Metábasis eis állo génos (3-7)
For a long time I’ve been convinced by James Jordan that Mordecai was wrong to require Esther to hide her Jewish identity, and wrong to refuse to bow to Haman. Jordan points out that the Jews were specifically charged to witness to the nations, and he also points out that it is quite appropriate for humans to bow to human authorities (e.g., Abraham in Genesis 23). Thus, the only kind of witness that Mordecai is successfully conducting is completely upside down—”God’s people are insubordinate schemers,” just like rebellious Vashti and just like Simeon and Levi in Shechem. My friend Nathaniel quotes Paul in favor of this: “Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all humility to all men.” (Titus 3:1-2)
Doing a little digging this week thanks to Bible reading, I’ve changed my mind. I’m still convinced that Jordan is right in his principles and applications, but I now believe that the typology of the text is wanting to highlight different principles, ones which are not in fundamental conflict with Jordan’s. Within Scripture, it is not unusual to be in a place where we want to say something is praiseworthy from one vantage point and isn’t from another vantage point, or perhaps that it is praiseworthy under specific conditions. For example, we see that Kings and Chronicles do not always agree whether a king is praiseworthy, because they are interested in highlighting different principles. And we have a very similar situation in Jacob and Rebekah’s deceiving Isaac; as a general principle, we maintain that it is wrong to deceive your superior for your advancement or benefit. But the text shows us that Jacob and Rebekah are taking a great risk on themselves and seeking something quite different from Jacob’s benefit: the preservation of God’s promises and covenant, and the repentance of Isaac. Similarly, the Hebrew midwives disobey and deceive Pharaoh, but we would never charge them with a failure to be appropriately subject to rulers and authorities.
So, I take as my starting point Jordan’s view, but let’s see if there is enough evidence to lead us to believe that the text is highlighting a different principle.
One of the echoes in the book is to Genesis and the story of Joseph in exile. Some of these echoes land on Esther (she and Joseph both have a beautiful appearance) and others on Mordecai (becoming second in command to the king), and others on both of them (they are in exile like Joseph, and together God uses them for the salvation not only of his people but of the entire world). I want to focus on the echoes with Mordecai: (1) Mordecai is in exile, as Joseph. (2) Two other men suffer the king’s displeasure (baker and cupbearer vs. Bigthan and Teresh) and have their heads lifted up. (3) The Hebrew ought to have been remembered by the king because of this but is forgotten. (4) The Hebrew is eventually elevated to a place of authority second only to the king. (5) This reversal and deliverance takes place because the king’s sleep is disturbed. (6) The Hebrew receives garments and a signet ring from the king. (7) In both stories, there is another (Judah vs. Haman) who gives up his signet. (8) The Hebrew becomes responsible for saving both his people and the world. (9) In both cases there is bowing involved; in the one, the bowing of Joseph’s family; and in the other, Mordecai’s failure to bow.
This seems compelling, and leads me to lend weight to this parallel: (10) Both Mordecai and Joseph “day by day do not heed” someone (Genesis 39:10, Esther 3:4). Subtly but strikingly, Mordecai’s refusal to bow is portrayed in a righteous light by comparison to Joseph’s temptation. How could this be? How is Mordecai being tempted to compromise or sin? And what good reason could he possibly have for refusing to be subject to rulers and authorities?
For this we have to look at another connection, that between Mordecai and King Saul. Consider: (1) Both are Benjaminites. (2) Both are descended from a man named Kish. (3) Both are associated with a man named Shimei. (4) Both of them wrestle with Amalekites: Saul faithlessly preserves King Agag and the spoils of battle (1 Samuel 15); while under Mordecai, Haman the descendent of Agag is destroyed and the Hebrews do not take the plunder (Esther 9; Jordan suggests that the plunder went to the building of God’s house in Ezra-Nehemiah and that the queen in Nehemiah is Esther). (5) Rather than destroying the Amalekites, Saul goes on to attack God’s house (1 Sam 22). By contrast, if Jordan is right, Mordecai is partly responsible for the building of God’s house (not laying hands on the plunder is always a significant signal that the plunder is devoted to God and his house), but Mordecai is at least responsible for the preservation of God’s people and the nations.
