Although my head may be bloodied, it is unbowed. The rest of you should also be ashamed of yourselves for visiting this obscure blog that no self-respecting Christian Scientist has any business reading. This is a reference, of course, to the chastisement received in a comment to the previous entry, possibly from some drudge in Boston, for all the disgusting material posted here. Please be assured, however, that at least none of the comments is my own surreptitious double-dipping. But if what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and Christian Scientists have no business reading this blog and the comments thereto, what pure and uplifting business does Ms Trammell have with Meow Mix and eriscopes?
We are informed in an article ("Planet Waves") reprinted in Andrew Hartsook's latest issue of "The Banner"--bless his longsuffering heart--that the Planet Waves writer and Ms Trammell met at Meow Mix (definitely not something for your cat) some years ago while some "research"-- the writer's quotes, not mine--was being conducted. One suspects that research could be a Meow Mix euphemism for some very un-kittylike behavior. Meow Mix, in NYC, as most readers of this know by now, is among other things a hard-core private sex club of some sort. If a visiting lady pussycat wishes to, shall we say, scratch the tender back of another available lady pussycat they won't be shown the door. In short, you don't take your sweet little kitten to Meow Mix for an innocent frolic. This can be verified by a visit to the Meow Mix web site, but send the children outside to play before you do. Yes, one does rather wonder about that "research".
It is now being claimed by the Planet Waves writer, so one hears, that even the original article reprinted by Mr. Hartsook was just a joke and she doesn't even know Ms Trammell. Riiiiight! Mr. Hartsook confirms, deflates once again, their silly riposte that the Trammell horoscope and eriscope caper was just a parody. Parody of what? That she has a kitten-like fancy for horoscopes and eriscopes? This parody excuse appears to be a very lame attempt by some fellow-traveler of Ms Trammell to foist off on gullible rubes a clumsy Rube Goldberg of their own. The only parody here is the parody of a slick cover-up. Anyone still unaware of what this is all about is referred to two earlier entries of this blog, "Earth to Mary Trammell" (Nov. 2) and the following entry. As you read you may need to beware, though, of the sensual siren song of the Planet Waves business model.
Mr. Hartsook's "Banner" can be obtained from him at 2040 Hazel Avenue, Zanesville, OH 43701. His book Christian Science After 1910 is also recommended and can be purchased directly from him or from The Bookmark. That The Mother Church appears to be punctiliously straining at gnats in some of his articles (while, to many, shamelessly swallowing camels of disregard for the spirit of the Church Manual, if not the letter) shows that his carefully researched findings must fit them like a hair shirt.
The gods are just, and of our pleasant vices
Make instruments to plague us.
Shakespeare, King Lear
24 comments:
Fantastic! Outstanding! Bless you for coming right back with an excellent blog post! I just phoned a friend, read it to her, and you could her laugh in the next county. Going to read this over and over again. What talent, what wit, what intelligence you exhibit in your writing.
Can't wait for those to read this who dared try to say what we CS's should not be reading. Apparently your blog is not "obscure" enough, else they wouldn't be trying to chastise you and us.
God bless you!
A simply marvelous rebuttal! This one is going to go all over the world as well. What a treat Christian Scientists have in store.
Bless you for sharing your considerable wit and talent with us.
Sorry if my "joke" about an obscure web site that CSers should not be reading did not come across as I intended it. But as we've seen, the internet is a difficult place for communication. Sorry if I sound like a Board drudge. I'm a long-time subscriber to Hartsook's Banner, who felt uncomfortable at the article on Planet Wave and wanted to find the truth for myself. I thought Christian Scientists were sincere seekers of Truth -- not people who take glee in rumors and vicious gossip - even if it is about a member of the misguided TMC Board of Directors. Why muddy your otherwise funny blog with such hate? I just do not understand. I'm willing to accept the ridicule being heaped upon me in order to ferret out the facts, but I wonder how it has come to this. I've been all for challenging the actions of the TMC Board for over 20 years now, but I see no reason for character assassination to get it done. For readers of Hartsook's Banner just tuning in -- the Planet Wave piece was satire; the writer has acknowledged it. I have no connection to the Board, Ms. Trammel, or the Meow Mix! I just wanted the facts. I've certainly got the number for this blogger. He/she is not interested in truth -- just attention at the expense of people's reputation.
