Month: November 2006

A reader writes:

Thanks so much for the slide show of Benedict on the runway. My favorite is the velvet toque trimmed in white fur. When I was a young gay boy in the 50’s I told myself I loved going to mass because I was good, but I was really just entranced by all the fabulous appurtenances: stained glass, a cornucopia of unheard-of saints, lace surplices, candles, incense, flower-banked altars, the gold ciborium, crosiers, colorful vestments. LOVED the little Infant of Prague doll which changed costume throughout the liturgical year. Great theater!!

Viva the Prada pope!

I’ve often wondered how many straight Catholics fully appreciate how gay their church has always been. Especially in the old days. High Mass was, in its heyday, more elaborate and choreographed than a very melodramatic Broadway musical. Do people really believe that gay priests and religious had nothing to do with it? They had everything to do with it.

The first time I walked into a gay disco, with all those lights, music, ritual and smoke, my immediate thought was: church! Madonna gets this, whatever Jonah says. Because she’s a born-and-bred Catholic, which Jonah isn’t. It’s theater, sweetie, theater. And the Church once understood that – which was part of its beautiful Catholicity. Gone, now, alas. But Benedict is helping nudge it back. And although I tease him about it, it’s a wonderful thing. More incense, please. And lace.

A reader writes:

I just want you to know that there’s at least one active Mormon "out there" who appreciates and supports what you are doing.  I blogged about it here and I discussed it on a local Utah radio show, which you can listen to here.

Ultimately the more candid, open, and honest discussion there is about Mormonism–and frankly, the more awareness that can be broadly generated about some of the more controversial and damaging aspects of our history and doctrine–the greater the likelihood that the top leadership will make positive progress in improving on the weaker parts of our faith and culture (renouncing the loopiness, etc.).  Ultimately, sunshine is the best antiseptic, as they say.

He’s not alone, it seems:

I’m a long-time LDS reader of your website.  Am still enjoying it.

Yes, your publishing the garment photos was a tad offensive to most of us. But you’re right that our taboos need not be your own. And truth be told, we Mormons are really hypersensitive about criticism (or even discussion) of our faith in the media. (Bad experiences in the 19th Century, misrepresentations of our doctrines in the 20th, etc.). The Romney candidacy, as well as public discussions of Mormonism on blogs such as yours, can only do a service to the Mormons in the long run.  So many in our community don’t want to discuss various aspects of Mormonism even amongst themselves, much less with outsiders.  But the more exposure we get, and the more that various Mormon "oddities" are scrutinized in the press, the more we’ll have to think about various doctrinal and historical issues, as well as talk about them.

As far as this Mormon is concerned, that’s a very good thing. At least it will make my otherwise stale Church meetings a bit more interesting. For that, you have my eternal gratitude.

George W. Bush is incapable of dealing with reality. He may be psychologically incapable of self-correction because it entails self-criticism. But if this Newsweek story is correct, we have a truly dangerous situation on our hands.

It isn’t going away. Charles Murray and James Flynn debate why here.

Borat gets pulled over. "Looking Muslim While Driving."

A reader has an insight:

Looking at the comment by Rich Lowry you highlighted today ("for all his swagger and protectiveness of executive prerogatives ‚Äî is becoming a disturbing study in lassitude in the executive branch"), it occurred to me that you can read it two ways. One is that Bush, as has often been noted even by allies, is rather intellectually lazy, incurious and generally detached from things that call for close attention or expertise (such as the Presidency, fighting wars, etc.). That’s not the Lowry we all know and love. The other – and the point I think Lowry tries subtly to make – is that Bush didn’t exert enough power in the execution of the war. He should have listened more to Cheney. We needed more executive privilege, more top-secret decisions, more "commander-in-chief" type leadership, whereas Bush preferred the comfortable position of simply being another branch of a democratic government. There’s also a clear dig at the generals there – if Bush had just kicked their asses a bit more, they might have gotten something done.

