Song of the Week

The other day, my friend Debbie Berkley put up a post on her blog, Taking the Ring, which reminded me of this song, and it’s been stuck in my head since. So, since I wanted to get back to doing songs of the week anyway, here it is:

Small Graces

Sometimes they slip by without notice;
Sometimes they’re very hard to see.
Other times it’s all so clear
When they’re happening to me.

Bright penny on the sidewalk,
Can’t buy nothin’ by itself;
But when I hold it in my hand
It’s a tiny piece of priceless wealth.

These are the small graces,
Little moments when the miracles come.
These are the small graces,
Small graces leading me to the larger ones.

A smile that is not automatic,
That lingers on a little more
Than the time it takes to count my change,
The time it takes to close the drawer.

Chorus

Small graces surely have a meaning
Beyond their merely passing by;
They are a reminder to the heart
There’s more to life than meets the eye.

Cheerful greetings unexpected
Shared by strangers on the run,
For when the sky is clouded over
Still the promise of the sun

Is in the small graces,
The little moments when the miracles come.
These are the small graces,
Small graces pointing me to the larger ones.

Small graces,
Little glimpses of the Kingdom come
From unexpected places—
These are the small graces.

Words and music: Bob Bennett
©1997 Bright Avenue Songs
From the album
Small Graces, by Bob Bennett

The coldest case of all

I’m a fan of mystery stories, going back a very long way. I remember as a kid sitting in my grandparents’ home reading Grampa’s collection—he had an omnibus edition of Sherlock Holmes, scads of Agatha Christie novels, and probably everything Erle Stanley Gardner and Rex Stout ever wrote. He also had this big blue-dust-jacketed book of true crime stories—it seems to me it might have been a Reader’s Digest book; in retrospect, I’m not sure a child as young as I was should have known who Sam Sheppard was, but at least I turned out OK. (Mostly. I think.)

Anyway, when it comes to reading mysteries, I tend to prefer the Great Detective sort of stories, authors like Christie, Dorothy Sayers, P. D. James, G. K. Chesterton, and (to name someone a bit more obscure these days) Melville Davisson Post; but on TV, I enjoy the current ascendancy of police procedurals quite a bit. (Though I would say that in my book, the CSI series are really more akin to R. Austin Freeman’s Dr. Thorndyke stories than to the classic procedural.) One of my favorites—though I don’t think it’s lived up to the promise of its first season—is Cold Case, in part because the show’s premise allows them to move throughout history, and in part because of a superb cast and generally good writing.

That said, I wasn’t all that pleased with last Sunday’s episode, “The Good Death.” It was an agenda episode, pretty much intended as a commercial for euthanasia, and that posed two problems for me. First, it was pretty unsubtle about its agenda; I don’t mind if a story tries to make a point, but I dislike being bludgeoned, even if I agree with the message. Second, in this case, I don’t agree with the message, since I consider euthanasia a barbaric and anti-human practice, even if many who support it do so out of compassionate motives.

In this particular instance, I especially disliked the episode’s subtext, which is that we should allow euthanasia because hospitals just let patients suffer. As a former hospital chaplain, that blindingly white TV hospital with nary a caregiver in sight (except for the nurse who’d been arrested for euthanizing patients, and the doctor whose only function was to give the diagnosis) doesn’t look anything like any of the hospitals I know. In point of fact, the depiction was a shameful libel on our nation’s caregivers. I don’t say all hospitals are perfect, and I would imagine there are those out there that do fall down on the job, but by and large, the doctors and nurses in this country put a great deal of effort into caring for their patients—and in cases of extreme pain, that doesn’t merely include pain control, it begins with it. Clearly, the writers of this episode know little or nothing about hospice care and comfort care—either that or they suppressed what they know in order to make the case for their agenda seem stronger.

The funny thing is, though, that they actually did a pretty good job of defeating their own argument—which is perhaps evidence of the grace of God working its way through the cracks in human intentions. There was, for instance, the closing song (Paul Westerberg’s “Good Day”), which declares, “A good day is any day that you’re alive”—a remarkable affirmation of the value of life in itself to conclude an episode which tried very hard to make a very different point. More significantly, though, the entire structure of the episode undermined its argument. The case for euthanasia rests, philosophically, on the assumption that suffering is an unmitigated evil, unrelievedly bad. Given that, if you aren’t going to be able to live without significant suffering, life isn’t worth living, and you should be allowed to kill yourself—or someone should be allowed to kill you. And yet, over the course of this episode, we were shown a very different reality, as the suffering of the deceased protagonist (whose death Lily Rush and the rest were investigating) proved in fact to be powerfully redemptive. The pain and other effects of a severe brain tumor transformed one of the most selfish and unpleasant characters I’ve ever run across—well, not to put too fine a point on it, back into a human being—bringing him to the point of reconciling with several people he’d hurt, most notably his wife.

