tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-147158892024-02-08T09:09:37.964-08:00Sam'l B's BlogCantankerous and Opinionated, a friend describes me as an "Interesting Character". I leave that judgment to the reader. I am an old geek, with an interest in S.F., languages, and religion.
Welcome to my worldSam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-5130093668124109452015-01-07T22:58:00.000-08:002015-01-08T05:22:31.150-08:00No, They Can't Murder Our Freedom<img src= "https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6wymWdIAAAsqtY.jpg">Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-57264007721485221322014-06-16T16:34:00.000-07:002014-06-16T16:34:34.965-07:002nd Amendment gun nuts They're really obsolete as a guarantee of Civil Rights against a tyrannical government, and have been since the invention of the repeating rifle in about 1870 -- no civilian or group of civilians can afford or manage the logistics of providing enough ammunition to put up resistance to the military for more than a few days.
<br>
<br>
When the Department of Hyenas & Scorpions (as well as the Dept's of Agriculture and the Interior) can order, ship, and distribute ammo in ton lots, poor pitiful pop-gun pushers are outgunned, and out of luck.
<br>
<br>
I sympathize, to some degree with their distaste for the current US government, but not at all with their testosterone fantasies.
Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-28354363101697318822014-06-14T23:07:00.001-07:002014-06-16T15:36:45.526-07:00Gringo Church BluesThe Episcopal Church (used to be PECUSA) is the quintessential Gringo Church -- starchy, white, upperclass, and LIBERAL. So Liberal, it looks like they will soon change their name to T(LGBTQ)C.
<br>
<br>
Hispanics (who are the growing ethnos in the US), on the other hand, are emotional, brown, middle-to-underclass, conservative, and family oriented.
<br>
<br>
In the last 40 years, a great number of Hispanics have deserted the rigidities of Rome (divorce, birth control, refusal of sacraments to non-parish members . . .) for the Gringo Church, who seemed to have a sense of sacrament and fervor. Fundamentalist Protestants have also made inroads into their traditionally Roman ranks.
<br>
<br>
Then, too, they are not enamored of the whole LGBTQ scene, and its often shrill apologists/practitioners. My sources in the Mission District of San Francisco and the barrios of the East Bay tell me that there is an increasing sense of hurt among the Episcopalian Hispanic community, just as there was/is among those still "at home with Rome".
<br>
<br>
St. Gregory the Great, 'round about 600 AD, said that the job of the Church and its bishops is to be "Servants of the Servants of God". While it is also necessary for the Church to speak truth to those in power, and fight the habits of evil and sloth that we are heir to as children of Adam and Eve, we should also be understanding and working WITH the cultures of the people we serve.
<br>
<br>
For those who cannot manage that, the blues are going to get deeper, and the defections larger.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-63389402456944999312012-12-14T22:23:00.000-08:002013-01-11T22:27:53.851-08:00Newton, Conn. 1st-Person ShooterToday's (2012-12-14) news is full of gory details and emotional reactions to yet another classroom massacre by a young man with s ninja suit and firearms. He is described by his classmates as "warm", "polite", and "soft-spoken".
Where th en did all this rage and murderousness come from?
Violent computer games, of course -- DOOM! Duke Nuke'em, and the like. So called "First- Person Shooters" I will be willing to bet that examination of the young man's personal computer sill show several of these "games".
It may come as a surprise to those born before 1980, that their kids' Primary Reality is computer games. Most of your lives and interests are, frankly boring to creepy to your kids -- work, politics, TV dramas (though adolescent girls like these). they may share devotion to the US' majority religion -- the National Football league -- but that is just another win-at-any-cost adrenalin pumper.
Please don't act surprised when young idiots show what their inner world really looks
like.
As you sow, so also shall you reap.
Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-33511408103619525812012-05-28T19:37:00.000-07:002012-05-28T19:37:03.593-07:00VaticangateVaticangate -- the recent series of Wikileaks-type revelations in the Italian press about relatively mild skull-duggery in the Vatican bureaucracy -- seem to me to have several roots:
1) Papa Ratzi is aging -- likely there will be another Consistory in the next 10 years (or maybe 5), and electioneering to choose the next Pope is beginning.
2) The book "His Holiness" is aimed directly at knocking ABp.Tarcisio Bertone out of the list of possible papabile. (Bertone is the same sort of friend of Papa Ratzi as Ratzi was of JPII -- no dynasties wanted!)
3) Liberal Cardinals and Bishops are beginning to take aim at Opus Dei -- the irridentist and revanchist (Forward to 1870!!!") storm troops that JPII canonized to fight Jesuit heresy and anarchy left by Paul VI.
