I was reading...

Here is another post from the Multiply days.  This one is from 2010 and still relevant, perhaps ever more relevant as things continue to get weirder.  I pray that I will be like the seven brothers and like Eleazer who scorned to take refuge in subterfuge but boldly defied the evils of his day.

 

The Maccabees are two interesting books--really a pity more people aren't actually acquainted with those books outside the Protestant canon that were part of the old canon....but then again, it's also sad that more people are not even acquainted with the "usual" books of the Bible, and I digress.  The point of this was to talk about II Maccabees.

The book is addresses to the Jews of Alexandria as an abbreviated history of the events it describes.  But at the very beginning it has this beautiful blessing written: "May God prosper you, remembering his covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, his faithful servants.  May he give you all a heart to worship him and to do his will with a generous mind and a willing spirit.  May he open your hearts to his Law and his precepts, and give you peace.  May he hear your prayers and be reconciled with you, and not abandon you in time of evil."(iiMac.1:2-6)
I had been going to share that a few evenings ago, but said "tomorrow," which didn't happen.  So it is this evening that I again thought, "tomorrow," but decided to go ahead and write tonight.
It is some chapters later into the history of this particular time.  The treasurer was envious of Onias the godly high-priest and exaggerated how much money was in the treasury to the king, who sent Heliodorus to collect the money.  Onias protested against this and made it clear that the money was for the orphans and widows and they could not break the trust of those who had placed the money there.  Onias and the priests then pray to God and Jerusalem follows their example.  Heliodorus is prevented by a miraculous apparition from looting the temple treasury.  His followers ask Onias to pray for Heliodorus life, which he does, and the glory is given to God. 
Time passes and Onias has been displaced by his brother Jason a hellenizer, who in turn was deposed by someone even worse.  People have taken to following pagan practices even on the temple ground. Jason attacks his successor in ch. 5 and is repulsed but when the king hears, he figures Judea is in revolt and attacks Jerusalem killing indiscriminately the inhabitants and even penetrating the temple and "with his unclean hands he seized the sacred vessels;...Antiochus, so much above himself, did not realize that the Lord was angry for the moment at the sins of the inhabitants of the city, hence his unconcern for the Holy Place....the Lord had not chosen the people for the sake of the place, but the place for the sake of the people;" That really struck me.  The temple was set aside for the sake of the people--a place to present sacrifices and worship God....How often do we act as though the church building is more sacred than the church itself?  We don't want to profane the church (referring to the building) but it's fine to tear down the Church (the body of Christ) by our actions and words....?  It is we humans who were chosen, the buildings and places are secondary.
The book continues.  Abominations are carried on within the temple grounds and Jews are being forced into pagan practices, being killed for noncompliance.  There is this old man Eleazar, though, who spits out pig's flesh that was forced between his teeth.  "Those in charge of the impious banquet, because their long-standing friendship with him, took him aside and privately urged him to have meat brought of a kind he could properly use, prepared by himself, and only pretend to eat the portions of the sacrificial meat as prescribed by the king;" Eleazar could escape death this way, but he refused because the example it would set for others.  People would think he had conformed and might be led astray, and he would much rather die a positive example, "of how to make a good death, eagerly and generously, for the venerable and holy laws."  His companions then turn on him and bludgeon him to death and his dying words: "Th Lord whose knowledge is holy sees clearly that, though I might have escaped death, whatever agonies of body I now endure under this bludgeoning, in my soul I am glad to suffer, because of the awe which he inspires in me."
The next chapter tells of a mother and her seven sons who are tortured for their  faith but likewise remain resolute. When the third son was asked for his tongue after the first two have already been tortured and killed he makes the statement, "It was heaven that gave me these limbs; for the sake of his laws I disdain them; from him I hope to receive them again."  It continues until the youngest.  Antiochus asks the mother to encourage her son to relent.  She has been forced to witness the deaths of her other six sons but she still holds to the faith. "My son, have pity on me; I carried you nine months in my womb and suckled you three years, fed and reared you to the age you are now (and cherished you). I implore you, my child, observe heaven and earth, consider all that is in them, and acknowledge that God made them out of what did not exist, and that mankind comes into being the same way.  Do not fear this executioner, but prove yourself worthy of your brothers, and make death welcome, so that in the day of mercy I may receive you back in your brothers' company."  and the son says, "What are you waiting for? I will not comply with the king's ordinance; I obey the ordinance of the Law given to our ancestors through Moses.  As for you, sir, who have contrived every kind of evil against the Hebrews, you will certainly not escape the hands of God.  We are suffering for our own sins; and if, to punish and discipline us, our living Lord vents his wrath upon us, he will yet be reconciled with his own servants."

