The Greatest Gift I Never Got.

Grenache |grəˈnä sh |
noun
a variety of black wine grape native to the Languedoc-Roussillon region of France.
• a sweet red dessert wine made from this grape.


"You know you guys didn't have to get anything for me," I said, and unlike most people during the holidays I actually meant it. Christmas in my family is another day with God. He really doesn't need to reinforce it on December 25th. "I really am not expecting anything."

"I know but Seth really wanted to get you a bottle of wine," my friend told me. Seth was her brother and though I had met him only once, I had instantly like him. He seemed like the kind of guy who appreciated genuine people.

"Well that was nice of him," I said, "but I really don't need anything."

"It was really funny," my friend went on telling me in her kitchen as we poured glasses of Riesling, "Seth was asking everybody, 'Don't you have any grenache?' We had all of Meijers looking for a bottle of it. He was like, 'It's Phil's favorite.'"

Many people know that I developed an interest in wines. I think this is pretty much because I was jealous with so many people having an hobby like model railroads or video games or stamp collecting. So, I have delved into writing and photography, cooking and wine drinking. I remember the first wine I ever had was in communion, and it is a miracle that I continued to be curious after that because if there is anything that can turn one off wine drinking it is probably communion.

Years later I went to college at a dry campus. Yes, a college with no alcohol sounds like watching an Hollywood Blockbuster with no special effects, but in reality without the distractions one does have a clearer idea of all the things going on. Still, I think ... it messed me up a little bit though because I was more interested in learning about alcohol after that.*

When I went to Spain I had a sangria that was quite possibly the worst sangria of my entire life; and yet I wanted to know exactly if there was a great wine. I had drank all the beers that one could, but I was still curious about this next step. When I got back from my trip, I went to the local wine section of my favorite grocery store in Cincinnati, Jungle Jim's, and asked what I should have next. The answer was that I should try this Spanish wine called Vina Alarba.

That wine will always be my favorite because it made me love wines. It is made from the grenache grape, but actually that is not its real name. The French called it that when they took it over the Pyrenees and started planting it in the Languedoc-Roussillon region.**

In Spain, where it is likely to have originated, it is called garnacha. It is still one of the most planted grapes there, but is not really well-known over here in the new world. It is also beautiful.

It's tastes are not subtle, but rich and bold. They are not heavy with the ether of alcohol, but rich with the flavors of the grape itself. In Spain's hot dry climate one can tell that this is a grape that is a survivor. It clings to every drop of rain that falls in that arid climate and concentrates and treasures its flavors deep in its berry. When the wine is made you know that it is a survivor and that it is rich with character.

"Oh wow. I'm really appreciative, but you can't find grenache around here," I began slowly as I realized the thought that had gone into this gift. It was a search for a grape that I had mentioned only once to a friend who I had met only a couple of times. I continued, "I have only seen it mixed with another grape around here. You have to go pretty far to get a bottle."

"Well, he tried to get it for you," she went on, and smiled as she said it.

"I know it sounds trite," I said, "but its the thought that counts."

Gosh, what a trite saying is! It is overused as people get us gifts for which we have no use (and even less room). We say it to people who miss parties or events. We even mutter it about failed attempts at things. Its a throw-away phrase like, "Thank you." or "Have a nice day." or even "How are you?". When I was a child, such words were so empty. When I was child, I tried to mean words the words in those phrases or I tried to really care about the cards people attached to my presents; but to be truthful, I just wanted the swag. What card could ever compare to a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle action figure wearing an hockey jersey or a Transformer? When your a kid, you appreciate the objects; I guess when you get older you appreciate the thought.

None of us like to be forgotten, especially by friends and strangers. Like the song, "Auld Lang Syne," we wish not to be the forgotten through the mists of "Days Gone By." Memories of people seem to be shorter and shorter; and we forget loved one's; but we hope that we can make up our shortcomings as good friends when they get a brief biography of the past year in a Christmas card.

However, it is the kindness of brief friends, the re-occuring "touching base" of old friends, and unexpected phone calls; that really make this world a beautiful place. Christmas presents and holiday letters are well-and-good, but they lack the pure kindness of person who lives up to the honest to God cliché, "Well, it's the thought that counts."



