He said what?! To whom?!
My sophomore year in high school brought a lot of changes. One of those changes, a positive one and one most important to me, was that I could take a class in journalism.
For one hour each day, five times each week, for about 40 weeks, I studied the fundamentals of Journalism. Throw in homework assignments and working on our award-winning school newspaper, I spent about 500 hours that school year immersed in journalistic pursuits. Yes, I learned how to write a concise, complete, accurate, and readable news story. Beyond the writing, though, I also learned how to do the research and investigatory work necessary to produce the elements of those stories. As Mrs. Cooper taught us: conveying what you want to convey is one thing; knowing whether it is accurate is something else entirely.
For the writing part, we learned to apply the Inverted Pyramid; the organization of information so that the most important facts appeared first in the story, with subsequent paragraphs containing information of lesser importance. Employing the Inverted Pyramid style, the first paragraph of a news story should contain (or, at least reference) the main who, what, when, where, and why (and/or how) fact-set.
If I were reporting on the events described in this week’s selection from the Gospel of John, the first paragraph would go something like this.
Last night in Bethany, at the home of Lazarus, Martha, and Mary, one of Jesus’s followers, Judas, criticized Mary for anointing Jesus’ feet with a pound of expensive perfume. Judas questioned why the fragrance was not, instead, sold for 300 denarii and the proceeds distributed among the poor.
That’s not a bad opening paragraph. The main actors are all named. The main event, the foot-washing, is referenced. And a possible conflict is identified. It’s enough to make the reader wonder what happened next.
In an exclusive to this paper, another follower, John, described the events. John indicated he and other followers were invited to join Jesus for dinner at the Bethany household. [You my recall this home from a story we reported not long ago. It is the same location where Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead!] During dinner, while Jesus visited with Lazarus, Mary brought in the jar of ointment, lavished its contents on the feet of Jesus and then proceeded to wipe it off with her hair!
This works perfectly in an inverted pyramid story. The second paragraph provides the background for the first part of the first paragraph. The third paragraph will address the conflict between Jesus and Judas.
As the scent of the expensive perfume filled the house, Judas was heard to say, “Why was this perfume not sold for three hundred denarii and the money given to the poor?" The reader might think this question was not aimed at anyone in particular; more of a rhetorical question than one seeking an answer. However, John tells us Jesus responded to Judas, telling him, “Leave her alone. She bought it so that she might keep it for the day of my burial. You always have the poor with you, but you do not always have me."
The good reporter uses the last paragraph to bring the story to a close ... or to as much of a close as can be engineered with the facts at hand.
There has been speculation as to not only what Jesus meant by the comment to Judas that he would “always have the poor” with him, but also why he directed the comment to Judas. Jesus is known to periodically pause and direct side comments to His followers. However, in this case, it is clear His remarks were made directly in response to Judas. There seems to be a brewing conflict between these two, one that bears watching. The reader can depend on our reporters to remain vigilant, and to bring you the news of whatever develops.
That would be the end of a news story. The facts were presented and unknowns were identified. Mrs. Cooper would instruct us to move over to the Opinion Page if we wanted to write anything else about those events. Let’s do that and see what might have been printed there.
Sharp words were exchanged last night at a home in Bethany. The well known preacher, Jesus, took to task one of his followers for criticizing the actions of their host (see related story on Page 1). It seems one Judas expressed dismay that a pound(!) of perfume was applied to the feet of Jesus by Mary, sister to Martha and Lazarus (see “Life After Resurrection” Page 8, for more on this mystery man). While it may seem bizarre to anoint someone’s feet with perfume (and then wipe it off with her hair), in our view, Mary was perfectly within her rights to do so. Her home, her perfume. However, this Judas opined that the perfume was expensive and could have been sold for 300 denarii(!). Further, he thought that value could have been more useful in the hands of the poor than on the feet of Jesus. It is hard to argue with the need of the poor, but ....
This Judas kept the common purse of Jesus and his followers and no doubt had money on his mind ... perhaps too much. We have it on good authority that this Judas said what he said “not because he cared about the poor.” Our source further accused Judas of being a thief, claiming that he “used to steal” from their common purse. Well, that puts a whole new light on his complaints about the poor! In our opinion, this Judas cares nothing about the needs of the poor, but only about his own pockets. It seems his master has caught him out as well, sending this parting shot his way: “Leave her alone. She bought it so that she might keep it for the day of my burial. You always have the poor with you, but you do not always have me."
Sounds to us like Jesus was not really commenting on the poor, at all. That, by using ‘the poor” as a metaphor, He was telling Judas that he could steal from the purse at any time, but that there would not be another occasion when Mary could express her feelings about Jesus. As for our newspaper, it is our hope the authorities will take note of this man and his love of money. For, as we all know, it is the love of money that is the root of all evil.