Why did God want Saul to conduct herem warfare against the Amalekites—and does this indicate why Mordecai resisted temptation (so to speak, putting it in Joseph’s terms) and refused to bow? Some evidence:
Then Yahweh said to Moses, “Write this for a memorial in the book and recount it in the hearing of Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.” And Moses built an altar and called its name, Yahweh-Is-My-Banner; for he said, “Because Yahweh has sworn: Yahweh will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.” (Exodus 17:14-16)
Then [Balaam] looked on Amalek, and he took up his oracle and said:
“Amalek was first among the nations,
But shall be last until he perishes.” (Numbers 24:20)
“Remember what Amalek did to you on the way as you were coming out of Egypt, how he met you on the way and attacked your rear ranks, all the stragglers at your rear, when you were tired and weary; and he did not fear God. Therefore it shall be, when Yahweh your God has given you rest from your enemies all around, in the land which Yahweh your God is giving you to possess as an inheritance, that you will blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. You shall not forget.” (Deuteronomy 24:17-19)
Samuel also said to Saul, “Yahweh sent me to anoint you king over His people, over Israel. Now therefore, heed the voice of the words of Yahweh. Thus says Yahweh of hosts: ‘I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he ambushed him on the way when he came up from Egypt. Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’ ” (1 Samuel 15:1-3)
It seems clear to me from this that Mordecai conceives of the situation as one where he is responsible, as a Jew and especially as Saul’s heir in some sense, to complete the work of herem warfare that God both prophesied and commanded. Although he is tempted (by Haman’s great power? Haman apparently has the means to put Mordecai to death) to “forget” God’s command and submit to Haman, Mordecai does not fear Haman and is concerned only for his people. Mordecai’s explanation that he “is a Jew” fits with this interpretation. Because of God’s commands, it does not seem necessary in this interpretation for Mordecai to have any particular belief about Haman’s motives, such as whether he is a usurper. In a way, perhaps Mordecai is saying to Haman that “you can be saved if you are subject to Yahweh, but until then Yahweh has declared that he will defend his people from being subject to you.” This is how the book ends, as well; salvation is found only in the church.
We are bound to read Amalek and Agag as a kind of Satan and it seems this requires us to read Haman in the same way. Thus the bowing takes on a larger significance; especially because of what we have learned from the connection to Joseph, it should, I think, remind us of Satan’s tempting Jesus.
Esther seems to be a bridge between the herem warfare of the old covenants and the evangelistic warfare of the sword of the Spirit in the new covenant. There is prayer as always, but there is much more subtlety and deception and persuasion and timing in conducting the warfare, though there are still actual swords.
This has implications for us in our mode of dealing with Satanic government. At times we should bow, but at other times we should not. For this, much wisdom is required even if you believe someone has taken office legitimately. But, as a practical example, I think we can agree that being subject to someone does not include using zxqeir preferred pronouns. You might also choose to honor your superiors in how you dress in their presence, yet without needing to submit to their own demands over how you dress your face.
There are a few loose ends:
First, how should we understand Esther’s hiding her identity? If Mordecai is in the right, then this deception echoes Sarai/Sarah and Rebekah hiding their identities from kings while in exile. The result this time is a blessing to both God’s people and the king. We are not told how Mordecai knew in advance that righteous bridal deception would be required. But in terms of the typology, it seems he had faith that, when the king takes the Hebrew exile into his house, plunder and vindication and release from exile are soon to follow, although in this case it was necessary for faith to persevere for a number of years. The typology seems not to be concerned with the question of “how should a typical person behave in a typical situation.” Instead the text seems to be concerned with “how should the church-bride dance with emperors and defeat satans.” Of course, the emperor to whom we make our appeal today knows everything about us. But maybe he has some secret Obadiahs and Daniels up his sleeve, kept in preparation for a few bad dreams and sleepless nights.
Second, it’s worth noting that Esther remains submitted to her adoptive father in ways that a married daughter normally wouldn’t. This seems to cast him in the role of pastor to a church-bride, though it doesn’t necessarily prove that his advice to her is right. Interestingly, though, he does not hide his own identity even when he asks her to do so.
Third, we have hardly scratched the surface of the typological allusions. A significant one is the presence of an emperor-king, with wine, in a house, with an inner room, and feasting, and a garden, with a bride, and a serpent (Haman). The feasts are all closely associated with judgment; either the occasion for judgment, or else a celebratory conclusion to judgment. And as I mentioned previously, there is a tremendous and significant use of face.