4) Vatican money affairs are improving as the various Capos and Consigilari are moved away from the seats of power. This will be a long, slow process, considering that some of the families have had their fingers in the pie since around 600 AD.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-48055968388929983192011-12-18T22:03:00.000-08:002011-12-18T22:12:57.474-08:00So What's The Problem?CNN News (http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/16/justice/stephen-glass/index.html?hpt=hp_c3) sez:<br /><br />"Trust me, an infamous serial liar says."<br /><br />It's no coincidence that most dialects of English pronounce the words "LAWYER" and "LIAR" identically.<br /><br />Glass just got caught at it.<br /><br />Then too, journalists huffing and puffing about truthfulness is risible in itself.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-13551873759687806052011-10-09T12:53:00.000-07:002011-10-09T16:48:16.272-07:00Mitt the MormonMormons ae generally nice people -- hard-working, energetic, and clean-cut. Romney is no exception, and seems to have done a good job of being Governor. Successive governors and legislators in Utah also seem to have done pretty well.<br /><br />The religion is to giggle at, however -- a collection of every sort of early 19th Century silliness, plopped on top of a basically Presbyterian ethos. The Book of Mormon is the second most successful religious novel of the 19th Century -- after Ben Hur.<br /><br />Meso-American archaeology in the 20th Century was largely supported by well-off Mormon businessmen, seeking validation of Joseph Smith's fairy-tales of an Iron-age culture in the Americas. What was found, instead, were numerous High Neolithic cultures. No iron, very little, if any, bronze, and lots of feathers.<br /><br />As to Mormonism being a cult -- NAAHH, They are too mainstream, and unlike most cults (Jehovah's Witless, for example), they don't try to cut you off from your family -- they want you to recruit them -- both the live ones and the dead ones. :)<br /><br />Mormons aren't Christian -- they fail the first test: "I believe in _ONE_ God . . ." -- they believe in innumerable gods, and every Mormon boy (not girls, mind you :) has a chance to become a god. Not being Christian doesn't make them a cult -- "Christian Science" is neither Christian nor science, but is perfectly respectable, if a bit dull. The same goes for Unitarianism.<br /><br />What it all comes down to is that I'd be willing to vote for Romney for President, unless some REAL scandal appears, or the Democrats run someone more reasonable. Then, too, some of the FunDUHmentalists screaming about Romney look a lot more cultish than the LDS.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-51246692019239943772011-07-25T19:50:00.000-07:002011-07-25T21:34:14.504-07:00Norse Shooter Boggles LeftI just read <a href="http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/25/understanding-christian-fundamentalist-label-for-norway-terror-suspect/">CNN's take</a> on the Norwegian shooter's self-designation as a Christian Fundamentalist. I probably shouldn't be surprised at the superficiality and incomprehension of the comments, since CNN is noted for their liberalism and most of the commenters are academics -- generally fellow-travellers of cultural Marxism and "multiculturalism".<br /><br />Europeans in general fall on a spectrum from non-religious to irreligious, and do not have the experience with religious zanies that we denizens of "Darkest USA" do. From a religious and rhetorical point of view, the Norse shooter falls right in line with the likes of Jim Jones, David Koresh, and the Oklahoma Bomber -- not to mention Fred Phelps and Jack Chick.<br /><br />The feigned surprised that "true Christianity" can consist of anything but weak-tea sentimentalism and huggy fellowship betrays a lack of understanding of history -- religious and secular. It is lately Politically Correct to blame Christianity for anything and everything, while glorifying any non-European culture or religion.<br /><br />Historically, Christianity has served as a focus in the defence of European cultures against Mohammedan and Tatar aggression. The 200-or-so-year-long war known as "the Crusades" was started and won by the Mohammedans. Not content with getting rich off Christian tourism to the Holy Land, the Caliph of the Faithful in Egypt decided to rape, loot, and murder them -- jihad in 1000 AD. After brief victories, the Crusades collapsed, and there was not a Christian country in the Middle East from 1300 until the establishment of Lebanon in 1946.<br /><br />Having grown up Catholic in the 1950s, I can understand the shooter's angst about the disintegration of Western (mostly Christian) values and culture in the Culture Wars of the 60s and later. Not that I agree with his methods -- we will conquer Mohammedanism with the Internet, not the sword. The young people leading the revolutions in Libya and Egypt are the <span style="font-weight:bold;">Internet Generation</span> who have seen the benefits of 21st vs. 7th Century culture & technology -- and are reaching for them.<br /><br />As for the shooter claiming he is a member of the "Knights Templar", the question is WHICH "Knights Templar"? There are dozens of groups by that name -- <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=Knights+Templar">see Google</a> -- mostly anti-clerical and anti-Roman. The "History" of the Templars since their 14th Century dissolution by the French Monarchy is all highly romantic (i.e. wildly fictional). I predict that the shooter's "Templars" will be found in his own head.<br /><br />Political and Cultural Marxists just don't have any handle on American-style wackos.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-20032020743909889212011-01-07T23:31:00.000-08:002011-01-07T23:50:31.763-08:00SFnal HeresyI recently tried re-reading a few of Robert A. Heinlein's novels. I cut my teeth on them in my teens in the late 50s, and remember them with awe. Not so much, half a century later.<br /><br />A few examples:<br /><br />"The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" still worked for me -- kept me turning pages.<br /><br />"The Rolling Stones" has flip dialogue, but the plot carried it'<br /><br />"Stranger in a Strange Land" (Author's 220,000 word version) had vast, weedy monologues -- often running to 3 or 4 pages -- that I found myself skipping.<br /><br />"The Puppet Masters" -- When I found myself rooting for the brain slugs, wishing they'd shut the mouthy cardboard characters the hell up, I threw the book in the Out box.<br /><br />I'm a cranky old man, I guess, and smart-mouth 30s/40s jive talk just sets my teeth on edge.<br /><br />(Heinlein is still WAAAY better than A.E. van Vogt, however!)<br /><br />Grump!Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-35533855048869978762010-10-22T20:56:00.000-07:002010-10-22T21:12:54.357-07:00The Date of EasterMy much-admired friend Michael Covington asks in <a href="http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/michael/blog/1010/index.html#101021">this</a> Post:<br /><br />"Does anybody know more about this?"<br /><br />Michael is a scientist, an astronomer, and a Protestant -- and is confused about the issues being addressed. They are complex, arcane, and have to do with the internal politics of Orthodoxy (as well as Western Catholicism).<br /><br />I answered his question as follows:<br /><br /> The issue has nothing to do with the real date/time of the Equinox, nor, directly, with calendars, and everything to do with the innate conservatism of Orthodoxy.<br /><br /> There is a light bulb joke:<br /><br /> Q: How many Orthodox does it take to change a light bulb?