So, now we're down to "he said, she said," your word against my word. Who should we believe? Unless someone can explain why a writer would choose to satirize a religion that 99% of the population doesn't even know--sadly, as far as I'm concerned--these days and to mention a woman by name that she's never met according to her--I'm going to go with our witty blogger and Andrew Hartsook. Also, there's the little matter that Boston never came out with a disclaimer. Yes, I'll take the blogger and Hartsook.
Christian, the blogger, recently wrote: "Another aspect of the trial worth noting is that it is the healing of a "Mortal Man" who felt ill in the course of doing good for a friend. Could this imply that a condition for healing or continued healing is to be always doing good for one's fellow man? Mrs. Eddy certainly chose the scenario and every detail of the trial carefully. This query may have a partial answer in the statement and two questions in the chapter "Prayer" (S&H 9: 5-11). Does it not appear that the only way for us to consistently express and demonstrate our God-given health and harmony is first to see and love our neighbor as His flawless reflection?" Good advice for us all...
Dear Mr. Net,
Below is a link to a post from Christian Science Issues 2 (a Yahoo group) which indicates that there is author denial of the credulity of the Trammel bit -- that it is indeed parody. I urge you to pursue the issue, lest you be sued for liable. I'd hate to see your contributions to cs progress become a noose around your neck in a court of law. The csbd has too many lawyers who are well funded. Please explore this issue thoroughly and issue an apology, if warranted. ~eric. (Eric Chaffee, Alden NY).
Here's the link I mentioned:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ChristianScienceIssues2/message/36991
Why are we talking about libel charges for our blogger who is merely discussing an obviously libelous (if untrue) article by another author? If it is indeed untrue, why hasn't TMC issued a statement to such effect? The place for TMC's leagle-beagles to start is with the original author, I'd think, not a second or even third-hand discussion. Our blogger didn't make the libelous statements, our blogger and Hartsook, for that matter, simply brought the statements of another writer to the attention of the readers of this blog.
Just checked that link that commenter Eric gave. It just isn't in the same league with what we're seeing here!
As our great Master, Christ Jesus, points out: "There is nothing covered that shall not be revealed; or hid, that shall not be known." (Matthew l0:26)
I must emphasize, yet again, that had it been moi that was connected in any way, shape, or form with a hard-core sex club, does any sane person think I would just sit on my hands and let my reputation sink? Perhaps Eric can call Trammell and ask, why did you just do nothing? A bit of "comedy relief" is one thing, but a reputation damaged? C'mon now, people, let's use our intelligence here.
Though I do not have the pleasure of knowing personally the author of this excellent blog, anyone who reviews the many fine pieces they have written over the months cannot help but see this is a dedicated Christian Scientist who has the deepest reverence for Christ Jesus as well as heartfelt respect for the Discoverer and Founder of our religion. This person is using their considerable talent and deep thought to uphold what Mary Baker Eddy gave to the world, and for this I cannot thank God enough!
I must second the above comment. And let me say that I owe much to this blogger for something posted way back at the beginning of "The Broken Net". The author recommended as a help to one's spiritual growth a thoughtful reading of "Prose Works" by our Leader. Well, I took the advice and got back into her writings there. I cannot tell you the blessings that have come from doing this! Am I indebted to the author of this blog? You bet I am!
Would that more in the field loved Christian Science as much as this blogger obviously does! My gratitude for all this person has written to uphold the high standards of our religion cannot be measured.
We need you, blogger!