Finally, the presence of a garden-temple raises another insight into Haman. The death of Bigthan and Teresh, doorkeepers, reminds us of two other stewards: Nadab and Abihu, among those who go “out from the door.” The only other death in Leviticus is that of the Israelite-Egyptian man who blasphemed and was stoned (Leviticus 24). If this parallel holds, we should read Esther expecting to find a blasphemer, who “shall surely be put to death”—Haman is a blasphemer.
Metábasis eis állo génos (3-6)
I’m proud to be a “small minority with unacceptable views.” Workers of the world, unite!
Elsewhere, this is how I explained my refusal to take the mRNA jabs:
You can count me as mostly aligned with moderate Alex Berenson; that is, I’m not inclined to discount germ theory or the existence of the thing, and I’m inclined to blame simple greed and social anxiety for everything that happened at least as much as I blame conspiracy. I do know people who fell gravely ill, but it is also the case that when it went through my family it wasn’t even as bad as the worst flu we’ve had. But, in short: I consider that the dangers of this (real) thing have been way overblown and the risk-reward of the (inadequately tested!) mRNA therapies for almost everyone is now looking to be way upside down. I consider mandating the therapies to be an evil thing.
[When asked about alternative injections] According to my understanding, Novavax is still not a traditional attenuated virus but is on the spectrum of novel approaches that focus attention in some way on the spike proteins. I actually think that these novel approaches could be useful tools for us in a few decades’ time, but in our anxiety and hubris and our failure to engage in an open scientific process, we are instead setting scientific and medical credibility back by much farther than that (not to mention the gross ethical failures). I am intrigued by the alternate history of polio, and I think that history will judge the chicken pox vaccine to be ill advised thanks to the unintended side effects that seem to be worsening shingles in the general population. In any case, even if we had a traditional attenuated or inactivated vaccine for Covid-19 (which seems unlikely since historically we have been unable to vaccinate against the common cold) it could be positively beneficial to only a small percentage of the population. (I’m at low risk plus I’ve already had the thing.) More importantly, it should be required of exactly zero percent of the population.
I haven’t told you all their argument, of course; it was long and complicated, as it often is when both sides are right. (J. R. R. Tolkien, Roverandom, 167-168)
Mark Horne cautions us to remember that imitation is not inauthentic. This is true of raising covenant children as well as our own pursuit of sanctification and maturation.
This is God’s heart toward Jerusalem:
“Comfort, yes, comfort My people!”
Says your God.
“Speak comfort to Jerusalem, and cry out to her,
That her warfare is ended,
That her iniquity is pardoned;
For she has received from Yahweh’s hand
Double for all her sins.” (Isa 40:1-2)
But: now such comfort is given to the New Jerusalem. So you must get yourself into the ark of the church if you wish to experience this salvation-rescue-deliverance.
But: God still disciplines his church, even to the point of removing lampstands:
The threshing floor and the winepress
Shall not feed them,
And the new wine shall fail in her. (Hosea 9:2)
Bread and wine are an actual manifestation of God’s presence and mercy. If you don’t practice weekly communion, you are pantomiming-enacting a famine of God’s mercy and his presence.
For certain values of regeneration:
I’m still listening to the Psallos Hebrews and Philippians albums regularly and enjoying them.
Metábasis eis állo génos (3-5)
I think of my job often as being a translator between executives, managers, architects, developers, testers, customers, writers, etc. My favorite work projects have been those we conducted war-room style or in an open landscape, yet now it is almost two years since I’ve been in the office. We’ve filled in the gap a little bit with some team outings. Today I went in to the office to collect my belongings, before my vaxx-leper status kicks in and my physical access is deactivated. This is such a stark contrast with my experience at church where we worked hard to find some way to meet, at times even with our fussy government’s disapproval. What a joy and encouragement that fellowship was, and what a missed opportunity these two years have been for camaraderie at so many anxious companies and churches!
Gary North has interesting thoughts on intellectual property. Nassim Taleb has a compelling argument that the long-term value of Bitcoin is zero. The same, I think, is true in spades for NFTs. If North is right, his insights serve as a secondary confirmation of Taleb’s position: in the long run, there is no solid foundation for digital property or title to it.
John Barach writes:
Our children should never wonder if—let alone doubt that—they really belong to God, if Jesus really died for them, if they’re really Christians at all. And we, as parents or pastors or teachers, shouldn’t teach them that these things may or may not be true. Assurance of salvation is not meant to be something we arrive at eventually in the Christian life, perhaps after quite some struggle to get there. Rather, assurance is the foundation on which our children ought to build with confidence from the very outset of their lives.