It might be interesting to read what this fictional newspaper would write about subsequent events. And what opinion pieces might grace its Opinion Page. But that’s it for now.
At least we now know who said what to whom.
_________________________
GRAPHIC (a great link to lessons for writers and wanna-be-writers): https://writerswrite.co.za/why-you-need-the-inverted-pyramid-when-you-write/inverted-pyramid-in-comprehensive-form/
__________________________
READINGS FOR THE COMING WEEK
Fifth Sunday in Lent (April 7, 2019)
https://lectionary.library.vanderbilt.edu//texts.php?id=122
Isaiah 43:16-21
Psalm 126
Philippians 3:4b-14
John 12:1-8
_________________________
One Friday closer to Easter! Join us for DaySpring’s Lectionary Breakfast at the Waco “Egg and I” restaurant. We start at 8:00am, packing an hour with good news, good food, good fellowship, good discussion, and a belly laugh or two. You should join us.
Blessings,
Steve
Showing posts with label Mary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mary. Show all posts
Sunday, April 7, 2019
Saturday, December 22, 2018
Dragons, Hipsters, and Mangers ... Oh My! (A Steve Orr Advent reflection)
The dragons were just too much.
That’s my guess, anyway. In a neighborhood (and, lets face it, a nation) festooned with Yule trees, lighted bushes and rooflines, blow-up Santas, wire reindeer, Yodas, and Minions ... it may seem strange that one of Diana Rowland’s neighbors took umbrage at her use of dragons for Christmas decorations. The AP story reported that her anonymous neighbor left a note suggesting the dragons were demonic and that Rowland didn’t “know the true meaning of Christmas.”
OK, yes, inflatable dragons are different. But demonic? I guess that is one of those “eye of the beholder” things. If we’re going to have to restrict our displays to just manger scenes ... well, people can get creative, there, too. One recent manger scene was rendered Hipster style. Mary and Joseph are shown taking a selfie with the baby. The three wisemen are rendered as Amazon delivery people on Segway scooters. There’s a solar collector on the roof ... and a drone.
Don’t get me wrong. I love a well-crafted manger scene. But considering how little we actually know about the night of Jesus’ birth, it might be that we would have to remove several manger scenes for not accurately reflecting what scripture actually says about it. Were there hipsters at Jesus’ birth? Unlikely. Dragons? Also unlikely. Same for Minions. And Christmas trees, light strings, inflatable ... well, anythings.
In fact, little-to-nothing of modern Christmas decoration relates directly to the birth of Jesus.
If we find ourselves spending an inordinate amount of time thinking about how such things don’t capture “the true meaning of Christmas,” it just might be that our focus is in the wrong place. Instead of thinking about how wrong everyone is in their approach to this holiday period, we should invest those brain cells and emotional energy in meditating on what was (and is) really happening.
And to that end, I recommend Mary’s lovely speech in this week’s selection from Luke. It is often called The Magnificat.
“My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant. Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed; for the Mighty One has done great things for me, and holy is his name. His mercy is for those who fear him from generation to generation. He has shown strength with his arm; he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts. He has brought down the powerful from their thrones, and lifted up the lowly; he has filled the hungry with good things, and sent the rich away empty. He has helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy, according to the promise he made to our ancestors, to Abraham and to his descendants forever.”
(Luke 1:46-55 NRSV - http://bible.com/2016/luk.1.46-55.nrsv)
Magnify the Lord, keeper of promises.
Rejoice in God’s mercy.
Lift up the lowly.
Fill the hungry.
Mary knew where the focus should be this season.
_________________________
PHOTO: Steve Orr
_________________________
READINGS FOR THE COMING WEEK
Fourth Sunday of Advent (December 23, 2018)
https://lectionary.library.vanderbilt.edu//
Micah 5:2-5a
Psalm 80:1-7
Hebrews 10:5-10
Luke 1:39-45, (46-55)
__________________________
Join us Friday morning for DaySpring’s Lectionary Breakfast. As usual, we start at 8:00 at the Waco “Egg and I” restaurant. The hour that follows is packed with Bible, discussion, food, fellowship, and prayer. It is a blessing.
Merry Christmas!
Steve
That’s my guess, anyway. In a neighborhood (and, lets face it, a nation) festooned with Yule trees, lighted bushes and rooflines, blow-up Santas, wire reindeer, Yodas, and Minions ... it may seem strange that one of Diana Rowland’s neighbors took umbrage at her use of dragons for Christmas decorations. The AP story reported that her anonymous neighbor left a note suggesting the dragons were demonic and that Rowland didn’t “know the true meaning of Christmas.”