<br /><br /> A: Change? CHANGE!?!?!<br /> We will pray in the dark,<br /> as the Apostles did!!!<br /><br /> The Byzantine and Oriental Orthodox churches in the East have been under relentless and savage attack, both physically and ideologically since the rise of Mohammedanism in the 7th Century AD. From the West also, since the 11th Century or so.<br /><br /> The cultural result has been an absolute intransigence, preferring martyrdom to accommodation -- which Mohammedans, Mongols, and Soviets have been more than happy to provide. Russian Orthodoxy has canonized Nicolas II as "The Tsar Martyr". despite (and sometimes because of) his total ineptitude as a ruler.<br /><br /> The first Ecumenical Council, held at Nicea in 325 AD, has enormous prestige, and is foundational to much of the Church's structure and belief -- both East and West. The Link:<br /><br /> http://www.usccb.org/seia/easter.shtml<br /><br /> . . . and their Link:<br /><br /> http://www.oikoumene.org/resources/documents/wcc-commissions/faith-and-order-commission/i-unity-the-church-and-its-mission/towards-a-common-date-for-easter/towards-a-common-date-for-easter.html<br /><br /> . . . are an attempt to open dialogue with the most intransigent of the iron-bound conservatives (often calling themselves "Old Calendarists", and more often than not located in the monastic communities on Mt. Athos).<br /><br /> The argument goes:<br /><br /> 1) Look what Nicea was trying to do: Unify Paschal worship<br /><br /> 2) Look how Nicea did it: using the best contemporary<br /> tools of science.<br /><br /> 3) Let us, therefore, follow in the footsteps of the<br /> Fathers of Nicea in unifying the Paschal<br /> dating, using contemporary tools in<br /> the same way they did theirs.<br /><br />=======================================================================<br /><br /> My personal take on the whole issue is to shrug, and just accept the date of Easter as calculated by the Orthodox (however bizarrely), on the grounds that changing the minds and habits of all of Western Christianity would be easier and quicker than changing anything in Orthodoxy.<br /><br />+Sam'l Bassett<br />Geek BishopSam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-86408072407208743932010-09-08T15:09:00.000-07:002011-10-22T21:06:48.294-07:00I Believe In What?The first three words of the Nicene Creed in English are: "I believe in..." Only one word in Greek -- "Pisteuo"; two in Latin: "Credo in..."<br /><br />Not just "I believe" -- like "I believe 2 + 2 = 4" or "I believe the sun will rise in the East tomorrow" -- Greek would use "Theoristeo" or "Pestho" for mere intellectual belief.<br /><br />Instead, we have the word for "visceral belief", "passionate belief" -- a belief that commits one to changing one's life and habits. The older (by 150 or so years) Apostles' Creed, which scholars think was an early 2nd Century Roman "Baptismal Symbolon" (Great & Holy Oath, sworn at Baptism) also begins "Credo in . . ." in Latin.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-38595406489106348922010-06-17T17:36:00.000-07:002010-06-17T17:47:19.870-07:00Rating ObamaWhen the historians finally get access to the documents, and comb through Obama's record, they will find that, of his predecessors, he most closely resembles U.S.Grant. Both are persons of mild charisma and limited gifts, surrounded by venal ideologues and corrupt machine politicians.<br /><br />Obama lacks Grant's passion for whiskey and cigars, however -- and shaves regularly.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-46270417446849025882010-03-20T22:58:00.000-07:002010-03-20T23:04:51.718-07:00How To Win In AfghanistanBoth simple and cheap -- buy all the Opium produced by the Afghans. This keeps it out of the Taliban's hands.<br /><br />Sell it to the Pharmaceutical Industry at 20% mark up -- this pays for the purchase.<br /><br />Same strategy works for Columbia and cocaine.<br /><br />Probably too simple and rational.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-64893215951941851992010-02-02T17:25:00.000-08:002010-02-02T18:25:16.417-08:00Scientific IlliteracyEducationally, I am a "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sputnik_1">Sputnik</a> Baby" -- I entered High School in September of 1958, 11 months after the first artificial satellite was launched by the Soviets. This launch set off a great Hullabaloo & Cry about the state of Science teaching in U.S. schools -- Primary, Secondary, and College-level. Much mooney and effort was thrown at teachers, textbooks, and curricula.<br /><br />I went to an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Trier_High_School">exceptional</a> High School, and was in the "bright brat" (level 4) program, which started out with Biology and Algebra in freshman year. Our teachers were very good, and I came away with what turned out to be and excellent grounding in science, and a thirst for knowledge, and a monumental reading habit.<br /><br />While the lower-level classes were not as intensive as the ones I took, it was my impression that they got a good, if less detailed, grounding in science. The general US culture, too, in that era, was moving away from scorn for "pointy-headed int'lechuls" toward respect for scientists and engineers.<br /><br />Come forward 50-odd (some very odd) years, and what do you see? The US educational "system" is gobbling mind-boggling amounts of money, and turning out functional illiterates. Enrolment in college-level science and engineering schools is largely going to non-US citizens. Chinese and Indian names are common in lists of high-tech CEOs.<br /><br />CNN and Fox News publish "viewer opinions" -- and I presume that they are edited for at least minimal legibility and meaningfulness. As to their general content, H.L. Mencken's comment that: "Nobody ever went broke UNDERestimating the taste {or the intelligence -- Sam'l} of the American people." still holds true 75 or so years on.<br /><br />And nobody seems to care.<br /><br />*sigh*Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-5479823522514983602009-12-29T19:04:00.000-08:002009-12-29T19:48:21.321-08:00Israel Arrests Vanunu -- Arabs TrembleIn the news today: <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/12/29/israel.arrest/index.html">Israel Arrests Whistleblower</a>.<br /><br />It occurs to me that at this stage of the game, Mordechai Vanunu can't know any useful details about Israel's putative nuclear arsenal -- according to what has been published, he was some sort of low-level technician, not a weapons designer or military brass hat. It's been more than 10 years, IIRC, since he first surfaced, and weapons design -- if any -- would have long since made whatever he knew obsolete.<br /><br />Does Israel have nuclear weapons? Probably -- but nobody knows for sure. Dimona may be nothing but a monstrously expensive underground barracks, where ShinBetniks lounge around and read Playboy. The <span style="font-weight: bold;">IDEA</span>, however, that it may be chock-full of awful things that can do horrendous damage to potential aggressors is worth every sheckel (and US$) spent on it -- to Israel.<br /><br />But what about Vanunu? My devious Macchiavellian mind notes that whenever the Israelis need to put the wind up the local Mohammedan bandit regimes, all they need to do is very publicly arrest Vanunu, making sure that every news-critter in the Near East gets a personal invite. Vanunu himself can be depended upon to produce reams of colorful declamations about the nuclear nastiness supposedly stored in the Negev, and ready to dump on Terhan, Qom, or Riyadh.