* I never fall in love with anything without full participation of my neurons. The irony of alcohol is that it negates the proper functioning of the neurons; and is a joyful paradox, kind of like talking about a square circle; which exists and doesn't at the same time. Or perhaps it is more like trying to make it to zero Kelvin or hit terminal velocity or get to absolute singularity.

** Can you see now why I love wine? When is the last time that a bottle of Mountain-Dew ever had such an interesting history?

Things I Thought When My Brain Was Off

I don't really do this, but my imagination was piqued earlier in the week and also tonight, so I did the unthinkable (literally, I had to stop thinking), I read some of Richard Dawkins' quotes. Okay, okay, there is a danger in reading quotes and a small diatribe; but hear me out, I didn't get them from any Christian web sites so I guess it counts.

Of course Dawkins makes some decent points, but the problem with some atheists and theists (unfortunately usually the most vocal ones of these groups) is that they believe they have made and/or are making the "slam dunk" argument; that after this argument there will be no more debate on the issue of religion and it will be over and done, Amen.

I think that is what makes some of these atheists so jaded. I once heard the story of a wealthy philanthropist who worked his whole life at something and when he accomplished his mission, he was angry and jaded because there was nothing left to do. Or, how about the fact that Martin Luther wrote a scathing anti-semetic work that embarrasses we Lutherans to no end and is completely unjustifiable, simply because the Jews wouldn't become Christians after the yoke of Rome had been removed. What is the similarity between the two stories? Though one person was disappointed with what he perceived was success and the other was disappointed with what he perceived as failure; both men put too much stock in their own achievements and win or lose became all that there was.

I think Mr. Dawkins puts too high a value on his own achievements, and that makes him look like a fool to a great many people (except his disciples). It allows him to go into areas of which he has no expertise (philosophy, literature, sociology). Then he says that that particular area is not important at all. This can make you a lot of enemies. However, Mr. Dawkins acts like a brash young bully rather than a person who really cares about his beliefs or, as he might say, "the facts". Mr. Dawkins overlooks the fact that in regards to the humanities he can allow himself to be outgunned and outclassed by simple bachelor's degree students. His hubris is his greatest failing, not his lack of zeal.

No one should debate Mr. Dawkins because there really will be no rational debate involved. I will give you an example. I once had a supervisor tell me I needed to get something done. It didn't make sense, so I asked why I needed to get it done? This person replied that he was in charge and, with all due respect, I shouldn't question it.* Mr. Dawkins seems to ignore a lot of things in his quest to be the world's smartest person. Ironically, the thing he ignores most is the fact that for every invective he levels against Christianity and belief of any kind for his own ego boosting, he is reinforcing the faith of every Christian and making his argument weaker by building it on his own very human understanding.

I wish Mr. Dawkins the best. I hope he finds a civil and intelligent way of debating with people, but until he does, I am thankful that the atheists will never have a foe worthy of the Christian's notice.



*In the hierarchy of things not to tell a philosopher, this is near the top. In the hierarchy of things not to tell an American, this is also near the top. Finally, under no circumstances should you tell a Christian this, just ask the Roman Catholic Church.

A Christmas Message

Christmas is upon us once again. Day in and day out we feel the unbearable weight of it all. There is a tension in this season unlike any other time of year a dark and cruel undertone behind the veneer of holiday platitudes about "peace" and "happiness." We are told that people behave better, have some common kindness, and a spirit of joy permeates us at this time of year. If this is the case than may I say two very important things. First, if humans are capable of such sentiment for a period of less than one month, why are they incapable of it for the rest of year? Secondly, they are incapable of such a sentiment for a period of less than one month.

I have driven on roads and been cut off by cars that any other time of the year would have yielded to me out of common kindness. Now that natural inclination to kindness is supplanted by the Macy's Christmas special homing patterns. I have seen people not tip or thank or return the greetings of lowly retail peons, because they were too busy trying to purchase the requisite presents for friends and family. I have even seen good people* get shunned when people talk of Christmas plans with other friends when this lonely soul is in their midst. In fact it is striking how many times it is the non-Christian's "merry Christmas" is heard as opposed to the Christian's.

