Christy Tennant

Final Ferry Dust Post

Christy Tennant — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:47:23 +0000

We know the seasons: fall, winter, spring, summer. But what do we call the in-between seasons? Right now, for example. Today is the first day of fall. But it still feels a bit like summer in NYC. It's warm and sunny, we have fans running in our apartments and air conditioning in the subway and offices. Technically it's fall, but really it's still summer. For a bit longer. We're in an in-between season. Fummer. Or Sall. Or whatever.

Life moves in seasons, too. You're in one job, but you're in discussions about a move, so you feel transitional. You're active at your church, but visiting new churches, so you feel transitional. You're living in one city, but contemplaing a move, so you feel transitional. You're single, but you're getting serious with someone, so you feel transitional. Your heart is not fully anywhere. It's divided, it's moving, but not yet.

The seasons of weather and the seasons of life don't change cleanly; there are transitional periods, which can feel chaotic and confusing. You wear a sweater, because it's fall, and end up a sweaty mess halfway through the day, because it's 81 degrees outside. Nothing is sure, everything is up in the air, focus is blurry, the future is unclear, and anxiety can take over if we're not diligent to "just remain calm." For people like me, who need a sense of being in control, transitional seasons are excruciating. I like clean breaks, clear boundaries, and clarified titles. I am in, or I am out. But the discerning period is torture. The waiting and wondering eats away at me like ants on a peonie bush. But, like ants and their peonies, I trust that, when all is said and done and the waiting is over, a flower will emerge.

I've enjoyed writing Ferry Dust these past couple of years. The original idea - musings from the Staten Island Ferry - gave way to musings about life in general, rarely written from the Staten Island Ferry. But as my plate got full, and opportunities for outside writing grew, I found myself losing focus. Rather than writing from a place of inspiration, I was writing sheerly out of discipline. But the thing about blogs is, once they lose their focus, a loss of inspiration quickly follows.

My focus is changing. I'm in a transitional time now, and it seems like a good time to let Ferry Dust go the way of the Walkman. While I have often processed things publically, I am craving a step backwards, back into a time when life was not so "public." I hope to start a new blog in the future, but I need to step away for a bit and figure out what, if anything, I really have to say. Sometimes I feel like I just add to the clutter of too much information online, too many voices vying to be heard.

The good folks at Conversant Life are supportive of my blogging hiatus, and they have extended an open inviation to me for when I'm ready to "come back." (I love my friends at Conversant Life!) So you might see me again in the new year. But I might not be writing from New York City, and since this city has been such a huge part of who I have been for the past twelve years, I expect there will be a season of silence. Finter. Or Wing.Or Sprinter, even.

Thank you for walking with me, for reading my posts and contributing (mostly) constructive feedback. Wish me well as I move through this Season of Mystery, this Wilderness of Questions. I'll be in touch when I dock this ship, and, knowing me, I'm pretty sure there will be fresh inspiration and lots to say.

Post-Christian, Post-Gay: But Could There Be a Third Way?

Christy Tennant — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 17:02:14 +0000

I read this article on Change.org this morning - "Will There Ever Be a Post-Gay Identity?" - and it struck me that if I removed the LGBTQ references and replaced them with Christian references, the article would have been just as relevant. For example,

"So what's next? Will we reach a time when there will no longer be a need for separate bars or centers, bookstores or retirement communities? Will there ever be such a thing as a post-gay identity?"

could just as easily read,

"So what's next? Will we reach a time when there will no longer be a need for separate (coffee) bars or centers, bookstores or retirement communities? Will there ever be such a thing as a post-Christian identity?"

In fact, some sentences are relevant to both as is:

"We've established a widening presence in pop culture and have out and proud representatives in all corners of professional and political life."

I am certainly not the first to draw parallels between the way the Gay agenda and the Christian agenda operate. The similarities are startling at first, but then they begin to make sense. Both "causes" are sub-cultural norms that want to become cultural standards. We have long talked about the separation of church and state, and I find that whole notion to be a tenuous balancing act. Whether Christian or Muslim or Jewish or other, when people with a strong faith identity are in positions of political leadership, their decisions often heavily reflect their faith, and the line that separates becomes very fuzzy.

I have heard people say we are in post-Christian America, but that reference indicates a waning presence and influence in cultural leadership.However, in this article about post-gay identity, the aim seems to be a world in which sexual identity is irrlevant, or at least a non-issue. Not waning, but rather so present that it's the new normal.

As I wrestle more and more with my place in this world - as a Christian, as a woman, as a single adult, as an artist, as a friend to non-Christians, as a friend to people who are LGBTQ, as a writer, as a small voice in a big culture conversation - and as I prepare to take part in the biggest and potentially most weighty conference focusing on world evangelization to date, I am honestly feeling "over" both the Gay agenda and the Christian agenda. Both scare me at times.

I want to wipe the slate of my mind clean of all the political commentary and noise, and I want to open my Bible. I want to consider what it really means to love my neighbor, to be the light of the world, to trust in Christ's atonement for the forgiveness of my sins, to be part of the solution for setting captives free and releasing prisoners from their chains. When I say things that are true theologically, I want them to also be soaked in love and mercy - otherwise, all my truth sounds like a noisy gong to God.

I'd love to see more Christians resist the very strong urge to play by the world's rules, political or otherwise. Jesus didn't. He acknowledged the state - "give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's" - and then he invited people to join him in a parallel kingdom, where the last is first and the first is last and power means that kings wash their slaves' feet. Rather than trying to fight against the cultural norms or trying to infiltrate with cultural influence, Jesus seemed to offer a different culture altogether, open to any who might want to become a citizen of that kingdom. I wonder what would happen if more of us were working toward that type of culture.

Preparing The Way

Christy Tennant — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 15:59:24 +0000

I was reading Luke this morning, and when I got to chapter 3, something occurred to me that I had not thought of before. John the Baptist's main purpose in life, it seems to me, was to set the stage for people to meet God. “Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.” Fill in the valleys, flatten the mountains, straighten crooked paths, and level the rough places so that people can see God.

It seems like such a great way to live, going about life doing whatever you can do to make it easier for people to see God. But as I thought about it, I was challenged. Is that what I try to do? Make it easy for people to see God?

The opposite of John the Baptist, of course, are the Pharisees, who “tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.” I flipped over to Matthew 23 and, in stark contrast to what I had just read in Luke 3, read about people who actually make it harder for people to see God. I can just imagine the fire leaping from Jesus' eyes, spittle flying from his mouth, as he called out the hypocrisy of people who are supposed to help others know God, yet actually make it harder.

Which am I? What does it look like to live in a way that makes the path to God straight and clear for others? I have several ideas, but here's the one I'm thinking about most right now: it looks rehumanizing.

