claus, St. Nick, St. Nicklaus, or whomever else we've happened to associate with this event, is beside the point. We're left with the fact that this Jesus guy had such an impact on so many people, that he got his own holiday (actually, here in the West, he got two, but we'll get to the other one - Easter - in the spring. Until then, you'll just have to be patient).

Even though a lot of folks don't believe Jesus is who those other folks claim he is, we still have the celebration, and I believe it's worth the effort to at least take a look at the guy and see what he's got going for himself. It turns out, he was a somewhat radical troublemaker who thought we should be looking out for other people instead of just looking out for ourselves. Yes, yes, yes ... he said and did a lot of other things, but when you take a closer look at it all, it's the taking-care-of-others thing that causes us the most problems.

As a result, there are a lot of people (as I said, about half the world's population) who claim to be followers of this guy, but the fewest of them actually use him as an example of anything ... so I've been wondering why ... out loud.

Tragedy should give us pause to think

My personal condolences to all of the families of all of the victims of the latest tragedy in Connecticut. I am truly saddened by your loss.

This shouldn't have happened, and I shouldn't feel like I have to say something about it. But, I must for this is not a singular incident, nor is it a one-issue event. It is a systemic, cultural tragedy, one that runs deeper than most Americans are willing to think or feel. Yet, what is most tragic about this event, what saddens me the most, is that it is not, by a long shot, the last one, nor will it remain the worst one. None of this is going to go away soon.

The American journalist and writer H.L. Mencken once wrote "There is always an easy solution to every problem – neat, plausible, and wrong." That was over a hundred years ago, and a quick look at Facebook and a quick zap through the news channels will assure you, it's every bit as true today.

My fellow Americans, you are a superficial, quick-fix society. You don't want to be bothered, you don't want to have to actually do anything other than pursue your own self-interest, make as much money as possible and just do your own thing. And what won't be said by any public figure in any public venue is that you all share the guilt of the shooter whether you realize it or not, whether you like it or not. The howling and finger-pointing have already started, the tragedy is already being used for political gain, the victims and their families instrumentalized for more reasons than I care to think about.

You can't find single solutions on the surface. You have to follow multiple issues deeper and deeper; you must recognize connections and relationships between attitudes and values and laws and beliefs; you must follow the branches down to the trunk in order to get to the root of what makes events like Connecticut even possible. When I look at what happened, I can tell you what I see. I see America.

This isn't about gun control, security, healthcare, police oversight and screenings, domestic terrorism, video games or any other red herring that every so-called journalist and expert is going to trot out for review. No, all of this is just distraction. It's part of the illusion that Americans love so dearly: the illusion that it was someone else, from somewhere else who is responsible, who is to blame. It's not. It's about you, too.

The United States of America is not just the allegedly richest country in the world (and I say alleged, because it may have the most monetary wealth, but one can easily get the impression it is morally bankrupt; in other words, what "rich" means is up for discussion). More importantly, it is the most violent country in the world. And I would maintain that Americans love their violence more than anything else. It is the only solution to problems that Americans know. Violence defines American culture. It is the only answer that Americans have for any pressing question: violence. I'm exaggerating? Hardly.

Military violence.
A defense budget that is breaking your fiscal back. Two full-fledged wars that have brought only death, pain and destruction to everyone involved, and for what? Don't do what we say and we'll bomb you back to the stone age. Violence.

Psychological violence.
Spreading fear and suspicion, allowing your rights to be taken away so you can be sent to Guantanamo on suspicion, where you can be tortured for the blandest of reasons, like we do to other detainees, like we do in secret interrogation (read: torture) centers the world around. Violence.

Political violence.
Did none of you see the last presidential campaign? Hate, bile, vitriolic aggression, an obscene amount of money spent in hate and anger, while real people still suffer in real places everywhere. A winner-take-all mentality because you shouldn't just beat your opponent, you should destroy him.

Social violence.
Poor people should simply be eliminated. Lazy welfare folks should be forced to work, for nothing if necessary. After all, it's their own damn fault that they're takers. Ever more draconian measures with ever fewer results. The highest murder rate in the world. The highest rate of violent crime in the world. Denying healthcare to those who need it because they can't pay. Opposing universal healthcare because it would impinge on others' right to exploit and extort.

