Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Two odd conversations

1.
Easter Sunday, the Chalicefamily was out having brunch. (This is our Easter tradition. "Throwing eggs at houses" is not, no matter what Charlie says.)

At one point the Chalicerelative was talking about her church service. She then turned to me and said "What do Unitarians do for Easter?"

"Well," I said. "Some churches just have a regular service, some do a celebration of new life and springtime, but I'd say most do a service on Jesus, though the focus is a little different because we don't believe in the bodily resurrection of Christ."

(I probably should have said "most of us don't" but I was trying to keep things simple and sometimes "simple" and "inclusive" are impossible to both achieve at once.)

"I'll tell you something, Miss Sue*, I'll bet you most Christians don't believe in the bodily resurrection of Christ these days."

"That's funny, because I remember sitting in church saying 'I believe in..."

"Oh, I know we SAY it, but not many people believe it."

Now first of all, I don't believe that most Christians don't believe in the bodily resurrection of Christ, though I believe that her friends don't. And secondly, not having to recite creeds I don't believe in is one reason why I'm a UU.

But I didn't think saying either of those things would be as effective as just letting her words hang in the air.

So that's what I did.

2.

Today at work, I was walking through the office.

"Hey, c'mere!" One of the other paralegals said.

"What's up?"

"Larry Shiflett is the father of Anna Nicole's baby," she said.

"Who's that?"

"He's the photographer, not the guy on the birth certificate."

"Ah."

"I didn't want it to be either of them," she said. "I didn't want anybody to be the father."

Now, I'm pretty sure she meant that she didn't want any of the men who had come forward to be the father so the search pool would have had to be widened, but the idea of Anna Nicole Smith having an immaculate conception amused me all the way back to my office.

CC

*No, you cannot call me that. And don't put "Whatever you say, Miss Sue" in the comments. That's not funny, it's just irritating and if you have the impulse to do such things you may want to examine yourself for other irritating habits.

7 comments:

ck said...

I had conversation #1 as well this weekend with someone else. It might be more widespread for people to recite creeds without believing them. I can't wrap my head around it, but that's why I am not a liberal Christian, but a UU.

Which, of course, begs the question of what creeds are good for.

And on #2, isn't it Larry Birkhead? Just saw something on Google News about it. I'd say an immaculate conception would be pretty cool--as would parthenogenesis, like those Komodo Dragons.

Peregrinato said...

"...the idea of Anna Nicole Smith having an immaculate conception amused me all the way back to my office. "

Theological nitpick: you mean "virgin birth." Immaculate Conception is the Roman Catholic doctrine that Mary was conceived free from original sin, to help prepare the way for her role as Christ's mother. The Virgin Birth is the more widely held Christian belief that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary.

Don't feel bad--many Roman Catholics make the same mistake.

Anonymous said...

LOL, Anna Nicole Smith having a virgin birth...that's like Ron Jeremy being a virgin...

Comrade Kevin said...

1. When I was a Methodist, some creeds were mentioned but not followed. Actually, if you want to get technical about it, all churches are full of sinners.

2. Anna Nicole Smith being the father of Jesus H. Christ might be the truest sense that God has a sense of humor.

kim said...

How many Christians believe in turning the other cheek?

Chalicechick said...

(((How many Christians believe in turning the other cheek? ))

The Christians I know believe in it as an ideal, but they don't always live up to their ideals.

Can any of us say any better?

CC

PG said...

The Christians I know believe in it as an ideal, but they don't always live up to their ideals.

I think at a certain point of premeditation, you no longer can claim merely not to be living up to your ideals, but are instead not a genuine holder of that ideal, or at least someone who makes a great many exceptions to the ideal. For example, if anyone had voted for Bush Jr. *b/c* he said he would get Saddam Hussein for the alleged assassination attempt on Bush Sr. -- i.e., someone based a thought-out political action on revenge -- then that person probably doesn't really idealize turning the other cheek, or thinks there's an assassination exception to that concept. This is quite different from someone who fails to turn the other cheek on spur-of-the-moment anger; if I accidentally cut someone off in traffic and she is angry and throws something at my car, she may well still idealize turning the other cheek, especially if she regrets her action after her anger has passed.