When Jesus met people, whether the woman at the well, or the “sinful woman” who flung herself at his feet in the house of Simon the Leper, or the woman caught in adultery, or tax-collectors like Levi or Zacchaeus, he saw them first as human beings, not as “the adulteress” or “the tax collector.” He called them by name (“Zacchaeus, you come down from there!”). He spoke to them in such a way that they knew he saw them – not just their sin.

Do I do that? Do I see “the unwed mother,” “the drug addict,” and “the non-believer?” Or do I see Jennifer, Steve, and Lewis, all made in God's image and all designed to reflect his glory and help me know Him better?

The Pharisees seemed to stop seeing people as people, and instead saw them as targets for conversion. They seemed to see people as religious trophies, and they laid on one another standards that no one could ever live up to. That is dehumanizing. Jesus, alternately, seemed to see people in the light of their future glory selves – he saw the potential of who they could be, and indeed would be, if they walked with God. And when people were seen by Jesus, the way they saw themselves was affected. Healing took place, redemption took place. They began to see God.

How do I see people? How do they feel seen by me?

This is just one idea, but there are many others. What comes to your mind when you consider what it means to prepare the way for the people you encounter to see God?

My Mercies Are Not New Every Morning

Christy Tennant — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 14:42:51 +0000

I have often comforted myself by reflecting on a passage from Lamentations 3 that talks about how God's mercies are new every morning. Of course, when I think about that reassurance, it is always in the context of failure. More specifically, my failure. I have, once again, failed to live up to my calling as a follower of Jesus, but he won't hold it against me; his mercies are new every morning.

Furthermore, the context is usually one of my perpetual failure. For example, have I known for years that I need to watch my words more carefully? Yes, I have. Yet nearly every day, I fail to do so, and on the days when I am a bit more reflective and self-aware, I regret my failure.

That is, until I remember that God's mercies are new every morning. “What a relief,” I think to myself, “that God doesn't hold my failures against me.” Day after day, week after week, month after month, yea, year after year, I fail in the same exact ways, yet manage to dodge the weight of shame for it thanks to the accessibility of God's mercies, in fresh supply like dew on the lawn outside my front door each time the sun rises.

I believe that each day is a new chance for me to be the God's-image-bearer I was created to be. How exhilarating it is to rest in the promise of a fresh start. I believe completely (at least in theory, at least most of the time) that God forgives me for my perpetual failures, of which there are many. In other words, I never imagine God is watching me from inside my heart or the cosmos or wherever He is watching me from, and expecting me to fail. In fact, it's quite the opposite; I actually believe that each day, knowing my failure the day before, God is cheering me on, giving me the benefit of the doubt, and allowing that, perhaps today, I will depend on His grace enough to rise above the circumstances and temptations that cause me to stumble. I have it in my head that God wants me to do well, and that He believes I can. I can almost hear him saying to me, “Christy, I know you want to do better. The old (from yesterday) is gone – the new has come! You can do it! I want you to! I'll enable you to!”

It's lovely, isn't it, that I live in such wonderful freedom?

This week is the second week of my church's summer camp, where I am teaching theater arts and leading music, among other things. By now, I have had enough time with the seventeen third and fourth graders in my charge to know who the troublemakers are. I know by now which children I will have to threaten with punishment before we even get to lunch time. I know which children's names I will say (shout, rather) at least a dozen times before we even get through the morning worship session. There are already children whom I expect to punish. There are children whom I already expect are going to fail to thrive in this camp – perhaps not even make it to the final party, because they'll get kicked out for behavior issues before the five weeks are up.

In other words, my mercies are not new every morning.

The leaders of the camp spend one hour in prayer each morning, from 7:00-8:00. (I join them at 7:15 usually. I have a hard time getting out the door on time. But hey, it's OK. “His mercies are new every morning.”) This past Monday, while we were praying, this truth hit me: I was already braced for the worst from some of the kids.

As I began to pray for the kids in general, I began asking God to give me his love for them. Reflecting on how deeply freeing it is for me to know that his love means that his mercies are new every morning, and that he is totally for me with a fresh start each day, I began to pray that MY mercies toward these little monsters would be new like His are toward me. I prayed that I would love them so much that I would give them the gift of a fresh start each day. I would not hold yesterday's failures against them. I would not say, “So-and-so always gets in trouble.” God never says that about me. Ever.**

Of course, I failed.

But even so, something really amazing happened on Monday. I had a fresh love in my heart for some of the kids who have historically demonstrated behavioral problems. I did not do as great a job as I would have liked not holding their previous crimes against them. I'm pretty sure I said to at least one child, “I am getting sick and tired* of how you never listen.” That's the very thing I don't want to say. As long as someone is telling them they never listen, they will never – well – listen.

But this revelation (if you will) from God (if you will) has really impacted how I want to at least try to approach people - and I don't just mean the kids in my camp. The woman I know who is always a bit combative toward me? I'm going in expecting that this will be the day she is grace-filled and agreeable. The man who is consistently dismissive and condescending of me? I'm determined to give him the benefit of the doubt tomorrow, because God will be giving me the benefit of the doubt.

Love believes all things. Love hopes all things. Love endures all things.

In the end, my mercies will never be anywhere close to where God's mercies are. He is fathoms below and above me in that department.

But it's a new goal, in my ongoing desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus, or, as Eugene Peterson put it so beautifully in his take on scripture, in my continued learning of the unforced rhythms of grace.

I want to be a woman whose mercies toward others are new every morning.

Oh God, have mercy on me.

# # #

* P.S. I vowed as a child I would never say “sick and tired” to a child in my care. But now I realize that there is no suitable substitute. It's like breathing or salivating at the thought of a lemon: instinct, not choice.

** P.P.S. God probably also never calls me a "little monster." Though He should. He really, really should.

Sometimes The Righteous are Barren

Christy Tennant — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 11:36:48 +0000

In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, of the division of Abijah. And he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. And they were both righteous before God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and statutes of the Lord. But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren, and both were advanced in years.

Luke 1:5-7

When I read this passage this morning, I stopped and wrote in the margin of my Bible, "Sometimes the righteous are barren."

Why did I feel the need to point this out? Why did it strike me as notable?

Because prosperity theology is ubiquitous in Christendom, and it's destroying people's lives.

There are still a lot of people who believe that material and physical affluance are marks of God's favor, while suffering and lean times are a sign of God's judgment. I hear it from the mouths of friends who are otherwise intelligent people, yet they have bought into some nonsense that flies in the face of much of what Jesus taught and Paul wrote about what it means to follow God, and even what it means to be blessed.

"Blessed are the poor," Jesus said, and, "Blessed are you when you are persecuted."

"I suffer for following Christ," Paul said, over and over and in many different ways, "and I'm blessed for it."

