It is very rare these days to see a large turnout at First Lutheran Church for anything. You should know it has not always been like this. Back in the Cliff Grindland years, an extra-special Sunday like of course Easter might have the ushers urgently setting up folding chairs at the rear of the sanctuary. Such formal ushers in those times, middle-age men who were pillars of propriety dressed in suits and ties.
A part of us pines for those times. Times change. One's appearance might be "grubby" today and it's perfectly acceptable for you to walk into church and sit in the pew. "Grubby" implies something less than desirable. Do we even pass judgment any more? Do we pass judgment on people's weight, I mean at all? Hasn't this been rather a sea change, really truly?
Part of the "enlightenment" that we have all gained means not judging based on body image. Tolerance can be a very nice thing. But excess weight brings dangers to one's health, so maybe we should push for more self-discipline on that front. But to say this directly to someone would be totally inappropriate. You wouldn't want to address someone about their "grubby" clothing in church either.
But as time progresses, we accept the new norm in a way that we do not pay special notice. At all.
"Fat?" Grubby clothing? It's absolutely of no matter. Life goes on.
The Grindland days at First Lutheran hearkens back to when the church was most steadfast with values that could easily be described as conservative. It was a wholly mainstream institution. I'm sure in the middle 1960s, if you were an adult member, you would not want to be caught saying anything skeptical about the U.S. war effort in Vietnam. I wonder if a lot of people privately did have skepticism. But they felt enormous pressure to tow the patriotic line. Many young members of the church were content to follow along with that, as they would not want to exercise their brains too much.
Part of human nature pulls at us to conform, largely because it's for our own good. Do you doubt me? Or do you think I'm exaggerating?
Did you catch the news item about Tom Smothers passing away the other day? The "Smothers Brothers" were a popular comedy team that got their own network TV show in the middle 1960s. They have come to be remembered mainly for how they staked out their position of being against the U.S. involvement in Vietnam, well before such a position was considered acceptable to hold in America.
You can research about how the Smothers Brothers drove the "network censors" crazy, constantly. America wasn't ready, but the comedy team opted to take risks. Their show was canceled because it could not survive the storm. Wasn't MLK branded as a shady character by U.S. intelligence agencies because he questioned the U.S. in Vietnam? Why were the headwinds so strong?
Why was our whole culture so ossified, ossified to the extent that there was a big controversy over how Jose Feliciano sang the National Anthem at the 1968 World Series. I mean, can you believe that? He personalized the song with an artistic twist. Oh, he didn't change the lyrics, he just employed some "pop" originality. And this has become the total norm in the years since.
Remember how the electric guitar player played the National Anthem for the season opener in the movie "Moneyball?" And while he did so, we saw these totally typical Legion and VFW types with their hats, out on the field unfurling a giant flag. They had no problem with the musical rendition. I mean, can you believe it? We all need to pause and think about these things sometimes. How times change and then we take for granted the new norms.
I will once again relate the First Lutheran experience. One of the new norms in our culture has been to accept gay people, to not look upon them with scorn or to force them "into the closet." Maybe First Lutheran was able to admit to some cultural changes in years past. But some hurdles just might prove too daunting. So is gay rights a bridge too far? We have to wonder about that.
Really honestly, I think most sensible people do not want gay people suppressed into this "closet" with such shame that some end up taking their own life. On the other hand, most sensible adults prefer having a sense of personal modesty about sexual matters. We don't want such matters in our face. We have an instinct to suppress such thoughts, probably ingrained in us by God for a reason.
What would my late mother say? I assure you, Mom would say the sole purpose of sex is procreation. It can be a terrible conundrum. I will confide with you: my own life was hurt terribly by the sense that sex was to be associated with nothing but shame. It was never to be spoken of. If the subject somehow arose like (in a subtle way) with a conversation on a TV show, we'd feel embarrassed to the extent of practically fainting.
A conundrum indeed: we want a sense of "personal modesty" about such matters. On the other hand, we cannot allow kids to grow up with zero guidance about it, to let boys in their mid-teens go to a movie, develop an erection and have no idea why their bodies are behaving like this. I'm forthright enough to make these points even if some people might want to cringe or say I'm disgusting. Go ahead and say I'm disgusting.
The Annette Funicello "beach movies" of the '60s were the epitome for "teasing young boys" with the images. I can just imagine the creative minds plotting all this entertainment: the undulating female bodies. I'll assert that it was cruel. We could not imagine the easy availability of "porn" like we have today with the Internet. I put "porn" in quotes because how, really, do we define it? Talk about conundrums!
And here's the deal with porn. It becomes passe among boys, really pretty quickly as they become "desensitized." That's the buzzword: "desensitized." Women's libbers who might want to decry porn should take the opposite view: the "desensitized" effect on so many men and boys helps the male gender get over their sexual preoccupations, so they can view women as just plain human beings! The way it should be.
Have you ever seen a porn star in an interview? They don't seem "exploited" at all. They in fact can have the most genuine laugh you could ever hear! They seem happy. Some of them may not be, but you could say that about any occupation.
Steve Van Kempen |
Does a very large funeral bother you a little? I mean, isn't it irresistible to wonder if your own funeral someday will attract just a fraction of the turnout? So, you wonder if you are just not as popular or as well-liked. I think it was Bud Grant who said "if you want a lot of people at your funeral, die young."
Steve Van Kempen was age 70 which in my youth would have been considered terribly old! Not today. Maybe "middle-aged" would describe. Anyway, members of the boomer generation never get old, right?
First Lutheran Church |
I suspect that Faith Lutheran of Morris had more of a plan for today. That wouldn't be hard because we had no plan. I wonder if there is a circle of insiders with First Lutheran who secretly know of a date when the church will simply close up. Cease to exist. I'm betting on it. We're the church that did not survive gay rights. The ELCA has experienced a crushing blow because of gay rights.
I sat down at First Lutheran this morning, then left after a couple minutes. I don't know why they didn't just cancel the service.
The holidays are hard on single people. Looks like there might not be any businesses open in Morris on New Year's Day. People have to eat. And pretty soon we'll have Martin Luther King Day. Look what has happened with Thanksgiving: it is turning into a four-day weekend. And now we have "Juneteenth" taking hold in summer: a three-day weekend. Well why not? Don't we all just love it?
Keith Lindor speaks during the Van Kempen funeral service at First Lutheran. Keith like Steve was a 1971 graduate of Morris High School. Your blog host was Class of '73, as was Keith's sister Laurie. The boomer generation slowly departs this life as do all generations. Us boomers have always considered ourselves irreplaceable, haven't we?
- Brian Williams - morris mn minnesoita - bwilly73@yahoo.com