This looks like bottom floor of television studio where I first encountered Shouwang Church in June 2010

In May-June 2010 spent four weeks journeying through the People’s Republic of China. That journey ended with a second visit to Beijing during which had the opportunity to worship with two house churches. One a house house church. Several people who met in a small two(?) bedroom apartment. After which we went to visit Shouwang Church which at that time met in the bottom floor of a television studio building. I had joy and privilege of talking for about one hour with an intelligent young professional man who spoke impeccable English about the state of religion in general and of the Christian church in China particularly.

What that young man told me was different from what I am reading one year later. That apparently the Chinese government has enacted newer stricter rules regulating religious activity. And apparently Shouwang Church had been forced to leave the space it had been renting. And so come Easter they were attempting to worship outdoors. But the Chinese government would not allow even this. Members of Shouwang Church were arrested and hauled away in buses.

A recent article by David Aikman in the June 2010 issue of The American Spectator brought this back to mind.

Foreign correspondents in Beijing were alerted to something strange going on with China’s Christian community on April 10, 2011. Hundreds of members of the prominent Beijing Shouwang house church (whose name means “Keeping Watch”) were preparing to gather in a prominent open-air space in the Zhongguancun high-tech commercial area of northwest Beijing for an outdoor Sunday worship meeting. Many of the worshippers, arriving at the site, were barred by the police from coming any closer. Others were herded into buses and taken away by the police for questioning. Still others, anticipating a blanket police clampdown of their corporate worship, gathered in small numbers nearby, including in a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant, where they went through the order of service that had been preprinted for that Sunday.

…

Though no one was formally arrested for the attempt to conduct Christian worship in an unauthorized location, by Easter Sunday, two weeks later, the authorities had clamped down even more fiercely. All of the top church leadership, all members of the choir, and hundreds of other prominent members of the congregation, more than 500 people in total, were physically prevented from leaving their homes by police planted outside their front doors. There was no letup the following Sunday, when even more church members were kept under house arrest, and dozens again detained for showing up at the Zhongguancun site.

It feels strange to read about this sort of thing happening to people that one has met and talked with and with whom one has worshiped.

Strangely enough have not been receiving the usual periodical emails from the aforementioned young man. The person who put me in touch with Shouwang Church his wife is battling advanced cancer and am reluctant to ask if he has received any word. Will keep you posted.

Note – This is the 500th post on this website. Woohoo!

Sloan Digital Sky Survey - most complete map of the universe

I have been thinking a great deal lately about the relationship between what we call heaven and earth. And/or(?) between time and eternity.

This appears to be a theme in many posts and podcasts by Father Stephen Freeman who is an Orthodox Christian priest in Tennessee. I have listened several times to one of his podcasts in particular “Now That We Have Come to the End of the World”.

Father Stephen takes seriously references to time and tense in Scripture. For example:

“All those whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world”
- Revelation 13:8b (New International Version – emphasis added)*

*(The verse could be interpreted/translated “written from the creation of the world in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain”. Although this is difficult given the order of elements in the verse:

οὗ οὐ γέγραπται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου.

So Christ the Lamb of God was not only slain at a particular point in linear time – say around 33-34 AD. He was slain from the foundation of the world.

Adoration of the Lamb by Van Eyck

Similarly Father Freeman cites especially Hebrews 12:22-23:

But you have come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23 to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. (New International Version)

But wait a minute. How can the writer of Hebrews say “you have come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God”? This can only be true if this has in fact already happened. The end of the world has already come.

This challenges our modern understanding of time as linear. That is time is like a line. Something that happened in 33-34 AD happened at a particular point in time. It did not happen earlier. It did not happen later. Something that will happen at the end of time – or the end of the age – simply has not happened yet. We are therefore waiting for the eschaton.

