Just a few days ago, we celebrated Independence Day, the anniversary of the United Colonies’ declaration of independence from Great Britain more than 225 years ago. We celebrated with fireworks, and perhaps still in a few places parades, with picnics and cookouts and trips to the beach and mountains.
And hopefully, somewhere along the line, we stopped for at least a few moments to give thanks for those who sacrificed much -- their “lives, fortunes, and sacred honor,” as they themselves put it -- to make us free, and to keep us that way in the years since.
But just how independent are we, actually? The truthful answer would have to be, not very. And less so, it seems, with each passing year.
Since our shift, c. 1970, from net oil exporter to net oil importer, we have been deeply dependent on sources of supply outside our own country to feed our ravenous appetite for oil and petroleum products. Some of those sources of supply are in countries that tolerate us at best, actively dislike us at worst.
We are dependent on 15,000-mile supply lines from China to supply us with the cheap consumer goods on which we have come to rely so greatly. Combine that with the last bit of dependency, and it’s easy to see why higher fuel prices are a concern for more than just filling our own tanks.
We have allowed ourselves to become dependent on government handouts and so-called entitlements in many areas of life. And we have acceded to the breakdown of organizations -- civic organizations and social clubs like the Grange, the Jaycees, and many others -- which previously served as buffers between individuals, the government, and the forces of nature, circumstance, and economics that buffet all of us.
That last is a clue to the fact that absolute and complete independence is an impossibility, of course. We could not have achieved our independence from England without the support of France, during our Revolutionary War. And even the most ruggedly independent pioneer or settler depended upon his neighbors, his family, or sometimes the local Indian tribe, to survive.
Interdependence is one thing, if it’s mutual. It is, in fact, probably the most basic, most natural, most normal condition for human beings. But the current situation, marked by trade deficits, military adventurism, and mistrust of American motives, is untenable.
If nothing else, the United States used to be able to be reliably counted upon to export its values: values like freedom, democracy, tolerance, and the rule of law. We still talk a good line in those regards, but place our rhetoric next to the Patriot Act, Guantanamo Bay, warrantless electronic surveillance, waterboarding, and other actions in Iraq and elsewhere, and it’s no wonder many people in many countries of the world still admire the ideals of America, but fear and mistrust our actions.
Our next President, whoever he may be, will have his work cut out for him mending fences abroad, and trying to rebuild our badly damaged reputation.
Between now and Independence Day, 2009, we need a national conversation on how we as a nation and as individuals can become more independent -- in fuel, food, consumer goods, and many other economic measures, and in our personal expectations -- while at the same time promoting healthy and reasonable inter dependence with our neighbors, both locally and internationally.
If we can accomplish this, whether by next Fourth of July or ten Fourths of July down the road, we will really have something to celebrate.
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
Tuesday, July 01, 2008
Column: Court strikes the right balance
Finally, at long last, the Supreme Court has confirmed what for many of us has always been self-evident: that sane, law-abiding citizens of the United States have an individual right, under the Second Amendment of the Constitution, to own guns for self-defense.
The Court was predictably divided on this decision, with the so-called “liberal” Justices opposed, and the more conservative ones in favor. Justice Kennedy, typically viewed as a moderate, voted with the majority to make it a 5-4 decision in favor of liberty, Constitutionality, and common sense.
Nonetheless this is not really, or at least exclusively, a liberal versus conservative issue. AP writer Mark Sherman accurately notes that the reaction broke less along party lines than along the divide between cities wracked with gun violence and rural areas where gun ownership is embedded in daily life.
This is the reality which partisan rhetoric has largely obscured: there is not a single “gun culture” in the United States. There are two. One of them is mostly an urban phenomenon: the “thug” or “gangsta” culture celebrated by gangsta rap and exemplified by the “Stop Snitchin’” DVDs put out by Baltimore’s gangs. For this culture, guns are about power obtained through violence, and wealth obtained the same way.
The second, and vastly larger, gun culture in the United States is often, but far from exclusively, rural. It reflects the estimated 43-55 million law-abiding gun owners -- only a fraction of whom are NRA members -- who own guns for hunting, shooting sports, and not least, personal safety. That includes defense against members of the first-mentioned gun culture.