All the time Christians "fight for their rights." "Keep Christ in Christmas" we say, or "Those atheists are trying to remove this or that from our town's Christmas." Yet, Christmas is not so much about what is done, but rather it is about what has been done for us. All our secularization of the holiday hasn't been able to remove the common theme: God loved the world and he sent his Son. No one brought God any gifts that he used to win our salvation. No one deserved to have God move into the neighborhood. And no certainly showed the holy family any kindness or gave them any tips or invited them to stay with them or even let them merge into traffic. The Gospels don't tell us of any human providing them with anything of use at all, and yet everything turned out okay.

And the gifts provided by the wise astrologers and songs of praise given by the shepherds all disappeared under the vast waves of history; but what remained was one gift, not earned by the laws of "naughty or nice" and not just given to the people who let people merge into busy intersections on Black Friday. The gift of peace on earth and unending happiness and reunion with God was given to the harried Christmas shopper who forgets the meaning of Christmas while at Wal-Mart or forgets to invite a friend to a holiday party. God, you see, has a way of reaching us even in the midst of Christmas.



* Not that ascribed moral worth should in any way dictate the benevolence that we should show to our fellow human beings.

The Human Problem

It is common to hear people lament the "divisive" nature that religion plays in our world today. Voiced by John Lennon's "Imagine" and Vladimir Lennin's "Russian experiment," people blithely accept that if we can just get rid of religion life will be a shining utopia. Recent events in India or the vast embarrassing history of humanity make such visions seem like a good idea. If only we could figure out how to get people to stop believing in God and start believing in one another life would be grand.

There is of course a catch to this though; and it is not God I can assure you. It is the human problem. "Imagine philosophy" and "Bolshevik politics" do not believe in a God. If there is no God, than it is humans causing all the suffering and pain in the world. If that is the case, than are human beings really worth saving? I mean, we are nothing more than carbon blueprints that only appear to "know" things. We don't even have ourselves. Indeed any rock we excavate or log we burn has just as much value as we do; this deduction seems preposterous and I have an hard time believing it.

However, even if I were to ignore that glaring flaw, how can I really love creatures as deeply troubled and messed up as myself. We do not share. Lennon lived in the Dakotas while the poor died on the streets of New York. At the same time in Russia, the Communist elite lived like kings while others were being dragged off to Siberia. Therefore this is not a religious problem, but a problem with humanity. Human beings have to be free to do the right thing, something that the Judeo-Christian religion has stated right from the beginning. To be forced or coerced into doing the right thing makes the allure of doing evil seem like a virtuous rebellion.

Meanwhile people kill because ... well, why? Borders are crossed and religions are offended? Folks Christianity has never backed any country and we can all say that Christ "humbled himself and became obedient to death -- even death on a cross." Translation, first, God has been mocked and is big enough to handle our little slights and second, I doubt God really needs us to avenge him. So while we kill in the name of God, we should note that God died for our "good" name.

This leads me to my main thought. There is nothing laudable about humanity. Even if we aren't unfortunate enough to be in places where our lives are in constant danger, we do live in a world where our wills butt up against other people's wills. The subtle anger and malice of people eats away at everyone's soul day in and day out. People kill in so many ways be it behind the back comments or sarcastic put downs that there really is nothing do be said in our favor. In fact I often wonder why God even bothers keeping us around and if there is no God, why not just be done with us all together. We have done nothing to commend us.

The answer is, I am afraid, an unpopular one even with me. I was ransomed and saved. I like to think of it like this: There are some very awful cars that cost a great deal of money. They break down a lot and have extremely high costing replacement parts, but people pay a fortune to own them. My little Geo Prism is a great car but isn't worth nearly as much. Why is that? Simple economics: People ascribe higher value to things that aren't necessarily worth the cost. In this regard, God has made a serious blunder. He offered his deity as sacrifice to creatures who don't deserve it.

I know it is pointless or foolish to actually love people for their intrinsic value, there is nothing really lovable. I just happen to love that which is perfect, and that which is perfect sets an unusually high price on humanity, so I am stuck loving this beautiful mess. In other words, if there were no religion, there would be no people worth living for. This option is something not worth imagining.

You win some, you lose some.