Father Freeman argues that this understanding of time as linear is not the understanding of time we find in the Scriptures of in the Tradition of the Christian church. The Cross is somehow not restricted to a single point along linear time. The Cross is an event that somehow reaches into(?) both past and future. Or perhaps more correctly the Cross is an event that exists(? happens?) throughout time. Which leaves us to wonder how to describe the Cross as historical event – for surely it is an historical event even if it is also an eternal event. Perhaps that the Cross is an eternal event that manifests(? appears?) at a particular point in linear(?) historical time.

In the context of his podcast this is not abstract or theoretical. This has enormous practical implications – as all good theology must. For example when we read the Sermon on the Mountain in Matthew chapters 5-7 – and that is how we should call/translate it – the Beatitudes are not wishful thinking. Jesus is being entirely serious. Nor are they only predictions of what life will be like in the kingdom of heaven. As Father Freeman concludes “they are the commandments of the kingdom of God”.

Because the end has already come among us in the incarnation of the God-man Jesus. We have already come to the end of the world. We have come to the heavenly Jerusalem. We already live in(?) the kingdom of God which Jesus proclaimed is at hand.

Which leaves us to ask whether all this represents an over-realized eschatology? Against which the apostle Paul warned the Corinthian church? But that is another topic for another post.

I am a strongly visual learner. Most of the time in order to understand or remember something I must be able to see it. When I take notes – in class or during a lecture or on a book – I frequently make little drawings that represent in visual form what the person/text is saying. And when I give directions I usually cannot tell you street names.

Father Freeman’s posts and podcasts – especially those that address the issue of time/eternity and heaven/earth – have challenged my normal understanding of theology and of the universe. And I have been trying to picture what he describes. If time is not linear… if the end has already happened… if Christ was slain from the foundation of the universe (ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου)… then how can we describe that visually?

Linear time. A line.

Eternity. A sphere.

The line travels through the sphere which surrounds the line. All points on the line are visible to the sphere.

But this is not entirely complete. Because the line opens into the sphere – the eschaton.

And the sphere at times(?) intrudes into(?) the line. An old friend of mine from my undergraduate days suggests a 3-dimensional sine wave that surrounds and sometimes penetrates/intersects the line.

Of course all models are imperfect. What might you suggest? And can this be expressed mathematically?

The excellent James H aka Opinionated Catholic took note of my recent post on “worship wars” and offered some comments as well as reflections of his own. At one point he writes:

I would be interested in Live the Trinity’s details of their service.

Well shucks brother – I can do that.

Behold!

Second Sunday of Advent (“Coming”)

Hymn 88                                              Hark! The Herald Angels Sing

Responsive Reading                                            Psalm 72:1-7, 18-19

R:      Endow the king with your justice, O God, the royal son with your righteousness.
P:      He will judge your people in righteousness, your suffering ones with justice.
R:      The mountains will bring prosperity to the people, the hills the fruit of righteousness.
P:      He will defend the suffering among the people and save the children of the needy; he will crush the oppressor.
R:      He will endure as long as the sun, as long as the moon, through all generations.
P:      He will be like rain falling on a field, like showers watering the earth.
R:      In his days the righteous will flourish; prosperity will abound till the moon is no more.
P:      Praise be to the LORD God, the God of Israel, who alone does marvelous works.
All:   Praise be to his glorious name forever; may the whole earth be filled with his glory. Amen and Amen.

Lighting of the Peace Candle

Bible Reading                                              Isaiah 11:1-10 (page 818)

R:      The word of the Lord.
P:      Thanks be to God!

Hymn 463                                                                       All Day Long

Children’s Message                                                      Armetta Wright

Welcome and Announcements

We Share our Praises and Concerns

Morning Prayer

Bible Reading                               Matthew 3:1-12 (pages 1133-1134)

R:      The good news of Jesus Christ our coming Lord.
P:      Glory to you Lord!