OK, yes, inflatable dragons are different. But demonic? I guess that is one of those “eye of the beholder” things. If we’re going to have to restrict our displays to just manger scenes ... well, people can get creative, there, too. One recent manger scene was rendered Hipster style. Mary and Joseph are shown taking a selfie with the baby. The three wisemen are rendered as Amazon delivery people on Segway scooters. There’s a solar collector on the roof ... and a drone.
Don’t get me wrong. I love a well-crafted manger scene. But considering how little we actually know about the night of Jesus’ birth, it might be that we would have to remove several manger scenes for not accurately reflecting what scripture actually says about it. Were there hipsters at Jesus’ birth? Unlikely. Dragons? Also unlikely. Same for Minions. And Christmas trees, light strings, inflatable ... well, anythings.
In fact, little-to-nothing of modern Christmas decoration relates directly to the birth of Jesus.
If we find ourselves spending an inordinate amount of time thinking about how such things don’t capture “the true meaning of Christmas,” it just might be that our focus is in the wrong place. Instead of thinking about how wrong everyone is in their approach to this holiday period, we should invest those brain cells and emotional energy in meditating on what was (and is) really happening.
And to that end, I recommend Mary’s lovely speech in this week’s selection from Luke. It is often called The Magnificat.
“My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant. Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed; for the Mighty One has done great things for me, and holy is his name. His mercy is for those who fear him from generation to generation. He has shown strength with his arm; he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts. He has brought down the powerful from their thrones, and lifted up the lowly; he has filled the hungry with good things, and sent the rich away empty. He has helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy, according to the promise he made to our ancestors, to Abraham and to his descendants forever.”
(Luke 1:46-55 NRSV - http://bible.com/2016/luk.1.46-55.nrsv)
Magnify the Lord, keeper of promises.
Rejoice in God’s mercy.
Lift up the lowly.
Fill the hungry.
Mary knew where the focus should be this season.
_________________________
PHOTO: Steve Orr
_________________________
READINGS FOR THE COMING WEEK
Fourth Sunday of Advent (December 23, 2018)
https://lectionary.library.vanderbilt.edu//
Micah 5:2-5a
Psalm 80:1-7
Hebrews 10:5-10
Luke 1:39-45, (46-55)
__________________________
Join us Friday morning for DaySpring’s Lectionary Breakfast. As usual, we start at 8:00 at the Waco “Egg and I” restaurant. The hour that follows is packed with Bible, discussion, food, fellowship, and prayer. It is a blessing.
Merry Christmas!
Steve
Friday, December 16, 2011
Relative Hospitality
Relative Hospitality
(a brief Lectionary reflection at Advent by Steve Orr)
When I was young, vacations usually went something like this. We kids would be awakened sometime in the night or very early morning (all I can recall is that it was dark and I was sleepy). Our parents would herd us into (or perhaps carry us to) the back of the station wagon where we would find a pallet of blankets nestled in among the luggage. Once we hit those blankets, that's the last we knew until well past sunup.
Depending on how our family was doing with money at the time, and just as often on my dad's mood, we might or might not stop to eat at a roadside diner. It was quite common for them to have packed several bologna sandwiches, potato salad, and Jello into Tupperware containers (lids carefully placed and burped to ensure freshness) so we would not have to stop for meals.
We might be headed to Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana, or Michigan; we might stop to see things along the way or Dad might be so focused we would have to beg him to make bathroom stops; but one thing was certain: there was always a relative at the other end of our journey.
We stayed with family. That was our way. There might be a guest room for the adults; but even if not, there were always places for us to stay (maybe a foldout couch or a trundle bed, maybe in a den or basement-cum-family room), even if only on the ever-handy pallet of blankets on the floor. There was always room for visitors. I was a married man before I took a family vacation that did not involve staying with relatives at some point in the vacation.
For most of us, it is still the same, today. We call it hospitality, but with family it is almost a given. Family tends to take care of family. When they're in town, they stay with us.
So, with the foregoing in mind, I have to wonder: why were Joseph and Mary looking for an inn? Why weren't they staying with family? We have this mental picture of the two of them: Mary astride a donkey, Joseph holding the rope, both looking forlorn as the Innkeeper informs them there is no room (perhaps due to the influx of people in town to register for the Emperor's census).
That picture is unlikely.