Sigh, the Phillies won the World Series. Don't get me wrong, I love the National League. I feel like too often we get beaten in the All-Star game by that other league. Still...and I apologize to all my Phillies-rooting Phanatics out there, I usually do root for the underdog.

But the real reason I am writing this is not to congratulate the Phillies or console the poor Tampa Bay Rays who will have to retreat to their high seventy-degree paradise. Rather, as the game wrapped up tonight, I turned to my dad and uttered that one word that hangs over my beloved Cincinnati Reds like a pall: Pitching. One baseball expert put it best by saying that "pitching wins games and hitting keeps butts in the seats." The Reds can have a very fine group of hitters, but it doesn't mean anything without the requisite pitching staff.

The great tragedy or comedy, depending on who you ask, is the fact that Cincinnati has known this for years. Yet, nothing has been done about this. We wring our hands and lament it, but we are unwilling to make the necessary changes (i.e. budget or valuable player trades) in order to get better and move forward. I can attack and criticize my hometown all I want, but I realize that it is really a lot like my own life.

I look at people around me and how my friends move forward by sacrificing that which is truly unnecessary. I know the problems and have an hard time fixing them. Someone once said that admitting you have a problem is the first step, but I'd add that first steps really don't amount to much of a journey without the requisite next steps. Sometimes our sins are just too comfortable. So are beds I guess, but sooner or later you're going to have to get up and go.

The key is to just accept there are going to be rough spots in the outside world as well as in our own psyche, and that rarely will everything unfortunate visit us at the same time and not to worry when they do because there are bigger things than our worries. Meanwhile we can still be happy that there are things like the World Series and especially baseball.

Hi, I'm a Mac ... and, I'm Sorry

(An attempt at a short blog.)

I once got into an argument with my uncle (nothing very heated, mind you) about a recent ad campaign by the vacuum company Dyson. At the end of the advert, the founder of the company said, "I just think things ought to work properly" or something like that. My uncle said it sounded arrogant, I countered that it just stated facts.

Following the rather ... oh lets face it, bad Seinfeld advertisement series released by Microsoft; the company and their ad firm have decided to try and resurect the PC from its bad image by showing that millions of people around the world (some ninety-five percent of the human population that owns a computer) runs Microsoft. This overlooks a couple of central themes. First, it is an all too blatant appeal to popularity fallacy. Second, it ignores that PCs have been getting bad marks for crashes, viruses, and generally just "not working properly."

This is not the hardware's fault on the whole (though I have owned a Dell that only gets to be plugged in from time to time). Most PCs have very similar components and do virtually the same thing. However, the modern PC has a major design flaw: its operating system. It isn't that the Window's operating system is flawed or bad or anything like that. These things can be fixed. It is that it is so inherently flawed, bad, and problematic; and that no one at Microsoft thinks that instead of fixing their deservedly tarnished image, they ought to try and fix their products.

In this Microsoft typifies corporate arrogance. They feel that instead of working to make things better, they should not be challenged. Instead of fixing what is the problem, they decide instead to try and "fix" how the problem is perceived.

My friends, I do not have the best job and I am not a graphics designer or scientist; but I do have an amazing computer that has lasted me longer than any computer I have ever owned. It is coming up on four years since I purchased one of my best investments. My last virus was over four years ago (on my Dell), my last hardware fix was over four years ago (on my Dell), the last time I had to restart my computer because of a blue screen of death was ... well you get the picture. My parents have a computer from longer ago than mine. My dad bought a computer recently and it shows no signs of slowing down. This is because all of these computers are Apples.

When people ask me what kind of computer they should buy, my answer is simple, buy a Mac. It doesn't crash, it doesn't get viruses, and it runs as fast years down the line as the day you got it out of the box. To me the choice is obvious. (Ironically it is also obvious to the ad company that runs Microsoft's campaign, for they too, you see ... run the Mac computer.)

Hello, I'm a Mac, and I'm sorry.



P.S. - If you have time and are interested you can also download Linux. It is free, but it is harder to use. Oh yeah, unlike Windows it won't crash, get viruses, etc. Odd how many operating systems out there don't mess up on an hourly basis.