Legal violence.
The (non-deterring) death penalty. Money talks, everybody else walks, and this is directly related to the increasing environmental destruction that follows in its wake; the use of force, violent force, to remove protesters, to prosecute opponents, the sheer brutality of the police in so many Occupy situations: pepper-spraying women and children with impunity, the suppression of due process; stop-and-frisk laws. The passing of special-interest laws that simply take from others at the expense of the public good.

Environmental violence.
Disproportionate over-consumption of natural resources. Pollution that need not be cleaned up (see legal violence above). The forceful takeover of water and air supplies in the name of financial gain. Factual manipulation, lying, suppressing, and threatening opponents to escape having to take responsibility for the pain and suffering (e.g. BP in the Gulf of Mexico, fracking, the Keystone pipeline, just to name the most visible).

Financial violence.
Predatory lending practices, forced evictions, unregulated speculation that cost millions of people worldwide their homes, their businesses, their retirements, and more. Banking activities that put the entire world at risk and we know there were untold numbers of people who were killed as a result, who were wiped out and saw no other way out than a heart-attack or suicide. The widespread feeling of desperation, and of course, none of the guilty were ever called to task (see legal violence, above).

Workplace violence.
From below through mobbing, and bullying. The successful professional is the one who can elbow his or her way up the corporate ladder, any method is accepted as long as it works. Employer violence toward employees: paying non-livable wages, even if the company is making record profits, short-timing employees so that benefits need not be paid. Suppression of wages in the name of competitiveness (instead of producing something better than everyone would want). Inhuman working conditions (often outsourced work), substandard facilities and ignoring of OSHA regulations in search of profit.

Entertainment violence.
(My personal favorite.) Where did violent video games originate? Who produces and sells them to this day? What about the movie industry: so many people haven't seen enough people hacked, chopped, tortured, blown apart, dismembered and there just hasn't been enough blood flowing to satisfy our insatiable thirst. (How many voyeur-vampires do you know?) Not to mention America's favorite sports pastime: football -- it can't be brutal enough, violent enough, you can't stomp your opponent enough, and we celebrate the most brutal of the players as our heroes. Idols for our children.

Ever more force, ever bigger weapons, ever stronger tactics, ever more brutality, thuggery, arbitrary suppression ... had enough? I'm sure I could find some more if I took some time to think about it. This is simply what immediately came to mind.

I'm sorry, my fellow Americans, but you live in a society that allows, accepts, encourages, promotes, at times demands, idolizes, welcomes, perhaps worships, and exports violence. It may not be the American Dream, but it is the American Way of Life. It is such a part of the culture that it is most likely simply taken for granted, but as long everything is about "me", and as long as it is about what I can get because I believe that everybody else is trying to get more than their share; along as it is about believing that ends justify means, as long as you tolerate and accept all of this as just the way it is, well, you are just going to have to live with these tragedies again and again.

You can't stop them. You have only fertile ground for growing more. You have built your society on violence and it is time to simply own up to the fact that this is how your world works. You support it. You feed it. You nurture it. You justify it. You defend it. You even argue for it. And you do nothing to stop it. Yes, my fellow Americans, it is a deep-seated, cultural problem that you (and unfortunately the rest of the world) have to deal with. And until you do, you're just going to get a lot more of the same. You are going to be part of who's to blame.

Really? It's that bad, eh?

While surfing through the hundreds of channels available to me in languages I both do and don't understand, I stumbled across one of those let's-see-how-dumb-most-people-are segments about Christmas. I know, I know, we only talk about "holidays" anymore, but for all you politically-correct folks: pound sand.

C'mon. I know that Hanukkah is always celebrated around this time, and I'm a big fan (they do daily presents and have special things to eat everyday ... now, who's against that?). Unfortunately, our Moslem brethren don't have anything to celebrate themselves, and our Buddhist and Shinto friends have to wait till February to get their New Year going. Christmas is, I'm afraid, the biggest game in town, and I'm all for everyone joining in and celebrating for whatever reason they can find, but I also believe that it's not a bad idea to know why there was a reason for all this chaos in the first place.

