God's noblest work

I'm reading a book called Revelations: Diaries of Women which includes excerpts from a wide variety of women including the wife of Tolstoy, the wife of Dostoevsky, Anne Frank, George Eliot and Virginia Woolf. Many of the women that I have read so far appear to adore some man or other (often husbands, but Dorothy Wordsworth adored her brother, William.) It was getting to a point that I honestly started to wonder if men were different or better or some such back in the day. (Or perhaps the women led more pathetic lives?)

But then I got to a quote by Louisa May Alcott, the author of Little Women.  When she was 10 years old she wrote the following in her diary:

Father asked us what was God's noblest work.  Anna said men, but I said babies. Men are often bad; babies never are.

I had to laugh at that.

So what would you say is God's noblest work?  (Atheists can play along by deferring to the God part for the moment and focusing on the noblest work bit.) I'm tempted to pick something mushy like "love" or "community." But I think the theme of the quote involves tangible objects. Chocolate jumps to mind, but that might be a bit of a silly answer.

I suppose a question like this calls to mind another question, "What does it mean to be noble?"

I guess I'm going to go with "People" as my answer for now. We're such complex creatures that I think that makes us pretty impressive. But noble?  See, I'm not sure if we fit that part. I'll have to keep thinking on this.

The Living Nativity « The Skit Guys

Link

Hmmm, I haven't used this share into Multiply feature before.  Even though the link under the video says "watch preview" I think you still end up seeing the whole thing.

The blurb under the vid. describes it as: "A hilarious and heartwarming mockumentary that tells the story of an actor performing in a living nativity who takes his role way too seriously."

Safe Ground

[A dorky poem by yours truly.]

As long as we continue to pedal
   through the same ideas and concepts
     every Sunday
As long as "they" are always wrong
   and "we" are always right
Then we are on safe ground.

Some days we seem to veer near the edge.
We come close to an interesting or new idea.
We consider that there might be more to consider.
And then we get back on task.

If we really believe what we believe
Then aren't we already on safe ground?
Shouldn't we feel safe then,
   pedaling outside our comfort zone?

*Sigh*

Another Sunday spent
   remaining on safe ground.

He has a knack for that

I got this in my email inbox today. The text at the bottom says, "Steve Fee has quite a knack for writing relevant worship songs with memorable melodies and lyrics that give voice to the songs that God has already put in the hearts of His people."

Does that even make sense to say that Steve has "quite a knack" for writing worship songs?Seems like that would be akin to saying that Elijah had "quite a knack" for working miracles or Moses had "quite a knack" for leading the Israelites out of Egypt. 

Jars of Clay covers Van Halen (accordion style)

We listen to Mornings with Brant on our way in to school. He's thoughtful, brings up interesting topics of discussion, and is just the right amount of irreverent.

He also plays accordion, but this time around it was one of the chaps from Jars of Clay that grabbed the instrument and rocked out. (Brant is the guy who throws his face in front of the camera about half way through.)

Ayn Rand vs. Kathleen Dean Moore

I'm currently reading Ayn Rand's We the Living. I've only read one Ayn Rand before; I can't remember which book it was.  All I remember was that the two characters that hated each other the most were also constantly having sex with each other.  It seemed a bit bizarre to me. But since then I've occasionally heard people rave over Ayn Rand's books. So I decided to dive in again in hopes of figuring out what exactly it was that people liked in them. I still don't think I get it.  (Feel free to enlighten me.) But I did find that some sections of the book stand at a delightful juxtaposition to an article I was reading in this week's High Country News.

I'm curious, which quote resonates with you more? And why?

"Don't you know," her voice trembled suddenly in a passionate plea she could not hide, "don't you know that there are things, in the best of us, which no outside hand should dare to touch? Things sacred because, and only because, one can say: 'This is mine'? Don't you know that we live only for ourselves, the best of us do, those who are worthy of it? Don't you know that there is something in us which must not be touched by any state, by any collective, by any number of millions?" -- Ayn Rand, in We the Living

This inclusiveness is by design. Kathy's friends and family members underscore Aldo Leopold's belief that, just as ecology is the science of connection, so "all ethics... rest upon a single premise: that the individual is a member of a community of interdependent parts." It is also Moore's reply to centuries of Western philosophy.  She believes that our great thinkers have spent far too much energy parsing distinctions between ideas, between humans and other living things, between the mundane and the sacred, and not given nearly enough effort to pointing out commonalities. -- John Calderazzo, writing about Kathleen Dean Moore in an article entitled, "When reverence isn't enough" in HCN.

Re: Jesus loves you

This cracked me up. I'd love to see what folks said in the emails they sent in reply to him.

I think the answer to the disconnect has to do with justice. But the disconnect itself is interesting in its own right (as the video hilariously points out). I think many people who call themselves Christians live in this world of disconnect without ever realizing how confused they are. And when it dawns on them, I think that's when they jump ship.