P.P.S. - Yes, that is the blue screen of death leading into my blog post. Lest we get lulled into a false sense of security and happiness by all those "happy" Window's Users, let us not forget what we are "really" dealing with. (Other options were the Mac and PC guys, a video of Windows messing up whenever Bill Gates unveils something, or the MCP from Tron.)

Words Have Meaning

Some of you may know of my increasing obsession with words, language, and its vital importance to how we live our lives. I’d like to focus on three words in particular namely: love, freedom, and sacrifice. These words seem to be or have been words bantered about recently. The latter two seem more important in our culture today than the first, but the first one is still used a lot today and in its time was the word of choice. In fact, it may actually demonstrate a generation gap.



Love



The Oxford English Dictionary says that love is “an intense feeling of tender affection and compassion.” It is important to know definitions, if for no other reason to know how inapplicable they actually are to our everyday usage. If we were to talk to an hundred people on the street, we would most likely end up with nearly as many definitions. Words have different meanings for different people because words are not solid things. They are socially agreed upon symbols. Imagine if you will a boat anchored in the water. It will move about on the surface of the water but stay relatively rooted to that spot. Words behave in much the same way.[1]



The main problem with people is when they believe, very firmly, that a certain word is no longer a symbol but an actual thing. In this way people cannot come to a common understanding because they are unwilling to yield on their notions of definitions.



A prime example is that of homosexuality.[2] Many people say we are to love homosexuals or that homosexuals love members of their own sex. However, we are fighting a battle of differing definitions. A Texas Baptist may differ greatly with a San Francisco homosexual on the definitions of not just erotic love, but of agape love as well. The problem comes when both sides refuse to see that the other person has a different definition. One of these definitions may indeed be tied into the deeper undercurrent of the laws of nature[3] and thus truly be called “right,” but that does not mean that we are to dismiss someone out of hand because they have a different definition. Indeed we are to “love” them so much that we try and practice our definition in such a way that they see it as so self-evident.[4]



Equally dangerous to holding too structured a definition, is to act as if such definitions do not matter. Back in the sixties such things were common. Love was the buzzword, but did it really mean anything to anybody? The definition was so mercurial that it actually didn’t have any substance at all. Therefore it wasn’t anything in which we could believe. That was the point. By ignoring the definition, you could have more and more people under one tent. What does that mean though? It’s not real community. Thus, reality imitated the word. A hollow group for a hollow word.



Freedom



Today’s word of choice is freedom. Yes, change and hope are popular, but they are not as important as freedom. The definition of freedom from Encarta is that it is “ a state in which somebody is able to act and live as he or she chooses, without being subject to any, or to any undue, restraints or restrictions.” It is manifestly obvious that no person on earth (with the possible exception of sociopaths) feels that absolute freedom a good thing.



However, we see that we run into the same problems with freedom as we do with love. Whose definition do we choose? Take for instance the very broad (almost cartoon-like) definition of freedom that I will give about the Democrats and Republicans. The cartoon depiction of Democrats is that they believe in freedom for sexual preference, religion, and lifestyle; whereas the cartoon Republican will believe in freedom for business practices, taxation, guns, and the like. The odd thing that neither side sees is that they both believe in freedom for different things. They are morally outraged that the other side would impede upon their freedom.



We know that these definitions of freedom only go so far though. The definitions that we give of freedom seem many times to be shallow and apparent excuses to allow us to do what we want to do. We accept it, not because we believe in freedom per se, but because we have a “gentlemen’s agreement” that we will look the other when you want something; a sort of “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch your back” attitude to rights and freedoms.



The true freedom needed in America is something that will not harm the civil population and should not be rooted in any religion per se, but must be rooted in the common culture which may spring from a certain religion. Our acceptance of some freedoms and rejection of others can become hypocritical and it is important that we do not overly condone or overly condemn other people’s desires.



From this we understand that freedom is pretty hollow. A culture rooted in Confucism or Islam or Hindu may have a completely different notion of freedom. And, to be frank America is not, has never been, and should never be a completely free country. The anarchy of three hundred million little gods imposing their will to power in the name of hollow freedom is a Hell too horrible to imagine. Freedom is marketed though because it ties in with our ego and that ties into our pride. The wise person knows the danger of pride, whereas the fool will buy into the lie of contentment at the price of happiness.