I am fully aware of the fact that historically, the reason for celebrating may be a bit divorced from what we've got today, but if it comes down to partying and having a good time and adhering to history, well, the party wins out every time. We don't get bothered by movies that are loose adaptations of actual events, so let's not get all bent out of shape because of a few historical details. If I didn't know when I was born and decided 1 April seems like a good day, and then I invite you all to a party ... what? you're not going to come because it's probably not really my birthday. Get real. There's free food and drink and you're going to stay home on principle ... right.

So, once more, for those of you for whom all of this has been moving along too fast: Christmas ... which is the holiday that's coming up ... the reason that civilized people in the West are going to get two days off ... is because at some point in time somebody decided that this is the day we would set aside to celebrate the birth of the Baby Jesus (whereby, had he been born an adult, we would have just had another myth to deal with that we didn't understand).

Over the last few posts, I've been trying to get behind who this character is. Obviously, he's had a tremendous impact on our culture, how we think and what we believe. There are various theories and there are a whole lot of people who claim to know exactly what he was thinking, what his Father was thinking and how this all fits together, but that's another issue we need to address at another time. (I personally think most of these know-it-alls have it all wrong, which is another reason why we'll deal with it later, OK?)

Look, I'm as amazed as many of you that it is not clear why there's even a holiday season, but the fact remains, as I learned from TV: not everybody knows. So, the next time, let me see if I can put it all as simply as possible ... just so we're on the same sheet of music.

Who would have thought? Till I saw the show, I didn't even know we were singing.

Is there another way to get there?

All roads lead to Rome, they say, but that's only if you're actually heading to Rome. What if you want to go somewhere else? I know there's a lot of you now thinking this not-me thing isn't really my cup of tea. I mean, where would we be if I didn't look out for good ol' Number 1? Yeah, who knows where we might end up.

You have to give this Jesus fella credit though: he knew how to keep it simple. I mean how hard did he really make it: Love Gd, love your "neighbor", and don't do anything to anyone else that you wouldn't want them to do to you. That's it. As I like to see it, just three simple rules, or principles, whichever you feel more comfortable with. It is the case, however, that there are some of you out there who don't believe in Gd. Your choice, I say. So, I think you've got it even easier, really, because then the system, the whole to-do, consists really of only two principles: love your "neighbor" and behave accordingly. How tough can that be? Two rules. C'mon, any of us can get it together with two rules, can't we? OK, apparently not.

As I read the story, this is what got him into trouble. The powers-that-were (which weren't a whole lot different than the powers-that-be today) knew that it was precisely these couple of rules which were going to ruin things for them. I mean, who's going to bow and scrape if everyone is looking out of other people, ordinary people, people who might for whatever reason need a hand. If we're all running around being Good Samaritans, if you like, who is going to pay them the respect and defer to them as they think is fit? Well, actually, nobody. My feeling has always been: if you want my respect, earn it. end of story. You don't get it just because you happen to think you deserve it. If you're playing by the rules, you get it because you're better and helping others and not doing stuff that you wouldn't want done to yourself. Anything else is, well, simply off program.

I know, I know ... not how things are, I hear you saying. All I can respond with is a question: why? Three billion people out there claim to be following this Jesus fellow and we're all gearing up for his birthday bash, and when I look around, all I see are folks who are looking for excuses not to follow him at all. Not even in a position to adhere to a couple of simple rules, rules that children, oddly enough, follow quite naturally, until we raise them to stop helping others and start looking out for themselves.

No, we're not putting our best foot forward, by any means.

Escape from Translations Woods?

Yeah, that Jesus guy was a troublemaker, there's no doubt about it. What's even worse, he's still making trouble for us today. Why is it that he gets so much lip-service but so little attention? That's always struck me as strange. Truth be told, those who are quickest to sing his praises and cry halleluja - at least in my experience - are those who by and large think they might owe him something (they claim because he was crucified on their behalf) but other than that don't really pay all that much attention to the details of the contract.

