New call at the MTC

Yesterday--Sunday, April 29--Margaret and I began our service at the Missionary Training Center in Provo.

Here's the story: On Monday, April 16, the day after being released from my ten years as a counselor in the Provo Utah Central Stake, I got a phone call from President Breinholt, a counselor in the MTC presidency. We scheduled an interview for the next day. Margaret and I came to the MTC on Tuesday morning and spent almost two hours, which included a call extended to me to serve as a counselor in a branch presidency. (The missionaries at the MTC are divided into branches that average somewhere around 40 missionaries.) For some reason, I was feeling rotten that day, and I was concerned about how this call would affect time with my family. But I knew it would be a good thing; Margaret was very excited about it and rightly knew that we could actually involve the family in some ways; and I knew I would end up saying yes if I took time to think about it more. So I just said yes right then. President Breinholt was wonderfully kind and understanding and helped us get acquainted with the MTC and with the call.

Friday of that week I found out I would be serving in branch 46, a French-Tahitian language branch, with Ron Eliason as branch president and Kuinisi Matagi as first counselor. Brother Matagi is originally from Samoa, served a mission in Arizona speaking Navajo, and met his wife (a Tahitian who speaks French) in Hawaii. Currently there are just 17 elders and 2 sisters in the branch, but more are coming on May 9.

It turns out that this new call is about as heavy as the one I've had previously--maybe more so, since there are fewer Sundays free (like virtually none except near Thanksgiving, Christmas, and when I'm out of town). But the call is more focused. And I'm very excited about it. It will be a wonderful opportunity to stretch, grow, learn, and I hope contribute. And since Margaret and the kids can be involved to some extent, I think it will be an opportunity for all of us to grow and grow closer to each other.

In a nutshell, I'll be spending about 7am-4pm every Sunday at the MTC, along with Tuesday evenings (about 6:30-9:30pm), some Wednesday evenings (when new missionaries arrive for our branch), and an hour on Thursday evenings when both Margaret and I will (separately) visit missionaries in their residence halls.

A little over a week ago, on Sunday, April 22, I got to sit with my family in sacrament meeting in our home ward--the first time, I believe, in almost ten years. Except when we're on break for some reason from the MTC, we won't be sitting together again for a while.

Yesterday Margaret, Julie (our 18-year-old daughter), and I went to the 8:00 a.m. sacrament meeting where I was sustained. Margaret and I bore our testimonies, along with the outgoing counselor (Brother Curtis) and his wife--actually they're being transferred to a German-speaking branch. I was then set apart by Brother Breinholt, after which I got to participate in a series of meetings (priesthood, district meetings, branch council) and interviews. I got acquainted with all the missionaries--they're a great group and are heading to several missions: Montreal, Canada; Paris, France; French West Indies; and Ghana, meaning the French-speaking areas of West Africa. Meanwhile, Margaret went to Relief Society and a special meeting for wives of branch presidency members.

I'm a bit overwhelmed right now, trying to figure everything out and especially to be spiritually fit for the service. But I'm happy to be embarking on a new chapter of my life, especially since I'm doing it--or a lot of it--with my sweet companion Margaret.

The text of the New Testament

As I noted recently, Margaret and I are part of a book group whose most recent book was Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman. Ehrman describes himself as a "happy agnostic," having gone from more or less fundamentalist belief in scriptural inerrancy earlier in his life through Christian belief (of a sort) that was more open to the realities of textual transmission.

I've been interested in this topic for 25 years or so, so a lot of this was not new to me. But I did learn some things and enjoyed Ehrman's readable style and pleasant personality. Still, I found myself frequently disagreeing with him, on matters of detail and on his interpretation of some of the data. And I found myself noticing, not with irritation but with a kind of amused recognition, some of the intellectual/discursive tics of the typical English major (which I think Ehrman may have been at one point): he seems eager to come up with something new and different and then bring out all his artillery to make his point; and though he starts some sections by acknowledging disagreement among scholars, by the time he gets to the end of the section he speaks with apparent certainty--"clearly" this and "obviously" that, etc. His tendency to overstate some of his claims will rub some people the wrong way. As someone in our book group put it, readers who encounter writers who don't acknowledge contrary views tend to be resistant and to supply the contrary argument on their own.