It’s not too much to say, looking at this episode, that the cancer was the best thing that ever happened to this guy. His suffering was redemptive; his life was better for the pain he had endured; and yet, from the perspective of the episode, better to kill him (at his request, it must be noted) than to let him suffer any longer. Never mind that had he lived, he might have fully reconciled with his son, thereby allowing the son to heal much sooner from the damage his father had done him through their lives; never mind any of that. Pain hurts, hurting is bad, anything is justified to end it. Except that in that case, wouldn’t it have been better if he’d never gotten sick?

There are no Other People

I’m a fan of much of Neil Gaiman’s work–for those of you not familiar with him, you could call him a science-fiction/fantasy/horror author/screenwriter/graphic novelist, if you don’t mind pigeonholing him too much–and have been ever since Neverwhere. His view of the world is very different from mine, but he’s a perceptive and thoughtful observer, a creative and powerful storyteller, and a gifted writer.

Anyway, it turns out Gaiman has a connection to the mass murder at Virginia Tech, which he noted in his blog last week, from which he drew one profoundly true and important point: “There are no Other People. It’s just us.”

Or, as the great poet/preacher John Donne put it in one of his sermons, “Never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”

What a week; what a world

This has been a week about violence and death. I believe it was D. L. Moody who declared that the world has never seen what God can do with one man wholly devoted to him; on Monday, we saw something rather more familiar–what the devil can do with one man who has given himself over to evil. Among the victims lie at least one hero, Dr. Liviu Lebrescu, and a good many people who were determined to do their part to make the world a better place. Most, I’m sure, imagined they had plenty of time to do so; and now, by the evil will of one cowardly human being, they have no more time. I appreciate those who have had something worthwhile to say about this; I particularly appreciate Blest with sons‘ call to us to appreciate the sheepdogs among us; for my part, all I’ve been able to do is say the Kyrie, over and over. Lord, have mercy upon us . . .

But he does. For all our evil, for all we do to mar the good he gives us, he shows us mercy, over and over; as broken and rebellious as we are, he loves us anyway. As obscene a thing as the VT massacre was–somehow worse, at least to me, for coming so close after Easter–yet death does not have the last word. God blesses us despite ourselves, and sometimes even despite our wishes.

In light of that, though I’m not drawing any parallels here, it seemed symbolic to me that two days later, the Supreme Court handed down a decision (Gonzales v. Carhart) upholding the federal Partial Birth Abortion Act. It was a much more limited decision than many (especially on the left) would have you believe–as Hadley Arkes expected, it upheld the law only against a facial challenge, with no repudiation of Roe v. Wade, leaving the door wide open for further challenges to the law as it’s actually applied–but as limited as it is, it is still a significant moment. As Joseph Bottum points out, this appears to mean that abortion law no longer enjoys special, protected status–the door is open to treat abortion legislation in the same way as legislation in other areas. Ultimately, we cannot know whether this step will lead to another step in the same direction or will prove but a momentary turn–barring another change in the Court’s membership, it will depend on Anthony Kennedy, who defies certain prediction–but as Fr. Richard John Neuhaus says, there is at least some reason for hope.

And if that comes through, if abortion on demand is no longer the law of the land by judicial fiat, then perhaps we can begin to build some sort of constructive consensus, along the lines Chicago Sun-Times columnist Neil Steinberg suggested a few years ago; even then, it would be a long way to legal recognition of the human rights of the unborn, but perhaps at least we can arrive at a general understanding that abortion is not a good choice, that there ought to be and are better choices, and that we all together need to do everything we can to make them available to and viable for women in need.

Hymn for Easter Sunday

–posted on Easter Monday, of course, as I was busy yesterday.

Christ the Lord Is Risen TodayChrist the Lord is risen today, Alleluia!
Sons of men and angels say, Alleluia!
Raise your joys and triumphs high, Alleluia!
Sing ye heavens, and earth reply, Alleluia!Lives again our glorious King, Alleluia!
Where, O death, is now thy sting? Alleluia!
Dying once he all doth save, Alleluia!
Where thy victory, O grave? Alleluia!Love’s redeeming work is done, Alleluia!
Fought the fight, the battle won, Alleluia!
Death in vain forbids Him rise, Alleluia!
Christ has opened Paradise, Alleluia!Soar we now where Christ has led, Alleluia!
Following our exalted Head, Alleluia!
Made like Him, like Him we rise, Alleluia!
Ours the cross, the grave, the skies, Alleluia!Words: Charles Wesley
Music: from
Lyra Davidica, London, 1708
EASTER HYMN, 7.7.7.7. with Alleluias

Hymn for Good Friday

I did think of more modern songs for this day, but the one that really came to mind (“The Killing,” by The Violet Burning) depends as much on the music as on the lyrics; and in the end, what else for Good Friday but the other greatest hymn ever written? (The first being “When I Survey the Wondrous Cross,” of course.)