Contrary to the views of at least one Presidential candidate, who seems to be doing some serious fence-sitting in view of the Court’s decision, members of the second-named gun culture are rarely bitter. In fact, they are typically optimistic, although sometimes frustrated by certain directions taken by this country’s ruling elite.
This second and much larger gun culture is peaceful, law-abiding, generally patriotic, and stresses personal responsibility. It views the Second Amendment as the “first freedom,” the right that, in the final analysis, guarantees all the others. It is, in other words, the culture that has remained in tune with the original intent of the Founders, now finally affirmed by the Supreme Court.
In making this ruling, the Court has struck the right balance. Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia noted that nothing in the ruling should “cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings.” In other words, it is only sane and law-abiding citizens who have the right to bear arms, and even then, not everywhere.
He further noted the justices in the majority “are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country" and that the Constitution "leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns.” This is hardly a return to a Wild West approach to problem-solving, as asserted by some fear-mongering anti-gun activists. If anything, statistics show the reverse: restricting gun ownership increases crime, as in Britain and Australia.
The right to keep and bear arms for a variety of purposes, including personal defense, is exactly that: a fundamental, individual right, on par with the right to speak freely, freely assemble, worship in accordance with conscience, and all the rest. It’s really rather sad that it’s taken this long, and required a Supreme Court decision, to affirm such a basic and self-evident truth.
The Court was predictably divided on this decision, with the so-called “liberal” Justices opposed, and the more conservative ones in favor. Justice Kennedy, typically viewed as a moderate, voted with the majority to make it a 5-4 decision in favor of liberty, Constitutionality, and common sense.
Nonetheless this is not really, or at least exclusively, a liberal versus conservative issue. AP writer Mark Sherman accurately notes that the reaction broke less along party lines than along the divide between cities wracked with gun violence and rural areas where gun ownership is embedded in daily life.
This is the reality which partisan rhetoric has largely obscured: there is not a single “gun culture” in the United States. There are two. One of them is mostly an urban phenomenon: the “thug” or “gangsta” culture celebrated by gangsta rap and exemplified by the “Stop Snitchin’” DVDs put out by Baltimore’s gangs. For this culture, guns are about power obtained through violence, and wealth obtained the same way.
The second, and vastly larger, gun culture in the United States is often, but far from exclusively, rural. It reflects the estimated 43-55 million law-abiding gun owners -- only a fraction of whom are NRA members -- who own guns for hunting, shooting sports, and not least, personal safety. That includes defense against members of the first-mentioned gun culture.
Contrary to the views of at least one Presidential candidate, who seems to be doing some serious fence-sitting in view of the Court’s decision, members of the second-named gun culture are rarely bitter. In fact, they are typically optimistic, although sometimes frustrated by certain directions taken by this country’s ruling elite.
This second and much larger gun culture is peaceful, law-abiding, generally patriotic, and stresses personal responsibility. It views the Second Amendment as the “first freedom,” the right that, in the final analysis, guarantees all the others. It is, in other words, the culture that has remained in tune with the original intent of the Founders, now finally affirmed by the Supreme Court.
In making this ruling, the Court has struck the right balance. Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia noted that nothing in the ruling should “cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings.” In other words, it is only sane and law-abiding citizens who have the right to bear arms, and even then, not everywhere.
He further noted the justices in the majority “are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country" and that the Constitution "leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns.” This is hardly a return to a Wild West approach to problem-solving, as asserted by some fear-mongering anti-gun activists. If anything, statistics show the reverse: restricting gun ownership increases crime, as in Britain and Australia.
The right to keep and bear arms for a variety of purposes, including personal defense, is exactly that: a fundamental, individual right, on par with the right to speak freely, freely assemble, worship in accordance with conscience, and all the rest. It’s really rather sad that it’s taken this long, and required a Supreme Court decision, to affirm such a basic and self-evident truth.
Monday, June 30, 2008
Hanging out my shingle
Well, it's taken a lot of time (more than ten years), and it's taken a lot of thought and prayer, but I finally did it: I applied for and received clergy credentials through the Universal Life Church. I am now officially, if humbly, The Rev'd Thomas H. Harbold.
Because the ULC confers ordination on anyone who is willing to accept and abide by two simple tenets -- "to promote freedom of religion," and "to do what is right" -- I know a lot of people become ULC ministers as a joke, or as an ego boost. In my case, it is neither.