Sacrifice



Sacrifice today is cheap. It can be bought and sold…literally. When President Bush told us to fight terrorism, he said we could do this by going to Disney World. This made many Republicans grown and gave many Democrats more ammunition; but the fact is that we all believe that we are sacrificing something while not really sacrificing anything at all. In many ways, however, true sacrifice flies in the face of freedom. You cannot have true freedom if you feel the need to sacrifice and you cannot have sacrifice if you place freedom at the forefront of your goals. Yet we hear all the time about sacrifices for freedom. We are told to respect the sacrifices that soldiers make for freedom. The irony of this is that we pay lip service to their sacrifices and yet make none on our own. We talk a great deal about the heroism of those fighting, but we don’t even do the smallest of things: like thanking a soldier.



And we can’t say that going to Disney World is a sacrifice or that paying the real cost of gas is a sacrifice or that this thing or that thing is a sacrifice. A real sacrifice would be to give up eating chocolate because of the slave labor that is used to produce it or not buying from China because of the horrible human rights abuses. We could set up public funds for colleges to do research for cleaner energy or volunteer at that local boys and girls club / food pantry / habitat for humanity project. We could spend less time glued to the idiot box while spending more time with family, books, and community. We could even sacrifice time and money to get that next degree. That is sacrifice.



Now this is not to say that Americans don’t give. Americans donate time and money on levels that other countries don’t understand. While I think more of our budget should go to foreign and domestic aid, I believe that Americans give more on a private level than most anyone else in the world;[5] but let us not pat ourselves on the back and tell ourselves that we are wonderful individuals when most of us (yes us, because I am as guilty as the next person) don’t sacrifice nearly as much as we really believe we could.



Sacrifice becomes a pharisaical word. We believe we can fulfill moral requirements when we have made the proper sacrifices. However, we know that a change of heart is the only place where true sacrifice finds its beginning and ending. We have even begun fudging on the definitions of sacrifice. It has moved from what have you done because you had a change of mind and body and heart to what have you done to what have you done without to did you not buy that thing you wanted because you couldn’t afford it to did you go to Disney World and sacrifice your budget so the terrorists won’t win? I don’t want to live in a world where that is the definition of sacrifice. Ironically sacrifice has been having a pretty universal agreement. Most people believe they have done or are doing enough and some believe they can never do enough.[6]



If, as the dictionary puts it, sacrifice is “a giving up of something valuable or important for somebody or something else considered to be of more value or importance,” can we really say there is anything we have sacrificed or will sacrifice? I suppose the great irony of America is that until it knows what it really values above everything else, it will never know sacrifice and no matter what it may sacrifice, it will never measure up to that unknown something.



Humanity will always wrestle with definitions and the thoughts behind the words. Words like sacrifice, freedom, and love are hard to define. A big danger comes about when we forget that words aren’t really the things they are describing but rather signs that point towards these things. A great example is the word car. When I say the word car you may think of a different car than that of which I am thinking. The question is who is right and how much does it matter? Love, freedom, and sacrifice matter to the American and individual psyche; but we should never hate because someone has different definitions. We can disagree with others and even hate their definitions, but in reality we are all humans trying to grasp at the deeper meanings of words and their importance to our daily lives.


[1] So do mathematical symbols and numbers, but that is another story.

[2] Oh yeah, I can just see it now. Everyone is going to be getting all ticked off and ready for a battle. It’s like someone broke a glass at a crowded restaurant. Now I am not going to argue homosexuality, primarily because I don’t care to do so at this moment. I am not interested in it in that way, but I may write a blog post about it in the future.

[3] Do not for a moment pigeon-hole me into a close-minded Christian camp because I speak of the laws of nature. People from Aristotle to Kant have discussed the laws that govern human beings souls as being co-equal to those that govern the natural world. One does not have to be a Christian to believe that such things exist.

[4] Neither camp has been too good with demonstrating their definition of love properly.

[5] If I could have data on this, I would be one happy Phil.

[6] A Christian believes that there is only one sacrifice that we can make and that we can never truly make it by ourselves and on our own.