O Sacred Head, Now Wounded O sacred Head, now wounded,
With grief and shame weighed down,
Now scornfully surrounded
With thorns Thine only crown:
How pale Thou art with anguish,
With sore abuse and scorn;
How does that visage languish,
Which once was bright as morn!What Thou, my Lord, hast suffered
Was all for sinners’ gain;
Mine, mine was the transgression,
But Thine the deadly pain.
Lo, here I fall, my Savior;
‘Tis I deserve Thy place.
Look on me with Thy favor,
Vouchsafe to me Thy grace.What language shall I borrow
To thank Thee, dearest Friend,
For this, Thy dying sorrow,
Thy pity without end?
O make me Thine forever,
And should I fainting be,
Lord, let me never, never
Outlive my love to Thee.Words: Paul Gerhardt, based on a Medieval Latin poem ascribed to Bernard of Clairvaux; translated by James W. Alexander
Music: Hans Leo Hassler; harmonized by Johann Sebastian Bach
PASSION CHORALE, 7.6.7.6.D

“In my end is my beginning. . . .”

The dripping blood our only drink,
The bloody flesh our only food:
In spite of which we like to think
That we are sound, substantial flesh and blood–
Again, in spite of that, we call this Friday good.

–T. S. Eliot, from Four Quartets, “East Coker,” IV.

Song for Maundy Thursday

Come to the TableCome to the table and savor the sight,
The wine and the bread that was broken.
And all have been welcomed to come if they might,
And accept as their own these two tokens.
The bread is His body, the wine is the blood,
And the One who provides them is true.
He freely offers, we freely receive;
To accept and believe Him is all we must do.Come to the table
And taste of the glory,
And savor the sorrow—
He’s dying tomorrow;
The hand that is breaking the bread
Soon will be broken.
And here at the table
Sit those who have loved Him;
One is a traitor and one will deny,
Though he’s lived his life for them all
And for all be crucified.
Come to the table:
He’s prepared for you
The bread of forgiveness, the wine of release.
Come to the table and sit down beside him;
The Savior wants you to join in the feast.
Come to the table and see in His eyes
The love that the Father has spoken,
And know you are welcome whatever your crime,
Though every commandment you’ve broken.
For He’s come to love you and not to condemn,
And He offers a pardon of peace.
If you’ll come to the table, you’ll feel in your heart
The greatest forgiveness, the greatest release.ChorusWords and music: Michael Card
© 1984 Whole Armour Publishing
From the album
Known By the Scars, by Michael Card

Hymn for Palm Sunday (late)

It’s been a crazy couple weeks. But this is an ancient and honorable hymn, and shouldn’t be neglected just because I’m behind.

All Glory, Laud and Honor
All glory, laud and honor to Thee, Redeemer, King,
To whom the lips of children made sweet hosannas ring:
Thou art the king of Israel, Thou David’s royal Son,
Who in the Lord’s name comest, the King and blessed One!The company of angels are praising Thee on high,
And mortal men and all things created make reply:
The people of the Hebrews with palms before Thee went;
Our praise and prayer and anthems before Thee we present.To Thee, before Thy passion, they sang their hymns of praise;
To Thee, now high exalted, our melody we raise:
Thou didst accept their praises–Accept the praise we bring,
Who in all good delightest, Thou good and gracious King!Words: Theodulph of Orléans, translated by John M. Neale
Music: Melchior Teschner
ST. THEODULPH, 7.6.7.6.D

Presumption, my dear sir; pure presumption

It’s one of the interesting (and annoying) things about scientists these days—well, to be precise, about the high-profile ones who write heavily-publicized books attacking Christianity—that they refuse to hear of anyone without a Ph.D. in science writing anything at all bearing in any way on science, and treat anyone who tries with utter contempt, but don’t hesitate to wade into the fields of the humanities, of which they know nothing at all, with the serene assurance that since they’re scientists, they must be experts here, too. Watching the likes of Richard Dawkins and Steven Weinberg dress up as philosophers, theologians and historians would be hysterically funny were it not so embarrassingly cringe-inducing, at least for those who actually know something about practicing the disciplines of philosophy, theology and history; it’s amateur hour to the nth power, rather as if someone stepped out of America’s Funniest Home Videos and into the finals of American Idol. Watching the noted philosopher Alvin Plantinga dismantle Dawkins’ book The God Delusion, however, is a very different experience, one in which Dawkins’ work plays the role of carrot to Plantinga’s Cuisinart; for his part, Weinberg’s smug, self-satisfied theory of historical development doesn’t fare much better against Barton Swaim.

I’ll concede, it would be unreasonable to expect these folks to stop trying to refute Christianity; but I would appreciate it if they would at least set aside their disciplinary arrogance and treat the humanities with the same academic respect they demand for the sciences.

Edit: as noted in the comments, including Daniel Dennett with Dawkins and Weinberg was inappropriate in more than one respect; he has therefore been removed. Mea culpa; mea maxima culpa. That said, I would still appreciate it if he would “treat the humanities with the same academic respect [he] demands for the sciences,” even if he’s formally a philosopher himself, as he treats even his own ostensible discipline with public disdain.