They were faithful.  They took on themselves, in a way, the guilt of the people and willingly accepted death.  Could these stories have encouraged the early church who suffered persecution similarly?
I don't want stuff like that to happen, but I do wonder, how would I respond?  Would I take the chance to live that was offered to Eleazar?  or would I scorn to make use of that sort of subterfuge and accept death willingly for the sake of my fellow people and my convictions and remaining faithful to my God?

Pollyanna Grows Up: a very American tale

I listened to the conclusion of Pollyanna Grows Up. It is very much of its era, not entirely in a bad way. It is also understandably an American classic. I do want to go back and reread or listen to Pollyanna. I say it is “of its era” because it betrays the worries of that time, the beginning of the twentieth century, of blood, genetics, and poverty. It does so in the most natural sort of way—attitudes and conversations rather than narration of the concerns. For example, in Ivanhoe, the author observes things in the “in those days people thought this or that” sort of mode.  That is not the case here.

In Pollyanna Grows Up, it is simply noted that surely that person has good blood. It is also an objection to getting married that nothing is known of the family, they could be anyone and what of hereditary disease or such? Pollyanna herself as a girl of twelve first encountering poverty in the city, wonders how some can be so rich while others are so poor? She is jokingly called a little socialist by an adult. The way the conversation goes kind of makes me wonder if the author had socialist sympathies?

Early on and throughout is expressed the opinion of many that “you could not understand, because you never experienced it” or the corollary, “she understands, because she has experienced”. The assumption is a little belied by one of the proponents of the belief in that he knows the stories of Arthur’s Knights and feels the need for heroic deeds and glory, though they seem unobtainable in his current circumstances and he is able to relate the stories and some of his own with such vividness and detail that it is described in at least one point like weaving a spell on his listeners. Nevertheless, the assumption is made throughout—if you have not experienced it, you cannot understand it. I have heard this assumption expressed throughout my life. I disagree. Much can be learned through reading and observation and imagination. I grant that observation is not identical to experience, but I also observe that experience can blind a person to the fullness of what a thing is. For example, a man and a woman may be very much enamored of each other and inclined to act upon their passions. An observer might sympathize with the feeling, but nonetheless be able to see that in no wise should they act upon their passions because one of them is married, so no matter how they feel, that would simply be adultery and betrayal, which they have already begun to enter into by letting their passions—lust—go so far. Someone else who has experienced adultery by participation may have a harder time seeing the error, unless he had already repented and worked towards reconciliation if possible. Of course, now our whole moral landscape is so corrupted that no one seems to accurately the gravity of most any sin. I guess they had to experience them for themselves in order to understand? Just had to take a bite of the fruit...Anyway.

Going to Church is treated as customary, but for most of the story you would have no idea that these people believe in God or an after-life. They are all oriented to earthly, material happiness. This is especially evident in the attitudes towards poverty and death.  As for poverty, Pollyanna cannot figure out anything to be glad about it other than, she doesn’t have that poverty, which makes her sorry for those who do, or she could be glad to help them materially, except that at first she can’t. Aunt Polly is a striking exemplar of their reactions towards death. It is all grief, pride, bitterness, and anger. No one speaks of heaven. No one speaks of God connected to this loss. It is just-he died. Now, how are we going to pay for this and that? How are we to live?  It does not seem that any know how to deal well with the pain of loss.

There is a focus on being happy, but the happiness is material. This leads to a moral dilemma which should not have been a dilemma in the way that it was. Some of the story focuses on the question of a missing boy Jamie Kent. His father was not approved of by the mother’s family, and when she died, father and son had disappeared. There is a Jamie and a Jimmy who are about the right age, one of them adopted by the aunt of the lost boy. He believes he is Jamie, or at least desires to be him in point of fact. When conclusive proof of who Jamie Kent is surfaces, it is decided not to tell Jamie, others may know, but not Jamie, because that would kill him, or something. His emotional belief or desire is more important than the truth. They would rather lie to him and let him believe a lie, but so would he. This is vicious. I cannot approve of such a moral. It darkened the end of the book for me.