Hymn 79 (tune 42)                   Blessed Be the God of Israel (1,2,4,5)

Prayer for the Offering

Morning Offering

Morning Message                                                   Pastor Rick Wright

Lenten Advent of Transformation

Closing Hymn 95 Go, Tell It on the Mountain

Litany of Benediction                                               from Romans 15
(“Responsive Good-Word”)

R:      May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you a spirit of unity among yourselves as you follow Christ Jesus.
P:      So that with one heart and mouth / we may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
R:      Accept one another then just as Christ accepted you in order to bring praise to God.
All:   May the God of hope / fill us with all joy and peace / as we trust in him / so that we may overflow with hope / by the power of the Holy Spirit. Alleluia and amen!

XXX

My last year of seminary took a year long class called Christian Ministry which was a ministry practicum. One of the biggest assignments was a Vocational Ministry Plan. Under “Dreams” I wrote (among other things) help produce a Baptist Book of Worship. And under “Vision for Ministry” wrote:

I will emphasize quality worship above all, and to this end I will seek to learn from, borrow from, and adapt elements of worship from other traditions. I will seek to develop – in cooperation with church members and other ministers – liturgical traditions which are both ecumenical and distinctively Baptist.

For a long time I have regarded the Book of Common Prayer as one of the most brilliant creations of the Christian church. Almost everything one needs for public worship and private/public prayer – all in one book. Why do Baptists not have something so amazingly useful? And one can see that at least since 1999 the issue of worship has been a central concern and interest.

The immediate point is that Baptists do not seem to have a clear tradition of liturgical worship – liturgical in the sense of regular/set patterns of ritual as well as verbal/aural worship. So I borrow heavily from the liturgical traditions of other branches of the Christian church – especially from the Anglican branch.

But I do not serve an Anglican congregation. So what I borrow generally is (a) adapted and (b) simplified to fit a Baptist context. The result is at least five basic liturgies:

1. Regular weekly worship
2. Weekly worship that includes celebration of Communion
3. Baptism
4. Wedding
5. Funeral

Most of my congregation is young – graduate students, visiting scholars, post-docs – so funerals are rare indeed.

For what it is worth I often receive strong positive feedback for the liturgies I develop. American Baptists who are not used to “liturgy” are often surprised and say I have never seen it done that way – that was very meaningful. Some of my fellow ministers have said – once in a letter of recommendation which they allowed me to read – that I am a “gifted liturgist”.

One of the guiding principles that I use for developing liturgies is cathechesis. Even regular Sunday worship each element has a catechetical – that is formational and educational – puurpose. For example:

R: The word of the Lord.
P: Thanks be to God!

Most of my congregation is people who have little to no Christian or religious background. They are studying the Bible for the first time. So every time they hear Scripture used in worship they are reminded this is the word of God for which we give thanks. Everything we do in worship helps teach the basics of the Christian faith – including worship and discipleship.

This includes the Christian calendar aka liturgical year and the lectionary. So we do not just observe Christmas and Easter. We observe Advent and Lent. Baptism of the Lord Sunday and All Saints Day and Transfiguration Sunday and Trinity Sunday and all the rest.

About a month ago attended my first Baptist association annual meeting in years. Have stayed away since more conservative Louisiana Baptists took over and within one year the state and (to a much lesser degree) associational meetings took on a different character. It was like getting beat up verbally. Sermon after presidential address after sermon reassured us and went after them and there was little doubt that I was among the them.

So I stopped going. First to the state meetings. And then to the associational meetings. Partly because the president of the state convention was a prominent pastor in this association and it was in fact his presidential addresses that left many more moderate Baptists feeling like we had been beaten up.

Do not misunderstand. I think we have an excellent Baptist association. And the current Director of Missions has been nothing but kind and gracious toward University Baptist Church and its ministerial staff. He could blow us off completely because although we still give 2% of our budget to the association we have been barely involved in associational activities for the last several years.

But I respect the association. And out of appreciation and respect for the current Director – especially since his mother recently fell asleep in the Lord. And because it is time to grow up and be an adult and just go – I went.

Got to see people and meet people. Was interested in renewing familiarity with the association its missions and ministries. Was especially impressed at the ethnic and cultural diversity – lots of African-American churches in a Southern Baptist association! But one thing that was hard to avoid was the realization that University Baptist Church is quite different from most churches in the association.