First, Bethlehem is only five miles outside Jerusalem. It's a long walk, but it is unlikely there was a need in Bethlehem for what we think of as an "inn." While there were open-air enclosures along the major trade routes where travelers could stop for the night, don't think "Inn of the Prancing Pony"; more like "biker bar." Not the kind of place a respectable Jewish man would take his pregnant fiancé for the night.
No, the word we usually translate as "inn" is better translated as "guest room," something every Jewish home had (even the poorest of one-room homes had a partitioned area where guests could bed down for the night).
The other matter is the fact that scripture says, "While they were there, the time came for her baby to be born." It's not that they showed up in Bethlehem only to be shuttled to a nearby barn just in time for Jesus to be born. They were already in town, probably staying with some of Joseph's relatives, but they were not welcome into one of the family guest rooms (unmarried? pregnant? perceived to be adulterous? ... you fill in the reason).
But someone finally decides that even though the couple has, apparently, broken some pretty serious Jewish laws, such a pregnant girl can't be forced to stay out in the open. So, taking pity, they put the couple in the cave with the animals. It's protected from the weather, and, perhaps just as importantly, from the prying eyes of the neighbors.
It's not a pretty story, but it is much more consistent with having the unsavory shepherds (those low men) show up to be the human heralds of the Messiah. Low key, low station, low people. A fitting birth scenario for the kind of king who would someday ride into the capital city on the back of a donkey rather than a warhorse and then usher in a new kingdom by ignobly dying on a cross.
#####################################
READINGS FOR THE COMING WEEK
Fourth Sunday of Advent (December 18, 2011)
2 Samuel 7:1-11, 16
Luke 1:46b-55 or Psalm 89:1-4, 19-26
Romans 16:25-27
Luke 1:26-38
(a brief Lectionary reflection at Advent by Steve Orr)
When I was young, vacations usually went something like this. We kids would be awakened sometime in the night or very early morning (all I can recall is that it was dark and I was sleepy). Our parents would herd us into (or perhaps carry us to) the back of the station wagon where we would find a pallet of blankets nestled in among the luggage. Once we hit those blankets, that's the last we knew until well past sunup.
Depending on how our family was doing with money at the time, and just as often on my dad's mood, we might or might not stop to eat at a roadside diner. It was quite common for them to have packed several bologna sandwiches, potato salad, and Jello into Tupperware containers (lids carefully placed and burped to ensure freshness) so we would not have to stop for meals.
We might be headed to Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana, or Michigan; we might stop to see things along the way or Dad might be so focused we would have to beg him to make bathroom stops; but one thing was certain: there was always a relative at the other end of our journey.
We stayed with family. That was our way. There might be a guest room for the adults; but even if not, there were always places for us to stay (maybe a foldout couch or a trundle bed, maybe in a den or basement-cum-family room), even if only on the ever-handy pallet of blankets on the floor. There was always room for visitors. I was a married man before I took a family vacation that did not involve staying with relatives at some point in the vacation.
For most of us, it is still the same, today. We call it hospitality, but with family it is almost a given. Family tends to take care of family. When they're in town, they stay with us.
So, with the foregoing in mind, I have to wonder: why were Joseph and Mary looking for an inn? Why weren't they staying with family? We have this mental picture of the two of them: Mary astride a donkey, Joseph holding the rope, both looking forlorn as the Innkeeper informs them there is no room (perhaps due to the influx of people in town to register for the Emperor's census).
That picture is unlikely.
First, Bethlehem is only five miles outside Jerusalem. It's a long walk, but it is unlikely there was a need in Bethlehem for what we think of as an "inn." While there were open-air enclosures along the major trade routes where travelers could stop for the night, don't think "Inn of the Prancing Pony"; more like "biker bar." Not the kind of place a respectable Jewish man would take his pregnant fiancé for the night.
No, the word we usually translate as "inn" is better translated as "guest room," something every Jewish home had (even the poorest of one-room homes had a partitioned area where guests could bed down for the night).
The other matter is the fact that scripture says, "While they were there, the time came for her baby to be born." It's not that they showed up in Bethlehem only to be shuttled to a nearby barn just in time for Jesus to be born. They were already in town, probably staying with some of Joseph's relatives, but they were not welcome into one of the family guest rooms (unmarried? pregnant? perceived to be adulterous? ... you fill in the reason).
But someone finally decides that even though the couple has, apparently, broken some pretty serious Jewish laws, such a pregnant girl can't be forced to stay out in the open. So, taking pity, they put the couple in the cave with the animals. It's protected from the weather, and, perhaps just as importantly, from the prying eyes of the neighbors.
It's not a pretty story, but it is much more consistent with having the unsavory shepherds (those low men) show up to be the human heralds of the Messiah. Low key, low station, low people. A fitting birth scenario for the kind of king who would someday ride into the capital city on the back of a donkey rather than a warhorse and then usher in a new kingdom by ignobly dying on a cross.