Like any other narrative, we need to sort the truth out from the red herrings and what's false; we have to find the substance and throw away the fluff; we have to sift the wheat from the chaff. For all of you who are not familiar with the source document (and especially for those of you who think you are), let me point something out to you: what we call the New Testament is actually three different parts that have been glommed together. The first four books, the Gospels plus the fifth book, called Acts (which was written by the same guy who wrote the third gospel, which is why we can include it here) constitute the first part. It is all about what Jesus said and did. The last part is the last book alone, Revelation, or as some like to call it, the Apocalypse which is a pretty heady vision of the end of the world, so it, too stands out on its own. The 21 "books" in between, which are actually letters, mostly by Paul, make up the other part, and these tell us what Paul and his friends think that first part means. And, as they say, therein lies the rub.

Some people think it's just a bunch of gibberish because it says too many different things. Some people think it's Holy Scripture and stands above reproach. Some people simply find deep inspiration in the first part (which is what Gandhi, for example, was most concerned with). And some people don't care at all. The point is that regardless of how we personally see it, something in there is strong enough that it has persisted till today. My question is what?

It would seem to me that if in fact we have this big celebration every year honoring Jesus' (alleged) birthday, then it strikes me as most reasonable to take our cue from the man himself, not someone else's ideas about what he meant. I mean, after all, should his own words and deeds count for more than someone else's thoughts about them? I'm a big fan of originals, so that's where I go first, and that was the reason for the little excursion through what gets lost in translation. It seems to me that it's all pretty clear: "the one next to me", the "one nearest to me", my "neighbor" (if you will) is first and foremost not me. The Other is every bit as important as, if not more important than, oneself. In fact, life in general isn't about you, it's about others. That's what he said, and that's what ticks us off the most.

If you ask me, that's why Jesus was such a troublemaker: he called us out on our own hypocrisy. So the next time, should you be so inclined, praising Jesus - and passing the ammunition or whatever else you do at the time - remember it was that guy who said it wasn't about you at all, it is about who you're shooting at. The rest of us can just stop putting ourselves first. That's what I think the Birthday Boy was trying to tell us.

More lost in translation?

Did you try it? Did you just randomly pick a moment, look at who was next to you and asked yourself if you can love that person as much as you love yourself (and we all know how much you love yourself)? It's not easy is it. Nah, it's not easy at all. So, obviously, he must have meant something else ... which brings me back to the story:

Well, in all fairness, the guy who asked Jesus the question in the first place wasn't all excited about the answer either, for his immediate response was "Well, just who is this person whoever is the closest to me at the time?" (See how clunky that sounds in English!) In other words: "Could you be just a bit more specific about whom you actually mean by that?"

And now comes my favorite part of the story. It is my favorite because we see right here why he was considered such a troublemaker. Instead of just running of the list (if there even is one), he decided to tell a little story. Most of us know this story under the title of the "Good Samaritan".

On the surface, it's harmless: one guy gets beat up by robbers, another guy happens along, helps the beat-up guy, gets him shelter and medical care and pays for it all out of his own pocket and then, like the Lone Ranger, goes on his way without waiting for a thank-you. Yes, yes, yes, we've heard it a thousand times. Except, most of us have never really heard it at all. To hear what he was saying, we need to know just a little history:

The guy who was beat up and robbed was a Jew; the guy who took care of him was a Samaritan. The Samaritans were to the Jews of the day much like the Soviets were to the West during the Cold War, or the way too many of us think of the Muslims today; and of course the feelings were mutual. Take your pick: choose the nationality, race, creed, religion ... whatever ... that you despise the most and imagine that's who was robbed and you are the one to help. What do you think about the story now?

The robbed guy just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. He might have even been warned not to be there, but went anyway (in other words, it was his own fault that he got beat up and robbed). It doesn't matter. The guy who helped him just happened to be passing by and found him. He wasn't looking for him; he had absolutely nothing to do with him, except he was the "one who was the closest to him at the time".