The way we talk. The way we pray. The way we preach. The way we worship.

My intent is not to criticize at all. Their passion and commitment for seeing men women and children experience a relationship with God through his Son Jesus Christ is something moderate Baptists sometimes lack.

What struck me in particular was what one might call emotivism. The worship and reports and prayers – especially the sermon – seemed largely oriented toward evoking an emotional response. We need to care! We need to cry! We need to repent! We need to get stuff done for the kingdom of God! An intense emotional response that would lead to renewed commitment and thence to renewed action.

Quite different from University Baptist Church. That does not mean better or worse. Just different.

One of the things that has troubled me deeply about Protestant worship over the last few years is the extent to which we decide the shape and content of worship. My colleagues often get together to plan worship. What are we going to do this year for the Christmas Eve service? What readings shall we use? What songs? What theme? What elements? What prayers – set or spontaneous? And so on.

Feel like we spend a great deal of time and energy inventing and re-inventing worship.

And how do we decide all these things? Well according to what we think right? In other words reason. Even our rationality.

This is not an attempt to judge or criticize. Because I know this congregation and I know my colleagues and I know other moderate Baptists. Our goal is to glorify God and build up the people for witness and work. We often pray about how to plan and design worship. But reason is the primary instrument. What do we think is theologically/liturgically/missiologically right?

Some Protestant Christians seem to emphasize emotion – generate an emotional response. Others seem to emphasize reason – say and do what we think is true and just.

One of my favorite books is now Bread and Water, Wine and Oil by Meletios Webber. Especially what he says about the human person. How our mind is damaged and broken. Lives in a constant state of fear and desire. The mind interacts with the body to generate emotions which in turn are damaged and broken.

But the heart – that is where we experience the presence of God. In the heart there is silence. Not an empty silence. But the silence of awareness of this presence. One of the primary goals of the Christian life is to get the mind back into the heart – understood properly and not as the seat of emotion – such that we are healed.

So beyond worship as emotivism and worship as rationality is there a liturgy of the heart? Where the goal is not to stir up emotions? or for our reason to be in charge? Not what pleases us or what we think is correct.

This is why increasingly I value ritual and liturgy – here meaning liturgy as something that has charge over us(?) and/or in which we participate. Emotions are not the goal. Reason in not in charge. Forms of worship which I do not invent and re-invent every week. Prayers which have stood the test of time.

I sometimes attend worship at other churches – churches with more ritual-liturgical worship. It is difficult to explain or articulate but I sense the difference. I am not in charge. My goal is not even to feel something. The liturgy is just there. We participate in it. Through the set readings and songs and chants and movements there is something that is somehow beneath and beyond my mercurial emotions and egotistical opinions. The heart – which properly understood is neither emotional nor rational – is engaged. Healing takes place.

Father Stephen Freeman directs our attention to this account from a 17 year old English boy who went on to become Metropolitan Kallistos Ware:

As my eyes grew accustomed to the gloom, the first thing that caught my attention was an absence. There were no pews, no chairs in neat rows; in front of me stretched a wide and vacant expanse of polished floor.Then I realized that the church was not altogether empty. Scattered in the nave and aisles there were a few worshipers, most of them elderly. Along the walls there were icons, with flickering lamps in front of them, and at the east end there were burning candles in front of the icon screen. Somewhere out of sight a choir was singing. After a while a deacon came out from the sanctuary and went round the church censing the icons and the people, and I noticed that his brocade vestment was old and slightly torn.My initial impression of an absence was now replaced, with a sudden rush, by an overwhelming sense of presence. I felt that the church, so far from being empty, was full — full of countless unseen worshipers, surrounding me on every side. Intuitively I realized that we, the visible congregation, were part of a much larger whole, and that as we prayed we were being taken up into an action far greater than ourselves, into an undivided, all-embracing celebration that united time and eternity, things below with things above….