For a very long time, since 1983 in fact, I have been torn (and I don't use that word lightly) between two spiritual traditions: Christianity on the one hand, particularly (since '89) in its classical Anglican expression, and some form of Earth-based spirituality (Paganism) on the other. At times the pendulum has swung more toward one or the other, but never have I felt entirely comfortable in either: mainly because both tend to be the homes of people who have very negative opinions of the other (with the exception of some Christians, mainly Episcopalians, who have become so "liberal" that they've all but lost touch with historic Christianity entirely).
My view is rather different: I believe that both paths contain good teachings and essential (if often metaphorical) truths that are lost if their essence is too-far diluted; that each is entitled to the integrity of its own traditions, and that people of good will can be found in large numbers in both spiritual paths. So it pains me that so many Christians talk negatively about "those Pagans" and so many Pagans about "those Christians" without, in many cases, truly understanding what it is they're talking about... or else speaking out of personal pain which I honor and with which I empathize, but which I contend is not sufficient grounds for painting whole groups of people with an excessively broad brush.
Add to this my long sense of call -- of vocation -- to some form of spiritual ministry, dating to at least since 1989. This is a vocation which has been affirmed by many people over the years, although interestingly not by organized religious bodies. I have done baptisms for friends, and I have been asked to do marriages (which requests I have had to turn down, of course, up until now), and I have provided various levels of spiritual counsel to various people, mostly friends, over the years. But there has been a limit to what I could do, not being ordained, and as I say, formal religious bodies have been less willing to affirm my vocation than have friends and even casual acquaintances.
The Commission on Ordained Ministry for the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland, for instance, rejected my application for postulancy in 1997 on the grounds that I was "too scholarly" for parish priesthood. A couple of years later, one of my sixth-graders at the Carroll County Outdoor School, a very perceptive little girl, informed me solemnly that "you should be a priest." Out of the mouths of babes and children...! And that's only one of a number of similar incidents.
So I have found myself in a situation where typical sources of access to ordination have either been closed to me, or are rendered uncomfortable because I am too much of a pan(en)theist and animist to be acceptable to most Christian seminaries, and too willing to see the good in Christianity to be entirely comfortably in an exclusively Pagan context. Besides, most Churches, whether Pagan or Christian, want me to start over more-or-less from scratch, and I quite frankly have neither the time, nor the energy, nor the desire, to do that.
My academic credentials, not meaning to sound immodest, are at least the equal of most clergy in most traditions: B.A., medieval studies, Western Maryland College, 1991; Master of Theological Studies, concentrating in Ecological Theology and History of Christianity, Vanderbilt Divinity School, 1995 (then the second-ranked divinity school in the U.S., academically); Certificate in Park Management, with a concentration in Environmental Education, Frederick Community College, 2001; and several courses in education at both WMC (now "McDaniel") and Carroll Community College.
In terms of practical ministerial experience, I spent just over seven years as a Licensed Lay Preacher and Licensed Lay Reader, preaching in a regular rotation at my (Episcopal) parish church, leading the Daily Office of Morning Prayer, and officiating in services at a local assisted-living community; more than nine years as Lector, Chalicist, and Licensed Eucharistic Minister; I've taught adult and youth Christian Education, as well as Confirmation classes; and have been a Subdeacon and Postulant for Holy Orders (just one step below Candidate) at a Continuing (traditional) Anglican Church as well.
Since 1983, when I first discovered the Pagan or Neopagan tradition through Starhawk's The Spiral Dance, I have engaged in a mostly solo, eclectic, practice; but I have been affiliated at different times with two different Wiccan Circles, the Temple of the Silver Crescent in Laurel, MD, and Oak, Ash, and Thorn in Nashville, TN, and have also been affiliated with two different Druidic Orders: Cedarlight Grove, ADF (Ar nDraiocht Fein), of Grove which I was at one point elected Chief Liturgist, and the Order of Bards, Ovates, and Druids, a British Druidic Order whose study program I am currently undertaking (I am presently in the Bardic Grade).
