Vicki Leon's book on Slavery in Rome, "Working IX to V"

NPR this morning had a wonderful interview with Vicki Leon about her new book, "Working IX to V" (Walker & Co, New York, 2007). Nota Bene, all those who want to take "family values" in the ancient world seriously.

Here's their excerpt:-

Slave Roundup

Running with scissors & other plum jobs

In the unfree workplace, there were certain positions that most slaves would fight to get.

The dream job for a female house slave was that of sandaligerula, a post that took more time to spell than to do. High-born Romans and Greeks engaged in shoe rituals with rigid standards as to where they could be worn. A man who wore a toga with sandals, for instance, would be laughed out of the Senate.

To guarantee that her mistress was properly shod at all times, the sandaligerula accompanied her mistress to dinner parties. Once there, the sandal-slave took off her owner's street shoes and replaced them with party slippers. Removing one's own footgear was so declassé that even the humblest guest brought along a sandal-slave. After the partygoers went in to dinner, the shoe-schleppers enjoyed a little downtime until the event broke up. At deluxe events, guests got their feet bathed as they reposed on dining couches; this job, however, was carried out by the host's special toe-cleaning, oil-'em-down slaves.

Another fab position that younger slaves lobbied for was flabellifer. Open to males or females, it involved carrying a fan for the mistress, flapping it on command. During the dog days of August, slaves might be in for some marathon fanning; most of the time, however, flabellifers were there for show, and knew it.

Seasoned slaves with good memories and diction became salutigeruli. They spent their days carrying complimentary messages from their owners to friends, acquaintances, and those on the "need to be flattered" list.

Musically inclined slaves nabbed the coveted fistulator positions, available only to those whose owners were public speakers. Fistulators carried a reed pitchpipe. To start, the fistulator gave a subtle tootle or two so that the great man could proceed to orate at just the correct pitch. Gracchus, famed orator in republican times, was said to have been the first to flaunt a fistulator.

Upper-class foodies had a problem: how to dine with elegance while lolling on a couch? Then some bright guy invented a labor-saving device called the scissors, a word that meant both the cutting instrument and a slave of the same name. Any household of consequence assigned a scissors slave to attend each dinner guest. A fellow of steady hands and good hygiene, the human scissors used his bronze instrument to cut up his guest's meat and other messy items.

Most slaves could only fantasize about working part-time. The flashiest part-time gig? Triumph slave. Whenever a victorious Roman general killed five thousand of the enemy in a single battle, he earned a triumph, a massive musical celebration with oxen sacrifices, booty distributions, and a huge parade, complete with cringing losers in golden chains.

The slave stood behind the triumphant general in his chariot, holding a heavy, jewel-laden gold crown over the man's head. His other task was much trickier. As the procession moved along amid cheers, the slave whispered wet blanket remarks into the general's ear: "You're not that great. Look around you and remember you're only a man."

When it came to averting bad luck—or military megalomania—the Romans thought of everything.

"Die Welt" on Paul

In an article "Paulus, Frauenfeind oder Gruender des Christentums?" ("Paul, Misogynist or Founder of Christianity?" in Die Welt posted yesterday, Gernot Facius announces that on Thursday Pope Benedict will declare a year of Paul celebrating the 2000th anniversary of the apostle's birth.

I translate some of the article here to see what view of Paul obtains in a widely circulating German publication. Note here arguments about the Jewish and inclusive Paul.

Using the work of Hans Kung, the article argues that it is unhistorical to propose that Paul was the founder of Christianity since before the conversion of Saul to Paul, there were Jewish followers of Jesus. However, through Paul the small Jewish sect became a world religion. Paul translated the message of Jesus into specific religious contexts. Paul became the first Christian theologian by means of the Jerusalem Council of the Apostles held around 48 CE in which he facilitated the access of pagans to the universal God Of Israel without taking over circumscision, purity, food and Sabbath regulations. Paul is however Jewish. Anselm Gruen, one of the most widely read spiritual writers of today, calls „a paradox of history “ the fact that Paul, who belonged as a Pharisee to the strictest interpretation of Judaism, dissociated himself in his preaching so radically from the rejudaising tendencies of the early church. Schalom Ben Chorin also opines: „In his argumentation, in his theology and in particular also in his Christology, and theory of the Messiah, Paul remains within Jewish theology.“

As fas as Paul's alleged misogyny goes, exegetes today agree that the command to silence doesn't come from Paul but a redactor of Pauline letters around 100 CE. Was it adjustment to the social environment? Were there time-bound statements like those about the power of the state which comes „from God “and to which everyone has to bear obedience“? The catholic theologian Hans Josef Klauck comes close to such a thesis: „As time progresses, Christian life consolidates. In intensified measures one falls back on patriarchal behavior patterns from the environment. It might also be that the Christians were anxious not to be disqualified in a Roman context with its rigid behavior patterns, if they would continue to grant liberty to women, which they had at the beginning of the church.“ But Klauck thinks that Paul still grants women equal rights within the community.