…Before the service had ended, I left the church; and as I emerged I was struck by two things. First, I found that I had no idea how long I had been inside. It might have been only twenty minutes, it might have been two hours; I could not say. I had been existing on a level at which clock-time was unimportant. Secondly, as I stepped out on the pavement the roar of the London traffic engulfed me all at once like a huge wave. The sound must have been audible within the church, but I had not noticed it. I had been in another world where time and traffic had no meaning; a world that was more real — I would almost say more solid — than that of twentieth-century London to which I now abruptly returned.

Everything at the Vigil Service was in Slavonic, and so with my conscious brain I could understand not a single word. Yet, as I left the church, I said to myself with a clear sense of conviction: This is where I belong; I have come home. Sometimes it happens — is it not curious? — that, before we have learnt anything in detail about a person, place or subject, we know with certainty: This is the person that I shall love, this is the place where I need to go, this is the subject that, above all others, I must spend my life exploring.

The point is not “oh then this Church/denomination” but to emphasize the character of his experience.

Can evangelical Protestants ever create(?) or practice this liturgy of the heart? I believe the answer is actually yes.

Postscript:

These are what I call “raw thoughts” – impressions and thoughts that have not been fully worked out. Dear readers might see some serious problems or offer pointed critique. This is most welcome.

This is huge. If it turns out to be legit.

I sort of followed the whole David Weigel on Journolist brouhaha that led to his being let go by the Washington Post. But leftist bias in the news media is old and tired and overwhelming. I want to enjoy life. Not read Newsbusters and be angry all the time.

Since undergraduate days have been an observer of the press aka the news media. In those days it was print and television and radio. About half the articles I wrote for the Cornell Review “the conservative voice on campus” were about the news media.

Okay so the news media is predominantly leftist aka “liberal”. We already know that. But why? And do they know that? For a long time assumed it was as simple as group think.

1. Most journalists (of whichever media) happen to lean left in their social-political views.
2. This colors their reporting. What they cover. How they cover. Questions they ask. Language they use.
3. These journalists with their left wing bias encourage and reinforce each other. Group think. Not conspiracy.

And that was just the way it was. Pervasive. Irritating. Annoying. But what could we do about it?

Two words: Internet. 2008.

The Internet alone has greatly challenged the monopoly of the “Mainstream Media”. We can get other news. From other sources. That is covered differently.

But in my opinion 2008 was the watershed year. The presidential election.

That is the year when the Mainstream Media took off the mask and chose sides. The left wing bias was no longer subtle. It was no longer “okay so most of us journalists lean to the left but we are still professionals and care about covering the news in a fair balanced manner”. And we could no longer say “well at least we are still getting the news we just have to filter out some of the bias”.  In many ways we were just not getting the news at all. And what news we got was so slanted it could no longer be filtered – it had been fundamentally transformed into something else.

In a way I felt like the news media had chosen sides in a soft civil war – against “middle America”. Against those of us who still believe in a federal republic based on and governed by the Constitution. Against those of us who believe in liberty opportunity responsibility and security.

For about ten years I got most of my news from National Public Radio. Was it biased? Yeah. But it was still thorough coverage of the issues. I could “filter” it.

I seldom listen any more.

(One could also mention cable.)

Enough background. Back to the news.

The Journolist is a listserv in which several hundred journalists (along with some professors and activists) participated. There are many such listservs for just about every group concerning just about every area of interest. I know of listservs for Hebrew language and Jewish studies. There is one for the Chinese Students and Scholars Association at Louisiana State University.

Sometimes these listservs are considered private. Sort of like email. It is considered a breach of confidentiality or at least of propriety to share the content of these conservations with people outside the group. In my opinion such groups are entitled to set their own rules. Public or private.

Journolist was very private. And like Climategate the problem is not a private listserv. The problem is what people were saying and doing under cover of that privacy.

According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.

Read the whole thing at The Daily Caller.

It appears that journalists actively worked behind the scenes to effect coverage of the presidential campaign. In Barack’s Obama favor.

