Blue Cord

I am pleased to announce that my son and I have been cast as roles in an upcoming production of Oliver! The production is being staged by the Pentucket Players. I will be playing Bill Sikes, while my son will be an orphan at the workhouse and one of Fagin’s boys.

I am excited about doing the play and even more excited that my son will be doing it as well. Oliver! holds a special place in my heart. The movie version came out the year I was born and won five Oscars, including best picture. Oliver! was also the first play I ever did. At age twelve, I played a workhouse boy and pickpocket, just as my son will. My parents and brother were both in the play as well; my father played the police officer who shoots and kills Bill Sikes, the character I am now playing. The story is a compelling one, the characters are rich, and the songs are some of the best from any musical.

I did a lot of theater from grade school all the way through college. I have been in productions of The Sound of Music (3 times), South Pacific (twice), The Music Man, Carousel, Guys and Dolls, The Wiz, Camelot, Shadow Box, and several others. I consider the time I spent on stage some of the best training I ever had for teaching and preaching. I am thrilled that my son is going to get the same experience of being on stage.

The one downside is that the performances are the same weekend as the SBL meeting this November. I will have to miss Saturday and Sunday at the SBL, although I can make it to Sunday night receptions because our performance that day is a matinee. On the other hand, if anyone at the SBL wants to come north of Boston to see a performance, it is just a short train ride up. You can hear me sing and see me get shot, all for the price of admission. Conveniently, the performances are done at the Rogers Center for Performing Arts, which is on the campus of Merrimack College where I teach.

Today was my first day of teaching at Merrimack College. I think it went well (i.e., no one got injured in the class). The classroom in which I teach was rather warm, but at least it is not receiving direct sunlight during the hours I teach in there. It should be quite nice by the end of September. It is not wired for technology, but I am told that can be brought in on an ad hoc basis. It does have a piano, however, as it is on the same floor as the fine arts department. I have always thought that Leviticus would work better as a musical, so perhaps this will be the year to try it out.

I am teaching two section of “Introduction to Religious and Theological Studies,” which all students are required to take. All of the intro classes I have taught up to this point have been either introductions to the whole Bible or introductions to the OT or NT. I have never done a general religious studies or theological class, and this intro combines both into one semester.

I am using three books for the course. For the religious studies section, I am having them read The Sacred Quest: An Introduction to the Study of Religion by Lawrence Cunningham and John Kelsay. It was recommended by some other professors in the department, and I am enjoying the reading I have done in it so far. For the theological segment of the course I am using Theological Foundations: Concepts and Methods for Understanding Christian Faith by J.J. Meuller et al. It is a team-written book that explores doing theology within a Roman Catholic framework. Each chapter has a segment on doing theological research using library resources, which will be helpful to first year college students. For the final week, the students will read Henry Chadwick’s Augustine: A Very Short Introduction. This college is run by the Augustinian order, so it is appropriate to have the students learn a bit about St. Augustine.

Because of my particular interests, the biblical studies section of my class will cover a few more class meetings than is usual, but I don’t think St. Augustine would mind. Tolle lege!

I just got final word today that I will be teaching two sections of “Introduction to Religious Studies” at Merrimack College this fall. Merrimack is a Roman Catholic liberal arts college in the Augustinian tradition. It is located about three miles from my apartment here in Massachusetts, which makes it much more convenient than teaching in Iowa (which I did last semester). Since I am only teaching two sections, I will be able to continue working as an editor on the New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible.

Apparently there is a new movie coming out called Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. I know this because it has been advertised on every billboard, TV channel, cereal box, and Burger King glass I have seen lately.¹ Cable channels are also jumping in by running Indiana Jones marathons constantly or “documentaries” that explore some of the artifacts from the films. Don’t get me wrong, I am very excited about the fourth Indiana Jones film. I only hope it can live up to its advertising.

In the spirit of things, I thought I would get in on all the hype. After all, I love a good bandwagon. So, here is a link to a long lost letter sent to Dr. Jones explaining why he was denied tenure at Marshall College.

1. Yes, I know the Burget King tie-ins are actually kids toys, but I really miss the days when Burger King gave out actual drinking glasses with movie characters on them. [back]

Scott Langston has an interesting article in this month’s SBL Forum entitled “What Makes the Bible Meaningful/Useful: The Ten Commandments and American Ideals.” Langston focuses on the reception history of the Ten Commandments and their use in politics during the Gilded Age of America.

Langston’s essay is well worth a read, particularly for those interested in how the Bible is used in politics. He notes that prior to the Civil War, the Ten Commandments were usually applied individually to address particular issues. In the Gilded Age, however, politicians began to refer to them as a whole as a text that expressed what it meant to be American. It is interesting to note that many of the uses of the Ten Commandments during that era were by progressives, which contrasts with the current situation where the Ten Commandments are more likely to be evoked by conservatives.

One of my favorite uses was by William Jennings Bryant, who accused the Republican’s of wanting to rewrite the Ten Commandments to say, “Thou shalt not steal on a small scale.” This sounds a lot like contemporary Republican rhetoric about revisionist history¹ and Democrats wanting to remove the Ten Commandments from public life.

Langston begins his essay by talking about recent controversies surrounding the use of the Ten Commandments, in particular their placement in the rotunda of the Alabama Judicial Building by Justice Roy Moore. Moore had done this to call America back to its moral foundation.

One of the arguments that is sometimes made by those who are advocating a return to biblical law is that the Ten Commandments are the basis for American law. While I would agree that American morality has traditionally been based in part on the Ten Commandments, the idea that the Ten Commandments underlie American law is demonstrably false. Nevertheless, it continues to be believed by a fidimplicitary portion of the voting public.

When I teach the Ten Commandments in my intro classes, I always have my students put this assertion to the test. We write the Ten Commandments on the board and then mark out the ones that are not American laws. Here is how it comes out:

1. No other Gods before Yahweh - Article I of the U.S. Constitution prohibits this from being an American law.
2. No idols - American law does not ban the making of graven images.
3. Do not take the Lord’s name in vain - The use of God’s name as profanity is not illegal, even on television. The FCC has ruled that while it may be offensive to some, it is not a violation of indecency laws.
4. Observe the Sabbath - We used to have Blue Laws on the books that prohibited some work on Sunday (if we pretend Sunday is the Sabbath for a second), but most of those laws are no longer in effect.
5. Honor your father and mother - There is no requirement in American law that we must honor our parents.
6. Do not murder - This is a part of American law.
7. Do not commit adultery - While not a federal law, some states do have laws against adultery. In Maryland, for instance, adultery is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of $10. Such laws are rarely enforced.
8. Do not steal - This is a part of American law.
9. Do not bear false witness - This is a part of American law.
10. Do not covet - American law does not forbid this. If it did, most commercials would suddenly be illegal.

In other words, only the prohibitions against murder, theft, and perjury are unquestionably a part of American law. Of course, you would be hard pressed to find a legal system anywhere in the world that doesn’t include laws against these three things, even in societies that have never heard of the Ten Commandments. And even if we add ##3, 4, and 7 (which were the basis for laws in times past), that still means that only six out of ten of the Commandments are a part of American law.

Those are hardly grounds for claiming that the Ten Commandments are the basis for the U.S. legal system.

1. As if there were such a thing as a non-revisionist history. [back]