Tucson and "Second Amendment Remedies"

The recent tragedy at Tucson with the killing of six people and the wounding of many others again raises the question of gun control. The Republican senate nominee, Sharron Angle, made headlines during the 2010 campaign with her statement that "second amendment remedies" might be necessary to consider. As I think about the Tuscon tragedy, I have to raise a question that many of us have considered: Would a person with a concealed weapon in the crowd that Saturday morning been able to kill the shooter and lessen the number of people injured or killed? There is always a possibility that more people would have been killed unless the concealed weapon shooter was blessed with a deadly aim for the enemy.

I have been a fan of gun control, and have been for years, since my father was shot three times and killed by a shooter in 1976. Even if I reluctantly agree to keeping some guns on the street in the hands of civilians, I certainly would remove any possibility of purchasing guns with multiple shot capability. While I am not naive enough to believe that insane killers would simply go away, after all they can kill with knives as they do in other countries, I believe limits and extensive background checks would lessen this violence. After all, guns are the weapons of choice in America. Why not work to at least raise the question once again in Congress?

Parallel Universes

Our Spiritual Formation class has been in quite a tizzy lately as we seem to have two groups of people representing two approaches to theology. One is the atheistic-scientific-humanist philosophy that wants to weigh and measure all things spiritual, i. e. if one cannot see or prove the event through history, then it must be metaphorical or symbolic. Another is the philosophy of faith believing that it is "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." I believe we simply live in a world of parallel universes.

The discussion has been ongoing for the five years we have participated in this class. The atheistic-scientific-humanist group is not convinced that eternal life is a possibility, that Jesus was both divine and human (perhaps they say he was the son of a Roman soldier), that there was likely no Resurrection, and that Jesus was not born in Bethlehem, that there was no census to bring Mary and Joseph there. It believes Jesus was simply a victim of the evil Roman Empire and that God never intended to send Him as a sacrifice for the sins of humanity.

The other group believes in the Truth of the Bible, but of course gives credence to the idea that the Bible does speak and teach through many parables and many metaphors. Essentially, this group believes in miracles and that God indeed does intervene in the affairs of the world. It believes that the Bible was written by humans but by those who were inspired by God. How can the two views be reconciled?

The Episcopal Church states a theology based upon reason, tradition, and the Bible, yet it seems that in some circles reason is becoming the dominant tenet of the church. My question is this: If God does not interfere in the affairs of humankind, why should one bother to pray, to attend church, or even to attempt to live a moral life? On the other hand, if we believe in answered prayer and seek to live as Jesus lived--loving God and loving our neighbors, are we not better people? Do we not have hope not only for this Kingdom on earth but also for the eternal Kingdom ahead? I choose to believe in the philosophy of faith. While I have only anecdotal evidence (much of it) of the presence and working of God in my life through the past sixty plus years, it is enough. I am not convinced the parallel universes will ever come together.

"I've Grown Old"

After recently viewing the new version of True Grit, I have realized how quickly the years have gone by since I saw the original version with John Wayne. It was 1969, and my husband and I were college students at the University of Mississippi. We had a one-year-old daughter and were still in our twenties. The world "so various, so beautiful, so new" lay before us. Having grown up in underclass, or nearly so, households, we were excited about the move into the middle class with all its possibilities. Now, some forty plus years later, I can identify with the latest view of life from the 2010 version of the film. Rooster Cogburn runs across the landscape near the end of the film carrying Mattie Ross in his arms. Time is of the essence since she has been bitten by a poisonous snake. He exclaims, "I've grown old." So have we all.

Since we are just a few days into 2011, the time is always ripe for setting new goals and resolutions. I am proud to say that I have kept quite a few of my last year's plans: to lose weight (forty-three pounds last year), to write down a "quietly joyful moment" each day of the year, and to love and see my family more. The year just past was a good one. We enjoyed a great trip to Seattle and to Victoria, B.C. to see our daughter and grandson last June. We were able to be together as a family for a short week along with our son and two grandchildren from Little Rock.

This year I want to continue my resolutions from 2010 but also add a few more. I want to write more stories and poems. I have been blessed to read two pieces recently on NPR's "Tales from the South" program, and I hope to submit more for consideration. I want to pursue getting my novel published, which has essentially sat in a drawer since I completed it in 2004. I have realized that even at age sixty-six that one's productive years do not have to be over.

Yes, the years do go by so quickly. I always remember the old adage though that it's not the number of years one has but the quality that's important. I hope to live life to the utmost in the time I have remaining--before the next version of True Grit.