I want to commend a commenter previous to mine for bringing up an excellent point: why would a website with a gay/lesbian/astrology audience pick out a religion that is almost unknown to them, to satirize? Doesn't make sense to me, either.
Thanks commenter for your clear thinking!
While I am not conversant with all this blogger has posted, the ones I am aware of are outstanding entries in support of Christian Science. There's no mistaking that this blogger loves the Cause and the woman who founded it. And speaking of "love", love what you said about Andrew: "bless his longsuffering heart". I echo this sentiment wholeheartedly.
As I see it, the onus is not on this blogger to verify anything. What's holding up the lady in question from getting to the bottom of all this--and putting out a statement clearing her name? Many of us are waiting to see this. I should think it would be a simple thing to do.
It is probably just the same old Christian Science way of ignoring evil even when its obvious to everyone else that something human must be done. They (the BOD) are probably all praying about it trying to see its "nothingness"!
Hi there,
Jumping in in the middle here, it would seem. I wrote the article that is causing so much consternation.
I've never met Mary Trammel, Meow Mix is an obscure reference to a lesbian bar (not a sex club) that was popular in NYC in the mid-90s, and the whole article was a joke, mainly aimed at our website's obscurity -- we're just a small voice in a large online world, and I was merely poking fun at us by even suggesting that a long-standing publication like the Christian Science Monitor would read our pages, let alone use our site as a business model.
A niche joke for a niche market, and I hope you will understand that Mary Trammel, the Christian Science Monitor, and Meow Mix (R.I.P.) are not involved in any way.
I'm sorry if you found the parody to be less than funny. I suppose we can't all get the joke.
Kindly,
Rachel Asher
This doesn't strike me as authentic. Some of the language just does not ring true. Let me offer two suggestions:
l) Ms. Asher should send her apology to be printed in the pages of The Christian Science Monitor (no emails that can be fabricated);
2) Ms. Trammell herself still needs to issue an official statement clearing her name from any involvement in this not funny business.
Why did it take from November 2,2008 to the present time for Ms. Asher to address this situation?
Well put, previous commenter. There clearly are further steps to be taken before the lingering questions are fully answered. One can't help feeling there is more to this than meets the eye.
Talk about getting your knickers in a twist. Folks ,the article was satire and actually commending the CSM for going paperless. You don't sue the Onion, Saturday Night Live or National Lampoon for satire. It's not character assassination, it's considered free speech. If you don't like it, don't read it. Simple as that.
Just like when I used to subscribe to the CSM I NEVER read the religion page. I didn't like it.
The news was good, though. Now I prefer Planet Waves as they have a sense of humor for all sexual preferences. AS for Rachel Asher, she doesn't owe the CSM any other explanation other than it was satire. End of story.
There still seem to be a lot of unanswered questions here. I'm reminded of Watergate. As the Nixon Administration fought tooth and nail all the way down the slippery slope, each new revelation or admission, rather than settling the issues, begged more questions. Has it struck anyone else as curious why Rachel Asher would sign her name and still claim to be "anonymous?" Also, there appears to be a total lack of remorse or contrition. "I'm sorry if you found the parody less than funny." is not what I'd call a sincere apology. She's (if she really is she and not just a pen name or someone else claiming to be her)either unaware of the damage she's done to Mary Trammell's reputation or the offense she's committed against Christian Science. Her thoughtless action has indeed caused a lot of damage and she still doesn't apologize for that. Somehow in her mind it's our fault for not thinking it was funny. As I started this comment off: There still seem to be a lot of unanswered questions here.
Do I detect a hint of "Little Religion's Disease"? I believe I do. This is a tempest in a teacup, Gentlefolk. Why give this issue, a parody, so much energy? I am a bit disenchanted by a pervasive overlaying notion flowing throughout the blog and most of the commentary that even poor attention is good attention. Just move on with grace and dignity... and quickly.
http://planetwaves.net/pagetwo/2009/01/12/christian-science-monitor-planet-wave/#more-9364
Post a Comment