Eclectic Amateur

From Greg Krehbiel (via Mark Shea):

Of course we still have to wonder about the 100 percent failure rate in my large sampling of Catholics at the University of Maryland. I have a lot of theories about that, but none of them have anything to do with the council of Trent. The sad fact is that we have a generation of Catholics who know Catholicism about as well as I did when I was in college. The bishops will answer for this when they visit Aslan’s country, but for now it seems that the failure is pastoral, not doctrinal.

Yeah, the hardest thing for me about trying to take Catholicism seriously has been Catholics. I managed to make it through 2/3 of my life without meeting Catholics who (a) know their faith, (b) seem excited about Jesus, and (c) want to share the Good News. Not that they were bad people (see the “(1) I never killed anyone”) but … being a Christian isn’t about just not having violated gross moral and social standards.

Of course, the danger for a good Protestant is when you do meet Catholics who are on fire for Jesus and apologetically capable, it kicks that chair out from under you …

… both that I took this quiz, and that I scored so low:

Final Score: 54

I mean, I was there and all (or should I say then?).

Of course, my neighborhood (OK, my country mile) didn’t have eMpTV. That could explain a lot.

One small step for the 4th Infantry Division, one giant leap for mankind

Just got the news that the ace of spades has been trumped.

I can’t help but celebrate a bit, and rejoice at this bit of good news for Americans and Iraqis alike.

While I know that this does not mean the end of violence in Iraq, I do hope that this turns out to be a major step forward to giving the long-suffering people of Iraq some well-deserved peace.

Score one for the good guys

Ann Arbor Schools found to have violated student’s Constitutional rights by censoring her due to her religious beliefs.

Quick summary: in March, 2002, Pioneer High School held “Diversity Week” to (along with the standard race/religion/multiculti stuff) promote “diversity” as relates to sexuality — in other words, a pro-gay agenda. (Diversity will not be achieved until all think alike, you know.) This included a panel “discussion” of “Homosexuality and Religion”, where the school approved six local clergy to all come and have a panel discussion regarding religiously postive views of homosexuality. (Two of the clergy were Episcopalian, of course.)

Student Betsy Hansen asked to be part of the panel in order to express a dissenting viewpoint. She was denied. She was then offered the opportunity to present a two-minute speech at a separate assembly, which school officials then censored because it didn’t promote “diversity” enough.

What’s really sad is that some of these people probably do not in fact “get it” that having a public school promote “good” religious views (pro-gay) and censor “ungood” religious views (2000 years of Christian teaching on morals, longer if you count Judaism) might, just maybe, be covered by the First Amendment’s prohibition on “establishment of religion.”

I’ve noticed some commentors take Mark Shea to task for his use of the phrase “gay brownshirts” to describe this kind of bullying tactics (and worse) to intimidate those who would dare to disagree with them. I will simply note that it was the judge who compared the school administration to Nazis this time:

“Isn’t this cultural hegemony, where you’re only going to present one view to the exclusion of others?” Rosen asked, demanding to know why school officials were afraid of letting students consider diverse viewpoints.

“Don’t you think that smacks of government and religious totalitarianism. Isn’t that what this government was founded to get away from?” Rosen asked. “Isn’t that how we got to book burning in Nazi Germany back in the 1930s?”

Congratulations to Betsy Hansen, Rob Muise, and the Thomas More Law Center for this win.

UPDATE: Henry Dieterich (through the unfair advantage of knowing the principals of the case) did, in fact, blog on Betsy Hansen’s win first and has some good observations.

DISCLAIMER/PROCLAIMER

Just in case there’s any possibility of ambiguity or misunderstanding, and because I know that Bishop Barbara Harris is not the only one who has fogotten this Word:

Here there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free man, but Christ is all, and in all.

— Colossians 3:11 (RSV)

It ought to be perfectly clear that this leaves no room for black and white, either — a gulf much less than that between Greek and Jew. Bishop Harris is oblivious to this, as she tries to turn the enforcement of the apostacy into a race issue (with the apostates assuming the mantle of Dr. King). In Bp. Harris’s universe, I guess Bp. Vicki Gene Robinson is an honorary black man.