All of these attitudes have only metastasized in American culture. We are obsessed with indicators of worldly success and comfort. We push away thoughts of death except to give respect to those who take death into their own hands or deal out death for their own perceived good.  We value lived experience more than truth.

I say “we” but it is a culture that has never felt like home to me. Is it that I loved hearing and reading Aesop, Grimm, & Anderson? Is it that we read the Bible regularly at home and I read it personally before I could understand much beyond the broadest strokes? Is it that I read more British literature than American? Is it that my melancholy disposition inclined me to relate more to Jeremiah and love books like Ecclesiastes? Is it that in traveling across the country to a place I knew not before I was ten prompted me to look more earnestly at Abram’s wanderings and apply that to the Christian life? Who knows. But at least since we traveled across the states when I was a child, I have had the sense of being a stranger in a strange land.

It still takes me by surprise when I hear the same tones of disdain towards religion in newspapers from a century ago that can be heard even today. It still catches me a bit off guard when I hear of people worried about bloodlines today as they did at the heights of the eugenics movement. It shouldn’t; I know well enough that there is nothing new under the sun, what has been will be and every new thing has already happened, still, I would have thought we could have learned from our past.

The Count of Monte Cristo and Lord Ruthven

 I was just commenting again how much I would love to see a truly good rendering of the Count of Monte Cristo in film.  The seventies one was pretty good, I never finished the black and white that stands a good chance of being the most faithful adaptation in my experience, I never finished the French one with Gerard Depardieux who was too big and blond for Edmond Dantes, Gungutsou I did finish and it was brilliant in its portrayal....but was lacking a vital point.  These, though, I watched all via Youtube.  The shorter film, that is perhaps familiar to more people, does not do justice to the story or the characters.

I found this note from last October.

I finally read the story of Lord Ruthven.

Eerie and short. I understand why the Count of Monte Cristo was compared to Lord Ruthven and why the Lady, I forget her name was not fond of him.

He had learned to suppress his natural feelings of repugnance towards violence and terror and was pleased to see vicious people or people connected to evils falling prey to their vices. Lord Ruthven delighted in the fall of the innocent, whereas the Count takes a grim pleasure in seeing the downfall of the guilty, but if one does not know the guilt or innocence of an individual...It would look the same.

I still want to see a brilliantly executed Count of Monte Cristo, with gorgeous costuming, moody lighting, music that fits and transcends the time, dramatic looks and textures. Why, o why has none in the English speaking world that I am aware of drawn upon that imagery suggested in the book of the vampire and the gothic novel? And why have they not drawn on that rich symbolism of the freed prisoner before the cross? Why have they not explored how he becomes a monster and is saved by the love of good and honest people?

I think Gungutsou draws upon the vampire imagery, but he is left a monster and must die. The letter is still there at the end, but it is a letter from the past.

The book, more brilliantly, portrays a double redemption.

Led by a spirit

"..., but he had no principles that were not common to others, if not to all; for others believed in the direct teaching of the Spirit, and these mistook their feelings for the effects of the Spirit, and their transient thoughts for emanations from the Spirit; and being thus enlightened according to their leisure and to the encouragement they gave to their thoughts and fancies, they could frequently see farther than other people into the Scriptures and the will of God, or fancied they could;..."
 How is it that so many people, claiming to be led by the Holy Spirit, claiming to follow Jesus, wind up going so many different directions? The above quote is from a book that was written about Matthias and his “Kingdom of Zion” that he tried to set up in the early nineteenth century. He was able to attach himself to a Bible study group who accepted him first as a prophet and then as ruler.
How is it possible for sincere people, involved in Bible study and prayer, to develop the idea that heaven and hell only really exist here on earth and the idea that souls go to another body when the people die, consequently your spirit match is of greater importance than your legal marriage?
Now, to be fair to the folks in the Kingdom of Zion, people today do many of the same things excusing their behavior on God’s will. We still interpret things idiosyncratically, and we still tend to rely on personal interpretation or whatever preacher/teacher we respect to tell us what scripture means (all while saying that it is just scripture). They had spirit matches, we have soul mates and incompatibility. Plus ça change…