Does all of this make me worthy or qualified to undertake the practice of ordained ministry? Well, certainly not worthy. I don't think anyone is truly worth to interpret Deity to the people, or lay the people's cares and concerns before the Divine. And anyone who thinks he or she is, is almost certainly not! But that's where humility and trust come in. Qualified? *waggles hands in a yea-nay gesture* Not in every respect, certainly. In particular, I haven't had the training in pastoral care that I might ideally like to have, although I have had perhaps all too much experience in dealing with issues of grief and loss. But as the saying goes in the Christian tradition, God "does not call the equipped, he equips the called."
I hope and trust that will prove true, because I do believe that I have been for many years and remain called to a somewhat more "formal" or "official" practice of ministry than has been possible to date. Exactly what form that may take, remains to be seen! But the ULC credential gives me the freedom to cross not only denominational boundaries but also the lines of faiths and traditions: to be a truly interfaith minister. Particularly in the context of my work with Spoutwood -- an interfaith community if there ever was one! -- I find that not only liberating, but essential.
So, we shall see what we shall see. And in any case, as I say, my shingle is out... the one reading
In service to both the human community and that mysterium tremendum et fascinans * which both permeates and transcends our physical/sensory reality,
Tom
* "awesome and fascinating mystery," in the words of theolgian Rudolf Otto, in seeking to describe the Indescribable... that indwelling yet transcendent Divinity which has been called Great Mystery or Great Spirit, and by many other names, by many cultures throughout time and across the globe.
P.S. My ULC ordination grants me the ability to perform marriage, within the laws and regulations of the state, and to perform "funerals, baptisms, last rites or any other sort of legal ceremony or ritual you wish to perform, except circumcision." I had no desire to perform the last, anyway! Out of my deep respect for the Christian eucharist, and its close connection with the apostolic succession of ministry, I choose not to perform any service which might be construed as Christian communion, unless or until I am ordained within a valid line of succession.
Because the ULC confers ordination on anyone who is willing to accept and abide by two simple tenets -- "to promote freedom of religion," and "to do what is right" -- I know a lot of people become ULC ministers as a joke, or as an ego boost. In my case, it is neither.
For a very long time, since 1983 in fact, I have been torn (and I don't use that word lightly) between two spiritual traditions: Christianity on the one hand, particularly (since '89) in its classical Anglican expression, and some form of Earth-based spirituality (Paganism) on the other. At times the pendulum has swung more toward one or the other, but never have I felt entirely comfortable in either: mainly because both tend to be the homes of people who have very negative opinions of the other (with the exception of some Christians, mainly Episcopalians, who have become so "liberal" that they've all but lost touch with historic Christianity entirely).
My view is rather different: I believe that both paths contain good teachings and essential (if often metaphorical) truths that are lost if their essence is too-far diluted; that each is entitled to the integrity of its own traditions, and that people of good will can be found in large numbers in both spiritual paths. So it pains me that so many Christians talk negatively about "those Pagans" and so many Pagans about "those Christians" without, in many cases, truly understanding what it is they're talking about... or else speaking out of personal pain which I honor and with which I empathize, but which I contend is not sufficient grounds for painting whole groups of people with an excessively broad brush.
Add to this my long sense of call -- of vocation -- to some form of spiritual ministry, dating to at least since 1989. This is a vocation which has been affirmed by many people over the years, although interestingly not by organized religious bodies. I have done baptisms for friends, and I have been asked to do marriages (which requests I have had to turn down, of course, up until now), and I have provided various levels of spiritual counsel to various people, mostly friends, over the years. But there has been a limit to what I could do, not being ordained, and as I say, formal religious bodies have been less willing to affirm my vocation than have friends and even casual acquaintances.
The Commission on Ordained Ministry for the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland, for instance, rejected my application for postulancy in 1997 on the grounds that I was "too scholarly" for parish priesthood. A couple of years later, one of my sixth-graders at the Carroll County Outdoor School, a very perceptive little girl, informed me solemnly that "you should be a priest." Out of the mouths of babes and children...! And that's only one of a number of similar incidents.
So I have found myself in a situation where typical sources of access to ordination have either been closed to me, or are rendered uncomfortable because I am too much of a pan(en)theist and animist to be acceptable to most Christian seminaries, and too willing to see the good in Christianity to be entirely comfortably in an exclusively Pagan context. Besides, most Churches, whether Pagan or Christian, want me to start over more-or-less from scratch, and I quite frankly have neither the time, nor the energy, nor the desire, to do that.