<br /><br />The Press can also be depended on to generate tempests in teacups for a week or so, all of which does a good job of feeding the paranoia and raising the hackles of the various neighboring despotisms. Notice, also, that nobody in Israel is claiming Vanunu actually knows anything, or told anyone anything, just that he <span style="font-weight: bold;">might</span> tell somebody something. Great tradecraft.<br /><br />Mazel Tov!!Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-15120698677905085822009-12-02T23:53:00.000-08:002009-12-03T12:57:43.125-08:00ClimategateI am rather unsurprised -- I had long suspected that:<br /><br /><center><a href="http://blog.mischel.com/2009/12/03/more-on-climategate/"><b>Liberal Luddites Lie</b></a></center><br />. . . to further their agendas.<br /><br />This, I ascribe to the following trends of the past 30-40 years:<br /><br />1) Postmodernism -- "There really is no such thing as 'right' or 'wrong', 'truth' or 'falsehood' -- it's all a matter of opinion."<br /><br />2) Marxist Anarchism -- "Everything that the U.S. and Western Civilization have done is evil, and ought to be destroyed'.<br /><br />I am old enough to have grown up before this particular brand of venom became popular.<br /><br />Kudos to the anonymous whistleblower.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-78698682681544935522009-10-25T18:36:00.000-07:002009-10-26T23:01:25.626-07:00Fair's FairIt occurs to me that the Anglicans should establish "Personal Prelatures" or some such, for "liberal", "Spirit of Vatican II" Romans interested in swimming the Channel to escape "traditionalists that ... refuse to come to terms with the modern world" and insist on theological and ecclesiological orthodoxy. That way, the could keep their unsingable hootenanny music, crude felt banners, individual interpretations of Scripture,and preserve their heritage, as they bravely transition to the blue-hair set in the 21st Century.<br /><br />;-)Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-27761996703116246802009-10-25T15:04:00.000-07:002009-10-25T16:11:49.929-07:00Anglican --> Roman ProblemsMy great & good friend, Jeff Duntemann yesterday <a href="http://www.contrapositivediary.com/?p=979">noted </a>three issues which he feels will interfere with the success of the recently announced Anglican --> Roman Anschluss: Contraception; Divorce; and Married Bishops.<br /><br />I beg to disagree.<br /><br />First: Contraception.<br /><br />Cradle Catholics overwhelmingly ignore Roman fulminations about contraception, The single most damaging mistake made by any pope in the last two Millennia was Paul VI's issuance of "Humanae Vitae" -- respect for the institution of the Papacy took a nosedive, from which it is only now beginning to recover.<br /><br />Some Roman laity are very careful to observe its requirements, and equally vehement in defending it. I have no reason to think that Anglo-Catholics will be any different. I see the issue as a thorn in the paw, but not a deal-breaker.<br /><br /><br />Second: Divorce<br /><br />As Jeff notes, Rome -- unlike the Orthodox -- is totally intransigent on the subject of divorce. I find it hard to imagine, however, that any but the most blue-nosed of Anglo-Catholic clergy would coldly excommunicate re-married couples and their families, even under blue-nosed Roman pressure.<br /><br />Cradle Catholics have a "Yes, Father" reflex -- when the clergy go on a rant, they turn their ears off, and say "Yes, Father" every time he pauses for breath, and go on about their business. Traditionally, Anglicans had a similar reflex -- smiling vaguely, and letting their eyes go out of focus, so as to be polite to the Vicar.<br /><br />It may be, too, that the Witness of the Anglican Rite Catholics to the Christian and loving way to treat the tragedy of divorce and the real leap of hope in remarriage may penetrate the testa dura intransigence of the Romans.<br /><br />I see this as a larger thorn, but again, not a deal-breaker.<br /><br /><br />Third: Married Bishops<br /><br />I feel this is the least troubling of the three issues. Rome can finess the whole issue with existing married bishops by creating/resuscitating intermediate ranks like Archimandrite, Arch-priest, or Dean to allow Tiber-swimming Anglican Bishops to continue their roles of guidance and overseeing of Anglican parishes and provinces while being seen sacramentally as priests, not bishops. Some of the language of the news reports of the Anschluss hint at this -- given the general incompetence of most reporters in dealing with Vatican pronouncements, however, I await the publication of the official text.<br /><br />I expect that at the Conclave after next, one of the issues on the table for the Pope after Papa Ratzi's successor will be abolishing clerical celibacy (long overdue). I think that the Witness of the Anglo-Catholics taken in by Rome in this Anschluss may be a tipping point, to where the future Pope can assure his election by pointing and saying: "Fratelli mio -- Ecce -- married clergy works -- observe our Anglo-Catholics!"<br /><br />In the meantime, there are the occasional unmarried Anglican priests, and Anglo-Catholic/Anglican Rite seminarians can make the choice -- as Orthodox and Roman seminarians do now.<br /><br />We live in interesting times.<br /><br />+Sam'l B.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-13256504334653039712009-09-29T20:14:00.000-07:002009-09-29T21:03:12.166-07:00Iconoclasm and BibliolatryTwo Heresies That Feed Off One Another<br /><br /><br />My great & good friend, Jeff Duntemann, recently wrote in his Contrapositive Diary:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.contrapositivediary.com/?p=922">Holy Faces</a><br /><br />"The stations [of the Cross, in his parish church] are painted icons, deliberately lacking any suggestion of a third dimension (so that they cannot be mistaken for the biblically prohibited “graven images”)"<br /><br />To which I replied:<br /><br />Piffle, Poppycock, and Bibliolatry!<br /><br />The Seventh and last Ecumenical Council [again in Nicea, 792 AD] was very direct about the fact that we do not worship images, but use them as an aid to remind us of whom they picture:<br /><br /><a href="http://orthodoxwiki.org/Seventh_Ecumenical_Council">Seventh Ecumenical Council</a> <br /><br />The 1918 Catholic Encyclopedia says:<br /><br />"But there is a difference not of principle but of practice between East and West, to which we have already alluded. Especially since Iconoclasm, the East dislikes solid statues. Perhaps they are too reminiscent of the old Greek gods. At all events, the Eastern icon (whether Orthodox, Nestorian or Monophysite) is always flat — a painting, mosaic, bas-relief. Some of the less intelligent Easterns even seem to see a question of principle in this and explain the difference between a holy icon, such as a Christian man should venerate, and a detestable idol, in the simplest and crudest way: "icons are flat, idols are solid." However, that is a view that has never been suggested by their Church officially, she has never made this a ground of complaint against Latins, but admits it to be (as of course it is) simply a difference of fashion or habit, and she recognizes that we are justified by the Second Council of Nicaea in the honor we pay to our statues just as she is in the far more elaborate reverence she pays to her flat icons."<br /><br /><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07664a.htm">Iconoclasm vs Veneration</a><br /><br />The condemnation of images in church is yet one more Protestant heresy, perpetrated by blue-nosed wowsers who know nothing of Church history, and hate what they do not understand.