A couple of days ago, I fired up "Bloodline" on Netflix, and finally finished watching it just now. This documentary is the breathless following, over a couple of years, of an investigation into the Merovingian Heresy. It could be funny, I could play a game of (pardon the offensive terminology, yet it is exactly the right phrase) "bait the 'tards" - making fun of the whacko conspiracy nerds (as one could play the same way with so many docs - about Trekkers, about ferret lovers, what have you) - but I chose to put it in my queue just because the heresy, named for the very dynasty Clovis I founded, is one which, while maddening, is also of at least a passing interest to me. I have a hard time abiding Dan Brown and this sort of thing (Foucault's Pendulum, which I allowed myself to read twice, with a decade or more between attempts, I have confirmed as a nuisance read), but anyone who knows me or reads here regularly won't be surprised to know this is exactly the sort of car wreck I succumb to rubbernecking.
So we started off this post with mention of wisdom.
I don't find wisdom in the games people play, performing edge-of-your-seat-AWFUL "archaeology" while following TV-series-Batman-level-silly/convoluted clue games and digging up bright shiny bottles they've caked with mud and swear are generations-old buried treasures. I don't find wisdom in missing the point that, in debunking something passionately, you actually accept its premises in order to deconstruct them. If you really don't believe a mythology, it isn't particularly necessary, for most people, to spend time and energy (and, in the name of making a documentary, one assumes many many thousands and thousands of dollarse/euros) obsessing about it.
The wisdom I found in "Bloodline" crops up near its end. With ten minutes left in its nearly two hour run, we come to an interview with the Right Rev. John Shelby Spong, DD, retired Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Newark. The documentary introduces him as controversial, and, though I must state that even as a relatively newly minted Episcopalian, I know nothing about him - I can believe he's controversial. Like many in this Church I was drawn to for its compassion, Spong sees change, and perhaps even the abandonment of certain traditions, as growth. I want to quote him at a little length here:
I think that traditional Christianity, that institutional form of Christianity, is probably dying. And I'm not sure that letting it die wouldn't be a good thing to happen, because I think When you look at the manifestations of traditional Christianity, they're not very life-giving. We blessed slavery with the Christian scriptures. We blessed anti-Semitism with the Christian scriptures. We stood by and watched Hitler destroy six million Jews, and then we were negative about women, and then we were negative about gay people, and we've been negative about left-handed people and we've been negative about mentally ill people and we've been negative about divorced people. The Church has victimized a great number of people in this world; now how does that square with the portrait of Jesus drawn by the Fouth Gospel, that says the purpose of Jesus is that we might have life and that we might have it more abundantly? Is the way we treat gay people giving them life? Is the way we have treated women giving them life? ... and so the traditional way in which we have told the Jesus story I think is inaccurate, and I think it will die. But I don't think the Jesus story will die, and I don't think the power of a G-d presence in human life will die.
As a rule, I write this blog to the standard that anything here could be read by my coworkers, my boss, my government, my nieces - my mother. This post is not one she'd have a happy time reading. It's also possible that, apart from being described as "controversial" by a conspiracy documentarian to whom he agreed to give an interview, the Bishop holds views or has done things I might find anathema. For some reason, I prefer not to start worrying about that with facile research; because in many ways what he says resonates with me.
At bottom, the very concept of divinity is beyond the ability of the magnificent, and yet wee and paltry human brain to actually comprehend. Those of us who believe in it choose mythologies to cope with it, to guide us, to grapple with *everything* we encounter which is beyond our wee and paltry brains (spirits and hearts). Some believe those mythologies very deeply indeed. Some believe an "essence" of these roadmaps to faith. Me, I give up on the particulars, rejoice in the spiritual leader I have been fortunate to find, and bless what wisdom can be gleaned, without (as above) trying to peer too closely at its provenance. Staring into the sun is bad for the eyes, and doesn't look interesting enough to justify doing it. Take the light, live in it, hope it shines on a good path, and try to stay on *some* track, for the most part.
Or explore, be brave, bless the light and still proceed at night as well. If that means concerning yourself with conspiracies, go with G-d as they say and try not to hurt anyone including yourself.
It's an interesting watch, in some ways. But could have been edited down significantly and still have said everything it does. Watch it, or don't. This is just the story of what I accidentally seem to have gotten from stumbling on this in my own path.
Edited 07/29/13 to add this - turns out the hoax is admitted. Hardly a pearl-clutching revelation, but does make taunting the fakers less fun.
No comments:
Post a Comment