My academic credentials, not meaning to sound immodest, are at least the equal of most clergy in most traditions: B.A., medieval studies, Western Maryland College, 1991; Master of Theological Studies, concentrating in Ecological Theology and History of Christianity, Vanderbilt Divinity School, 1995 (then the second-ranked divinity school in the U.S., academically); Certificate in Park Management, with a concentration in Environmental Education, Frederick Community College, 2001; and several courses in education at both WMC (now "McDaniel") and Carroll Community College.
In terms of practical ministerial experience, I spent just over seven years as a Licensed Lay Preacher and Licensed Lay Reader, preaching in a regular rotation at my (Episcopal) parish church, leading the Daily Office of Morning Prayer, and officiating in services at a local assisted-living community; more than nine years as Lector, Chalicist, and Licensed Eucharistic Minister; I've taught adult and youth Christian Education, as well as Confirmation classes; and have been a Subdeacon and Postulant for Holy Orders (just one step below Candidate) at a Continuing (traditional) Anglican Church as well.
Since 1983, when I first discovered the Pagan or Neopagan tradition through Starhawk's The Spiral Dance, I have engaged in a mostly solo, eclectic, practice; but I have been affiliated at different times with two different Wiccan Circles, the Temple of the Silver Crescent in Laurel, MD, and Oak, Ash, and Thorn in Nashville, TN, and have also been affiliated with two different Druidic Orders: Cedarlight Grove, ADF (Ar nDraiocht Fein), of Grove which I was at one point elected Chief Liturgist, and the Order of Bards, Ovates, and Druids, a British Druidic Order whose study program I am currently undertaking (I am presently in the Bardic Grade).
Does all of this make me worthy or qualified to undertake the practice of ordained ministry? Well, certainly not worthy. I don't think anyone is truly worth to interpret Deity to the people, or lay the people's cares and concerns before the Divine. And anyone who thinks he or she is, is almost certainly not! But that's where humility and trust come in. Qualified? *waggles hands in a yea-nay gesture* Not in every respect, certainly. In particular, I haven't had the training in pastoral care that I might ideally like to have, although I have had perhaps all too much experience in dealing with issues of grief and loss. But as the saying goes in the Christian tradition, God "does not call the equipped, he equips the called."
I hope and trust that will prove true, because I do believe that I have been for many years and remain called to a somewhat more "formal" or "official" practice of ministry than has been possible to date. Exactly what form that may take, remains to be seen! But the ULC credential gives me the freedom to cross not only denominational boundaries but also the lines of faiths and traditions: to be a truly interfaith minister. Particularly in the context of my work with Spoutwood -- an interfaith community if there ever was one! -- I find that not only liberating, but essential.
So, we shall see what we shall see. And in any case, as I say, my shingle is out... the one reading
The Rev'd Thomas H. Harbold
Interfaith Minister
Interfaith Minister
In service to both the human community and that mysterium tremendum et fascinans * which both permeates and transcends our physical/sensory reality,
Tom
* "awesome and fascinating mystery," in the words of theolgian Rudolf Otto, in seeking to describe the Indescribable... that indwelling yet transcendent Divinity which has been called Great Mystery or Great Spirit, and by many other names, by many cultures throughout time and across the globe.
P.S. My ULC ordination grants me the ability to perform marriage, within the laws and regulations of the state, and to perform "funerals, baptisms, last rites or any other sort of legal ceremony or ritual you wish to perform, except circumcision." I had no desire to perform the last, anyway! Out of my deep respect for the Christian eucharist, and its close connection with the apostolic succession of ministry, I choose not to perform any service which might be construed as Christian communion, unless or until I am ordained within a valid line of succession.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Column: Summer Reflections
As the wheel of the year turns from the Winter Solstice, December 21st, to Candlemas, February 2nd, there is an old axiom that “as the light lengthens, so the cold strengthens.” And in fact, the period between Christmas and Groundhog Day is often the coldest and snowiest of the year. In fact, the cold and snow sometimes extends right up to the Vernal Equinox, on March 21st.
If there were a similar axiom for this time of year, it might go “as the dark lengthens, so the heat strengthens.”
We are just past the Summer Solstice, the longest day and shortest night of the year. From now on each day will be just a little bit shorter, and each night a little bit longer, than the last. It’ll be barely noticeable at first, but within a few weeks we’ll be noticing, regretfully, that it’s not staying light quite as late as it was before.