Even in churches where pastors are intentional about confronting the lie of the prosperity gospel, people still carry around in their hearts and minds a theology rooted deeply in that stream. My own pastor has pleaded from the pulpit for people to renounce such theology, yet still, it comes out in big and small ways as people pray or discuss what is happening in their lives.

Plenty has been written lately on the evils of the prosperity gospel heresy, yet still, I was compelled to stop and marvel at this truth as it jumped off the page of the gospel: sometimes the righteous are barren.

The prosperity gospel is a noose around peoples' necks. Grace has no place in the prosperity gospel. The prosperity gospel is evil, and I want people to be freed from its yoke.

There are many good reasons for the righteous to be barren. In my own life, seasons of barrenness and failure to thrive have been where I have learned grace and mercy and God's kindness. And it is in barrenness that God has humbled me, teaching me that God's presence are my highest reward.

Sometimes the righteous are barren, by God's design and for God's glory.

Culture: Thick and Thin

Christy Tennant — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 07:00:00 +0000

I just read this article by Roberta Green Ahmanson, who is on my short list of personal heroes (these images show me interviewing her in March at IAM's Encounter 10). In it, she describes two types of culture:

The sociologist James Davison Hunter has argued that—from entertainment, sports, and literature to family customs, fashion, and architecture—we live in an increasingly thin culture. I think of a film of ice on a lake so fragile that it breaks at the slightest touch. What can sustain us through suffering, loss, aging, and death? There is nothing to catch us when we fall. Thick culture is, instead, like the ice you see in a Dutch Master’s painting of canals in winter. Skaters fly across ice formed by freezing temperatures, adding first one layer, then another and another. Sliced, it would be feet deep. It won’t break when we fall.

A thick culture, in other words, provides a foundation for the challenges of our lives: for building friendships, marriages, and commitments, for facing loss, suffering, and even death.

When I read this article, I started thinking about the culture of my own life. I have some thin places, to be sure: an insatiable appetite for celebrity photos and gossip; a propensity to neglect prayer and devotional meditation when things are going well in my life; a disregard of my conviction to only use my credit card for emergencies when there is a good sale at Target; a ready-defense of why I would rather stay home and do nothing on a Friday night, rather than go to my church's discipleship class; an addiction to caffeine.

But, thankfully, I also have thick places, and the more I think about it, that's where I spend the bulk of my time: regular phonecalls with my parents, where I tell them about everything in my life and invite their input; the time I spend preparing for leading worship, meditating on the songs' lyrics and praying for the members of my music team, pastor, congregants, etc; morning devotions (though sometimes they are, admittedly, rather "thin," they're always there - well, almost always); long walks with my dog in Snug Harbor; dinner with friends, where we talk just as easily about spiritual things as we do things like skincare and the latest PTA drama.

Interestingly, the more I think about it, both places provide food for reflection - the thin places are the cotton candy and the thick places are the rice and legumes. I don't want to live on cotton candy, but every so often...

In my city, there are marks of thin culture everywhere: right now, whenever I come upstairs from the subway at 42nd Street, I am greeted by a huge poster for the latest new program on Showtime, featuring a cluster of beautiful, nude lesbians, with a hint of airbrushed palm trees barely covering them "where it counts." That strikes me as pretty thin. A thriving sweat shop industry, rampant sexual promiscuity, systematic poverty oozing from the housing projects, and proud secular humanism are other marks of thin culture in my city.

And then there are the thick spaces: the many city-wide prayer and unity-in-the-church initiatives that have sprung up; the Museum of Biblica Art and International Arts Movement and Dillon Gallery; theater pieces like Max McLean's The Screwtape Letters and Threads/IAM's Babette's Feast; farmers' markets and artisan co-ops; used book shops; the Bowery Mission and God's Love We Deliver; outdoor cafes with reasonable prices; my church's summer camp for fifty urban at-risk kids. These are all, in varying degrees, thick places that provide "foundations for the challenges of life," as Roberta put it.

So how about you? What are some marks of thin and thick culture in your sphere of life?

Your sphere could be the city in which you live, the family system in which you function, the social ecosystem in which you thrive (or fail to thrive). Whatever the case, would you call it thick? Or thin? Is your sphere a place where the challenges of life lead to growth or destruction? And what does that look like?

Patriotism and the House of Worship

Christy Tennant — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 20:32:39 +0000

I grew up in a church that celebrated the Fourth of July every year with a big patriotic musical. That was the one Sunday of the year when everyone was encouraged to "dress casual," the service included a lot of patriotic songs, and the preaching focused on how America needs to get back to her Christian roots. Songs were sung about how we are one nation under God. Military veterens dressed in their uniforms. There was a color guard that marched in with the American flag and led us through the Pledge of Allegiance. Come to think of it, the entire sanctuary was decked out in American flags, and everyone dressed in red, white and blue. Following the worship service, there was always a church picnic on the grounds.

It has been a while - years - since I've been part of this celebration, but this year I went.

I found it... jarring. The music was excellent, the people were all in fun and festive moods, and the church was more full than usual on a Sunday.

But over the years, especially as my passion for global Christianity has grown, patriotism mixed with religion has begun to leave a very bad taste in my mouth. I find that many Christians, and the preachers who teach them, have a very wonky theology when it comes to what it means to be a Christian nation. The more time I have spent with Christians in other (especially oppressed) countries, the more the idea that America is a Christian nation strikes me as ridiculous.

I am grateful for the fact that I live in America. I love America. I am humbled by the freedom we have, by the opportunities open to me simply because I hold an American passport, the protections I enjoy simply because I am a national. And when we sang a medley of the various armed forces theme songs this morning, with men (only men) in uniform marching in and bearing their branch's flag, I got misty eyed. I am grateful for the armed forces. I sleep well at night because those men - and women - are doing their jobs well.

But I really buck against the suggestion that America is a Christian nation. The very foundation of our nation is morality based on Judeo-Christian scriptures, to be sure. But many of our founding fathers were deists or secular humanists, and the very liberty we celebrate is liberty to worship whom and how we wish.

In fact, and this is what I always find myself wanting to scream at the top of my lungs, there is one nation under God - but it is not the United States of America. The one nation under God is made up of people from every tribe and speakers of every language that exists under the sun. To buy into the lie that America is united under God is a huge misunderstanding of both American history and biblical truth.

The men and women who are fighting for our freedom are also fighting for the freedom of Muslims in America, Buddhists in America, secular humanists in America, and... you get the picture.

So worship in my home church - the church I grew up in, the church I was baptised in - this morning was a real wrestling match. On the one hand, I tried to focus on what I am grateful for when it comes to my nationality and I prayed for my country and her leaders. I teared up singing the "Caisons go Rolling Along," thinking of my dad's service on the front lines of war in Viet Nam.