Speaking of hospitality: Have you read Horace Griffin's "Their Own Receive Them Not?"

The Rev. Dr. Horace Griffin, my friend and GTS colleague, summarizes the argument of his important new book, Their Own Receive Them Not: African American Lesbians and Gays in Black Churches. It is courageous and timely.

Even with the presence of gay Christians in their families and churches and the strong and faithful witness of revered black gay Christians like George Washington Carver, James Cleveland and Barbara Jordan, African Americans continue to resist viewing homosexuality as anything but sin, a negative "lifestyle" and a white aberration. Although there is opportunistic tolerance of gays in black churches, black gays -- like other gays -- often are dismissed as irrelevant to moral black people.

As a gay African-American pastoral theologian in the liberation tradition, I find this black church practice to be an ironic tragedy, antithetical to a black liberation theology and gospel of Jesus that offers justice for all people. Historically, black church leaders opposed oppressive actions against humans and played an active role to end slavery, mobilize African Americans in the political process, organize educational institutions and provide places of worship, recreation and training for black people. Many black church leaders protested social and religious injustice toward African Americans. As a result of the African-American experience, black church leaders and members developed a theological perspective of justice and liberation taken from the Exodus story and the prophets of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Despite this historical perspective, most black ministers have failed in their application of this theology toward women and gay-identified men. Black heterosexual Christian men's objection to racial hierarchical practice, by and large, had to do with their resistance to being dominated by white men. In general, they did not object to, but rather supported, the domination of women and later gay men. Their use of Scripture to support this domination is similar to that of conservative white Christians who converted, enslaved and dominated black men.

Peter Brooks of the Times (UK) on the new PM

Why Do We Discuss Hospitality?

I'm just going to link to my post on Episcopal Cafe today on hospitality.
Simply put, westerners like myself discuss hospitality because we don't regard it as a norm in the way ancient and modern non western cultures do.

Natural World and Imago Dei: Common Sense Philosophy Updated

Today's NY Times discusses Science of the Soul (possibly in a continuum with the essay by Republican Presidential Candidate Senator Sam Brownback, "What I think about evolution" in which he said earlier this year:-

Man was not an accident and reflects an image and likeness unique in the created order. Those aspects of evolutionary theory compatible with this truth are a welcome addition to human knowledge. Aspects of these theories that undermine this truth, however, should be firmly rejected as an atheistic theology posing as science.)

Today's article challenges Senator Brownback's argument:

As evolutionary biologists and cognitive neuroscientists peer ever deeper into the brain, they are discovering more and more genes, brain structures and other physical correlates to feelings like empathy, disgust and joy. That is, they are discovering physical bases for the feelings from which moral sense emerges — not just in people but in other animals as well.

It cites theologians:-
“Evolutionary biology shows the transition from animal to human to be too gradual to make sense of the idea that we humans have souls while animals do not,” wrote Dr. Murphy, an ordained minister in the Church of the Brethren. “All the human capacities once attributed to the mind or soul are now being fruitfully studied as brain processes — or, more accurately, I should say, processes involving the brain, the rest of the nervous system and other bodily systems, all interacting with the socio-cultural world.”

Therefore, she writes, it is “faulty” reasoning to want to distinguish people from the rest of creation. She cites the ideas of Thomas Aquinas, the 13th-century philosopher and theologian who, Dr. Haught said, “spoke of a vegetative and animal soul along with the human soul.”

Side Bar: I'm not sure the NY Times is right about Descartes' statement "I think therefore I am" being an argument for the unique existence of the human soul. Wasn't Descartes simply establishing grounds for human existence?

Clerical Abuse in Italy (report from NPR)

Sylvia Poggioli reports (yesterday) from the Vatican that the lid is just beginning to lift on cases of clergy and religious sexual abuse of children in Italy.