I’ve reflected in the past that Girardian scapegoating is to be resisted forcefully. But there is also a sort of garden-variety human nature to justifying ourselves in little ways by discounting others’ experience. These can be only very little transgressions, and it is a glory to overlook them.
I found this article fascinating. HT: Aaron Renn.
Metábasis eis állo génos (3-4)
Snow!
I wrote last week about households. A corollary of this is that any work a wife does outside of her home is a gift that she brings to her husband and places under his direction.
But if her husband overrules her on the day that he hears it, he shall make void her vow which she took and what she uttered with her lips, by which she bound herself, and Yahweh will release her. (Numbers 30:8)
This does not mean that he does not give her great freedom in it. It is the nature of authority to beget and to multiply authority.
The heart of her husband safely trusts her;
So he will have no lack of gain.
She does him good and not evil
All the days of her life.
She seeks wool and flax,
And willingly works with her hands.
She is like the merchant ships,
She brings her food from afar.
She also rises while it is yet night,
And provides food for her household,
And a portion for her maidservants.
She considers a field and buys it;
From her profits she plants a vineyard. (Proverbs 31:11–16)
I always look for Wolfe when I go to the used book store:
I was tempted to form a trifecta, but I think it will be a long time before I can work in The Bonfire of the Vanities.
But whenever we are dealing with symbolic language, we must remember that the symbol is always less than the reality. The wedding ring is less than the marriage. The flag is less than the country it represents. This means that if the lake of fire is a literal lake of fire, then it must be really bad. But if the lake of fire is merely symbolic, then that means that the reality it represents is far worse . . . Saying that the fire and brimstone are symbolic does not fix our dilemma. Symbolic of what? — Douglas Wilson
But what if the essence of a place is that it is defenseless? What if its ability to welcome others, to be hospitable to strangers, is its identity? What if vulnerability is its unstated mission? . . . . A synagogue is not like an airport or a stadium. When it becomes a fortress, something immeasurable is lost. — Juliette Kayyem
My state and county Republican leadership is a little too eager to commemorate 9/11 and MLKJ.
Fruits of the Spirit are to be practiced, cultivated:
Hatred is a fruit of the Spirit:
Oh, that You would slay the wicked, O God!
Depart from me, therefore, you bloodthirsty men.
For they speak against You wickedly;
Your enemies take Your name in vain.
Do I not hate them, O Yahweh, who hate You?
And do I not loathe those who rise up against You?
I hate them with perfect hatred;
I count them my enemies. (Psalm 139:19–22)
Metábasis eis állo génos (3-3)
Charlotte and Asher competed in an NCFCA tournament last week and did well. Ivy volunteered with judging. I really enjoyed witnessing so many young folks engaging in good speech and debate, and I greatly appreciate the home school speech club we’ve been able to participate in this year.
One student made the striking statement that “the good is the enemy of the best.” I’m familiar with the converse expression, but there are cases as well where this is true: we must offer our best, our first fruits, to God.
The tournament forced us to miss our church’s twelfth night feast, but we lit our own Epiphany light upon our return, combining our tree with three that we collected from the neighborhood:
Then he shall put his hand on the head of the ascension offering, and it will be accepted on his behalf to make atonement for him. (Lev. 1:4)
This leads to a profound irony:
Then they spat in His face and beat Him; and others struck Him with the palms of their hands, saying, “Prophesy to us, Christ! Who is the one who struck You?” (Matt. 26:67–68)
Therefore your sin remains. Thomas makes better use of his hands:
Then He said to Thomas, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing.” (John 20:27)
May we be his heirs:
Jesus said to him, “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” (John 20:29)
We set our sights too low if we merely train our daughters to “love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed” (Titus 2). We have received many blessings from the global economy, but it also represents an ever-increasing dislocation from a healthy oiko-nomos, that is, healthy household management. Our sons as well must be oriented towards their household, though they will naturally have a more outward-facing posture than their wives.
With Rosenstock-Huessy, I believe that the day of the big things—the big countries, the big economies, the big banks, the big companies, the big denominations—is coming to an end. Right now we must and do find ways to walk in this world of great giants and beasts, but we do so with a hopeful eye to the future. Our children will likely walk in a different world, and our grand-children almost certainly will. C. R. Wiley’s books Man of the House and The Household and the War for the Cosmos are both helpful introductions to thinking differently. I recall Nassim Taleb writing about Italian doctors and lawyers, how their practices tend to be much smaller and how they place a high value on individual accomplishment. I cannot find the quote but it was a compelling idea, especially in the male world.
