Some days are too long, but most not long enough. My obligations and ambitions pull me in too many directions, and before I know it the day is nearly gone.
But not without first posting something here. After all, a commitment is a commitment, and I am determined to meet the challenge.
Better thoughts will find their way to these pages soon. For now, this will have to suffice.
[Daily post 062 of 260 in my year-long challenge.] ♨
Religion has been an implied value in America’s national park idea from the time of the earliest nineteenth-century parks to the present. But the religious element usually remains buried in visitors’ private aesthetic responses to park experiences and attractions. Rarely do specific theological views appear in the parks, even in unofficial activities or park uses. Certainly, the National Park Service…
A few years ago I listened in on a conversation with poet, novelist, and essayist Wendell Berry, introduced that day as “without question the leading agrarian of our time.” He suggested a definition of this term agrarian as a “love for farming” that includes an inclination to put land first as our highest value. “Access to land,” Berry surmised, “provides…
The difference between pilgrims and tourists is a perennial question. The best answer I have found came from a conversation with Peter Brown.
The Memphis Interfaith Coalition for Action and Hope (MICAH) brings together a diverse and passionate crowd of citizens committed to tackling the city’s most pressing challenges.
The Latin word pax, most often translated as “peace,” lies at the etymological root of both “pay” and “pacify.” How do we fit the Pacific Ocean into this puzzle?
Religious elements of national parks may not be obvious, but visitors’ experiences rely to some extent on traditions of religious travel and religio-aesthetic interpretations.