Her report mentions a symposium in which participants gathered to hear from victims in cases of clergy sexual abuse. She continues:-

The story of Paul Cultrera, who kept silent for 30 years, resonated with the participants in the symposium.

Marco Marchese, a 26-year-old from Agrigento in Sicily, says he was absued by a priest for four years, starting when he was 12.

He says the American story is "the story of all of us."

"At first we think we're the guilty ones," he says. "It takes years, and only if you're lucky enough to find someone who believes you, can you heal. I just wanted to stop this man from hurting others and hoped the church would embrace me, but that embrace never came."

Believing the victims is the central issue.

The report mentions "Hand of God" directed by Joe Cultrera shown on PBS in January 2005. In case you haven't seen it, here are some press reactions. You can watch the entire movie on the PBS Frontline link. It is riveting.

A discussion of Common Sense Philosophy

This week, In Our Time with Melvyn Bragg discusses Common Sense Philosophy. Is common sense innate as Plato and the Stoics argued, or must it be learned? The later Cambridge Platonists argued against the materialists that our knowledge of God and morality is innate and given by God.

In 1690 John Locke challenges this in the essay on human understanding arguing that diversity of beliefs and senses in the history of thought opposes it and makes us lazy. In the 17th and 18th Century, Descartes wanted to found science on a reliable foundation and argued the proposition based on human existence which cannot be doubted: cogito ergo sum. Locke argued that there are properties of things which give us direct access to things outside our heads. Hume says there is no way of proving the validity of inductive reasoning. Can rationalist philosophy provide proofs? Our human nature provides evidence of the existence of the external world but not proofs.

Thomas Reed in Aberdeen, a minister of the Kirk, and his circle receive Hume's ideas well although the Aberdonians were not skeptics. He argues there are common sense principles: we exist and have a mind, and we can trust our senses generally along with the testimony of others e.g. on evidence for miracles and faith in general. There should be a unity between life in the real world and your philosophy. We have direct access to the real world.

Subsequently Immanuel Kant argues in the Critique of Pure Reason that events represented in the mind are orderly and it is through them that we know the world indirectly.

Ziggy, granddaughter of Pale Male, recovers after a night (or two) on the town

The recent drama of Ziggy is detailed for us on the new City Room blog of the NY Times. Those interested in "family values" will be pleased to hear that Ziggy's parents are now identified as Charlotte and Pale Male Jr. The picture (from NY Daily News) shows her at the ball field in Central Park about to take off after her recovery.

Gay Marriage Debate in the NY State Assembly

The NY Times reports on a personal and intense debate. Amongst the highlights:-

Teresa R. Sayward did not hesitate when she rose from her seat on Tuesday night to address her colleagues in the State Assembly. An observant Catholic from a small, conservative upstate town, she had rarely shared the story of her son, Glenn, 42, and his struggle to come to terms with his gay identity decades ago.

But she said the occasion — a chance to make New York the second state in the country to pass a bill legalizing same-sex marriage — called for a highly personal approach.

“We would spend long nights crying together and talking,” she told a full house of hushed lawmakers. “And one night I said to him, ‘You have to be what you are; you can’t be what people think you should be.’ ”

Ms. Sayward received resounding applause, and the bill later passed, 85-61. But in the Senate, where Joseph L. Bruno, the majority leader, opposes the bill, it is not expected to come to the floor.

Supporters of the bill had no illusions about its ultimate fate. But the Assembly chamber, usually abuzz with the white noise of Statehouse gossip and last-minute deal-making, stood silent on Tuesday night as members embarked on a three-hour debate that included tearful tales of family struggles and a gay-marriage proposal via cellphone.

New EU Constitution

This is a major achievement for Angela Merkel.

Der Spiegel reports that the 50-article charter contains an exhaustive list of well-established rights, such as freedom of speech and religion, and will now be legally binding in the other 26 member states.

However, the BBC reports that Britain has been allowed to opt out of a 50-article charter containing an exhaustive list of well-established rights - from freedom of speech and religion to the right to shelter, education and fair working conditions.

The UK was concerned at the charter's impact on business and its legal system.

Moreover, the charter will not become part of the treaty - it will just be referred to.

On the question of the religious implications for the inclusion of Turkey in the EU, see the recent work of Benoit Challand, a speaker at the recent LSE conference (June 16) on Religion and Politics in the Construction of the EU.