#####################################
READINGS FOR THE COMING WEEK
Fourth Sunday of Advent (December 18, 2011)
2 Samuel 7:1-11, 16
Luke 1:46b-55 or Psalm 89:1-4, 19-26
Romans 16:25-27
Luke 1:26-38
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
The Wild Bunch (a slightly different Christmas story)
Photo courtesy of middle-east-pictures.com
(A brief Lectionary reflection by Steve Orr for Christmas Eve)
On the surface, "The Wild Bunch" sounds like a pretty interesting movie: an aging group of “old west” outlaws has trouble adjusting to the very modern world of 1913. From that premise we could build almost any kind of movie; a comedy, a love story, a heroic epic; maybe even a heart-warming Christmas tale. But that premise is not the whole of it.
When Roger Ebert reviewed the movie back in the summer of 1969, he called it "the most violent movie ever made," a movie in which "there are no heroes; just some bad people we know killing some bad people we don't know." And if that doesn't give you pause, let me add my own caution: even though some mainstream movies may have matched the violence of this film in recent years, the cruelty depicted in it is still truly disturbing all these decades later. While we could spend a lot of time engaging in the ongoing debate about the value of the film (it is considered by many to be one of the top ten westerns of all time), that's not why I raised the topic here.
I want us to consider the wild bunch, themselves.
Here is a group of men who are hard; who spend a lot of their time out in the badlands, sleeping rough, living rough. They look rough, and they smell bad. Not the kind of folk most of us would choose to spend any time with at all. For any reason. We immediately mistrust them. There is something about the look of them that makes us want to turn and go the other way. Not someone you would wish to have join the family, and if they were already in the family, well, we would want to send them as far away as we could possibly arrange.
In short, a lot like the shepherds keeping watch over their flocks by night . . . on THAT night.
What?!
Oh, yes. Scholars tell us that at the time of Jesus' birth, shepherding was a despised trade, comprised of despised people. They were considered thieves; in fact, people were strongly discouraged from purchasing milk or wool from shepherds because it was widely assumed they had come by those goods dishonestly. Loving fathers refused to teach their sons the trade.
Wow. That really changes how we see the events of that night of nights. Picture it with me. These low men are out in the fields with the sheep. Some are sleeping. Sheep don’t smell any better at night than in the day; and they don’t smell any better when asleep. But these men have grown accustomed to the smell. In fact, the men smell exactly the same as the sheep. Those who are keeping watch are alert to the sounds of the night; more concerned for their own lives than for the lives of the sheep.
Suddenly: an angel just APPEARS out of nowhere! Right there in the middle of them! Glory and light shine all about. The shepherds’ first thought: RUN! But the angel, who knows they are afraid (and probably should be) calms them down. He gives them the message about the Messiah being born in the nearby town and describes how they will recognize him. And if that was not enough, suddenly, there are even MORE angels surrounding them; an army of them, shouting in unison “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and peace on earth to people who please Him!”
Then, just as suddenly as they appeared: they are just not there.
After all that, what would you do? The shepherds did just what I think any of us would do (after we got over the shock); they went to investigate.
Now picture THIS scene: Mary and Joseph (surrounded by livestock, having wrapped their newborn son in cloths and placed him in the feed trough because, well, there is just NO WHERE ELSE) hear a noise. At first, it is unidentifiable; but soon, they recognize it as the many voices of excited people; and the sound appears to be rushing toward them. In short order, the little stable is crammed full of shepherds; not exactly the kind of people parents would want near their newborn. And the smell, already bad, only gets worse. There is a lot of pushing and shoving; finally the whole crowd tells the tale; talking over each other, each one trying to tell it.
Then, like many have over the ensuing millennia, the shepherds took to the streets to tell what they had seen and heard that night. And---maybe for the first time ever---people stopped to listen to them; these hard, low men; these thieves. And the people marveled at what they heard.
###
Our own wild bunch is going to meet (unofficially) for breakfast this Friday (12/24/2010) at Kim’s. It is very easy to spot on the corner of 26th and Waco Drive. The traditional time is 8:00 a.m., but the Orr’s and Hamerly’s are aiming for around 7:30 . . . What? Why, yes, we ARE bringing Luke ;-)
Hope to see you there!
Readings for the Coming Week
Isaiah 9:2-7; 52:7-10; 62:6-12
Psalm 96; 97; 98
Titus 2:11-14; 3:4-7; Hebrews 1:1-4, (5-12)
Luke 2:1-14, (15-20); John 1:1-14
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