A few caveats. And they are important.

1. Who is The Daily Caller? Does s/he really have these Journolist archives? Frankly “according to records obtained by The Daily Caller” does not inspire my confidence. Who else has seen these? Is there a way to confirm they are authentic?
2. Just because a bunch of journalists on a private listserv say “we are going to do something about this” (attack journalists who in any way even remotely make Barack Obama look bad) does not mean it happened. People say “we should do something about this” all the time. What did these journalists actually do as a result of these conversations?
3. What about context? Many of the journalists cited are with The Nation which is hardly mainstream. Oh wait. It is.

I think the true significance of the Journolist archives might not lie in what these journalists achieved – would the Republicans still have lost? would Hillary Clinton have been the Democratic nominee? – but in how it exposes the mindset of many journalists.

Ann Althouse (whose blog is read by millions as opposed to my hundreds) has two great posts on this.

In one she ridicules the plight of feminists who had to “wave aside as politically irrelevant” the very anti-feminist personal behavior of one William Jefferson Clinton:

Ah! How Katha suffered for Bill Clinton! She would prefer to have a more pleasurable life, full of the fun of being true to the principles of the feminist movement, but there were more important things to be done at the time. Caring about rape, sexual harassment, male privilege, and female subordination — that was a self-indulgence brave Katha [Pollitt of The Nation] rose above.

Heh. Yet this is not unrelated to another issue which is the astonishing lack of ethical considerations:

But in The Daily Caller quotes, they only ask what will work best. They don’t even throw in as a makeweight argument that it would be more ethical to refrain from calling their opponents racists.

Another distinction is that Alinsky was talking about rules for political activists, not journalists. Even as means are subordinated to ends, journalism is subordinated to political activism. (emphasis added)

That last clause is the money quote. It is why I believe 2008 was the critical turning point for the relationship between the news media and the American people. Before 2008 I think there was always political activism but it was often subordinated (if barely) to journalism. 2008 is the year in which that relationship flipped. Journalism began to serve the ends of political activism.

Looking at the comments – before they were closed – one wonders how many New York Times readers need help with basic reading comprehension.

Ross Douthat nails it. With facts rather than speculation or supposition.

He discusses a recent study that demonstrates that college and university admissions policies favor black and Hispanic applicants. White and Asian applicants need better grades and scores to get in. Okay. I think we all knew that. And in a way I support that. Seriously.

But here is the kicker. The study found that not just any white applicants need better grades and scores. Downscale rural and working-class whites were most disadvantaged:

An upper-middle-class white applicant was three times more likely to be admitted than a lower-class white with similar qualifications.

Well maybe that has to do with money. Perhaps. But more than that:

While most extracurricular activities increase your odds of admission to an elite school, holding a leadership role or winning awards in organizations like high school R.O.T.C., 4-H clubs and Future Farmers of America actually works against your chances. Consciously or unconsciously, the gatekeepers of elite education seem to incline against candidates who seem too stereotypically rural or right-wing or “Red America.”

Now that is interesting.

This is why some of the people who left comments need to learn how to read.

“When Douthat made it about white Christian conservatives I stopped reading. It’s about class!”

“It’s not about race as Douthat says. It’s about class!”

Precisely. That is exactly what Douthat is getting at. It is about class. Rich and poor – with poor or working-class whites on the losing end. And it is about culture. Urban versus rural – with rural whites on the losing end.

This is what I have been observing and writing about. America is becoming increasingly divided. Not by race. So much as by class (and culture). City people looking down on country people. (In my opinion the single biggest divide. I will address this in future posts reflecting on the journey through China.) East and West coast versus the Midwest. North versus South. A couple nights ago I was chatting with some people online and a couple of them started trash talking “redneck yeehaws” in the Southeast. I was quite offended and pushed back.

It would be interesting to look at the data and compare rural African-American and Hispanic applicants. The results could undermine or reinforce Douthat’s points.