<br /><br />The Encyclopedia continues:<br /><br />"Images then were in possession and received worship all over Christendom without question till the Protestant Reformers, true to their principle of falling back on the Bible only, and finding nothing about them in the New Testament, sought in the Old Law rules that were never meant for the New Church and discovered in the First Commandment (which they called the second) a command not even to make any graven image." <br /><br />Thus Sola Scriptura Bibliolatry feeds Ignorant Iconoclasm, and vice-versa.<br /><br />Harrumpf!Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-14592832160300384942009-08-30T20:59:00.000-07:002009-08-30T21:02:49.856-07:00Imperium Romanum Mortuum Est -- Deo Gratias!"The Roman Empire Is Dead -- Thank God!"<br /><br /> The Bishop of Rome has had a thousand years' more practice pretending to be the Roman Emperor than the Patriarch of Constantinople does. (Imperial Rome fell about 450 A.D., and Constantinople fell in 1453.)<br /><br /> Both have the idea that they have the inalienable right to rule the whole of the Church -- each after its own pattern. The Western Pattern is more consciously Imperial -- in default of a Western Emperor, the Papacy was the only structure which the various polities could rally around to create at least an ideal unity; The Eastern pattern attempts to continue the relationship that the Eastern Churches had with the Eastern Emerors -- that of the Department of Religious Affairs of the Imperial Government structure.<br /><br /> Since about 600 A.D., the Papacy had been working to extend its political hegemony over the entire Church -- and the entire world. Until after the Council of Trent (1545-1563), this had been more theoretical than practical. The Papacy and the emerging nation-states of Western Europe jousted for influence, mostly equally. The Papacy did manage to gain political control over a collection of small Italian states, which lasted until 1870.<br /><br /> The various Western national Churches -- England, France, Spain, etc., were essentially self-governing (with frequent appeals to Rome to settle arguments) until after Trent. In particular, the French Church fiercely defended its independence from direct Roman rule until after the Revolution.<br /><br /> The Eastern Churches, on the other hand, identified themselves closely with the dominant political power -- originally the Eastern Roman Empire, later the Turkish Sultanate and the various national governments -- Serbian, Bulgarian, Russian, etc.<br /><br /> In keeping with the Acta of the 1st Council of Nicea, the East preserves the idea of the ecclesial independence of the individual bishop in his See, and of the larger ethnic and geographical groups -- autocephalous Patriarchates (again, Serbia and others) which have been allowed to grow up.<br /><br /> Each of these Patriarchates, however, welded itself as best it might to the local political establishment. The Mohammedan Turkish Sultanate used the Patriarchate of Constantinople to rule its Orthodox citizens, but identification with the Turk was not something easy to stomach!<br /><br /> The various Patriarchates in the East spent a great deal (entirely too much) of their time and energy fighting their political masters' battles, often with each other. They developed an ideology which said, in effect: "The way WE do things is the only authentic one, received unchanged from the Apostles". Which was (and is) not true, but useful as propaganda.<br /><br /> So here we had two different ecclesial systems, each striving for mundane political power. The results are interesting.<br /><br /> In the West, being the only Patriarchate (Carthage might have been another, but was destroyed by the Vandals in the 5th & 6th Century, then overrun by Mohammedans), Rome developed over time a unified structure of control. The various National Churches may have protested their independence, but were quite willing to copy Roman methods and Roman organization -- even Roman Liturgy.<br /><br /> The Roman ideal of governance was explicitly that of the Roman Empire -- an all-powerful central administration, controlling the chaotic and unbridled tendencies of an unenlightened mob. This view grew out of the political interactions between the Senatorial and Plebian classes in Republican Rome, and has persisted for about 2700 years now.<br /><br /> This lust for absolute power has colored both the political history of the Papacy and the pastoral practice of the Western Church -- including its stepchildren, the Protestants. And not in a good sense, either.<br /><br /> The idea of Papal supremacy impinged on the supremacy of the Bishop in his See, and the supremacy of the pastor in his parish, and extended itself down further, to the supremacy of the religious over the laity. It is a structure of control and command, with very little room for love and transcendance.<br /><br /> The mundane political results of this Roman idea of absolute control were horrifying. The Papal States before 1870 were ruled with an iron hand, secret police, and confiscatory taxation. To this day -- 106 years later -- the parts of Italy -- including Rome itself -- which were part of the Papal states are anti-clerical, and consistently vote Communist. The Roman Curia mismanaged and tyrannized their people, just as the Roman Senate and the Byzantine Emperors had.<br /><br /> I grew up under the perfection of this system in the 1950s. It was awe-inspiring and perfectly dreadful. Everything could be rigorously proven by Scholastic logic -- down to the individual level -- and one had only the most minuscule chance of obtaining heaven, and then only by observing every jot and tittle of the rules and obeying one's religious superiors. Rome had developed its own, home-grown version of Calvinism -- often called Jansenism.<br /><br /> Vatican II was called by Pope John of blessed memory, specifically to combat that cold, dead hand of Roman Imperial tyranny. It was to be a pastoral council -- calling the Church to a more open and loving approach to the People of God. No doctrinal changes -- nor any but the most superficial liturgical ones -- were contemplated. The Documents of the Council clearly reflect this,<br /><br /> It is interesting to see, however, how the Council has been interpreted. The entire structure of command and control, has been retained. Bishops and National Committees have more formal authority, and indeed often ignore Rome, but clerical elitism and superbia have not changed a whit.<br /><br /> Theology, the liturgy, and the artistic patrimony of the Western Church have been savaged, but Roman Imperial command and control has been preserved. It is this Imperial command -- and basic scorn for the People of God -- which led to the recent sexual scandals. At base, no one in the hierarchy cared -- as long as the pastors made their financial quotas, they could do as they liked with and to their people. Higher clerics were not immune from scandal -- just from exposure. The recently deposed bishop of Santa Rosa in California was not the only bishop carrying on homosexual relations with his clergy. (If is was with a WOMAN, for God's sake, great scandal would ensue -- but men? That's not really the same, after all.)<br /><br /> The results of the "Spirit of Vatican II" has been a clericus which, by and large, no longer believes what the Church has taught is the Christian religion, and cynically manipulates the laity. The laity are educated now, and not intimidated -- they have been voting with their feet -- and exercising the veto of the pocketbook. (A dollar a week in the basket, for a family of 3 or 4, making $50k+ a year).