He gives much useful background, though especially when talking about dim antiquity he generalizes a lot and fails to acknowledge that specific people apparently had remarkable experiences that can't be explained away by "trends," "influences," "developments," etc. But his main task seems to be to show us that lots of familiar passages in the New Testament may not have been in the original documents. Of course, we don't have the original documents. But we have manuscripts dating from about AD 200 onward along with indirect evidence going even further back.

Ehrman discusses about 45 passages, but in many cases these are minor items he touches on quickly. I set aside 12 or 13 that didn't seem worth spending much time on, and of the remaining 32 I picked 17 that seemed to me most interesting and significant, including the ones he spends the most time with. The passages I looked at include all the items on the list found at the back of the book titled "Top Ten Verses That Were Not Originally in the New Testament." (I count them as 8 items, since some of them appear together as part of longer passages.) That "Top Ten" list is preceded by the following VERY misleading statement: "These scribal additions are often found in late medieval manuscripts of the New Testament, but not in the manuscripts of the earlier centuries." Though a lawyer could identify some loopholes in the sentence, it seems to be saying that the passages listed were NOT found in manuscripts earlier than the Middle Ages--that they are absent from any ancient manuscripts--but were added later, during the Middle Ages (i.e., after about AD 500, when the Middle Ages are usually said to have begun). Interpreted that way, the statement is blatantly false.

With the exception of one of the verses, 1 John 5:7 (which I acknowledge to have genuinely weak support--in fact, Erasmus originally left it out of his edition of the Greek New Testament), ALL of the items listed are found in manuscripts dating back to the 400s or earlier and most have even earlier indirect support. One example: the woman taken in adultery (John 7:53-8:12), though probably not part of the original text of the Gospel of John, is a genuinely ancient story, and I think almost certainly a true one about Jesus. Far from being added in the Middle Ages, it is referred to by Christian writers as early as the 200s and is found in existing manuscripts of John as early as the 400s. It is likely the story was part of one or more collections dating to the early 100s or before. Jerome and Augustine, in the 300s, refer to its existence in manuscripts of John, Augustine speculating that some manuscripts lacked it because men were worried about the effect the story might have on their wives.

Other passages have even stronger support, and Ehrman's reasons for rejecting them are often weak, ESPECIALLY when his reasons derive from his interpretation of a gospel writer's style and intent. In a later post, I'll give an example from Luke--but it would take a mini-essay for me to make my point on that one.

Another thing Ehrman doesn't reveal is that in a few cases his views, presented with great confidence, contradict the conclusions of mainstream scholars. That's true of his proposals for changes in Mark 1:41, Hebrews 2:9, Luke 3:23, Luke 24:12, and to some extent Luke 22:19. That doesn't mean he couldn't possibly be right. It just means he is not, as he generally presents himself as doing, presenting the assured results of modern scholarship. In some cases, he's making an off-the-wall suggestions that most scholars don't accept.

Also, it's interesting that, despite his announced aim to show that many traditional readings should be rejected, in 7 or 8 of the 17 disputed passages I looked at, the traditional reading has reasonably good scholarly support, and in another couple of instances a good case could be made for the traditional reading, from a scholarly/textual point of view.

Attached are two handouts I've created that give what I've discovered about the 17 passages I tackled: (1) Handout 1 (click here) has two pages, "Passages Discussed in Ehrman" and "More Passages Discussed in Ehrman," presenting Ehrman's proposed reading, a standard scholarly consensus (and the degree of confidence the scholars in question had), the King James Version (which usually, but not always, differs from the previous two readings), the "score" of the traditional (KJV) reading according to a system I've devised, and then evidence FOR and AGAINST the traditional reading in ancient manuscripts and early Christian writers. (2) Handout 2 (click here) lists proposed dates for the composition of the four gospels along with a generally appreciative review of Ehrman's book by a Catholic writer.