Robert Matthews (Matthias actual name) denied Jesus functionally. He claimed to be the Spirit of Truth, having the spirit of Jesus and Matthias the apostle in himself and speaking on behalf of the Father while claiming the title of Father for himself and Mother for his “wife”. It was a bit eerie hearing that Jim Jones demanded that his congregation call him Father and his wife Mother.  While Robert Matthews never denied the existence of God and indeed stressed his own version of Old Testament understanding, Jim Jones ultimately wanted to get his people to leave Christianity, the entire Bible, and any god outside himself behind.
Both men were extremely controlling of those around them. While Jim Jones ultimately was more successful in drawing a large body of people around him and died in their midst while causing many to die rather than relinquish the dream, the control, Matthias did not. After he was accused of killing one of the members of the “kingdom” and beating his daughter who was married, he basically was abandoned by all but one person and wound up wandering the west before fading away into obscurity. We do not know where he died. We do know he had a run in with Joseph Smith.
What spirit led these men to death? I see the seemingly sympathetic smile of the gentleman with cloven foot from the fairy tales I grew up reading. “You want power? You want security? Money? Love? Trust me, I’ll give you what you want. Just follow me.”

Robert Matthews was apparently a natural leader and may have been responsible for a couple of physical deaths to say nothing of the spiritual. Jim Jones was even bigger, more successful, more set against Christianity, responsible for more death. He, too, was a self proclaimed prophet. He too made the claim of being what people called god.
While Jim Jones had a vastly larger following, both of them had people who otherwise would have been considered respectable following after them. How do so many people, some well educated, some apparently devout, become caught up in these movements that bare the fruit of Satan--lies, immorality, and death?

Dickens and Surrealist Cinema: or the post from the end of December that never was published

Have you heard of that style of cinema in which a person may be portrayed as actually shedding a river of tears? Or images may have more symbolic import than “real” import--you know that the character is not actually a giant, but because he seems so overbearing, overpowering and gigantic to this other character, he is made to appear that much larger for this scene.  It is an interesting approach, and for some stories works well.

As I have been reading Little Dorrit, I keep on thinking that odd style would really suit this book; has anyone tried fantastical realism with Dickens?  Take this, a Mr. Casby had been introduced as very benevolent and patriarchal in appearance, long beard and all, and another character, Mr. Pancks is introduced “,with a snort and a puff,” upon which Mr. Clennam, though whom much is related reflects, “much as an unwieldy ship in the Thames River may sometimes be seen heavily driving with the tide, broadside on, stern first, in its own way and in the way of everything else, though making a great show of navigation, when all of a sudden, a little coaly steam-tug will bear down upon it, take it in tow, and bustle off with it; similarly the cumbrous patriarch had been taken in tow by the snorting Pancks, and was now following in the wake of that dingy little craft.”  

Or how this would look. A young lady is looking upon the ruins of Rome and reflecting on ruins in people’s lives and ruins in England when Mrs. General, who is often called “the varnisher” comes in.  Mr. Eustace is the writer of some travel journals who never compares anything favorably to England. “Up, then, would come Mrs. General; taking all the color out of every thing, as nature and art had taken it out of herself;...looking everywhere for Mr. Eustace and company, and seeing nothing else; scratching up the driest little bones of antiquity, and bolting them whole without any human visitings--like a ghoul in gloves.”

Visualize, visualize.  It isn’t enough to show her as powdery and wigged and stiffly full of proprieties.  Mrs. General must also be attended by proprieties.  She is a most varnished varnisher, but also a “ghoul in gloves”.  The whole thing with her gloves reminds me of some of the stuff I have read and seen in reference to Disney’s use of gloves on characters.  

In re-reading the first few paragraphs, I saw again the blistering, glaring, staring day in Marseille. Everything stares in the too bright day, his description takes you through the streets and through a church-the only refuge from the heat--and into the prison, where there are two people in a cell and other vermin.  One of them is described as having a distinctive nose.  He doesn’t exactly smile, but his mustache comes up and his nose goes down.  He was amazingly acted by Andy Serkis in the film version I saw.  Other than height, he was everything the book described.  Can you imagine taking this approach, though, of showing Dickens’ more peculiar or more shocking imagery on the screen?  Just as in the books, you would not always see barnacles when you saw the Barnacles--who exist throughout the British government and are paramount in the circumlocution office, you would not always be shown a ghoul in Mrs. General’s place, but sometimes, where appropriate, you would see these sorts of things.  It might be a longer mini-series, but I think it would be fantastically delightful.  

Jeremiah 5 (with comments)

Run to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem,
    look and take note!
Search her squares to see
    if you can find a man,
one who does justice
    and seeks truth,
that I may pardon her.
² Though they say, “As the Lord lives,”
    yet they swear falsely.
³ O Lord, do not your eyes look for truth?
You have struck them down,
    but they felt no anguish;
you have consumed them,
    but they refused to take correction.
They have made their faces harder than rock;
    they have refused to repent.

⁴ Then I said, “These are only the poor;
    they have no sense;
for they do not know the way of the Lord,
    the justice of their God.

I will go to the great
    and will speak to them,
for they know the way of the Lord,
    the justice of their God.”

This has been a suspicion held in so many different times and places--the poor and ignorant may not live correctly and may not know God the way they ought.   But surely the people who have an education will know better.  Surely people who have even just a little privilege and proper upbringing will live rightly.   What does Jeremiah find?

But they all alike had broken the yoke;
    they had burst the bonds.

⁶ Therefore a lion from the forest shall strike them down;
    a wolf from the desert shall devastate them.
A leopard is watching their cities;
    everyone who goes out of them shall be torn in pieces,
because their transgressions are many,
    their apostasies are great.

 The godlessness is across all of society.  The poor, the rich, the ignorant the learned--all alike refuse God's authority.

“How can I pardon you?
    Your children have forsaken me
    and have sworn by those who are no gods.
When I fed them to the full,
    they committed adultery
    and trooped to the houses of whores.
⁸ They were well-fed, lusty stallions,
    each neighing for his neighbor's wife.
⁹ Shall I not punish them for these things?
declares the Lord;
    and shall I not avenge myself
    on a nation such as this?

Naturally, God is upset.  After having chosen them, given them a place in the world, freeing them from slavery, establishing them as a nation, and so much more, they still turn from Him to the surrounding world.  How much more has God done for us?  And how often do we turn our backs on Him, choosing instead ourselves, the world, whatever?  
 

¹⁰ “Go up through her vine rows and destroy,
    but make not a full end;
strip away her branches,
    for they are not the Lord's.
¹¹ For the house of Israel and the house of Judah
    have been utterly treacherous to me,
declares the Lord.
¹² They have spoken falsely of the Lord
    and have said, ‘He will do nothing;
no disaster will come upon us,
    nor shall we see sword or famine.
¹³ The prophets will become wind;
    the word is not in them.
Thus shall it be done to them!’”

Notice the words, "make not a full end".  Even in the midst of judgment, God has a plan for restoration, there is hope. 

Also the line about stripping away the branches reminds me of later, in the New Testament, an analogy to branches being grafted into the vine . . . 

Therefore thus says the Lord, the God of hosts:
“Because you have spoken this word,
behold, I am making my words in your mouth a fire,
    and this people wood, and the fire shall consume them.
¹⁵ Behold, I am bringing against you
    a nation from afar, O house of Israel,
declares the Lord.
It is an enduring nation;
    it is an ancient nation,
a nation whose language you do not know,
    nor can you understand what they say.

This summer I have also been studying the Celts and Irish history.  I was reminded of these verses as I read about the Roman Empire being chipped away by Celtic tribes and then sacked by the Germanic tribes.  They also had been given much, but did not give due honor to God.

Where are we?

There are a few verses detailing devastation.

¹⁸ “But even in those days, declares the Lord, I will not make a full end of you. ¹⁹ And when your people say, ‘Why has the Lord our God done all these things to us?’ you shall say to them, ‘As you have forsaken me and served foreign gods in your land, so you shall serve foreigners in a land that is not yours.’”