<br /><br />=====================<br /><br /> There is a story told by the Orthodox in the US:<br /><br /> "How do you know two bishops are truly Orthodox?"<br /><br /> "Easy -- when they meet, they first kiss each others' shoulders, then they excommunicate each other."<br /><br /> Orthodox hierarchs spend more time bickering and exercising Eastern Roman Imperial pretensions than they should. Beautiful liturgies are one thing -- pomp and circumstance are quite another.<br /><br /> Another symptom of the Phyletism (Ethno-centrism) that afflicts the Orthodox is lack of ability to work together. Central authority and widespread missionary Orders in the West have allowed concentration of people and money resurces on a worldwide scale -- to the point where there are 5 Roman Catholics for every 1 Orthodox. The people of the various ethnic churches nowadays feel that they are all one Church, but the idea has not percolated up the hierarchy as yet.<br /><br />===========================<br /><br /> The point of this whole Jeremiad is that the assumptions about power inherited from the Roman Empire simply do not work in this day and age. The verities of the Faith certainly work, and are as relevant now as they were in the 1st Century A.D., but the way we structure the Institutional Church, and the way we look at the People of God need to change.<br /><br /> The laity is increasingly well-educated, and unwilling to be dictated to. I have found it useful -- and a lot less work (tyranny is a hard job) -- to talk to peoples' good sense, to explain what the Church teaches, and invite them to join the hosts of the faithful and joyful worshippers, rather than try to herd or compel them.<br /><br /> Let us then resolve to give Imperial Roman ideas of religious tyranny the decent burial they so richly deserve.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-54869146326801880002009-08-30T20:57:00.000-07:002009-08-30T20:58:46.294-07:00If Jesus had kids, would they be half-God?Short answer: No.<br /><br /> Middlesized answer: God ain't in the genes (or jeans).<br /><br /> Longish answer: God is spirit, or more properly, the Ground of Being, that which sustains all of creation and the Universe. That is rather too large a concept to cram into the tightly-wound spirals of human DNA. They have a big enough job, just guiding and regulating the growth of the physical organism.<br /><br /> Even longer answer: Christianity teaches that Jesus Christ is both God and man. Fully God, and fully man. If you don't believe this, you're not a Christian.<br /><br /> What that means, from one perspective, is that Jesus is the conduit and connection between us, who are caught in time and space, and the infinite glory of God, who is beyond, before, and beneath all we perceive and imagine. If Jesus were not God, he would not be able to bridge that gap; equally, if he were not man, we would be up the proverbial creek, because what or who would there be to connect with?<br /><br /> In the Gospels, Jesus says a couple of times: "You who see me, see the Father" -- he unequivocably identifies himself with God. Yet he obviously and painfully suffers the uncertainties of human life, and also suffers a human death.<br /><br /> Yeshua ha-Nazri (Jesus the Nazarene) was fully man -- he had a real physical body, with all its component parts in working order, and ate and eliminated (no jokes about the Holy Outhouse, please, but he did use one when he was on earth) just like we do.<br /><br /> And if his mission had (which it did not) included being married and having children, they would have been quite ordinary Jews of their day. They would have had a really impressive and scary dad -- can you imagine somone who really knows exactly what you have been up to? (He would have been pretty outstandingly loving, too -- and minded to forgive and create interesting learning experiences for his kids. Come to think of it -- we ARE his kids. :)<br /><br /> Likewise, presuming the Shroud of Turin is the actual burial shroud of Jesus (It does not matter to the Faith either way -- but I will leave that discussion for later), say in 50 years or so, when science has gotten to the point of being able to clone a person from individual cells (the technology will probably get there, but whether we SHOULD do it or not is another story).<br /><br /> So they go at the Shroud of Turin, and find dried-out human cells with a full compliment of DNA that is not completely scrambled. They take them off, do mystic passes with their technology (all sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic), stuff the result in a Uterine Replicator (artificial womb), and 9-10 months later -- POOF! -- they have a kid.<br /><br /> So what have they got? Assuming that the DNA they found was actually from Jesus, and not from anyone who has handled the Shroud since, they have an entirely normal Jewish boy, who would have fit right in with any crowd of kids running the streets in 1st Century Judea.<br /><br /> Normal human child -- body & soul. Not god. No supernormal powers. No choirs of angels. No three kings of Orient.<br /><br /> You can bet that the apocalytpic wackos would be all over him, touting him as the "Second Coming of Christ", but there is no rational reason to think that. Christ came once, to save us, and there will be no doubt in anybody's itty-bitty head when He comes again.<br /><br /> Back to the original question -- which was prompted by reading "The Davinci Code". The "Code" is a re-write of the book "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" published in 1982. Rather better that the original, since it has a plot and some action, BTW.<br /><br /> There exists exactly NO evidence, from Apostolic times to 1982, that Jesus was married. And none since, either.<br /><br /> There exists exactly NO evidence that Jesus of Nazareth was anywhere on earth after 30 A.D.<br /><br /> The whole incident goes to illustrate that when people don't have anything real to believe in, they will believe absolutely anything -- no matter how far-fetched.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-47271199346560917622009-06-02T16:33:00.000-07:002009-06-02T20:04:46.466-07:00FunDUHmentalists Considered as Not ChristiansIt occurred to me a while ago while I was musing that Fundies (the dumb end, at least), do not really believe that Jesus is God.<br /><br />Sola Scriptura (Bible Only) has dragged them mumbling and gibbering out of Christianity and into the theological weeds planted by the Marcionites in the 1st & 2nd Centuries. The New Testament, after all, nowhere says explicitly -- in just those words -- "Jesus is God", nor does Jesus say "I am God" -- explicitly.<br /><br />Doubting Thomas says "My Lord and my God" -- Jesus says "Before Abraham was, I AM" -- and the Jews understood exactly what he meant, and were going to stone him -- but that's not quite "I am God", as the various brands of Arians gleefully point out. The FunDUHmentalist then says:<br /><br />"If'n it ain't in the Bah-bul, whur ah kin read an' un'erstan' it real plain, ah don' gotta bee-leev it!"<br /><br />Sola Scriptura also presupposes not only Lowest Common Denominator (i.e. stupidest) sorts of interpretation, but also the individual chaos we see in Protestant theology -- as Martin Luther observed, "...every milkmaid will be interpreting scripture."<br /><br />At best, Fundies seem to see Jesus as a good ol' boy:<br /><br />"When ah git t' heaven (an' it's a shure thang, 'cause ah'm all-ready Saved"), me 'n' Jesus is gonna kick back and enjoy some brews."