BUT…

… the other side of this coin is that there is no room in the Gospel for any nonsense about white racialism, either. NONE. Or for anti-Semitism, as well. While there are various tribes populating the world, there is only one race, and that is the human race. We are all fallen sons of Adam and daughters of Eve, parents of the dying race. In Christ, the new Adam, we are joined with him and become part of the new race, the living children of God.

In the one nation of ultimate importance, there will be no “white homeland” or “black homeland” or even “Jewish homeland” — all the nations shall bow to the One who is King of Kings, and every nation, tribe, people and language shall be represented.

And anyone who says otherwise is “creatively reinterpreting” Scripture as much as Barbara Harris or Vicki Gene Robinson are.

To Mark Shea, Adrienne Truett, and Owen Courrèges for your links to my pictoral fisking of Barbara Harris’s race-baiting. And, of course, to all of you who read and appreciated it.

To whoever emailed it around with the subject “cheap laugh but true” — THANK YOU! I got quite a laugh out of that evaluation.

Oh, and as for you other people (you know who you are) — I had no idea who Amber Frey was. I am pretty sure she is not a relative. And I do not have any photographs.

It is a solemn duty to fisk Bp. Barbara Harris and her “white boys” comments:

Domenico Bettinelli reports that Bishop Barbara Harris thinks the Freedom Rides are back in town:

“This is a power struggle as to who is going to run the church, the white boys who have always run it, or some different kinds of people. White men see their church being changed and they don’t like it.”

(reported in the Guardian)

Let’s reality check this:

Barbara Harris (Assisting Bishop of Washington)

Nope, definately not a white boy.

Let’s see about those “different kinds of people” challenging the “white boys”:

Vicki Gene Robinson (new Bishop of New Hampshire)

Not a white boy:

Frank Griswold (Presiding Bishop of the ECUSA)

Not a white boy:

Douglas Theuner (retiring bishop of New Hampshire)

Not a white boy:

Um, whatever … now that we’ve taken a look at those challenging the dread grip of White Boys™ on the life of the Anglican communion, let’s take a look at those who “see their church being changed and they don’t like it.”

Peter Akinola (Archbishop and Primate of Nigeria)

White boy:

Drexel Gomez (Lord Archbishop of the West Indies, Primate and Metropolitan)

White boy:

Moses Tay (Primate of South East Asia, Bishop of Singapore)

White boy:

Does anyone know a good opthamologist in the Washington, D.C. area? It would appear that Bishop Harris needs to have her eyes examined. She’s clearly not color-blind, but suffering from some odd inversion of color perception.

Here there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free man, but Christ is all, and in all.

— Colossians 3:11 (RSV)

But never mind what that old homophobe St. Paul had to say. According to Barbara Harris, we can still have white and non-white. You go, sister! Don’t let those white boys in America push your brothers in Africa and the rest of the Third World around! “Different kinds of people” Power!

Chris Johnson points out that the Rev. Harry Cook is not amused that Some Counter-Revolutionary Agents™ are failing to properly celebrate the elevation of Vicki Gene Robinson as Bishop. But in the middle of an otherwise unremarkable Spongian screed (“613 so-called commandments” [Leviticus] … “homophobic” [Paul] … “Jesus’ silence” [guess Matthew 19:4 is one of those “discarded concepts”] … yadda yadda yawn), Rev. Harry lets on more than he perhaps meant to:

…my private anger at Episcopalian fundamentalists…

Somebody should clue in Rev. Harry that he’s departing from the script.

It’s the “fundamentalists” who are supposed to be angry. The revisionists — sorry, those who are “learning to live the mystery of communion at a deeper level” — are supposed to be merely saddened and mystified at such irrational displays.

He also let slip the following —

… the church decided to stop discussing, take a stand and make a statement.

No more dialogue for you Neanderthal fundamentalists! We’ve been patient with you, and you didn’t even have the decency to shut up. “Now I shall have to be vewy angwy.”

Shouldn’t the presiding bishop remind Rev. Cook about all his statements that GC2003 didn’t end the discussion about human sexuality in the ECUSA? Who to believe, who to believe?

Flying Circus meets First-Person Shooter:

“How Not to be Seen”

I definately think that qualifies as “something completely different”…

Corporate Client Afflictions

From Rhymes with Orange — a not unrealistic look at way too many projects I’ve seen: