Tuesday, August 24, 2004

A Short, Over-written Lament

There is a desperate cynicism that seems to pervade every face-to-face encounter these days. Everyone is oh-so-sensibly unhappy with the to-ing and fro-ing of the moon and the mornings. Even I, reluctantly, often feel the familiar weaving of dolorous tones around my own tongue.

Attitude. Skewed attitude harrumphs, "This is summer?" Pause for effect. "Not!"

And irony, in accord, adds, "When's the snow?"

Of course, this is mature irony, yet, like a brown child still living with both parents, and coloured in need by a non-denominational con-artist's palate, it is adopted unnecessarily.

Oh, yes, I know. This is nothing new--it was ever thus. The sophisticated contraposto of dispassion leaning on boredom has been around since Adam was a lad. Okay.

But! Today, those posing thus are so young! And so numerous. There is indeed a generational emptiness of eye and cooling of concern detectable in our youth that should disturb us much more than it seems to.

As well as a decided lack of wit and humour.

That's the most noticeable thing of all, to me. That so many young people are so verbally clumsy and unfunny. Is this a natural result of their linguistically artless parents? Those mush-mouthed scions of mush-brained hippies?

Or is it some as yet uncatalogued communication-retarding syndrome caused when the wrist and thumbs are swollen beyond reasonable limits through the constant twiddling of remotes, mice and video game controllers?

Perhaps it is simply that the human imagination is stunted to eventual mortification by the continuous influx of audio-visual offal on tap 24/7 in our electronic nurseries?

Personally, I'm more inclined to believe that their souls have been paralyzed by the egregious immorality floating like detritus through the atmospheres. This, and the varnish of anti-transcendence that covers every heirloom their parents bequeathed. When a father and mother no longer wish to court favour with the God of their fathers and mothers, what messages will the midnight bedtime stories contain? If King David is a gentile, he merely dances naked in front of a lewdly unpolished mirror. What could he hope to teach a nation? How to table dance?

This is summer?


Tuesday, August 10, 2004

The Rabbit Heart

Cornered deep beneath a gasp
The rabbit heart trips thunder
As the teasing, staggered hedges wink
Suggestively at plunder.
Risk is lashed to a moment’s dash
From still to silent islands
Leaving unseen wakes of tiny fright
Through the pirate sea of gardens

Above panting in the warren dank
Where the rabbit heart soft stumbles,
Winter even softer struts
Upon the heath that autumn humbles.
But light, not cowed, bright showers down
Warming acres spliced and spoiled.
In shading shafts the rabbit sees
Pirates failed by famine foiled.

jsk.10 Aug 04

Monday, July 12, 2004

What Do You Love Most?

“For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?”
—Mark 8:36

I’m not sure of the background of the following parable. Yesterday, a friend of mine gave me a hard copy of it; his wife sent it to him in an email. Wanting an e-copy, I googled “king 4 wives”, and found this version on an “Islamic Forum”. That it might be of Arabic origin isn’t so surprising, seeing that, on the surface, it concerns a king with multiple spouses.

The King Who Had Four Wives

Once upon a time there was a rich King who had 4 wives. He loved the 4th wife the most and adorned her with rich robes and treated her to the finest of delicacies. He gave her nothing but the best.

He also loved the 3rd wife very much and was always showing her off to neighboring kingdoms. However, he feared that one day she would leave him for another.

He also loved his 2nd wife. She was his confidante and was always kind, considerate and patient with him. Whenever the King faced a problem, he could confide in her to help him get through the difficult times.

The King's 1st wife was a very loyal partner and had made great contributions in maintaining his wealth and kingdom. However, he did not love the first wife and although she loved him deeply, he hardly took notice of her.

One day, the King fell ill and he knew his time was short. He thought of his luxurious life and pondered, "I now have 4 wives with me, but when I die, I'll be all alone.

Thus, he asked the 4th wife, "I have loved you the most, endowed you with the finest clothing and showered great care over you. Now that I'm dying, will you follow me and keep me company?"

"No way!" replied the 4th wife and she walked away without another word.

The sad King then asked the 3rd wife, "I have loved you all my life. Now that I'm dying, will you follow me and keep me company?"

"No!" replied the 3rd wife. "Life is too good! When you die, I'm going to remarry!" His heart sank and turned cold.