That does not mean that the intensity of summer heat will lessen along with the light. It will eventually, of course, but we are now facing the hottest part of the year: “High Summer,” or the “Dog Days,” as some call them. From the Summer Solstice until at least Lammas (“Loaf-Mass,” the old harvest festival on August 1st), and perhaps until the Autumnal Equinox on September 21st, we can look forward to days, weeks or months of hot, hazy, and humid weather.
Nonetheless, this is a wonderful time of the year in many respects. Traditionally it’s a time for vacations, a word stemming from the so-called “Gilded Age,” when Vanderbilts, DuPonts, and other wealthy families literally “vacated” cities for the healthier climate of exclusive mountain or coastal retreats. With the advent of the Automotive Age, ordinary families could join the pilgrimage, and the Great American Vacation was born.
Present fuel costs may keep more people closer to home this year, and in years to come, but that’s not all bad: there are many places and events worth visiting here in our home state of Maryland, in fact right here in Carroll County. It’s even possible that some families may focus more on being families, and doing things together, rather than just going places.
And of course, this is the most fruitful time of the year, when fresh vegetables, fruits, and berries abound at farmers markets and roadside stands. What would late spring and early summer have been without strawberries and asparagus? But now we can look forward to locally-grown tomatoes, corn, and beans, yellow and zucchini squash, plus peppers and eggplant for those who like them, along with cantelopes and watermelons, cherries and peaches, red raspberries and plump blackberries, and much more.
And if the heat and humidity gets you down, be of good hope! It won’t be that long until the first Canadian cold fronts sweep through the area, bringing crystal blue skies and crisp nights, and the markets will be replete with apples and pumpkins, Indian corn and colorful gourds.
But that’s for the future. The wheel of the year keeps turning, ever-varied, eternally interesting. Best not to look too far ahead: better to simply enjoy what this turn of the year brings. Although the seasons may come back around, each moment in time is unique, and once gone, it can never be recaptured.
If there were a similar axiom for this time of year, it might go “as the dark lengthens, so the heat strengthens.”
We are just past the Summer Solstice, the longest day and shortest night of the year. From now on each day will be just a little bit shorter, and each night a little bit longer, than the last. It’ll be barely noticeable at first, but within a few weeks we’ll be noticing, regretfully, that it’s not staying light quite as late as it was before.
That does not mean that the intensity of summer heat will lessen along with the light. It will eventually, of course, but we are now facing the hottest part of the year: “High Summer,” or the “Dog Days,” as some call them. From the Summer Solstice until at least Lammas (“Loaf-Mass,” the old harvest festival on August 1st), and perhaps until the Autumnal Equinox on September 21st, we can look forward to days, weeks or months of hot, hazy, and humid weather.
Nonetheless, this is a wonderful time of the year in many respects. Traditionally it’s a time for vacations, a word stemming from the so-called “Gilded Age,” when Vanderbilts, DuPonts, and other wealthy families literally “vacated” cities for the healthier climate of exclusive mountain or coastal retreats. With the advent of the Automotive Age, ordinary families could join the pilgrimage, and the Great American Vacation was born.
Present fuel costs may keep more people closer to home this year, and in years to come, but that’s not all bad: there are many places and events worth visiting here in our home state of Maryland, in fact right here in Carroll County. It’s even possible that some families may focus more on being families, and doing things together, rather than just going places.
And of course, this is the most fruitful time of the year, when fresh vegetables, fruits, and berries abound at farmers markets and roadside stands. What would late spring and early summer have been without strawberries and asparagus? But now we can look forward to locally-grown tomatoes, corn, and beans, yellow and zucchini squash, plus peppers and eggplant for those who like them, along with cantelopes and watermelons, cherries and peaches, red raspberries and plump blackberries, and much more.
And if the heat and humidity gets you down, be of good hope! It won’t be that long until the first Canadian cold fronts sweep through the area, bringing crystal blue skies and crisp nights, and the markets will be replete with apples and pumpkins, Indian corn and colorful gourds.
But that’s for the future. The wheel of the year keeps turning, ever-varied, eternally interesting. Best not to look too far ahead: better to simply enjoy what this turn of the year brings. Although the seasons may come back around, each moment in time is unique, and once gone, it can never be recaptured.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)