I'll be revising handout 1 at some point since I took the evidence and so-called "scholarly consensus" from the 2nd ed. of the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (1968), ed. by Kurt Aland, Bruce Metzger, and others. There is now a 4th edition, which I will soon get my hands on, that may lead me to modify a few details. By the way, Bruce Metzger was one of Ehrman's teachers; Ehrman dedicated his book to Metzger--making Ehrman's differences in judgment from his teacher of course perfectly acceptable but still slightly ironic.

Current events

A quick list of some current happenings chez nous and in the environs:

(Tues., Apr. 17:) Margaret and I had an interview at the MTC we'll tell you about shortly.

(Wed., Apr. 18:) Misha had tutoring from a new math tutor, Nancy Krause.

(Thurs., Apr. 19:) We spent the evening with the Lifferths, Noah taking an exam while the rest of us ate fabulous muffins and cookies made by Kaila.

(Fri., Apr. 19:) Margaret and I went to book group at Lynn and Lenore Davis's to discuss Misquoting Jesus. For those interested in New Testament textual studies, I'll soon be giving you more on the book and the book group meetinig, with attached handouts responding to some of the author's claims about specific New Testament passages--and I'll explain how reading his book has helped increase my faith.

(Sat., Apr. 20:) Temple, shopping, and housecleaning (more or less the usual).

(Sun., Apr. 21:) I sat with my family in church!!! Misha and I visited two of the people we are assigned to home teach.

(Mon., Apr. 23--Shakespeare's birthday!:) I gave a final exam at 7:00 a.m. for the class I took over the last couple of weeks because of the teacher's illness.
   Don't worry--you won't be getting a weekly travelogue from now on. I thought, just for once, I'd give a snapshot of our lives. But mainly this is a reminder of some things I'll expand on when I have the time--and when the time is right.

Life goes on

Yesterday I was released from a church calling I've had for almost ten years. I'm still processing the change and will tell you more in a later post. Feel free, though, to post any condolences or congratulations as comments on the current post.

As for life going on, it apparently does. And so this week I'll be getting back, I hope, to diligently writing my book. This morning I finished a Shakespeare class I got to take over from an ill colleague. Wednesday we'll have a math tutor come to help one of the kids. Margaret and I will be attending our monthly book group on Friday (the book is Misquoting Jesus). And THURSDAY we get to go to the Lifferths, eat dessert, play "guitar hero" (which I do NOT do well), and administer a test to Noah.

We're looking forward to it!

Quick report on San Diego

I'm back from the Shakespeare Association of America meetings in San Diego. (Click here for the web site.) I didn't do any sightseeing--I've been to San Diego before, we're going as a family at the end of May, and the conference hotel (Sheraton San Diego Hotel and Marina) was not convenient to town (it's about four blocks from the airport).

But I enjoyed the conference. I roomed with a young faculty member from Allegheny University (Meadville, PA), named Jim Casey, and we had some good talks. I ate lunch a couple of times with Mike Jensen, a friend from California who respects but strongly disagrees with my religious beliefs. (We also talked about Levinas, family life in the past, and other topics, and he said how much he was impressed by the BYU students he had heard talk on National Public Radio on both sides of the Dick Cheney issue.) I saw other friends, including former student Kent Lehnhof and BYU colleague Brandie Siegfried, who I seem to talk with more at conferences elsewhere in the world than I do in Provo even though she has an office on the same floor as mine at BYU.

I went to sessions and seminars on various topics: historical formalism in Shakespeare studies, "Trans-Shakespeare: Temporality and Identity" (which included a fine presentation on Vigny's translation of Othello and Anglo-French Shakespearean relations in the early 1800s), academic publishing, classical associations, "Shakespeare and the Trace of Theology" (including an especially interesting piece on Calvinist theology and King Lear), and "Re-Sounding Shakespeare" (a seminar about Shakespearean music, speaking Shakespearean verse, and Shakespeare on the radio).