Quick note. During my trip to China sometimes I have had easy fast access to Internet and sometimes not. Depends on the hotel/location. Generally the bandwidth is much slower than in the States – even though the connection is supposed to be 100 bps and/or 801.2g/n. Surely this is simply because one is sharing the connection with so many other people.

Websites.

Most of my usual websites I can access no problem. Personal. Computer game sites. Some political/commentary sites.

Many are blocked. YouTube. Facebook. Any and all Blogspot blogs/sites. (But not WordPress sites. Go figure.)

Gotta run. Checking out and a friend is bringing by a last minute gift.

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!

Last time took eight to see “Turandot” by Puccini. Fairly full theater. People came up to us with tears in their eyes (I am not making that up) to express how much they appreciate young people coming to see the opera.

This time we had eleven. Theater was packed. And quite a few young people – children and college age. Why was “Carmen” even more popular than “Turandot”? Our international friends said “‘Carmen’ is very famous!” I saw more people from University Baptist Church this time.

To be honest after the first half hour I was a bit embarrassed. “Uh oh. Wonder what our Chinese friends are thinking. Wonder if they wish they had not come. Very very different from ‘Turandot’”. The opening songs are about soldiers hanging around and pawing at Micaela (Barbara Frittoli) and leering at the cigarette girls who sit around wiping sweat from their half-exposed bodies. Real high drama there.

And then you get Carmen (Elena Garanca – whom I saw also in Rossini’s “La Cenerentola”). With cleavage and at least one leg showing at all times. Who is seriously bad news.

If you want her then she does not want you. If you do not want her then she wants you. And if she wants you better watch out!

Si je t’aime, si je t’aime prend garde a toi!

Our humble soldier Don Jose (Roberto Alagna) – who already has a girlfriend – unfortunately attracts the attention of Carmen who trains her wiles on him like a laser beam. Dude you are so dead. It does not take long before Don Jose is making out with Carmen and letting her escape from arrest and planning to get together with her later at a resort.

What the heck is this opera about?!? At first glance it seems dirty and sleazy and slutty. Not at all like “Turandot” in which the passionate love of Calaf breaks through the cold cruelty of the princess Turandot – all very noble virtuous and glorious. This is about a respected soldier and good son with a nice girlfriend who throws it all away because some hot temptress hands him a flower.

Speaking of “love is like a bird”. The first act talks a lot about love – l’amour. But it does not seem to be about love so much as desire or shall we say lust. “I love you” seems to mean not much more than “you’re cute and I want to have sex with you”.

So what is going on here? What is Bizet trying to say? Who – or should we say what – exactly is Carmen?

There are several different approaches I would suggest.

The first is rather simplistic morality play. “Stay away from bad girls”. Something like that. No doubt feminist literary scholars would have something to say about “the patriarchal warnings against the archetypal temptress” motif – and frankly they would be at least partly right. Don Jose has a nice girlfriend who goes to church brings him letters from his momma and won’t even kiss him on the lips. Along comes the hot hussy Carmen with her blazing unrestrained sexuality. Before you know it Don Jose is hanging out with bandits and breaking his momma’s heart and strangling said hussy and getting executed. Bad bad bad. Sort of “Reefer Madness” meets “Fatal Attraction”.

(Yeah I don’t know where that came from either.)

Maybe. But that seems too simplistic.

At one point it suddenly hit me just who or what Carmen is.

Freedom.

She sings about “I will live free or die free”. She represents perhaps the freedom to throw off the constraints of law responsibility and commitment. Don Jose is not just a guy – he is a soldier. He obeys orders and enforces the law. He does not just go off with Carmen – he becomes a bandit. He leaves behind society with its laws and regulations. Perhaps that helps explain the famous habanera “L’amour est un oiseau rebelle”:

Love is a rebellious bird… He has never known law. If you don’t love me I will love you. If I love you – you better watch out!

