The Sacramone mystery solved

The Lutheran blogosphere has been in a state of disturbance since the disappearance of Anthony Sacramone.  When you go to his blog site, Strange Herring, a window comes up that says that it is available by invitation only.  Since no one has an invitation, that has provoked outrage and hurt feelings, with an inchoate fear that Mr. Sacramone has been murdered.  (Sorry, I’ve been reading Swedish mysteries.)  So it comes as something of a scoop for this blog that Mr. Sacramone in a comment came out of his self-imposed exile and explained himself.  In case you missed it, here is what he had to say:

Herr Veith:
The attention you have shown my online wares over the years is both undeserved…and much appreciated. As for Strange Herring, as you have noted, my enthusiasm waxes and wanes for it, as I question its value, even entertainment value, over the long haul. I have also mulled the possibility of re-jiggering it, making it more focused, perhaps strictly on film. In any event, I found myself inundated with some editing work and just didn’t want to think about it anymore, so I took it offline, which I now recognize was a mistake, as it seems to have offended some who thought I had made it for members only, when in fact not even I go on it (LARS! IT WAS NOTHING PERSONAL!). Also, I have been informed that FIRST THINGS is looking for a more “moderate tone,” and since I don’t do moderate, I have probably blogged my last over there. So, as soon as I can figure out how best to peddle my limited talents, I promise to reemerge.

So the message about the blog being by invitation only is just a quirk of the software, nothing personal!  So thank you, Mr. Sacramone, and we understand.  Take all the time you need, but just realize that you have lots of fans and you have an obligation to the public good.

Do what you please, of course, but I implore you in your new re-jiggering to BRING BACK LUTHER AT THE MOVIES, at least sometimes, at least as a special guest.  Your portrayal of him as if he came back to live today as a movie critic, as unlikely as that might seem, just nails the personality, the earthy spirituality, and the gusto of the great man.   That is a literary achievement of great note.

UPDATE:  Oh, man. Strange Herring is back, and Mr. Sacramone is on another roll.  He says some kind things about us here, so thanks for that, but there is much more good stuff.  I’m glad we shamed him so effectively.

North to Alaska

This weekend we head up to Alaska.  Anywhere to get away from this heat!  No, I have always loved sagas of the high seas, and had always wanted to go for a ride on a big ship.  My wife not so much, but she has always wanted to go to Alaska.  So she proposed that we celebrate our 40th anniversary (40!) on August 7 with an Alaska cruise!   How brilliant and thoughtful she is.  So we saved our pennies and made our plans, and now the time is here.  We leave Sunday and will be gone for around two weeks, with some time before and after the cruise to do a little exploring of Alaska and Canada on our own.

Don’t worry, though.  I expect to be able to keep up the blog.   The ship has Wi-Fi.   I don’t think it violates the point of a vacation to blog.  That’s not my job.  It’s my hobby.   But I reserve the right to miss a day or not post quite so much.

We go north, the rush is on.

Introducing the guest blogger, my brother

This blog is subtitled “the blog of Veith.”  It doesn’t say which Veith.  So I feel no qualms about letting my brother Jimmy do some guest blogging.  He has started reading this blog and you may recall some of his comments, some of which I have turned into regular posts.  So I think he will be a good blogger.

In many ways, we are polar opposites:   I am conservative; he is  liberal.  I am Lutheran; he is Baptist.  I am a professor; he is a lawyer.  I am a writer; he is a musician.  How much more different can anyone be?

And yet, we are also very similar:  We look exactly alike.  We have the same tastes.  We have identical senses of humor.  I would say we have the same sensibility.

So let’s see how he does.  Please welcome him.  You can argue with him, like I do, but don’t be insulting or snide or generally mean.  Part of the vocation of being a big brother is defending the little brother from people who pick on him.   The big brother can pick on him, but no one else can.  So I’ll zap comments that might hurt his feelings.  He is doing me a favor in these busy times, which I appreciate.   I hope you do too.

