Into the Woods

This past weekend I officiated at a wedding for a family member.  This professional couple in their thirties had each taken their time in choosing a mate.  The bride, a cousin of mine, had dated several men, a few of whom we all liked, but the one she married last week was definitely "a keeper".  And as many professional folks do when they finally decide to tie the knot, theirs was a "destination wedding".


"Destination weddings" have come into vogue in the past ten years. As is my wont, I have again consulted Wikipedia for a simple, and easy to understand definition of "destination wedding"; it points out; " Not to be confused with an elopement, a destination wedding is one in which a wedding is hosted, often in a vacation-like setting, at a location to which most of the invited guests must travel and often stay for several days. This could be a beach ceremony in the tropics, a lavish event in a metropolitan resort, or a simple ceremony at the home of a geographically distant friend or relative. During the recession of 2009, destination weddings continued to see growth compared to traditional weddings, as the typically smaller size results in lower costs."

The Clooney-Alamuddin wedding also happened this last weekend, and it was also a "destination wedding"...but one on steroids: three days of festivities in Venice of several parties, receptions and ceremonies.  Somehow, I don't thing this Clooney family feast was a low-cost affair; I suspect that once one tots up the amount of money spent by guests at the event on lodging, meals and transport, the cost of the wedding is quite high.       

We, on the other hand, did two days of cocktail parties and wedding ceremony and reception in lovely Roxbury, NY located in the middle of the Catskills and near by  ski country. The leaves were just at their first color turn, and the glowing reds and yellows mingled with the remaining green and the early morning mists gaving the place a surreal feel.

I stayed with three other family members in a rented weekend home tucked away, in the words of my cousin, "In the middle of frigging nowhere" over fifty miles from the New York Thruway which would bring us back to civilization once the festivities were over. The décor was...well, to put it nicely "rustic chic" with an homage to local fauna: bear skin rug, mounted antliers and deer skin stapled to a wall. 

A pre- wedding cocktail hour was in "downtown" Roxbury...an area about the size of two city blocks, at  local art gallery. 

The wedding was the next day at "Roxbury Barn" the reception in the bi-level barn, the cocktail hour in a pergola on the edge of a wood, and the ceremony within the woods itself. The majestic stand of trees surrounding the ceremony was kind of like a metaphor for marriage itself. Those of us who have ever entered into the state of matrimony can attest to the fact that it is like navigating through a dappled forest in which we discover and learn about oneself, one's partner and the fellow travelers along the way.
                                       

Oh, I also have a bit of advice for those attending an event that involves forest floors, gravel trails and old wooden barn planks: Do not wear four inch stiletto "do-me" shoes.  They impale leaves, get stuck in old barn floors and can cause an ankle to twist on a gravelly filled hillside path.  Just sayin'.
And oh, by the way: good luck to all the newlyweds: George Clooney included.

Fairness v. generosity

"...are you envious because I am generous?”

When I explained to my sister who lives in Connecticut, that I would be preaching this Sunday, she, being the well-adjusted middle child and the solidly anchored one, had a great idea for my sermon.  She knows and supports my addiction to reality television since she herself is a fan of “Dance Moms”. She sent me a link to a news item lamenting the fact that Mama June and Teddy Bear of “Honey Boo-Boo” fame are experiencing couple’s issues and are living separately while trying to “work things out”.  After milling that one over for about half a nano second, I rejected it as a part of this sermon, but I may just continue to monitor the situation on my own.  Instead I decided to think about the difference between “fairness” and “generosity”.

As some of you may know, I come from a tradition steeped in the labor movement in this city.  My father was a Teamster in the days of Jimmy Hoffa.  My uncle was a member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; my husband was a union official in the Communication Workers of America and not only am I a member of the United Federation of Teachers, I was the chapter leader at my school for ten years.

As a child I remember an aunt who used to remind us to hum the jingle used by the International Ladies Garment Workers Union that admonished everyone to “Look for the Union label”, when we shopped in local department stores for clothes.  I understood Fairness: fair wages, fair contracts, fair labor practices, fair work schedules. I knew “fair”, but perhaps not “generous”

A few weeks ago, I was privileged to accompany members of “Building Bridges” on a walking pilgrimage of our island and visited one of the most sacred labor sites in the City of New York.  In the Hebrew United Cemetery in Richmondtown , 22 victims of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire were laid to rest. The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in Manhattan, New York City on March 25, 1911 was the deadliest industrial disaster in the history of the city, and one of the deadliest in U.S. history. The fire caused the deaths of 146 garment workers – 123 women and 23 men – who died from the fire, smoke inhalation, or falling or jumping to their deaths. Most of the victims were recent Jewish and Italian immigrant women aged sixteen to twenty-three; of the victims whose ages are known, the oldest victim was 43, and the youngest was 14 years old.