<br /><br />At worst, they seem to consider Jesus as a Salvation Vending Machine -- you drop in your 4 spiritual quarters:<br /><br />"Ah tayk Jheez-zay-yus (at least 3 syllables) Kee-rayhst as mah Low-urd an' Save-yur!"<br /><br /> . . . an Clink, Rumble, Thunk-a-thunk, Ker-CHUNK!, out comes a can of Salvation Brew. Pop the top, and chug it down:<br /><br />"Ahhhh -- thet's gooood -- 'n' lasts fur-ever, too!"<br /><br />(Except that it doesn't -- the next time he runs into a spell-binding wowser of a preacher, he'll be convinced that the last time really didn' take, and do it all over again -- like Fundy baptism.)<br /><br />If Jesus isn't God, who and what is left? The God of the Old Testament, of course -- usually shorn of his fatherly and loving aspects -- a vast, thundering Presence, engaged in scaring the goo out of all & sundry, like every Bible-bashing preacher contaminated with Calvinism loves to do.<br /><br />The other side of Sola Scriptura is Bible-Worship -- Bibliolatry. Once you give up worshipping Jesus, the only thing you have left is the Bible. Not only is the Bible itself (paper and ink) sacred, but every verse in it is separately sacred, and to be used to prove how sacred the Bible is. Can anyone say: "Circular reasoning"?).<br /><br />Bibliolatry also resuscitates all 620+ Commandments of the Jewish Law. These no-longer-Christians have turned themselves into the very Judaizers who St. Paul contended with. They also set themselves above the Apostles, whom we see deciding in Acts 15 that Christians need not be bound by that Law. Makes one wonder just who this "Lord and Master" they invoke is!<br /><br />The titles "Lord" and "Master", nowadays, are mostly used in BDSM (Bondage, Discipline, Sadism, and Masochism) games. Other than in Fundamentalism, they have only very tenuous meaning. The very tenuousness may indeed explain their attractiveness to Fundies -- the idea that you can get to heaven by repeating a short and meaningless phrase is awful tempting. When the Stupid Do Theology, Theology is Reduced to Bumper Stickers.<br /><br />Calvinists bray about a "sovereign God". The intersection of the meanings of "sovereign". "lord", and "master" are all in _COMPULSION_ -- the right and ability to compel the obedience and agreement of the subject person, over-ruling and over-whelming their personal will.<br /><br />Now, there is no question that Jesus _CAN_ over-ride individual will -- He is the one by whom and through whom all things came to be (who do you think throws the switch when the Father says: "Let there be light!"?) We see Him and His Father in both the Old and New Testaments, constantly _ASKING_ that we voluntarily turn to Him. From the cries of Jeremiah in the OT ("Turn, O Israel, from evil-doing..."), to the heroic opening of herself by the girl Mary ("Be it done to me according to Your will") -- we see that our free will is central to our salvation. Not Fear and Compulsion; Love and reaching out.<br /><br />The point is that God wants us to turn willingly and lovingly to Him, as He reaches out lovingly and willingly to us. The cold and capricious sadist who is the Calvinist god is not the loving Father Jesus speaks of.<br /><br />Fundies are quick to quote John 3:16 -- "God so loved the world, that He sent his beloved son into the world to save sinners."), but they seem to miss that little word, "love". It's as if Jesus is nothing but a Salvation Vending Machine -- put in your quarters, and get your can of Salvation -- and that's it.<br /><br />The Nicene Creed says of Jesus: "...one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in being with the Father. Through Him all things were made." -- this from 1200 years before Protestantism was invented.<br /><br />The Gospel of John begins: "1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God; 3 all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men. [. . .] 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world knew him not."<br /><br />These are much grander conceptions than a Salvation Vending Machine. He is the SON, the Second Person of the Trinity. It is He "By Whom, and Through Whom, and In Whom we live and move and have our being."<br /><br />Bibliolators know Him not; the Babdist who said 'Creeds interfere in the relationship between the individual and God" knew Him not.<br /><br />Bibliolatry substitutes "Bible" for "Jesus" -- and they seem to interpret John 1:1 as: "In the Beginning was the Bible, and the Bible was with God, and the Bible was God." (The Bible being the "Word of God" of course.) This goes right along with the dementia of the fringe crazies (KJV Only) who think that the only _REAL_ bible fell from heaven into King James' lap, all perfectly typeset and bound.<br /><br />Another excrescence of bibliolatry is the idea that anyone who can quote the Bible is a <span style="font-weight:bold;">Good Guy(tm)</span> and a <span style="font-weight:bold;">REAL CHRISTIAN (tm)</span>, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Now Mohammedans (clearly not Christian), Jehovah's Witnesses (a mind-control cult who outright deny Jesus' divinity), and Seventh Day Adventists (who ignore Jesus in favor of Ellen G. White, and practice increasingly bizarre "prophecies") all quote the Bible -- and as the saying goes "The Devil can quote Scripture to his own ends."<br /><br />Without any authority other than their own imaginations, and without the leaven of a critical education (or any at all), FunDUHmentalists are extremely reluctant to "judge" and confront even blatant blasphemy, much less subtle and debilitating heresy.<br /><br />It is clear, then, that much of the non-Christian content of FunDUHmentalism is due to the lack of education in what the Church has and does teach. Whether this lack is genetic (i.e. those incapable of learning better fall into it), the result of human laziness, or there are darker forces (the Devil) behind them -- is not clear.<br /><br />(An apology, by the way, to well-educated Fun_DA_mentalists who have learned -- and do -- the Work of the Lord, and who understand some of the depth of what the church means by "God of God, Light from Light, Very God from Very god" -- with them, I have no issues.)Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-60147111372468899402008-11-17T09:19:00.000-08:002008-11-17T09:33:44.767-08:00De "N" Card Don Wuk No MoWHITE GUILT IS DEAD<br /><br />By Tom Adkins<br /> <br /><br />Look at my fellow conservatives! There they go, glumly shuffling along, depressed by the election aftermath. Not me. I'm virtually euphoric. Don't get me wrong. I'm not thrilled with America 's flirtation with neo socialism.. But there's a massive silver lining in those magical clouds that lofted Barak Obama to the Presidency. For today, without a shred of intellectually legitimate opposition, I can loudly proclaim to America : The Era of White Guilt is over.<br /><br />This seemingly impossible event occurred because the vast majority of white Americans didn't give a fluff about skin color, and enthusiastically pulled the voting lever for a black man. Not just any black man. A very liberal black man who spent his early career race-hustling banks, praying in a racist church for 20 years, and actively worked with America-hating domestic terrorists. Wow! Some resume! Yet they made Barak Obama their leader.. Therefore, as of Nov 4th, 2008, white guilt is dead.<br /><br />For over a century, the millstone of white guilt hung around our necks, retribution for slave-owning predecessors. In the 60s, American liberals began yanking that millstone while sticking a fork in the eye of black Americans, exacerbating the racial divide to extort a socialist solution. But if a black man can become President, exactly what significant barrier is left? The election of Barak Obama absolutely destroys the entire validation of liberal white guilt. The dragon is hereby slain.