But on the other hand, I did not join in saying the pledge of allegiance - my allegiance is pledged to Christ, and there may come a time when I will have to choose between allegiance to my nation or to my God; I want my mind to be clearly made up if that time ever comes. I also feel very duplicitous worshiping the God of Genesis 12 and Psalm 67 and Galatians 3 and Revelation 5 (i.e. the God of all nations) and declaring, hand to heart, my allegiance to a socio-political nation. I am grateful for America, but I do not swear my allegiance to her. She might turn on me - she might lead me astray; God never will.

I love what the American flag stands for, and I actually have a rendering of one - made by a soldier/artist who is also my friend - hanging in my home. But the lines get very fuzzy for me when Old Glory is hanging at the foot of the cross.

So I'm curious: how do you feel about this? Does your church bring patriotism into worship? Do you have an American flag on display in your sanctuary?

Do you have something to share that challenges where I'm coming from here? My heels are not dug in the ground here - I'm open to other ideas and interpretations. I'm trying to approach this with humility, and I don't begrudge those who celebrate our nation as a church. One Sunday out of the year devoted to patriotism is not "wrong."

Its just more of a personal conviction that I have to wrestle with annually. Thoughts?

The Primal Scene Revisited (En Total)

Christy Tennant — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 07:00:00 +0000

Last post, I shared the background and abstract of this paper, sent to me by the author in response to an article I wrote for The Curator. Here is the paper in full. I hope it will help people to wrestle with this issue not just on the basis of morality, but on the undeniable psychological findings of this professor and psychiatrist, treating a woman with a past in the porn industry and the effect her past has had on her teenage daughter.

Toward the bottom of the paper, there is an area for discussion. I enourage you to respond.

# # #

SASHA GREY, SIGMUND FREUD AND JOHANN WOLFGANG VON GOERTE
THE PRIMAL SCENE REVISITED:

A CASE REPORT

3^rd Biennial International, Multidisciplinary Conference, “EROS 2010”
Nipissing University, Muskoka Campus
Braceland, Ontario, Canada
May 21-22, 2010

James Bozzuto M.D.
Assistant Clinical Professor
University of Connecticut, Department Of Psychiatry

After all, the best of what you know may not be told

to boys.

Mephistopheles (Goethe)

ABSTRACT:

There is a vast number of studies and a plethora of scholarly literature on various aspects of pornography and particularly internet pornography. Most have focused on the negative outcomes related to individual functioning. There are few that examine the consequences for the offspring of internet pornography performers.

Freud postulated that children who become “witnesses of sexual intercourse between their parents”, The Primal Scene, “arrive in every case at the same conclusion. They adopt what might be called a sadistic view of coition”. (Freud) One hundred years later, these observations and conclusions need to be reconsidered.

In our current social media climate, more and more of our lives are being recorded in perpetuity. The internet is everywhere and forever. (Paul) U-Tube, Twitter, Flicker, cell phone cameras, etc. provided the technology for recording and storing our everyday lives in ways that were unimaginable 20 years ago. Our private sexual lives can be recorded and viewed by adults and children. Individuals who work in pornography are creating a lasting legacy that will be viewed by their children and will have lasting effects on those children. These children will certainly be exposed to the Primal Scene and the lasting psychological sequela will be profound. A single case report will be presented, and an actual performer will be profiled.

Freud and Goethe:

Goethe, in Faust, has Mephistopheles say, “after all, the best of what you know, may not be told to boys”.

Children are unprepared for comprehending adult sexuality. Society has universally condemned the participation in, the viewing, commercial sale or trafficking of children in sex and pornography for good reason. This is a heinous crime that destroys young lives. The consequences of sexual abuse of children, or not protecting children from sexual abuse, are well known to the clinician.

This will not stop the intense interest and healthy curiosity in children and adolescents in sex. Adult mature sexuality is achieved by gradual assimilation of material and experiences from various appropriate sources at age appropriate levels. When children are exposed to material that is overwhelming, and not age appropriate, various misunderstandings arise, defenses are erected to protect the individual, and psychopathology is the result.

Sometimes children are inadvertently exposed. Freud was the first to examine the effects of these inadvertent events on children. When children view explicit the sexual activity of adults, it is beyond their comprehension, and they conclude various distortions.(Peto) Freud labeled this the Primal Scene, and responsible parents go to great lengths to conceal this activity. In the “Sexual Theories of Children”, Freud stated,

The third of the typical theories arises in children if, through some chance domestic occurrence, they become witnesses of sexual intercourse between

their parents. Their perceptions of what is happening are bound, however, to be only very incomplete. Whatever detail it may be that comes under their observation-whether it is the relative positions of the two people, or the noises they make, or some accessory circumstance-children arrive in every case at the same conclusion. They adopt what may be called a sadistic view of coition. They see it as something that the stronger participant is forcibly inflicting on the weaker, and they (especially boys) compare it to the romping familiar to them from their childish experience-romping which, incidentally, is not without a dash of sexual excitation. I have not been able to ascertain that children recognize this behavior which they have witnessed between their parents as the missing link needed for solving the problem of babies; it appears more often that the connection is overlooked by them for the very reason that they have interpreted the act of love as an act of violence. (220-221)

Thus Freud reminds us, that the Primal Scene, has intense and lasting consequences. Most important it will be retained and distorted. Freud’s concept of Traumatic Neurosis (vol. 19) and the Stimulus Barrier (Furst), had not yet been formulated when he defined the Primal Scene. If he had conceived these later ideas at the same time he conceptualized the Primal Scene, he would probably expanded concepts with a different language. Using those formulations, the Primal Scene would present the child with psychological information that would easily overwhelm the undeveloped ego of the child and present it with material that could not be digested and overcome the Stimulus Barrier and produce what we call today PTSD. In adults, PTSD is produced in adult minds with some self-regulating capacity and ability to adapt. In children, there is no such hope. Children and adolescents cannot comprehend adult sexuality, and will lead to overstimulation and distortion.

Primal Scene occurrences continue today and we would perhaps interpret the consequences differently than Freud 100 years ago. (Knafo) The age of the child, the quality of the relationship between adults, (Holt) the explanatory capacity of the parents, the previous sexual education of the children, are just a few of the considerations that would mitigate distortions.(Blum) However, no parent would willing expose their child to viewing the Primal Scene, as the consequences would be overwhelming and grossly inappropriate. Longitudinal, prospective studies have examined early childhood exposure to parental nudity and scenes of parental sexuality and concluded that there may be increased risk of STD transmission and of becoming pregnant. (Okami)

But as traumatic or not, the accidental Primal Scene, does not compare to viewing parental sexual behavior recorded on the internet forever. Explicit sexuality of parents, with strangers, for money, will have a different impact. The internet will preserve these images, in a manner, that an accidental intrusion into the parental bedroom will not. More important, the mass distribution of this material to friends, peers, family members, employers, teachers, etc., multiplies the consequences of the Primal Scene and ensures it will be experienced over and over for many years.

Goethe, wrote Faust, in 1806, approximately 200 years ago. Faust is Goethe’s most famous work and may be one of the greatest works of German literature. Widely referenced in our culture, one theme remains current. How much would you sell your soul to the devil? What price would induce you to engage in behavior you would not ordinarily do? The Faustian bargains we all engage in every day are familiar. Would I cheat to get ahead, would I embezzle to enjoy the indulgences of money now? Madoff made the ultimate Faustian deal, to enjoy infinite wealth for many years, all the while knowing that the devil was coming for his due.

Young adults, usually women in their teens enter pornography with the promise of a lucrative career and fame. Eighteen is not the best age to understand the consequences of one’s actions. One of the unintended consequences of pornography is that the sexual behavior of these individuals will be viewed by their children with significant negative impact on these children. The Faustian bargain, 200 years old, still has its payback. The bargain that young woman make was best described by Goethe with the inevitable outcome of “infanticide”.

Faust makes an arrangement with the devil: the devil will do everything that Faust wants while he is here on Earth, and in exchange Faust will serve the devil in Hell. The pact is signed in blood. Faust has a few excursions and then meets Margaret (also known as Gretchen). He is attracted to her and with jewelry and help from a neighbor, Marthe, the devil draws Gretchen into Faust’s arms. Faust seduces Gretchen and they sleep together. Gretchen’s mother dies from a sleeping portion, administered by Gretchen to obtain privacy so that Faust could visit her. Gretchen discovers she is pregnant. Gretchen’s brother condemns Faust, challenges him and falls dead at the hands of Faust and the devil. Gretchen drowns her illegitimate child and is convicted of the murder. ((http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goethe%27s_Faust

The Faustian bargain that woman who work in pornography make, now has to include the inevitable negative consequences on their children. No longer can the immaturity of our young adulthood be hidden from our children. The internet will preserve our activities and definitely be a part of our children’s legacy. Infanticide will be the consequence for of these families; faulty superego formation will lead to concrete problems manifest as acting out and the inevitable adolescent problems of STD’s, drug abuse, pregnancy and suicide.

SASHA GREY:

Sasha Grey is arguably the most popular pornographic performer in the U.S. industry today. She planned a career in her teens and on the day of her 18^th birthday, moved to L.A. and recorded her first porn film. From a poor family in Sacramento, her father left when she was 5, and her mother remarried when she was 12. She had experienced divorce, poverty and isolation. She states that she felt miserable at home around her step father and at 16, informed her mother she was going to move out. She attended four high schools before graduating, unhappy in each one. She attended junior college and took classes in film, dance and acting. She waited tables, saved $7,000 and moved to L.A. when she was 18.

In an interview, her first agent disclosed that she was the perfect porn teen, willing to do anything. (author interview) Her first scene was an orgy for the Fashionistas 2. When she was younger, prior to her video career, she dated a cook at the steak house where she worked, who introduced her to slapping and other kinds of consensual degradation during sex. In that first scene, she asked the lead male actor to punch her in the stomach hard. Within weeks of turning 18, she was booked solid for months and has continued a highly productive volume of material. She has appeared in well over 200 videos, probably 100 in her first year of work. An attractive and intelligent woman, her reputation remains as one performer who will do anything. Much of her scenes involve graphically sadistic sex, and particularly violence towards woman. Either administering or receiving pain has been her specialty. Her most popular videos involve graphic sadomasochistic sex that she says enhance the sexual experience. She never uses condoms and has experienced at least three episodes of STD’s. (Williamson)

Outside the film studio, she has received high acclaim by the Adult Film Industry. Less that a year after entering the industry, in January of 2007, Grey was the recipient of awards for “Best Three Way Sex Scene”, and “Best Group Scene” at the AVN adult movie awards. She was nominated as “Best New Starlet”. In 2008, she became the youngest person to win the AVN “Female Performer of the Year” award. That same year she won the award of “Best Oral Sex Scene” for a scene in which she performed oral sex on four men. (hhhp:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sasha_Grey)

She has also become the face of the industry, appearing on multiple national TV shows. She has advocated and promoted herself cleverly as the “spokeswoman” for sexual freedom and is now a frequent speaker at age 21 on numerous college campuses, including Brandeis and Yale. She has also become a director of pornographic films, recruiting young woman to star in her films. She presents herself as the philosophical pornographic actor, and appears holding a copy of Nietche’s books.

Recently in January 2010, she appeared at “Sex Week” at Yale and in an interview when asked what she hoped students would take away from her talk, replied, “People my age are uncomfortable with their sexuality, and I want to change that.” She also talked about her plans for life after porn. She said she hopes to start a family some day. “Obviously, I will not be performing in adult films then”. (www.Nathan Harden)

CASE PRESENTATION:

A 35 y.o. woman presented to an outpatient psychiatric clinic with a chief complaint of difficulty functioning in law school as a first year student. She described an inability to focus on her course work and increasing depression. She had a past history of episodic depression. She reported a four week symptom complex of difficulty concentrating, anxiety and lack of sleep. Another focus was concern about her 15 y.o. daughter. The mother reported that the daughter was doing well, socially and academically until a few months ago. Rather abruptly the daughter’s academic performance had severely deteriorated; she was truant frequently and was experimenting with drugs and sex. She was expelled from a private school the previous year and enrolled in a new public school this year.

The patient reported that this was causing her to be distracted from her demanding studies. The patient also had marital problems. She had married a few months ago, to a man who had two teenage sons. They set up a blended household. She complained her husband was excessively controlling. This centered on her activities of going out to bars with her ex-boyfriends during the week. She would get dressed up provocatively, to go out with the ex-boyfriends and found the husband’s objections unacceptable. She felt she could see anyone she wanted and thought her husband was over-reacting and being overly possessive.

In review of the initial diagnostic presentation, the question arose of why this teenage daughter had decompensated now. Adolescent problems usually reflect issues in the family. In subsequent sessions, questions were raised concerning raising three adolescents in a new, blended family. She revealed, after my inquires, that physical fights were common and she had found her 15 y.o. daughter and the 16 y.o. stepson kissing and touching. There was no strong response from the mother. I wondered how boundaries were maintained with three teenagers living in a small home without the incest barrier to maintain distance. She described her parenting style as “more like friends’ and did not feel that strict rules and boundaries were necessary in raising children.

I felt that meeting my patient and her husband now was necessary to obtain a more comprehensive view of the marriage and the family and arranged a meeting with them both. He seemed like a reasonable man, who was stressed as he was a student also. He understood the necessity of placing limits on his two sons and had no problem imposing reasonable limits, but was ineffective and blocked from intervening with the patient’s daughter. The patient’s focus in this meeting was not on her daughter but was on her request for her husband to not be as “possessive”, as she was demanding her freedom to see other men. She expected me to support her in her demands.

These issues of a blended family, with three adolescents without clear boundaries, seemed like a precipitating issue for the daughter. A few weeks after the first visit, the mother related that things had further deteriorated; the daughter was arrested on school grounds for disrupting classes, threatening other students and teachers and eventually had to be subdued by four policemen. She was found to have PCP in her system and was hospitalized on an adolescent psychiatric unit for one week. In addition, she faced criminal charges surrounding the incident at school.

Following discharge, the daughter was referred for outpatient treatment in a therapeutic school while awaiting rulings in her police cases. The daughter was placed with the maternal grandmother, where there could be more supervision.

Over the course of the next several months, and a developing therapeutic alliance, the patient revealed more of her history, haltingly and in fragments. As an only child, she was raised in an affluent suburban community. Her mother was a professional and her father died when she was a teenager. She left home at age17, after conflict with her mother, and moved to New York City to live on her own. She drank excessively and used drugs. She would not be more specific. She got pregnant, had a daughter at age 20, and moved with her to California. The father was not involved in the child’s upbringing.

My patient’s daughter, like most 15 y.o.’s was active on various social networking sites. One month after the daughter’s hospitalization, multiple unknown people sent the daughter pornographic images and videos of her mother. They were also sent to daughter’s peers, and mother’s teachers, school and employers. The mother had failed to tell me that as a 21 year old, she had worked in the pornography industry. As a performer, she had made some shoots in California had traveled to Europe and had made movies there also. She was not sure if this was the first time the daughter had been exposed to this material, as she had never shared this history with the daughter.

After this exposure of her past, the patient was concerned mainly about her own career. “This is terrible” as she was afraid for her own education and being suspended from school. There was no discussion of the child, or the problems this might cause her daughter. I was not sure how this child handled her peers, and their comments, or behavior. The patient’s response to her daughter’s discovery of her on Facebook, engaged in various scenes, some portraying sadistic and masochistic content (that was one of her specialties), was, “now maybe she will believe me more when I tell her I don’t want her to make the same mistakes I have”. At my urging and my concern for the child, she was encouraged to speak to the daughter about the daughter’s feelings and of the inevitable conflicts this would create for the daughter. There was no real discussion, but she felt relieved that the daughter professed that “she still loved me”. Around this time, the daughter had a pregnancy scare. She was not on any birth control. She was found not to be pregnant, but told her mother that the only thing she wanted to do in her life was have a baby and hoped it would happen sooner rather than later. She had not approached the topic again with her daughter. The daughter continues to live with grandmother and sees her mother every few days. There are currently no plans for her to move back with mother.

The daughter was never interviewed but was receiving appropriate psychiatric care. The husband was referred as he requested help. The main focus of our therapy was exclusively with the patient and being able to function in school, without the disruptions from her daughter.

DISCUSSION:

This case illustrates one of the consequences of permanently recording sexual activity of parents on their children. Our patient, when raising an adolescent girl, hoped, (denied) that her prior sexual activity would not become public for her daughter to view. However the Primal Scene was revisited, to child, friends, teachers, employers, etc. A chapter of her young sexual activities, including pornography, was now made available to her daughter and to the world.

Superego lacunae is a term that implies faulty development in an otherwise well-functioning superego. Parents who transmit these absences to their children do so consciously and unconsciously. Parents who lie, cheat, steal generally do not place limits on their children’s behavior in these areas. Children, who push every boundary naturally, to test limits, find they are given permission to pursue these activities without guilt. This patient rationalized her behavior or never anticipated its consequences. By rationalizing her own behavior, she showed poor judgment and poor limit setting with her teenage girl. By placing a 15 year old in a living situation with two boys her own age, she was subjecting the girl to a potentially dangerous sexual situation. Finding the girl and one of the boys “making out” did not bring the appropriate response. By demanding to her husband that she be allowed to spend evenings with old boyfriends, she was demanding a certain freedom in marriage that usually results in disaster. Only when the child was removed from the family and placed in the custody of the grandmother did the girl settle down.

The adolescent was not interviewed for this report. During her formative and early explorative sexual attempts at experimentation, she must have experienced her mother’s lack of concern and limit setting. Now, to be exposed to the explicit, graphic, pornographic activities of her mother, can only imply permissiveness. The mother’s videos were of a sadistic and masochistic nature. Superego formation in children is an almost a direct transplant, especially in single-parent families. As she watches her mother perform, one can only guess the curiosity, intensity and “misunderstanding in a 15 year old mind”. There will be no limitations, no prohibitions, and no moral sense of wrong-doing.

The fragility of adolescence is further compounded by the exposure of this material from the mother’s past to peers, teachers, friends and other children who are not always supportive. Children are highly stimulated by adult sexual behavior

and they will seek it out. We also know children can be very cruel. Boys may project onto this child that she will be permissive like her mother, and girls may be either attracted or repulsed by her mother’s activity. Either way, the result is that teenagers will be over-stimulated and not able to comprehend no matter how they pretend to be mature.

The amount of trauma that a child will experience in this situation will vary with the age of the child. At nine or ten, it is predicted that older students will become aware of the sexual behavior of a sexual performer and identify the child of that mother. The internet makes this relatively easy. The older children will not be kind, and the inevitable cruelty, teasing, harassing and bullying can be predicted. They will be truly victims no matter how their parents prepare them or support them.

At true adolescence, the chorus of singling out and identifying these children by other children cannot be escaped. They may choose to defend their mothers, but that will place them in an untenable position. As they experiment with sexuality, their mother’s behavior, as recorded on the internet will play some part. It is predicted that internal limit setting would be a problem for the child.

As adults, we are responsible for our behaviors and accept society’s response to them. That is adulthood. But as children, we have no choice. We are exposed to our parents’ mores and values, and to society’s response to our parent’s values. Society can be very cruel and some of the basest comments are to teenagers by other teenagers who are perceived to be loose with their sexuality. But even more harsh words and deeds are reserved for parents who expose their children to explicit sexual images, especially of the parents themselves. There will also be distorted interactions with other families. Will other mothers allow their daughters to spend sleepovers with a mother who is a porn star? Will other fathers linger longer at the soccer match or school function with the porn star? Will teachers treat the child of a porn star differently? The answer is yes, and the child will perceive the difference. Celebrities create special problems for their children, most of which can be overcome. Porn stars create a different legacy, one that I think is destined to produce PTSD in their children, no matter how it is handled, and it is just too much to ask an adolescent to integrate.

In Sasha Grey’s case, her graphic, sado-masochistic and “free” sexuality with multiple partners, male and female, are forever available. As a teenager, she made a pact to advance her career doing “whatever it takes”, without regard to future children. She now plans a family. Her children will not have to wait 15 years to view her sexuality; it is available all over the internet now and they will be exposed to it.