He then asked the 2nd wife, "I have always turned to you for help and you've always been there for me. When I die, will you follow me and keep me company?"

"I'm sorry, I can't help you out this time!" replied the 2nd wife. "At the very most, I can only send you to your grave."

Then a voice called out "I'll leave with you and follow you no matter where you go."

The King looked up and there was his first wife. Suffering from long years of neglect and malnutrition, she was very weak and thin. Greatly grieved, the King said, "I should have taken much better care of you when I had the chance!"

Now, as with the parables in the Old Testament (i.e. of the Creation, or of Noah), and those of the Lord Jesus Christ (of the Sower, of the Foolish Virgins), ostensibly the preceding tale is curiously unsatisfying as narrative. However, the minute the deeper, spiritual meaning is revealed, there is a marvelous, intellectually satisfying flash of understanding. Here is the explanation of the "Parable of The Four Wives":

The 4th wife represents the body: No matter how much time and effort we lavish on it to make it look good, it'll leave us when we die.

The 3rd wife represents our possessions, status and wealth: When we die, it will all go to others.

The 2nd wife is our family and friends: No matter how much they have been there for us, the furthest they can stay by us is to the moment of death.

And the 1st wife is our Soul: Though often neglected in pursuit of wealth, power and pleasures of the ego, this is the only thing that will follow us into eternal life.

Sunday, July 4, 2004

A Poetic Return

The Mendicant

On grins of golden bread I feed
Just like the chary mice of greed.
Gnawing to my hungry heart's delight
While the rats of avarice take flight.

Soundly step my unshod soles
As a beggar walks on slabs of holes
Up the mountain path so steep
Passing those who town-ward creep.

Then the too-near world withdraws
Into a gray, unfocused fog.
And these aging eyes are forced to stare
At the light that crests the next day's glare.


Friday, April 9, 2004

An Indefinite Sabbatical

Due to a sudden, astounding and most wonderful turn of events in my life, I will be withdrawing indefinitely from the blogosphere. I want to thank any and all who have been dropping by to read my wayward scribblings.

Thanks and Take Care. The Lord Jesus Christ bless and keep you all!

Ex Animo,
J. S. Kern

Tuesday, March 30, 2004

A Separation of Belief

An interesting debate is shaping up on the newly redesigned and much improved Politics Canada Forum between the editor and yours truly:

Secondly, to Rob:

KERN says – “uhm...if a politician is a "Satanist", I'd want to know about it.”

ROB says – “Indeed as others may want to know if a candidate is a Christian Scientist, an Islamic, a Jew, or a Catholic. Such knowledge while irrelevant to governing a nation is essential for discrimination.”

KERN – Are you equating Satanists with Jews and Catholics? How someone governs anything (himself, a household, a business, a country), whether ethically/morally or not, is directly related to his character. His character can be gauged by the belief system to which he subscribes. Such knowledge, because it is essential information about a candidate’s character, is highly relevant to, as you put it, “governing a nation”. Discrimination in favour of politicians of good character is a duty we owe our nation and fellow citizens.

KERN says – “As well, this secular humanist "Theophobia", so pervasive in those who object to Harper's religious identity, apparently render's a person blind to the differences, subtle and overt, between, say, an Islamofascist and a Presbyterian.”

ROB says – "Harper’s religious identity has nothing to do with politics. Objecting to revealing religious identity does not make one blind to risk of fascism for it preys upon the weak irrespective of denomination. Prejudice on the other hand, is forever busy and never blind."

KERN – See above. You have, once again, equated all people of faith regardless of doctrine (this time casting them as fascists) thus revealing your own “Theophobia” and confirming my point. Perhaps you didn’t realize that the most tyrannical, murderous regimes of the 20th Century (fascists) were constitutionally irreligious and practically anti-religious?

KERN says – “Historically, Canadian politicians, in order to promote harmony, avoided the sectarianism of the UK & Europe between the Roman Catholics and Protestants. They did not, however, avoid references to Jesus Christ as the incarnate God of both. This anti-Christian stance is a recent invention.”

ROB says - "The founding fathers desperately sought cooperation from a conquered French population. Parading religious differences was regarded as divisive then, as it remains today."

KERN – This is a tautology. You have simply restated my point as a rebuttal: Historically the differences were avoided, but the similarities (i.e., Jesus Christ as the incarnate God of both “founding nations”) were not. Today references to any religion are not seen as divisive between French Catholics and English Protestants, but are seen as an affront to the secularist sensibilities of the anti-religious establishment.

It is folly to accept and/or desire that the doctrine of separation of Church and State precludes people of faith from holding office. No one wants a Theocracy run by an established sect, but all the virtues civilized people hold dear, that are responsible for the highest degrees of national success, are Christian virtues. The undermining of this religious/philosophical basis of our own nation is a disasterous turn of events. As we have had demonstrated time and time again, a nation of increasing antipathy towards Christianity is a nation descending into a hellish chaos.

J.S. Kern

...so, go on and add your zero-point-zero-two of a dollar!

Tuesday, March 23, 2004

The Better Alchemist Won

That Stephen Harper breezed casually to victory on the first ballot at the new Conservative Party of Canada’s Saturday leadership vote was neither unexpected, nor unwelcome. Of the three candidates, only Harper has the requisite experience and acumen to master the political alchemy of turning underdog lead into leadership gold. At this time, with the Liberal government floundering in the deep end of the hubris pool, the Tories need a seasoned man at the helm. As I noted in my last column:

"By next week, after dealing with the earnest but forsaken Tony Clement and the obscenely opportunistic Belinda Stronach, Stephen Harper will be the newly elected alpha male of the federal pack. With the right leader, a series of well-organized forays over the next few months could return them to the top of the political food chain. And they should all feed well this season. Their primary prey is scattered, ill and broken. There will be many necks exposed. My advice is to go for the jugular every time."

Even the fiscal Socialist Michael Coren thinks Harper is the right magician, at the right time, for not just the party, but the nation. And, as he wrote last week, even some far-left NDPers think so, too:

"I am writing this column before we know who will be the new leader of the Conservative Party of Canada. I can only hope, and believe, it will be Stephen Harper....

"But it is Harper who can seriously undermine the rancid Liberal machine and change the political future of this nation. Federal Liberalism stinks. Let me be specific and careful here. There are many fine men and women in the Liberal Party, who care very deeply for Canada. But the confidence of power has become an arrogant smugness, a malodorous assumption of victory.

"I've even heard some hardened New Democrats and labour leaders tell me they would rather have a Conservative government in power than more of the Liberal chokehold on the throat of this country. That, let me tell you, is quite something."

It is indeed, Michael. What’s next; editorialists at the Globe & Mail quietly whispering of a secret revulsion to buggery? CBC writers holding a Seder and selling Israel Bonds?


And Michael, his leftist friends, and I aren’t the only ones who see Harper as a viable candidate for Prime Minister. On Coren’s CFRB radio show last night, the Live Listener Poll asked the listeners whether or not they would vote for Stephen Harper. Well over 80% of a predominantly Ontario audience, one not noted for it’s Tory sympathies, said they would.

Looks like the chattering wizards of the punditry coven are wrong again: This ex-Alliance alchemist has got appeal east of the Manitoba border, after all.

Of course, this appeal will in no way stifle the invective of those in media who cannot stand the thought of anyone even liking a Conservative leader, never mind being willing to vote for one. The Warlocks of Wordiness will ceaselessly chant their tired incantations of "red-neck", "racist" and "misogynist Christian war-monger", hoping to cast a decent, sensible prince of a man into a warty toad. The uninformed Zombies of the Canadian electorate will soon be spoon-fed a witches brew of raw lies and bile in order to revivify them just long enough to vote Liberal.

But Stephen Harper is on to them. In his victory speech he nailed it:

"The tired, old, corrupt Liberal Party is, right now, cornered like an angry rat. They are going to attack us like we've never been attacked before.

"They will attempt to open old wounds. They will do this because this is the only way they can survive. We cannot allow this to happen. We must unite as a team."

It is a testament to the skill and dignity of the man that he stopped short of including the members of the mainstream Canadian media when he spoke of cornered rats, and the openers of old wounds. And, it is a measure of the wisdom and morality of the man when, to the certain disgust of those unnamed enemies he ended his speech with “God Bless Canada.”

All I can think to say now is, "Hurry up Stephen. Let’s get the lead out!"