²⁰ Declare this in the house of Jacob;
    proclaim it in Judah:
²¹ “Hear this, O foolish and senseless people,
    who have eyes, but see not,
    who have ears, but hear not.

The punishment fits the crime.  Also, Is not verse 21 reminiscent of the descriptions of foreign gods, the idols "They have mouths, but they speak not; eyes have they, but they see not; They have ears, but they hear not; neither is there any breath in their mouths. They that make them are like unto them: so is every one that trusts in them." (from Psalm 135)

Do you not fear me? declares the Lord.
    Do you not tremble before me?
I placed the sand as the boundary for the sea,
    a perpetual barrier that it cannot pass;
though the waves toss, they cannot prevail;
    though they roar, they cannot pass over it.
²³ But this people has a stubborn and rebellious heart;
    they have turned aside and gone away.
²⁴ They do not say in their hearts,
    ‘Let us fear the Lord our God,
who gives the rain in its season,
    the autumn rain and the spring rain,
and keeps for us
    the weeks appointed for the harvest.’
²⁵ Your iniquities have turned these away,
    and your sins have kept good from you.
²⁶ For wicked men are found among my people;
    they lurk like fowlers lying in wait.
They set a trap;    they catch men.
²⁷ Like a cage full of birds,
    their houses are full of deceit;
therefore they have become great and rich;
²⁸     they have grown fat and sleek.
They know no bounds in deeds of evil;
    they judge not with justice
the cause of the fatherless, to make it prosper,
    and they do not defend the rights of the needy.
²⁹ Shall I not punish them for these things?
declares the Lord,
    and shall I not avenge myself
    on a nation such as this?”

³⁰ An appalling and horrible thing
    has happened in the land:
³¹ the prophets prophesy falsely,
    and the priests rule at their direction;
my people love to have it so,
    but what will you do when the end comes?

On Faith and Jeremiah

The church must express itself in faith, for "the just shall live by faith."

Where do we put our trust?  

What do we rely on in times of trouble?

I know I sometimes turn to distractions--I punch a pillow, watch a film, read a book, do some study, listen to chatter, chatter away myself, immerse myself in music, work, sleep (or try to do these things) rather than waiting in silence on God.

I noticed something in Jeremiah.  In verses 4-10 God calls Jeremiah to be a prophet.  Then verse 11 begins, "And the word of the LORD came to me saying, "Jeremiah, what do you see?"  It is an almond branch that Jeremiah sees, and almond in Hebrew sounds similar to the Hebrew word for watching. It is an object lesson from God-- "You have seen well, for I am watching over my word to perform it."

Then in verse thirteen, "The word of the LORD came to me a second time, . . ." once again there is a question of what Jeremiah sees, but this time it has to do with future disasters and God's message that He was sending through Jeremiah.

It does not say anything about the time between these events.  Jeremiah is not strictly chronological all the time, and he does not all the time tell when things happen with respect to each other.  For all we know, he could have waited years between being called as a prophet and being given the message he was to carry.  There is a silence.  There is also reassurance.  God is watching over His word to perform it.

Two years ago my mother knew from God that he was providing her with a mini-van.  This past month it was accomplished, but it was not through any finagling, or debt, or whatever; it was outright, bought and paid for with money that God got to us at the right time for His purpose to be accomplished.

Do we sometimes try to present our own work to God and hope that He will bless it?  That is what Cain did in the early days of the world.  But, "our righteousness is as filthy rags," only when we do God's work that HE has laid out for us in HIS timing do we get it right; but there's still more.  We cannot do His work in our own strength; we must constantly rely on God's strength, because His work is more than we can handle on our own.

"But you, dress yourself for work; arise, and say to them everything that I command you.  Do not be dismayed by them, lest I dismay you before them.  And I, behold, I make you this day a fortified city, an iron pillar, and bronze walls, against the whole land, against the kings of Judah, its officials, its priests, and the people of the land.  They will fight against you, but they shall not prevail against you, for I am with you, declares the LORD, to deliver you."

"They that wait on the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles."

Jesus, Himself spent much time in prayer and said He did nothing without the Father.

Are we better, more capable than He?

So, where is our faith?  What do we really trust in?

I cannot count on my own ability to do right actions with right motives.  I cannot count on my own faith even.  I must throw myself on God's mercy and accept His grace that conquers all my sin and trust that He will work in me "to will and to do of His good pleasure."