The seminar I took part in, titled "Shakespearean Attachments," was so large it had to be split into two parts. I took part in the first day's discussion. My paper was on "Family, Sociality, and Identity in Shakespeare's Comedies of Identity" (I'll explain some time what it was really about). Both mine and Kent Lehnhof's papers used Levinas, and Levinas's name was tossed about during both sessions. One seminar member, though, questioned whether modern philosophy ought to be used in connection with old texts (like Shakespeare), and another member referred to a critique of Levinas by someone who wanted to remind us that our neighbor might be a monster. That's not a critique Levinas would have been unaware of or unprepared for, so I was a bit irritated to have the challenge thrown down and not really have much of an opportunity to take it up. Furthermore, I had never heard of the person who was quoted as criticizing Levinas. The name sounded like zhee-zhak--I thought maybe it could be a Frenchman named Gijac or Jijaques. After returning to Provo, I did a search and found the real name: Slavoj Zizek, a Slovenian thinker/writer. As I've gotten to know his thought a bit, I find some of it attractive (he is a bit more obviously pragmatic than Levinas appears to be, and he makes some good arguments against things like the invasion of Iraq and the NATO bombing of Serbia). But I also found some things that put me off, such as (apparently) a defense of Robespierre and the Reign of Terror.

Otherwise, the "Shakespearean Attachments" seminar was both thought provoking (with some especially interesting papers on what "neighborliness" meant in Shakespeare's time, practically, ethically, and theologically) and confusing. After each session I felt I was less clear about what exactly we were talking about.

Other events at the conference: an opening reception at Balboa Park (Thursday evening), the annual luncheon on Friday with a fine talk by Georgianna Ziegler, a performance of English broadside ballads by Lucie Skeaping and Robin Jeffrey (Friday evening), and an advanced screening of Kenneth Branagh's latest film, As You Like It (Saturday evening). I did not go to the annual dance, "with live music by Tom Berger and the Hey Nonny Nonnies" (seriously), but my roommate did.

Broadside ballads, by the way, are songs that were sung on the streets of London, and elsewhere, and sold in one-penny sheets with the lyrics. They covered all sorts of subjects, from current events to strange (and usually fabricated) occurrences and constitute what I've referred to as the Renaissance English equivalent of country music crossed with The National Inquirer. I'm apparently not totally original in coming up with that idea, since the promotional materials referred to the ballads as something like popular music combined with the tabloid press.

I enjoyed As You Like It, which will be released in August, apparently only on TV (HBO), later on DVD. It wasn't up to Branagh's greatest (Henry V, Much Ado, Hamlet) but was nowhere near as bad as his worst (Love's Labour's Lost). The play was set in Meiji Japan, but more with atmospheric suggestion than realistically. It was actually filmed in a botanical garden in England that has tori gates and other elements that can pass for Japanese. Some of the casting choices were interesting--Brian Blessed doubling as the two dukes, three black actors as the de Boys boys, and an intermixture of ethnic Japanese here and there.

I spent a good amount of time among the booksellers and got a few items. And I had the adventure of losing my Palm Pilot either on the plane coming to San Diego or somewhere in the airport there. They found it and called me, and I did the 10 or 15 minute walk to the airport to get it and walked back. Maybe that doesn't sound like much of an adventure, but it was.

The other adventure, I guess, was catching an early flight back to Provo so I could enjoy Easter (and a Passover celebration) with my family on Sunday. I made it, amazingly, to our ward's sacrament meeting at 11am but was then so dead tired I had to nap before our Passover dinner at 5--which was a marvelous event, mainly because of the wonderful people there (Margaret, Julie, Misha, Kaila, Noah, Gabby, Alex, Rob, Stephanie, and briefly Julia Blair).

It's good to be back.

Going to San Diego

I'm still looking forward to hearing from Misha about the Clapton concert. But since life is moving on, I thought I'd give a progress report. I've had votes for a variety of topics. It will be easy to talk about sonnets, chocolate, and the classes I'll be teaching this coming year. I also need to talk about the book I'm writing (publisher's deadline is October 1). But I will get back to Groundhog Day soon. I know there's interest out there, and I really want to get my ideas down because Plato, Levinas, and that movie are wonderfully, mutually illuminating and because what they (together) reveal is a crucial lesson of life. (Am I pushing this too hard? I don't think so.)

Meanwhile, though, I'm leaving for a conference on Thursday: the Shakespeare Association of America meetings, held in San Diego this year. I'll get to do lots of interesting things, including see a new film by Kenneth Branagh. I'll give a report when I get back.