It also strikes me that we do not see the hidden tradeoffs we have made. Aaron Renn’s reflections on “Beyond Economic Piety” underscore this well. What if we could abolish abortion in exchange for half of our GDP? Or abolish abortion in exchange for half of our pharmaceutical formulary being put out of reach of the average person? Wouldn’t you make that exchange without hesitation? We have received great wealth but at unbearable cost. Rich Lusk rightly observes that, “Of all the revolutions of the last several centuries that have rocked the world (the French Revolution, the Russian revolution, the Chinese revolution), it is the sexual revolution that has been the bloodiest of them all.” Miserere nobis.
Mark Horne recognizes the voice of Aslan:
So sometimes you know things and sometimes you really know things. I knew Jesus was YHWH but, when I came to the messages to the seven churches (Revelation 2-3), having read through the Bible from the beginning to that point, I really knew it.
His voice was unmistakable.
Mark Horne also passes along this article on what you might call a “best is the enemy of the good” strength training regimen. I appreciate the observations here; right now a one-hour workout twice a week is the best balance for me. I’m squatting twice, deadlifting twice, curling twice, pressing once, and bench pressing once. I’m never sore while I maintain this pace, though I only have to miss a single workout in order for the next one to leave me sore! I’ve also been influenced by the Barbell Medicine team to conduct my work sets around 70-80% of my estimated 1RM, rather than trying to negotiate complex patterns in an attempt to experience further progression. Maybe things will be different ten years from now, but I’m content with how things are going now.
Alan Jacobs plans to “repair something every day, even if it’s something insignificant, and even if the repair is just a bit of cleaning. I want each night to be able to say: Today, instead of acquiring something new, I took something already known to me and made it a little better.”
It is true that each little victory is hardly a victory thanks to the fact that the Overton window has moved so far. We should not even be entertaining the idea of the things that are being half-heartedly struck down.
Metábasis eis állo génos (3-2)
Wendell Berry’s “A Standing Ground”—
However just and anxious I have been,
I will stop and step back
from the crowd of those who may agree
with what I say, and be apart.
There is no earthly promise of life or peace
but where the roots branch and weave
their patient silent passages in the dark;
uprooted, I have been furious without an aim.
I am not bound for any public place,
but for ground of my own
where I have planted vines and orchard trees,
and in the heat of the day climbed up
into the healing shadow of the woods.
Better than any argument is to rise at dawn
and pick dew–wet red berries in a cup.
Mark Horne writes that “people who read the whole Bible every four years are better off than people who read less than half the Pentateuch in the first quarter of every year.” Read the whole thing.
Metábasis eis állo génos (3-1)
Happy ninth day of Christmas!
I love this phrase by Frost: “the earnest love that laid the swale in rows.”
And I love this evocative picture of a kind of New Jerusalem by Berry, from “The Morning’s News”—
. . . Though the river floods
and the spring is cold, my heart goes on,
faithful to a mystery in a cloud,
and the summer’s garden continues its descent
through me, toward the ground.
Those are richly blessed who find a place where they are completely out of breath trying to keep up:
Metábasis eis állo génos (2-52)
To the Word has us in Isaiah. Advent is such a fitting time to read Isaiah!
Woe to the multitude of many people
Who make a noise like the roar of the seas,
And to the rushing of nations
That make a rushing like the rushing of mighty waters!
The nations will rush like the rushing of many waters;
But God will rebuke them and they will flee far away,
And be chased like the chaff of the mountains before the wind,
Like a rolling thing before the whirlwind.
Then behold, at eventide, trouble!
And before the morning, he is no more.
This is the portion of those who plunder us,
And the lot of those who rob us. (Isaiah 17:12–14, NKJV)
And in this mountain
Yahweh of hosts will make for all people
A feast of choice pieces,
A feast of wines on the lees,
Of fat things full of marrow,
Of well-refined wines on the lees.
And He will destroy on this mountain
The surface of the covering cast over all people,
And the veil that is spread over all nations.
He will swallow up death forever,
And the Lord Yahweh will wipe away tears from all faces;
The rebuke of His people
He will take away from all the earth;
For Yahweh has spoken.
And it will be said in that day:
“Behold, this is our God;
We have waited for Him, and He will save us.