Why is mathematics important to theology?

According to Roger Bacon in his Opus Majus there are seven reasons.  One of them has to do with geography.  Basically, his theory is that we cannot rightly understand the scriptures if we do not understand the geographical situation of its histories.  Because, if we cannot understand that, we cannot understand the literal sense of the scripture, and if we cannot grasp the literal, how can we hope to understand any spiritual meaning? 

This was one example offered:
" We note that the Jordan flows down from north to south to the east of Jerusalem, which lies to the west, a little way from the Great [Mediterranean] Sea. Between these two, on this side of Jordan, is Jericho, a city surrounded by its plain. Next comes Mount Olivet, then the Valley of Josaphat, and after it Jerusalem. Now the saints tell us that the world is represented in their method of interpretation by Jordan, both symbolically and because of the river's characteristics. For one thing, it flows into the Dead Sea, a symbol of the Inferno; there are also many other reasons. Jericho, in the view of the saints, symbolizes the flesh. Mount Olivet signifies the loftiness of the spiritual life, because of its own loftiness, and the sweetness of devotion, as sweet as its oil. The Valley of Josaphat signifies lowliness through the meaning of valley, "a low place," and true humility in the presence of majesty, (186) since the translation of the name Josaphat is "in the sight of the Lord." Jerusalem itself means "vision of peace"; in its moral interpretation it points to the holy soul which possesses peace of heart. Allegorically it signifies the Church Militant; analogically, the Church Triumphant.
We all hope to pass with peace in our hearts from the beginning of our life (the dawn of our physical birth and the sunrise of reason's theory and practice) to its end, the sunset of old age; this is our hope expressed in moral terms. We all hope to be true and faithful members of the Church, beneath whose shade we may rest, untroubled by the malign assaults of our enemy; this is the same hope expressed as allegory. We hope that in this life our thoughts may be turned [by analogy] to the heavenly Jerusalem, and that at our death we may pass to that heavenly city, there to dwell in the beauty of peace, in the tents of faith, in rest and in fullness. Whoever hopes for all this must first leave Jordan-this world-behind, either by reducing it to his control, like the saints who live in the world, or abandon it completely, as the monastics do. This is the first stage of progress to a spiritual life, a stage easier than the others.
Having achieved this, he must next do battle with the flesh, something not as easy to overcome as the world, being very close to us and never abandoning its subject.[isn't that the truth!] He must not, therefore, charge it by brute force and destroy it, but must bridle its arrogance slowly and tactfully. This is why it is figured by Jericho and the plain around it; one must advance in penitence along the level road, thus justifying the reasonable obedience of his flesh. For if he foolishly overwhelms his flesh by violence, his spirit can never attain the greater heights. In acting patiently he will be unlike most people who have been turned to penitence, who for a year or two humble their own bodies, but thereafter are good for nothing, unable to benefit themselves or anyone else.
But after a man has put down the world under his feet and has overcome the flesh in the way he should, then-and not until then-he is ready to rise up to the heights of spiritual life and the sweetness of true devotion. From then on he will be able to climb up to Mount Olivet and gain the pinnacle of human perfection and immerse himself in the delight of prayer and contemplation of God. But even when he has trained himself by the ascent from all sides of that height, he must still cross the valley of Josaphat-that is, he must finish the course of his life in complete humility and make himself poor and humble of spirit in the eyes of God, not merely his own or those of his fellow men. For many look humble to themselves and to other men, but in the presence (187) of God and his angels are puffed up with arrogance.[never thought of that]
When at last he has ended his whole life in perfect lowliness, then he has entered Jerusalem, in all three senses of the word. He will possess peace in his heart, the peace which follows perfection of the life of the spirit. "To the ungodly there is no peace," says the Lord. But the saints possess the peace of God, which transcends the senses of mankind. Free from all troubles, he will rest in the peace of the Church Militant-the peace unknown to the faithless and sinful, who drag on in the state of damnation, plagued by the Devil and driven from one sin to another, punished for one, then tormented for another. Even in this life he must play his part, as it is said, by sure and certain hope and by revelation, in that blessed vision of the peace of Jerusalem that is above, which by the grace of God he will win after his death."
I never thought of geography that way . . .