<br /><br />So today, I'm feeling a little uppity, if you will. From this day forward, my tolerance level for having my skin color hustled is now exactly ZERO.. And it's time to clean house. No more Reverend Wright's “God Damn America , Al Sharpton's Church of Perpetual Victimization , or Jesse Jackson's rainbow racism. Cornell West? You're a fraud. Go home. All those black studies programs that taught kids to hate whitey? You must now thank Whitey. And I want that on the final.<br /><br />Congressional Black Caucus? Irrelevant. Maxine Waters? Shut up. ACORN? Outlawed. Black Panthers? Go home and pet your kitty. Black separatists? Find another nation that offers better dreams. Go ahead. I'm waiting.<br /><br />Gangsta rappers? Start praising America . Begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. And please no more ebonics. Speak English, and who knows where you might end up? Oh, yeah, ¦pull up your pants. Your underwear is showing. You look stupid.<br /><br />To those Eurosnots who forged entire careers hating America ? I'm still waiting for the first black French President.<br /><br />And let me offer an equal opportunity whupping. I've always despised lazy white people. Now, I can talk smack about lazy black people. You're poor because you quit school, did drugs, had three kids with three different fathers, and refuse to work. So when you plop your Colt 45-swilling, Oprah watching butt on the couch and complain Da Man is keeping me down, allow me to inform you: Da Man is now black. You have no excuses.<br /><br />No more quotas. No more handouts. No more stealing my money because someone's great-great-great-great grandparents suffered actual pain and misery at the hands of people I have no relation to, and personally revile.<br /><br />It's time to toss that massive, obsolete race-hustle machine upon the heap of the other stupid 60s ideas. Drag it over there, by wife swapping, next to dope-smoking. Plenty of room right between free love and cop-killing. Careful don't trip on streaking. There ya go, don't be gentle. Just dump it. Wash your hands. It's filthy.<br /><br />In fact, Obama's ascension created a gargantuan irony. How can you sell class envy and American unfairness when you and your black wife went to Ivy League schools, got high-paying jobs, became millionaires, bought a mansion, and got elected President? How unfair is that??? Now, Like a delicious O'Henry tale, Obama's spread-the-wealth campaign rendered itself moot by it's own victory! America is officially a meritocracy. Obama's election has validated American conservatism!<br /><br /> <br /><br />So, listen carefully Wham!!!<br /><br />That's the sound of my foot kicking the door shut on the era of white guilt. The rites have been muttered, the carcass lowered, dirt shoveled, and tombstone erected. White guilt is dead and buried.<br /><br />However, despite my glee, there's apparently one small, rabid bastion of American racism remaining. Black Americans voted 96% for Barak Obama. Hmmm. In a color-blind world, shouldn't that be 50-50? Tonight, every black person should ask forgiveness for their apparent racism and prejudice towards white people. Maybe it's time to start spreading the guilt around. <br /><br />Tom Adkins is the publisher of CommonConservative.com<br /><br />610-888-7970<br /><br />======================<br /><br />What Tom said!Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-86536723530993465112008-09-29T19:03:00.000-07:002008-09-29T19:13:12.829-07:00"Malefactors of Great Wealth"It has been just about a century since Teddy Roosevelt coined that phrase:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=wq.essay&essay_id=216341">http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=wq.essay&essay_id=216341</a><br /><br /> . . . and they're at it again. This time they want thee & me & everybody else to cough up $2,300 or so each, to save their gold-plated behinds from the consequences of their own risky stupidity. As of today (29 Sep 2008), thee & me & everybody else has been telling their Congresscritters exactly what they think of that bit of highway robbery.<br /><br />For once, Congress seems to be listening, and the House trashed the bill. If they take it up & pass it, it will just verify Mark Twain's cynical remark:<br /><br />"The U.S. has the best Congress money can buy."<br /><br />Keep on kickin' your Congressdonkey on the subject.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14715889.post-52260945512419634582008-07-25T15:03:00.000-07:002008-07-25T15:43:55.019-07:00"I" vs. "We" BelieveMy friend +Jim Balija, says in his recent e-Newsletter<br /><br />"As I presided at liturgy recently with the community at Holy Trinity I was reflected on how and what we did in reciting the Creed together. As a group I was struck by the fact that we seemed to 'race through it' rather than reflect on what it was we were confessing as our beliefs."<br /><br />In a way, I can relate to that -- as text, the Nicene Creed is pretty dry. In my Liturgy <a href="http://am-cath.org/GregLit.html">http://am-cath.org/GregLit.html</a>, I combat that with a few bits of stagecraft:<br /><br /><br />First, we say "<span style="font-weight:bold;">_I_</span> Believe" -- making it personal -- and I punch the "I" in my delivery. And yes, all you "Spirit of Vatican II" types, I do know that "We" is in the Conciliar documents, but the whole Church, East and West, used "I" ("Credo" in Latin) in the Liturgy from about AD 1000 onwards. I still do.<br /><br />My problem with "we" is that it allows language-lawyering about belief. "I believe this part about Jesus, Suzy over there believes the part about the Holy Spirit, and George, in the back, believes the part about the Church." (I.e. We don't necessarily agree about the rest.) <br /><br />"We" is <span style="font-weight:bold;">de</span>scriptive -- "I" is intimately <span style="font-weight:bold;">pre</span>scriptive.<br /><br /><br />Second, some callisthenics in the middle of the Creed, to break up the otherwise dry recitation:<br /><br />"...For us men, and for our salvation, he came down from heaven;<br /><br />{Here, we kneel in reverence for the Lord's Incarnation}<br /><br />By the power of the Holy Spirit, He was born of the Virgin Mary; and Became Man. For our sake, He was crucified under Pontius Pilate, He suffered, died, and was buried.<br /><br />{A moment's silence, then all rise}<br /><br />And on the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures..."<br /><br />The Roman Liturgy prescribes a bob-and-dip genuflection at "..and Became Man...", but I extended it in both directions for dramatic effect. I bow my head during the silence, count 5 or so heartbeats, then rise up and mime the Ascension by raising my arms to heaven.<br /><br /><br />Finally, I lead the recitation in a measured and formal tone and cadence -- I never allow it to become a rattle or a race to see how quickly "we" can finish. The Niceo-Constantinopolitan Creed is the central statement of the Christian Faith -- enunciated as we came out of the Catacombs into the daylight of the Roman world, and repeated for emphasis regularly since. Who does not believe the Creed in its entirety is not Christian.<br /><br />The Creed is also the high point -- the culmination -- of the Liturgy of the Word, where we announce out unity of belief before entering into the Sacred Sacrifice which is the true heart & glory of the Mass.<br /><br />+Sam'l B.Sam'l B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08976515279979279481noreply@blogger.com0