One result of this horrific event was the creation of a Committee on Public Safety headed by Frances Perkins, a noted social worker, Episcopal churchwoman and later first Secretary of Labor under Franklin Delano Roosevelt. This group was commissioned to identify specific problems and lobby for new legislation, such as the bill to grant workers shorter hours in a work week.

In her role as Secretary of Labor, a post she held from 1933 until 1945, Perkins led the way in reform for workers. Her work for labor led to  the passage of Social Security Act, unemployment benefits, pensions for the many elderly Americans, and welfare for the poorest Americans . She pushed to reduce workplace accidents and helped craft laws against child labor. Through the Fair Labor Standards Act, she established the first minimum wage and overtime laws for American workers, and defined the standard forty-hour work week.

Perkins came of age at a time when many in the Judeo-Christian communities of New York City were talking about a “theology of generosity”, as opposed to a theology of righteousness. The theology of righteousness held that people get what they deserve, that their wealth and status are signs of their relationship with God. Simply put good, hardworking people get what they deserve, and sinful, lazy people get what they deserve. The theology of generosity, on the other hand, states that all we have is a gift from a generous God. The particulars may be influenced by our own effort, but the foundation is the generosity of God who gives to all people without regard to our particular circumstances or merit. Frances knew fair, but she also knew “generous”.

And “generous” is a far more difficult concept to grasp than “fair”. Recently I learned that the Mennonite group that had been living at St Charles Seminary and quietly doing Sandy Recovery work were heading home after over two years of generous service to the affected population on Staten island.  I had the privilege of meeting a few of these folks who quietly and respectfully shared their skills with homeowners who needed basic construction help done in a very professional and efficient manner.  They did not call attention to themselves. They did not seek out publicity for their latest “event” or invent local “stunts” to keep their name on the lips of local media.  They did the work they were called to do in a forthright and generous manner…and it will be their generosity that will be remembered here.  A generosity that reflects the spirit of today’s Gospel: something they did because they could; not to call attention to themselves, but because it was God’s call to them.  Let us try to emulate their generosity of spirit.

 

In search of masterpieces...

One thing I have learned from my many travels is that every destination claims to have a plethora of masterpieces for the visitor to visit and savor. Some are artistic, some architectural.  Others are of a more religious nature, and still others are just plain quirky and definitely in the eye of the beholder.

As a child growing up in mid-century New York City, I was exposed to several pieces which were said to be "masterpieces" of one kind or another.  These were mostly European masterpieces sent on loan for special showings in museums or other exhibition sites. I remember seeing Michelangelo's "Pieta" at the 1964 World's Fair in Flushing Meadows.  This statue was displayed in almost total darkness, boxed in a bullet-proof case with a single spotlight illuminating the sorrowful face of the mother holding her dead son.  We stood on a moving electronic walkway similar to those found in airports, but much slower that took us past the sculpture.

Years later, I was able to see it "in situ" at St Peter's Basilica.  I was able to get up closer to actually see the carefully carved folds in the clothing and the fine carving of the arms and limbs of the dead Christos as he is held by his sorrowful mother.

I was also able to see his "Mona Liza" at the Metropolitan Museum of Art when I was in high school.  So when I finally saw it at the Louvre, I was not surprised by its diminutive size. The Met also exhibited "The Book of Kells" when I was at Hunter College...a hop skip and a jump away.  I later saw this in Dublin at Trinity College...before they began charging people to take a look.  All three of these masterpieces certainly look better in the context of their surroundings. 

On a recent Christmas markets trip, I got to see lots of castles and churches that local folks claimed were national masterpieces.  I think the most impressive was the Cathedral in Cologne, Germany. It was quite large with scaffolding surrounding it...It seems it takes several years to clean it, and once it's done, it has to be re-cleaned from the beginning again...so it is a never-ending process.  Its outer layer is dark and towering, but you have to get inside to see the things that make it a wonderful space.  Its stain glass windows construct a multi-colored glass screen on all sides.  The craftsmanship of the stonework is superb; the wood working is amazing. It is a place of solace in a bustling city.

And grand it was, even in the dead of winter.  It also helps that the Christmas Markets are next door and they sell hot Gluwein.

But quirky is also good when it comes to masterpieces. And art is truly in the eye of the beholder.  I know some folks who eschew modern and post modern art. And still others who think Warhol is "old hat", but  his work is considered to be masterpieces of post modern society. His work has influenced several generations of graphic artists as varied as local graffiti practitioners to ad men of Madison Avenue who adopted his clean lines and interesting use of primary colors in packaging of all things from bubble gum to cigarettes.

His most famous protégé, Jean-Michel Basquait, started life as a graffiti artist.  He led a short heroin addicted life, and is buried in Brooklyn's Green-Wood cemetery where his grave marker is regaled with notes of love, packs of cigarettes, red lip-stick kisses, and flowers.  His art is quirky and still highly sought after. 

Well, I guess "masterpieces" are rather fluid things whose value depends on how important their admirers feel they are.  And what I think is a "masterpiece" may not make your list.  Vive la difference.