A bit of a look into Victorian New York

Our perceptions of the world present and past are shaped by the biases that are naturally developed through training and experience.  The way moderns perceive the culture of the Victorian age is, therefore, quite naturally different from the way in which a person from that time would perceive it.  Lydia Maria Child wrote this volume of letters from New York in which she commented on pretty much every aspect of society, but the thing that stands out most is her commentary on culture as related to morals.  Whether she is talking about Five Points or the Battery, slavery or temperance reform, women's rights or penitentiaries,  the morals of those issues and circumstances and the morality which they breed is constantly present.  So, let Lydia Maria Child be a guide to the culture of New York, principally, and to that United States of yesterday, in a larger sense.  She herself expresses the belief that society and circumstances make people who they are.  Consider her, then a person created of that time and society and see through her eyes into that era and culture.

It seems that there is in New York a sense of moral obligation to help the unfortunate.  Some of this is seen in things as simple as the keeping of public parks and gardens.  These are to be found in the New York that Child knew and not as common in Boston, to whom Child principally writes.  Child defends these public places: "Let science, literature, music, flowers, all things that tend to cultivate the intellect, or humanize the heart, be open to 'Tom, Dick, and Harry;' and thus, in the process of time, they will become Mr. Thomas, Richard, and Henry.  In all these things, the refined should think of what they can impart, not of what they can receive" (6).   More than general public availability of beauty and science is the positive activity directed toward helping the unfortunate.   Child speaks of the Temperance Society and the city-wide parade they had.  An anecdote in which a minister of the Temperance Society finds a poor drunk on the street and takes him in to give him clothing a find him a job is an example of the focus of this group.  The focus is on lifting up the oppressed.  After all, "society makes its own criminals,"(8) so if we turn society to rescuing those on the lowest rungs of society, we shall better their morals and better society.  Similarly, Child references a Benevolent Society of displaced Highlanders whose aim is to aid their "indigent countrymen." 

One can glimpse a bit of the poverty that is being combated in Child's description of Five Points.  In January, she speaks of naked children running the streets in that place and in various places comments on the filth of the place. Another bit shows a similar picture—a young boy, "about four years old, with a heap of newspapers, 'more big as he could carry,' under his little arm, and another clenched in his small, red fist."  Child projects a likely future involving drunken parents, theft, and arrest.  The law becomes merely an enemy to the unfortunate soul who has known nothing more than poverty and desperation.  On the opposite end of the scale, one can perceive glimpses of the fantastically wealthy in the mention of pleasure yachts and luxury.  Even more distinction can be noted in how well educated Child shows herself to be.  She is very familiar with Greek and Roman mythology, classic literature of the time.  She is very aware of the modern sciences of the day.  She writes in an elegant, if sometimes ponderous style.  It displays an education that the poor could not hope to get.   Perhaps it is appropriate that in this time of enlarged distinction between the upper and lower classes of America, elements of society would turn toward the aid of those in the less fortunate position.

Much of societies' ills, Child blames on society—" society . . . makes its own criminals, and then, at prodigious loss of time, money, and morals, punishes its own work."(8)  A physical comparison is made to a place in New York that used to be a fresh spring.  It was filled in for construction purposes and at that time, had become a stinking den of poverty and water now had to be transported in at great expense.  But there is another aspect of morality and culture that influences negatively—the relative positions of men and women. 

(And that is the first segment of the report).

It is interesting to see this bit of a report..."society... makes its own criminals" This is a dangerous proposition.  We live in a fallen world.  It seems James' explanation for wars and contentions is more to the point.   
You desire, and you do not have. You envy and you kill, and you are unable to obtain. You argue and you fight, and you do not have, because you do not ask.
You ask and you do not receive, because you ask badly, so that you may use it toward your own desires.

A few quotes that I like

"So I had this problem -- work or starve. So I thought I'd combine the two and decided to become a writer."
— Robert Bloch

"You do what's right, and let the pieces fall where they may."
--Peter Burke

and about the sea-
"Most fitting symbol of the Infinite, this trackless pathway of a world heaving and stretching to meet the sky it never reaches, like the eager unsatisfied aspirations of the human soul."
--Lydia Maria Francis Child