This is Yahweh;
We have waited for Him;
We will be glad and rejoice in His salvation.” (Isaiah 25:6–9, NKJV adapted)
I have five different tunes for While Shepherds Watched in my music library. It’s hard to pick a favorite, especially now that I have one more to pick from:
Every social theory is a theology in disguise. (C. R. Wiley, “Culture and Worldview“)
Have you ever wondered what set the ladies dancing and the lords a–leaping? Well, it was the pipers’ piping:
Metábasis eis állo génos (2-51)
And Jesus, answering, spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, “Is it lawful to meet on the Sabbath?” (Luke 14:3, adapted)
The striking thing about this is that he answered their watching.
Praise God:
The story of Noah is a comfort for Christians today. Faced with ungodliness on every side, we do not have rule or dominion. We live in a time of prophecy and Ark-building, warning the wicked and building the Church. In time, however, God will destroy the wicked, either through plague or conversion, and give rule to His people. The wine we drink in Holy Communion and the robes our church officers wear are our pledge that this is so. Like Noah, we must never shrink from our duty. (James Jordan, Primeval Saints, 50)
I keep falling farther and farther behind on podcasts. I am three and a half months behind on Ken Myers:
Shakespeare earned his place in our pantheon of minds by staging thought and action. Across his works, terms like think, thinking, or thought outnumber feel, feeling, or felt by a nearly ten to one ratio. He raises ideas into a quasi-physical reality, vivifying their dynamic power as a palpable force. (Scott Newstok, How to Think Like Shakespeare, quoted in MHAJ 151)
He comes to make his blessings flow far as the curse is found: Two cheers for utopia.
Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man’s devising. Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead. (Acts 17:29-31, NKJV)
In read-aloud this week, we stumbled across this helpful history of a grown–up counting his NFTs:
Scott: The Little Prince is Jesus. He has tamed us, and we miss him so much. And all of the stars remind us of him.
Annie [sighing]: Thank you for reading to us!
Amos: I’m going upstairs to wrestle with Asher.
But: we tryst with the prince every week, and so he continues to tame and tend us!
When one wishes to play the wit, he sometimes wanders a little from the truth. I have not been altogether honest in what I have told you about the lamplighters. And I realize that I run the risk of giving a false idea of our planet to those who do not know it. Men occupy a very small place upon the Earth. If the two billion inhabitants who people its surface were all to stand upright and somewhat crowded together, as they do for some big public assembly, they could easily be put into one public square twenty miles long and twenty miles wide. All humanity could be piled up on a small Pacific islet.
The grown-ups, to be sure, will not believe you when you tell them that. They imagine that they fill a great deal of space. They fancy themselves as important as the baobabs. (Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, The Little Prince, 68)
The population is now four times as great, so the dimensions are twice as great. But this is still a good thing to know.
In a multitude of people is a king’s honor,
But in the lack of people is the downfall of a prince. (Proverbs 14:28 NKJV)
“It has done me good,” said the fox, “because of the color of the wheat fields.” (Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, The Little Prince, 86)
The little prince went away, to look again at the roses.
“You are not at all like my rose,” he said. “As yet you are nothing. No one has tamed you, and you have tamed no one. You are like my fox when I first knew him. He was only a fox like a hundred thousand other foxes. But I have made him my friend, and now he is unique in all the world.”
And the roses were very much embarrassed.
“You are beautiful, but you are empty,” he went on. “One could not die for you. To be sure, an ordinary passerby would think that my rose looked just like you—the rose that belongs to me. But in herself alone she is more important than all the hundreds of you other roses: because it is she that I have watered; because it is she that I have put under the glass globe; because it is she that I have sheltered behind the screen; because it is for her that I have killed the caterpillars (except the two or three that we saved to become butterflies); because it is she that I have listened to, when she grumbled, or boasted, or even sometimes when she said nothing. Because she is my rose.”
And he went back to meet the fox.
“Goodbye,” he said.
“Goodbye,” said the fox. “And now here is my secret, a very simple secret: It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye.”
“What is essential is invisible to the eye,” the little prince repeated, so that he would be sure to remember.
“It is the time you have wasted for your rose that makes your rose so important.”
“It is the time I have wasted for my rose—” said the little prince, so that he would be sure to remember.
“Men have forgotten this truth,” said the fox. “But you must not forget it. You become responsible, forever, for what you have tamed. You are responsible for your rose . . .”
“I am responsible for my rose,” the little prince repeated, so that he would be sure to remember. (Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, The Little Prince, 86–88)
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. (Declaration of Independence)
I gotta have my orange juice. 