Carmen will not be imprisoned – no handcuffs or jail for her! Don Jose spends time in jail because he sets her free – but what gets him through that time is the flower Carmen gave him. If you do not love freedom – then freedom will come hunting for you. And if freedom comes after you – better watch out! Don Jose will not live without freedom (Carmen). The opera seems largely about freedom and the desire for freedom.

I will not suggest that freedom is unambiguously good in the opera. What happens when the desire for freedom means you reject duty and obedience and commitment? Freedom yes – but balanced with responsibility and self-control? Perhaps the opera also explores the ambiguity of freedom.

There is another theme which has to do with ethnicity and class. Sure we may fault Carmen for being the temptress. But she is not just a woman. She is a gypsy. A member of an ethnic group – the Roma(ny) – that even today is considered outcast and undesirable in Europe. How else will these people fight back against a (Spanish European) society that rejects them and marginalizes them? Can we blame them when they turn to (a) sex and (b) crime to get what they want – or need? And how noble are these “white” Europeans who are quite happy to get their booze and cigarettes and sex and black market goods from gypsies? And who think torturing and killing bulls is somehow more noble and civilized? Is not the final act with its parade of the different kinds of bullfighter a kind of satire? How silly!

Toreador, toreador!

And notice how the toreador desires and wins Carmen – and transforms her into a proper Spanish lady. Carmen has gone from marginalized outcast gypsy to accepted member of Spanish high society. (I am reminded of how the prostitute civilizes Enkidu in the Epic of Gilgamesh – but cannot quite make the connection.)

One last theme. Fate and free will. This is particularly evident when Don Jose and Carmen are with the bandits in the mountains. Two of the woman consults the cards to find out their fortunes. Wealth and fame. Sounds great. So does Carmen. Death and death. She knows ahead of time that Don Jose will kill her. And no matter how many times she turns the cards the result is the same. Death and death.

Oddly enough she seems resigned to this. “Oh well. Nothing I can do. The cards say I am going to die. Guess I better just follow the script to its end”. She convinces herself that she does not have the freedom – free will – to make different choices and change course. In a way she brings about the very “fate” she fears. One is reminded of how Voldemort creates his own downfall in the Harry Potter books because he is obsessed with a misunderstood prophecy.

So perhaps there are many different themes and issues that drive the opera – all at the same time. Women and sexuality. Race and class. Freedom and its ambiguity. Fate and free will.

Okay – enough about the opera. What about the performance?

Outstanding of course. The music was energetic and delightful. The acting solid. The singing exceptional. And the pas de deux (sp?) that opened each act masterful. I did find the physicality of the performance a bit distracting. Woman getting pawed and groped. Don Jose lying down on Carmen whose legs are spread wide. Pushing hitting fighting. Even Rene Fleming commented and asked if the singers felt bruised after their performance.

The sets were a bit drab but otherwise brilliant – giant rotating circular walls?!? Now it’s a jail… now it’s a town square. Now it’s a town square… now it’s the inside of a bullfighting ring. Amazing. Clearly only the best work for the Met.

My favorite part by far was when Rene Fleming was interviewing Escamillo (performed by… don’t seem to have his name available). Apparently the bass performer was sick and this guy got a call that morning at like 10:00 a.m. “Hey um we need you to sing Escamillo at the Met today”. You could not tell this man had filled in on such short notice. That alone earns my respect.

Even better she asked how he became an opera singer. Well apparently he used to be a certified accountant in his native New Zealand. Around age 30 or 31 decided he wanted to sing opera. Gotta love it. We all had a good laugh.

“I’m sick of this pastoring gig. Think I’ll join the opera”.

Toreador, toreador! L’amour t’attend!

Hey. A guy can dream.

Not sure why this has been getting so much attention lately – except perhaps because someone is trying to do this again but from an even higher altitude.

On August 16 1960 (then) Captain Joe Kittinger flew in a helium balloon to the edge of space – to an altitude of 102,800 feet above the earth.

And then he jumped.

This just blows my mind. The guy must eat rusty nails for breakfast.

H/T Ace of Spades.