Verdict

In response to all of the discussion about “to ban or not to ban,” I think I will take the suggestion by Webmonk and others to delete certain comments that I find repetitive, tangential, or obnoxious.

I will be constrained by time, how busy I am, and when I get around to reading the comments. But I will try to supervise the discussions a little more. Hopefully, I can avoid banning people, though if I find myself always striking their comments that could happen. But I hope to keep this a positive forum in accord with its past reputation.

I do want this to remain a place where Lutherans and non-Lutherans, conservatives and liberals, Christians and non-Christians, can come together to discuss and interact. That can’t happen if any of the sides are vicious and insulting to each other. So all of us would do well to mind our manners. Again, I prize vigorous debate, but gratuitous rudeness will get your comment smitten (even if I do agree with it). A good test: Would you say this to a person’s face, without the anonymity of the internet? If not, rephrase.

To ban or not to ban

That is the question. . . .I think it’s good for people to hear from those who disagree with them. I believe in freedom of expression and freedom of conversation. Contrary to what some of you realize, I have banned people from this blog, those who kept throwing in racist comments or obscene language. Some of you have asked me to ban different commenters for being offensive in various ways. I have sometimes admonished the offenders, but I have resisted blocking them from participating in the discussions. But now I have heard in one of the comments (somewhere past 400 in the “Where are the Lutherans” thread) a new consideration. Some commenters, it was said, bring out the worst in some of you, to the point of making you sin in your reactions. That frames the issue differently, not in terms of rules but in effect, not focusing on a person’s misbehavior in isolation but on the harm it does to others, thinking in terms not of abstractions but in love of neighbor.

So what do you think? Should I ban participants in this blog with greater frequency? Are any of you being harmed morally or spiritually by anyone who comments here (no names need be mentioned)? Not just offended but tempted to uncharitable thoughts and emotions?

We really do have a kind of community here, so I take seriously what you think. Can we take a vote?

This blog’s new title heading

In the midst of all of the talk about Redeemed Rambling’s critique of the appearance of this blog, the consensus that this blog has a good design really, the addition of Cranach’s seal with its many variations, the minor suggestions that people put forward, and the tweaks that Stewart implemented, commenter Tom Hering–who knows a thing or two about design–was kind enough to design some other possible headings for the title of this blog.  I really liked the one with quasi-medieval lettering and the colorful version of Cranach’s seal.   I also like how it adds a touch of color–antiquated parchment color–without taking away from the clear black on white posts.  So Stewart put it up.

So what does Cranach’s seal mean?  It’s very simple, if we go by the original intention:  It means Lucas Cranach!  The device of the winged serpent bearing a ring is part of his coat of arms, as awarded by Frederick the Wise.   Knights had their coats of arms on their shields, and Kings used them on their royal seals.   The Kings of England had three lions.  The Holy Roman Emperors had a two-headed eagle.  Shakespeare’s was a shield with a diagonal spear, which presumably could be shaken.  Middle class types, such as Shakespeare and Cranach, could be granted a heraldic seal in recognition of their services or contributions, and they were typically very proud of that sign of semi-nobility and used it everywhere they could.  So Cranach signed his paintings with his device, which existed in many different forms, from the realistic to the abstract.  This one has the most artistic elements, in my opinion.

So the seal simply means Lucas Cranach and was the equivalent of his signature.  What is its derivation?  That is another question, which was discussed in last Friday’s post.  Was it a multi-language pun on his name, as one expert suggests?  Was it based on a symbol for artists, combined with one for speed, as another expert suggests, building on Cranach’s reputation as a really fast worker?  Was it an alchemical symbol?  A symbol for redemption?  I don’t know.  I’m waiting to hear from John Warwick Montgomery, who has agreed to weigh in on the matter and who has  published scholarship on how during the Reformation alchemical symbols for chemical transformations were used to symbolize spiritual transformations.

Anyway, thanks to Tom for the design.   How do you like it?


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X