Like Rebecca in Faust, Sasha has “killed” her Irish Catholic mother, and now commits infanticide. There is no way her future children can escape the “sins of the father”. They will be exposed from infantacy. Sasha is the most recognizable porn star in the U.S. and she actively promotes herself.

I have worked with many men and woman who have been arrested for child pornography and sex with underage children. Most are drawn in by the naïve hope that their internet or actual activity will remain hidden. That is not the case anymore as law enforcement agencies have become more adapt at tracking and uncovering these dangers. Even soliciting underage children is dealt with harshly and appropriately. If a parent was found exposing their child to pornography, that child would be removed from the home. We now have cases where parents are recording their pornography for profit. In this digital age we can reasonably assume their children will view this material. This will definitely disrupt the normal, phase-specific development of children in catastrophic ways.

This case represents only one episode of internet pornography of a mother and the consequences for her adolescent daughter. Is it a crime to promote the Primal Scene, especially with strangers, for money, with multiple partners, on the internet? If parents showed pornographic material to children, they would be arrested. One analogy would be to seat belts. Twenty years ago, many parents did not strap their kids in or use different seats. With scientific evidence showing the dangers, the legal system has made it a crime to expose children to the dangers of driving children without the proper restraints. Should pornographic performers have to protect their children, and how would one install “seat belts” on pornography?

These women, one probably hoping to avoid the past, the other actively promoting pornography, raise questions about society’s response to pornography. Should all porn performers be required to undergo counseling before they start a career? Should they be advised that their activity will have adverse consequences on their children? The lack of supervision in the industry allows 18 year olds to perform in an industry that some label sex trafficking. And is the self promotion, on college campuses and national TV, of activity that harms children to be encouraged? Should future families of performers of pornography be registered as potential persons who place their children at “Risk of Injury to Minors”? Should they and their children be monitored by social service agencies as we do with sex offenders? Are these children at an exceptionally high risk for psychological problems precipitated by the behavior of their parents? Are they PTSD victims at birth?

Goethe understood, and Freud recorded. Sexuality is not appropriate for children. They are too immature for exposure to adult sexuality. Exposure to adult sexuality will only lead to over stimulation, lack of integration, distortion and trauma. A parent’s responsibility is to protect children from exposure, be it the Primal Scene, pornography, or their parent’s engagement in pornography. Performers who record permanent images of their sexual activities will now know that there will be future negative consequences for their children. Cultural institutions will have to define where this stands in the spectrum of restricted behavior and sexual abuse. Women are universally united in protecting children from harm; women will take the lead on this issue.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Blum, HP. (1979) On the Concept and Consequences of The Primal Scene. Psychoanal

Q. 1979;48(1):27-47.

Freud, S. (1908). On The Sexual Theories of Children. In J. Strachey (Ed. & Trans.)

The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol.IX, pp. 220) London: Hogarth Press

Freud, S. (1917-1919). An Infantile Neurosis and Other Works. In J. Strachey

(Ed. & Trans.) The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud, Vol. XVII) London: Hogarth Press

Furst, S. (1967). Psychic Trauma, Basic Books, New York, 1967

Goethe, J.W. (1806). Faust

Gunderson, J.G., Zanarini, M.C.. Pathogenesis of Borderline Personality. In Tasman, A.,

Hales, R.E., Frances, A.J. (eds): Review of Psychiatry, Volume VIII.

Washington, D.C.: American Universtiy Press, 1989:25-48

Hoyt, MF. (1979). Primal-Scene Experiences:Quantitative Assessment of an Interview

Study. Arch Sex Behavior, !979, May;8(3): 225-45

Holt, MF. (1980). On the Psychology and Psychopathology of Primal-Scene

Experience. J Am Acad Psychoanal. (1980) Jul;8(3):311-35.

Kalman,TP, (2008), Clinical Encounters with Internet Pornography, J. Amer. Acad.

Of Psychoanalysis and Dymanic Psychiatry, Vol. 36, #4, 593-618

Knafo, D, Feiner, K. (1996). The Primal Scene. J Am Psychoanal Assoc. 1996;

44(2):549-69

Okami, P. et al. (!998), Early Childhood Exposure to Parental Nudity and Scenes of

Parental Sexuality (“Primal Scenes”): An 18-Year Longitudinal Study of

Outcome. Arch. Of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 27, #4, 361-384

Paul, P. (2005). Pornified: How Pornography is Transforming Our lives, Our relations-

Ships and Our Families. New York: Times Books, Henry Holt and Company

Peto, A. (1975). The Etiological Significance of the Primal Scene in Perversions.

Psychoanal Q, 1975:44(2):177-90

The Primal Scene Revisited (An Abstract)

Christy Tennant — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:32:26 +0000

In May 2009, I wrote an article for The Curator, “The Dehumanization of Sasah Grey,” in response to an article I read in Rolling Stone about the reigning princess of porn (April, 2009). Some of you may recall that I reposted that article here on Ferry Dust recently. Part of what prompted me to repost it here was that, because of Google alerts, the article was getting some attention from people who came across it while researching the porn industry and, more specifically, Sasha Grey.

Some of the feedback I got was hostile (“I think the article was very narrow minded...” and “if a person is fine doing it, what's bad about it?” and, my favorite, “it seems many of these people who are acting as critics are of the type who are not able to do it themselves.”)

But one email, from a psychiatrist and university professor in Connecticut, was encouraging. He wrote:

I got interested in Sasha Grey from a patient. I was supervising a psychiatric resident who had a patient with an adolescent daughter who was having all kinds of problems. The mother was a 35 yo professional who had worked in the porn industry as a young adult. Someone emailed all the porn stuff to the daugther's friends, teachers, mom's employer, etc. We felt this was a factor in the child's decompensation.

Then, I see Sasha Grey, the most famous porn star, was at Yale, spreading her message at Sex Week there. She is now planning a family. I wrote a paper about the internet and how what you do is now recorded forever... It was accepted for presentation in May in Toronto at a scientific meeting, entitled “Eros...”

When I did research on Sasha, yours was the only sane article, everyone else fawns over this lady. There are consequences of your actions, and one of those is on your children.

Dr. Bozzuto presented his findings at “EROS 2010” conference in Ontario, Canada, and has given me permission to post his paper here as well. It is long for a blog post, but I wanted to share it with you in its entirety.

This paper presents a side of the porn industry that is not often addressed: the affect a porn star's career has on his or her children.

Today, I'll post the abstract of the paper. Next week, I'll post it in its entirety.

