I swear before Heaven and earth that I heard a young man say the following today, in the Men’s Room at the Bible School:
“I’ve been reading this book called The Faery Queene. I heard it’s where Shakespeare got some of his ideas. It’s really good.”
Somewhere, C. S. Lewis smiled.
As Phil noted below, Patrick McGoohan died yesterday (Ricardo Montalban too, but I have less to say about him). McGoohan is most famous for his roles in the TV series, Secret Agent (known as Danger Man in England), and The Prisoner. Also for his one-dimensional but massively entertaining portrayal of King Edward I of England in Braveheart.
I watched both Secret Agent and The Prisoner when I was a kid. Can’t say I was a big fan, though. Secret Agent, in my opinion, didn’t have enough pretty girls, and The Prisoner was all style, no actual story (and again, not enough pretty girls).
It turns out the lack of pretty girls was purposeful. According to McGoohan’s Wikipedia entry he accepted the leads in these programs partly on the condition that he do no kissing. Apparently he had moral objections (like Kirk Cameron) to kissing a woman who was not his wife.
The Wikipedia article says nothing about his religious convictions (if any). Perhaps he was simply a principled man. However it was, he deserves respect.
The role I remember him best in, though, was that of Vicar Syn in Disney’s The Scarecrow of Romney Marsh series, back in the ’60s. I haven’t watched it in a long time, but I remember it as one of the most memorable TV experiences of my youth. The inspiration for Batman may have been Zorro, but Russell Thorndyke’s Scarecrow character could have fulfilled the same function as well or better. Like Batman, The Scarecrow is a generally frightening, nocturnal costumed character who takes advantage of his enemies’ superstitions. The major difference is that The Scarecrow is himself (technically) a criminal—a smuggler. But his smuggling is portrayed as a protest against unjust tariffs (he’s a free trader! Hoorah!).
The Scarecrow of Romney Marsh series is now available on DVD from Disney. If I had any spare money, I’d buy it.
In closing, back again by popular demand, are the boys from Minnesotans For Global Warming. Can’t imagine why.
Apparently he had moral objections (like Kirk Cameron) to kissing a woman who was not his wife.
Reminds me of the movie Ushpizin, made by Charedim (= Ultra Orthodox Jews, although they resent the Ultra part of the label).
The plot calls for two main characters, a husband and a wife. The experienced actor, a former secular Jew turned Charedi, could not play opposite any woman except his wife, who had zero acting experience. She took up the role, and did a really good job of it.
The entire movie, they never touch each other(1) – but both the love they feel for each other and the tensions of married life came through wonderfully.
(1) Charedim keep a lot more privacy about their intimate relations. They are not allowed to touch for part of the month lest one thing lead to another, at times when she’s menstruating or recently finished menstruating and sex is forbidden. To avoid publishing when those times are, they just don’t touch in public at all.
Fascinating. They sound like admirable people.
If you want to read more about them, try Cross-Currents. At their best, they are the Jewish image of a Pharisee. At their worst, they are the Christian image of a Pharisee.
I’ve long held (from the point of view of an interested, but not expert, Bible reader) that the secret to really understanding Jesus’ interaction with the Pharisees of His day is to realize that Jesus, essentially, was a Pharisee. In the sense that someone might say, “Well, I don’t agree with everything the Republicans do, but I tend to vote Republican.”
In terms of the controversies between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, Jesus comes down on the Pharisee side on almost every issue, the exception being that of divorce. So when He lambastes the Pharisees, he’s like Rush Limbaugh dressing down the Republicans in congress, telling them they’re not living up to their real principles. He says less about the Sadducees because He had less to say to the Sadducees.
Or so it appears to me.
Makes sense. Whatever remaining evidence we have suggests that Pharisees were normative Judaism. Not that we have that much, since the only surviving evidence that wasn’t written by Pharisees is Josephus Flavius.
I think Jesus disagreed with the oral Torah, which is part of normative Judaism (and has been at least since the redaction of the Mishnah around 200). However, back in the 1st century that may or may not have been considered essential to be a good Pharisee.
I too remember the scarecrow as an influential impact on me as a youth. Got to love his laugh. I bought the DVD and it still is good.
When I think of a Scarecrow, The Wizard of Oz comes to mind. I use an audio clip of Dorothy speaking to the Scarecrow as the error sound on my computer. That way, when I’m playing Freecell and put a card on an illegal pile, my computer plays Dorothy’s sweet voice saying, “And what would you do with a brain if you had one?”