So, here's my point: the story is the mirror, and we all have to decide how well each of us is meeting these expectations. If you're feeling a little sheepish at the moment, well, then it's not really all that hard to understand why this troublemaker has got to go ... sooner than later.

Lost in translation?

Let me relate one of my favorite stories to illustrate what I'm talking about.

He was once asked what it is that we should do more than anything else; that is, what is the most important guiding principle for our lives. I think that's a pretty straight forward request. Being the good Jew that he was, he responded that really there are two of them: Love Gd, and love your neighbor as yourself. Well, anyone who doesn't believe in Gd really can't do much with the first one, but the second one seems applicable no matter who you are. And it's at times like these that he just bugs the bejeezuz (if you'll excuse the pun) out of us. But, it's at this point that things get interesting.

The response begs the question: who is my neighbor. It would appear that we have decided in the meantime that my "neighbor" is anyone I like or can stand, and everyone else isn't, so we can all pretty well pick and choose who that is. It might be the folks next door (unless their jerks) or it can be people who tell me what I want to hear, say on bowling night or at church on Sunday, or the like. One of the problems, though is that he never said "neighbor". That's just how it ended up being translated into English. What did he really say?

In actual fact, the word he used in that line (as it was recorded, in Greek, we must remember) was πλησιον (plesion). The word derives from the preposition for "near, next to, near by" and in a neuter noun; that is, it doesn't refer specifically either to males or females, rather it applies to everyone. In English we'd have to say, "whoever happens to be near you". Not very spiffy, so we end up with "neighbor" but it turns out that "neighbor" is simply too weak a word to do the statement justice.

There is a huge difference between whomever I happen to be with, as opposed, for example, to one's "neighbor". Do we have any choice about who's next to us, who's near us ... not just feeling-wise, not just spiritually, not just emotionally, but physically as well. All of a sudden, this sounds more like a challenge than simple advice. It's is, without a doubt, not the answer that we want to hear, not by a long shot.

Have you ever stopped at any random time during your day: at the mall, at the supermarket, at work, on the bus or train or subway, or just walking down the street? You should. You should just stop sometime and look at who's next to you, and then you should think real hard: "This is the person I should love as much as myself." What do you think?

Who are we dealing with?

Before you get the wrong idea that I'm going to get all sappy-sentimental on you, you can forget it. I'm not proselytizing either. I don't count myself a member of that particular club ... there are too many in it that I'd prefer not to have to associate with. It's nothing personal, don't get me wrong, but there are just too many who have such little idea of what any of it is about that I'd prefer to settle my accounts on my own terms, if you don't mind. Nevertheless, that doesn't mean there isn't something to be learned from what they at least purport to believe in, even if they don't practice it.

I actually think that Kris Kristofferson (who might have been - and I believe most likely was - inspired by John Prine) put it best:

Jesus was a Capricorn, he ate organic food.
He believed in love and peace and never wore no shoes.
Long hair, beard and sandals, and a funky bunch of friends,
Betcha they'd just nail him up, if he came down again.

OK, apart from the Capricorn thing, it's not a bad summary, and a little poetic license has to be tolerated to at least acknowledge that the choice of his birthday was something less than arbitrary. Nevertheless, we like to think that actions speak louder than words, and if we look at the actions of this particular individual, the "love and peace" idea isn't all that far-fetched at all. I mean, mass-feeding hungry people, healing the sick, forgiving your torturers. These, be they literally true or not, are big-ticket items. The intents that are being conveyed by the narrative are moving, inspiring, and, if you ask me, make for pretty big sandals to fill. Maybe that's why so many folks don't even try.

Yes, I know, he was also a troublemaker. Lord knows we shouldn't be hanging around with people like that, but just what kind of a troublemaker was he? Certainly not violent (if you forgive him the money-changer thing), certainly not subversive - he insisted one should pay one's taxes (Mat 22:21, Mk 12:17) - but he still managed to rub the establishment the wrong way. Have you ever really asked yourself why? I have.

My current theory is quite simple, actually: there is one thing about him we can agree on independent of any theological or religious sentiments we may harbor, namely, he was damn good at holding up a mirror and asking, what do you think of how that person you see is behaving? That'll get us every time.