# # #

THE PRIMAL SCENE REVISITED: SASHA GREY, SIGMUND FREUD, AND JOHANN WOLFGANG VON GOERTE

(A CASE REPORT)

3rd Biennial International, Multidisciplinary Conference, “EROS 2010”
Nipissing University, Muskoka Campus
Braceland, Ontario, Canada
May 21-22, 2010

James Bozzuto M.D., Assistant Clinical Professor
University of Connecticut, Department Of Psychiatry

Nandini Lee M.D., Fourth Year Psychiatry Resident
University of Connecticut, Department of Psychiatry

After all, the best of what you know may not be told

to boys.

Mephistopheles (Goethe)

ABSTRACT:

Jeremiah Lanphier and the Mother of God

Christy Tennant — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 20:36:31 +0000

If you happened to be on the Upper West Side in New York City last night – specifically near the intersection of Broadway and 61^st – you might have seen me walking along the street holding a lit cigarette in my hand. Some of you know that I used to smoke, but it has been over a decade since my last puff. So why was I walking along Broadway like any other smoker, smoldering butt hanging between my fingers?

Well, first a little background. I happened to be at the corner of Broadway and 61^st Street because that is where the Museum of Biblical Art is located, and I am a fan of that museum and had decided to attend the opening of their latest exhibition, Ukrainian Icons, which took place last night.

I had an interesting experience with the artwork, and the opening in general.

# # #

I should tell you that I come from what can only be described as a “low-church” background. I grew up with a mixture of United Methodist, American Baptist, Lutheran and Southern Baptist church influences. Besides the plain, brass cross that was in a few of the churches I attended, and the portraits of Jesus both of my grandmothers had (which now hang in my living room), we didn't have much in the way of icons. So reading about how all this fancy stuff was used in worship made me a little uncomfortable.

I was also uncomfortable with all the “Mary stuff.” It is safe to say that, compared with a Catholic or Orthodox view of the mother of Jesus, I have a pretty low opinion of her, too. My take on Mary, based on what I read in the Bible, is that she was a sinner like any other human being, and she was chosen by God's grace, not her merit, to bear the Christ. I do not believe that she was sinless, nor do I believe she remained a virgin after Christ was born. I esteem her for her humility and submission to God, and I appreciate that she was part of the early church. I honor her as I would any other from the early church – Peter, Joanna, Thomas, Lydia, Paul – sinners, all. So all the veneration makes me uncomfortable. Praying to Mary? Making art that depicts her as Christ's equal, in stature and holiness? These things do not sit well with me. As I perused the icons, I felt more disconnected from my Catholic and Orthodox brothers and sisters than ever. I struggled even to believe we worship the same God, to be honest.

# # #

So now, back to the cigarette.

If you have ever visited MOBiA, you know that it is on the second floor of the American Bible Society building. And if you have ever visited the American Bible Society, you know that there is a statue in front of the building. It is a life-sized statue of Jeremiah Lanphier, the New Yorker who began holding lunchtime prayer meetings in downtown Manhattan in 1857. Under his leadership and faithfulness to prayer and intercession, over 1 million people's lives were transformed by God's love when they turned from sin and embraced faith in Jesus Christ. That period in New York City's history is known as the Fulton Street Revival, and many of us are praying today that something like that revival will happen again in our day.

For a Christian like me, Jeremiah Lanphier is a hero.

# # #

When I walked out the front door of the American Bible Society last night, there were two women taking a picture of the statue of Jeremiah Lanphier. They were laughing and having a good time, and I initially thought they might be spiritual pilgrims, visiting landmarks in NYC that are particularly important for followers of Christ. There are folks like that – they know all the places famous Christians have spoken or preached or prayed – and they like to visit those spots. I can appreciate that.

Then I saw why they were laughing so hard.

One of them had placed a lit cigarette in Jeremiah Lanphier's mouth, and they were taking pictures from all angles.

As soon as I realized what they were doing, I was mortified. If it had been a statue of someone else – someone I didn't care much about – I probably would have laughed with them. It was a juvenile prank, yes, but I have a pretty good sense of humor.

But this was a statue to honor Jeremiah Lanphier! This was a place of honor and respect for a humble servant of God, whose faithfulness was integral to over a million people coming to faith in Christ.

Something in the way I reacted to seeing this act of vandalism told me that, deep in my heart, I knew there was something holy about this statue, and it was to be treated with dignity.

My first instinct was to chastise these morons for their disrespect. The words, “Do you realize how disrespectful that is?” were dancing on my tongue, coated with fire, but I managed to rein it in before I said anything. After all, how would it be if a woman came bounding out of the American Bible Society and ripped these passers-by a new one for being disrespectful?

But as I walked away, I felt helpless. Do I confront them? No. Do I hope that the security guard will do something? No. I happen to know he saw what they were doing and did nothing.

So I turned around, and waited til the women had had their fun and moseyed along. Once they did, I walked up to Jeremiah Lanphier with tears in my eyes and removed the smoldering cigarette from his lips.

I looked around for a place to put it. I didn't want to drop it on the sidewalk in front of the American Bible Society. I mean, that just didn't seem right at all to do that.

So I began walking until I found a trash can on the corner. Then, I dropped the cigarette on the ground, crushed it with my foot, and when I was sure it would not start a fire in the trash can, threw it away.

As I descended the steps to the downtown 1 train, I could smell the familiar stench of a cigarette butt on my fingers. It harkened me back to the days years ago when I was constantly trying to cover the smell up with lotion and hand wipes, to hide the fact that I smoked. I found it very ironic that someone might have seen me holding a cigarette outside the ABS and drawn the completely wrong conclusion. No, I have not fallen off the wagon – yet. I'm ten years nicotine-free.

But then another irony hit me.

It was just a statue. There was nothing particular holy about it. Except for what it stood for. I thought about my struggle with the icons – the reverent images of Mary. Do I think Jeremiah Lanphier is any more holy than Mary? No. They were both humble, obedient servants of God. Does it bother me that someone undertook to commission an artist – in this case, Lincoln Fox – to create a sculpture in his honor? No. I think it's a fitting way to honor his memory and perhaps even inspire others to follow his faithful example.

As my train pulled out of the station and I dug around in my purse for some hand lotion to cover the smell on my fingers, I laughed. I thought about the Orthodox priests I had just seen at the opening, in their black robes and towering hats. I thought about my Catholic friends and their reverence for Mary. I know we are different. I know there are really important differences in our theology. I know that I am not welcomed to take communion in their churches, for example, and that bugs me. I know they believe Mary never sinned, and I don't think that is a conclusion that can or should be drawn sola scriptura.

But I also thought about the icons, the statues, the images of Mary, and I realized that, in many ways, the heart of the issue, at least for some, is pretty much the same.To them, Mary stands as an example of someone who humbly followed God in obedience. They honor her with art. They hope people will be inspired to follow her humility, and when someone desecrates a statue of Mary, they are offended.

That's why I honor Jeremiah Lanphier. And that's why, when I saw those women treating his likeness - and the building in front of which it stood - with mockery, I was offended.

Perhaps we're more alike than I thought.