Today we attended Chee's funeral. Afterward, we went to the cemetery where there was a committal service for the cremated remains of both Chee and her husband Smitty who died a little over three years ago. I'm told that my three-year-old grandson had a lot of questions about what was happening. I'm glad he has good parents to explain things
I have a largely negative feeling about cremation. Maybe I would also have a negative feeling about embalming and other ways of treating the physical remains of a departed loved one if I knew more about it. I guess it's just all a rather unpleasant aspect of reality, and I shouldn't borrow trouble by obsessing about it when I really have no decision to make on the matter.
No doubt my sensibilities have been strongly influenced by convention. The thing is, conventions in society are in flux, and cremation is becoming quite common. It's less expensive than embalming and burial of an intact body. Are there really justifiable reasons for opposing it? From memory, it seemed to me that in the Old Testament the burning of bodies was associated with sin and judgement. I think I was remembering the story of Achan and his family and how their bodies were disposed of. This memory may be why it seems disrespectful to me to burn a body.
This website sheds some light on the subject: "In general, the practice of cremation was taken more as a punishment than honor in the Bible. In fact, most people who were burned in the Bible were cursed." Nevertheless, whoever writes a conclusion on that website feels that there really is no clear biblical instruction either for or against cremation.
***********
It's a borrowing-from-Facebook night again. First , the heavy stuff. Here's what I posted this morning:
Favorite quotes from Michael Gerson's recent column.
" . . . there might be some lessons to be taken from the Thomas-Meadows exchanges. They illustrate many of the reasons that people — including religious people — get disturbed by an outsize role of faith in politics.
· The Christianization of politics makes people in a democracy less persuadable. . . .
· A religious certainty on uncertain matters can blind people to difficult and complex debates. . . .
· Religious passion in politics can easily become tribal, as opponents are transformed into infidels. . . .
· Religious passion can lower the standards to which we hold leaders, since the only real political choice is between a favorable strongman and the social abyss. . . .
· Religious passion in politics can encourage an apocalyptic tone that drives out real deliberation.
"I say all this as a religious person. I say all this because I am a religious person. I believe that religion can raise the moral sights of politics (see the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.) and root our belief in human dignity. But it is the very power of religious conviction that can make people co-opt it with their own passions and beliefs. Instead of being judged and challenged by the best of their faith, they use their faith to judge others. And they move closer and closer toward blasphemy.
The Christian writer and lay theologian C.S. Lewis wrote: “I am a democrat[*] because I believe that no man or group of men is good enough to be trusted with uncontrolled power over others. And the higher the pretensions of such power, the more dangerous I think it both to rulers and to the subjects. Hence Theocracy is the worst of all governments. … The inquisitor who mistakes his own cruelty and lust for power and fear for the voice of Heaven will torment us infinitely more because he torments us with the approval of his own conscience and his better impulses appear to him as temptations.”
The problem, of course, is that this furor is rooted primarily in a theological error. And there is very little that government can do to address it (except for the healthy maintenance of democratic institutions). Oddly for a secular age, our country might be waiting on a theologian equal to the moment."
********************
*Lewis was British, and did not belong to any American political party. He was using this term in a generic sense. Lewis died in 1963.
You can read the entire column here.
************
Now for a lighter post, also from this morning.
What "It's ready" means at mealtime:
When Hiromi speaks: The smoking-hot breakfast griddle, laden with hash browns, eggs, and ham, has just been turned off.
When I speak: The table is set with a plate, filled water glass, and three piece of flatware at each place setting. All the food is in serving bowls or on plates on the table, with a serving utensil in each one. Condiments or minor meal accompaniments (butter, soup crackers, etc.) are at the table, along with anything needed to serve them (pickle forks or tongs, for example).
************
Thoughts about meal preparation:
In Hiromi's mind: This is no big deal.
In my mind: Trying to remember so many things can be exhausting (but I still love to cook).
*************
Note: During most of our marriage, I prepared breakfast for the family. In retirement, since Hiromi has no regular work schedule to commit to, he'd rather cook breakfast for both of us whenever he's ready than to be inconvenienced by breakfast being served before he's ready. I do appreciate his facility in the kitchen and his willingness to use it to benefit us both.
*****************
Several of the comments are too good not to share. I'll refrain from identifying the authors, because I have not asked their permission to share.
First comment: This precisely describes our marriage in this area. It was fun to read.
Second comment: So true! [husband's name] cooks a lot, but when he wants people to come to the table, often serving utensils are missing for the main dishes, and condiment utensils are always missing. He is sitting at his place waiting to pray, and I am still running around filling in the missing items!
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home