Do we have any idea?

Right, wrong, or indifferent, this is a unique time of year, and it has been for longer than any of us can remember. That we moderns have perverted it into some hedonistic festival of waste and debauchery, of egotism run wild and false expectations, is, I suppose, in some ways just a natural progression of things. Things don't always change for the better when we humans are involved.

We've turned it all on its head: everyone who ever celebrated anything at this time of year - except for us, of course - did so with a certain reverence for things greater than themselves. Since we are defined by our man-made toys and gadgets, we have lost this sense of "something greater" and have degenerated into über-consumers who can't get enough fast enough, shiny enough, twinkly enough, expensive enough. And yet - and here I have divorce, mental-illness, and crime rates to back me up - we are some damn unhappy people. Like any other junkie, our consumer fix will fade fast and we'll be seeking another kick before all too long.

Now, before the more religiously inclined of you get up on your high horses and tell me you're the only ones who have figured it out and haven't succumbed to the holiday, consumer madness surrounding us, I just want you all to know that I don't believe a word of it. You may be bothered to no end that there are insensitive people who don't want to hear anyone say Merry Christmas any more, but you only need to look at the clips of Walmartians on Black Friday to know that whomever this holiday is supposed to be about or because of has absolutely nothing in common with what's going on there. How soon we forgot that he was the one who drove the money changers out of the temple, not the one who invited them in.

But that's just part of the story, of course, those ireful actions were the consequence of a long frustrating narrative, and one that still hasn't sunk in. I mean, you have to give the story credit: it's persistent. It's hung on in spite of centuries of efforts to suppress it. But, it is also clear to me that we have lost sight of that narrative in meaningful terms. OK, roughly a third of the world's population call themselves Christian (though Lord only knows how many actually act like one), and the figure of Jesus inspired even non-believers like Gandhi. It would seem that it should be a powerful narrative, but do we even know what it is anymore?

I would suggest we don't. More abuse, suffering and death have been caused in the name of that poor guy than even he would be able to stand, I think. Just what was he trying to tell us? What is the story really about? I'd like to know, so it seems the perfect time of year to submerge beneath the glare and glitter, the theological smoke and mirrors and just take a look at why this narrative is all but forgotten today.

What's on the way?

While I realize many of you have no antenna for religion, we shouldn't be so foolish as to think that it has no influence on our lives anyway. Christianity, generally speaking; that is, independent of the many flavors of it we encounter daily, is so deeply entwined in our Western culture that it is simply more often than not overlooked. Being aware of certain things within that culture doesn't put one at a disadvantage, and, believe it or not, there are some things in the culture that can be downright helpful. Yes, when it has to do with good things, picking and choosing is perfectly fine with me.

We, thankfully, have Black Friday behind us. Talk about perversions! The day after Thanksgiving in America has got to be the most insane "event" ever derived from twisted minds. The logic of allegedly being so thankful for everything one has that it one is compelled to rush out and get even more stuff simply escapes me. But, then again, I don't think a lot of stuff does much for us except collecting dust, and I hate to dust.

But, just for your information, tomorrow is "officially" the beginning of the "Christmas Season". Yes, in the Roman and most protestant churches, tomorrow marks the beginning of the Church Year. It is always the fourth Sunday prior to Christmas, and this period of a month leading up to Christmas is known as Advent, from the Latin adventus, meaning "arrival" or "coming". The original purpose of setting this time aside was to get ready for the big event of the year: the solstice, Christmas, the coming of the light ... any number of things, most of which I talked about last year.

Regardless of the religious or philosophical doctrine you subscribe to, it simply makes sense to periodically take a step back and think a bit about what you think and what you believe. In pure calendar terms, a new year will be starting soon and you may or may not want the next one to be like the last one. If that's the case, I suggest you take some time and think about what it is you really want. For those of us in the Northern Hemisphere, there couldn't be a better time: longer nights and colder days drive us inside, both literally and figuratively.

Do yourself the favor. Take some time. Give it all some thought. Get yourself sorted for what's on the way.