What we needed was more troops, more allies and an actual post-invasion plan (which Rumsfeld vetoed). Even then, it would have been tough. What we didn’t need was more bombs, more torture, more executive secrecy and more unilateralism. But the terrible lack of that list of horribles seems to be an emerging theme on the denialist right. My reader continues:

I predict that we will start seeing a new meme emerge from the Right (and linked to approvingly by Reynolds): Bush just wasn’t tough enough: he countenanced treasonous dissent in the press and in Congress; he was too cautious, too afraid of ticking off the ACLU and all those bleeding heart Europeans; he was too soft on the generals and failed to expand the war to Syria and Iran when he had the chance. That, combined with "the Iraqis were a bunch of incompetent ingrates" will comprise the Right’s assessment of this war over the next two years.

We’ll see, won’t we? But given the dreadful record of much of the conservative intelligentsia these past few years, I wouldn’t be surprised.

An Australian atheist gets ticked off by pre-lunch Mormon proselytizing, so he gives a fireside rant and then travels to Salt Lake City and goes door to door trying to convert people to Darwinism. Since I have now offended every Mormon by publishing a picture of the undergarments, I figure I have nothing left to lose by posting this YouTube. It’s not something I’d do myself (I tell proselytizing Mormons that I’m Catholic and, if that doesn’t work, that I’m a flamer), but it’s somewhat revealing about some double standards with respect to religion and other views of the universe:

The correlation between strict orthodoxy and fabulous outifts is a long one, as this Harvard Advocate piece points out. Money quote:

"[T]he Catholic use of art and design to broadcast a message of strength and authority in times of transition is not new. In response to the Protestant Reformation, Baroque art became the propaganda of the Counterreformation. As Protestantism embraced a simpler aesthetic, Catholic art became more extravagant. The new churches rejected such indulgences as idolatrous and sinful. Catholics, however, played up this dichotomy in order to assert their identity as well as influence the hearts and minds of everyday churchgoers who marveled at the glory of the cathedrals and representations of holy figures. Protestants may have offered a more intimate relationship to God through study of the Bible, but Catholics put on a better show…"

The NCR sees this a little differently:

It has become apparent in recent years that there’s been an upsurge in historical ecclesiastical finery and other goods. We’ve seen more birettas (those funny three-peak hats with the fuzzy ball on top that come in different colors depending on clerical rank) and cassocks (the kind with real buttons, no zippers for the purists) and ecclesiastically correct color shoes and socks, lots of lacy surplices and even the capa magna (yards and yards of silk, a cape long enough that it has to be attended by two altar boys or seminarians, also in full regalia). In some places they’re even naming monsignors again.
It’s as if someone has discovered a props closet full of old stuff and they’re putting it out all over the stage. …

It really is the Age of Conservative Denial, isn’t it?

I love Michel Gondry’s work; and it doesn’t come much better than this Rolling Stones video. Classic rock on ketamine.

An email I should address:

I’m a pretty reasonable Mormon. I live in MA, voted for Deval Patrick, got my MBA from Boston University after going to BYU. I also served a two year mission.

Your garment picture is offensive to me. You showing them and joking about them (to me) would be like having a rave in the holy of holys to a Jew or touching the Koran to a devout Muslim.

Every worthy LDS church member that has been a member longer than 1 year most likely wears them. You are offending a lot of people.

I’m sorry I was unaware of the underwear. I’m sorry if my eyebrows jumped a notch. But I am not sorry for publishing a visual of them. My response is the same to Mormons as it was to Muslims who were offended by my publishing images of Muhammad. This is your taboo, not mine. And this is a free country. If you cannot handle some inspection of your religious practices, then you need to find some other place to live.

I dare say this blog has revealed more about Mormonism to a mainstream audience than many other outlets in recent history. I’ve linked to many Mormon websites and sources of information. I’ve published emails from Mormons. I’m busy reading more. And I have to say that the more I read about Mormons’ understanding of the constitution and politics, the more I actually agree with them. They seem very keen on the separation of church and state, religious liberty, and the separation of powers – much more so than the evangelical right. It comes, perhaps, from a deeper understanding of what it actually means to be a despised minority in this country. Yes, they are virulently homophobic. But so are most organized religions, sadly. And all in all, this past week has made me far less concerned about a Mormon president than I might have been. In fact, I think the message of constitutional propriety and reverence that seems common among Mormons could do well in appealing to the conservative center, especially in contrast with the bullying and contempt for the constitution displayed among many Christianists. But it’s foolish in my view for Mormons to be so sensitive. If Romney runs, you’ll need to deal with this. And you’d best get a thicker skin.