October 2005 Archives

American deaths in Iraq

| Comments

The New York Times has a webpage devoted to all those who have died in Iraq. It is quite moving.

Click here

What Happened?

| Comments

Whatever happened to the concept of the "loyal opposition?" It seems to have collapsed under the political polarization that has overtaken our government over the last twenty years. Now, polarization has overtaken our Church. The loudest of us can no longer countenance anyone who disagrees with our particular theological perspective or vain of Scriptural interpretation. Heck, even the strict Evangelical Calvinists and Arminians can put up with one another without calling the other "heretic" or "blasphemer" or casting the other out of the Church (for the most part). Why can we no longer tolerate one another? Pride, I submit.

In a similar way that many consider Fascists and Communists of the same ilk, but from different perspectives, I came to see long ago segments of the religious "conservatives" and "liberals" as being of the same ilk, just from different perspectives. They are Anglican-fundamentalists beholden to extremism within their ideological and theological perspectives. Not much different than the political conservatives and liberals - ideological-fundamentalists. Gee, the Church looks a whole lot like the world, doesn't it. The worst-of-us has invaded both relms.

Despite it all, despite what happens, I will maintain a middle-way whether it is popular, convenient, or tenable. Jesus' way tended to be a third-way. That is the way I seek. In theology, I might call myself a Reformed-Catholic (an Anglican). In politics, a progressive-conservative (perhaps somewhat libertarian by default). Frankly, I would rather avoid labels all together, but that is impossible. I would rather be confounding.

Our Future

| Comments

There was an interesting article in last Sunday's New York Time's Magazine dealing with virtual reality and our probable decline into fantasy worlds. Virtual reality is becoming so good and the machine-brain interface so sophisticated that in a few short years the connection will be so complete that a person could conceivably live his or her entire life in a virtual world. For many people, this will be preferable. Just thank of a mother who loses a child being able to continue “living with that child.”

Once I get a few moments, I want to deal with this more completely (or, as completely as comments on a newspaper article permit). As the Church, as a representative of the Church, we will have to deal with people who lose the ability to form and maintain tactile relationships. We also will have to deal with people who would rather live in fantasy than in the real world (not including those who have diagnosed mental disorders).

What impact will this have on the Church and our mission? Think of the Church as a bastion of people who desire to live tactilely with one another. We will be the "new" Amish. Think of the Church as a devise/place that teaches people how to once again live in physical community. The Church will have to help people re-learn the art of dealing with other "real" people not dependent on pre-programmed outcomes.

A friend of mine at Kent State (my former place of learning and employment) finished her PhD a couple years ago. Her dissertation topic dealt with brain patterning/synaptic pathway development and pedagogy. One of her hypotheses dealt with what students are really saying when they complain, "I'm bored. I'm bored. I'm bored!" She suspects that over the last 20 years (post-MTV) that younger peoples' brain development has actually changed - synaptic pathways and brain patterning has shifted to such a degree that younger generations actually acquire and assimilate knowledge differently than in times past. She suggests that when students in classrooms say, "I am bored," what is actually occurring is that they cannot receive the information being dispensed by an instructor because of these changes in brain development. Our prevailing pedagogies rely on a certain commonly understood “pattern,” but these students have brains that are simply wired differently. She is working with professors at Kent State to develop new pedagogies that may enable younger people to "not be bored." This has nothing to do with just including "power-point" presentations or adapting to an "entertainment" model for teaching. These are fundamental changes that require a fundamental rethinking of how we give and receive information.

What does this suggest concerning a person's connection with God, with other believers, with the "doing" of Church?

In addition, I recently read another article concerning the shift in learning patterns. We have entered the beginnings of an "image-based" system of learning. This is more than "I am a visual learner" or an "aerial learner." This is acquiring information and making sense of that information strictly through imagery, not words. We could talk about being "image-illiterate/literate" in the same was we might talk about being "word-illiterate/literate."

What does this suggest for Church, for liturgy, for preaching, for discipleship? I cannot help but think of a return to High-Church liturgy that includes all the senses and where the images we see convey meaning going back thousands of years. Images don’t just represent something, but they _are_ meaning. How might the Orthodox deal with this in the use of icons? What would an iconoclast say? I cannot help thinking about stained-glass which was used to teach the word-illiterate masses. The Church that depends entirely on the "word" may find itself using an educational pedagogy, a spiritual-pedagogy that just doesn't work anymore.

Once the machine-brain interface becomes complete, the virtual world can enable us to "smell" and "hear" and "feel" and "experience" anything. Yet, it will not be real. How important will the "real" be in the next one hundred years? Honestly, what will "real" even mean? What will an “experience” of God suggest?

Throw in post-modernism and we have a lot of work to do. We have a lot of explaining to do!

Williams on Hooker

| Comments

From Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, during a rectent lecture.

The Richard Hooker Lecture: Richard Hooker (c1554-1600): The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity Revisited
The Temple Church, London, Wednesday 26 October 2005

"The ‘sufficiency’ or perfection of Scripture, argues Hooker, is a matter of its perfect capacity to do what it is meant to do. If we try to make it do more than it is meant to, we destroy its credibility; if we suggest, for example, that nothing except what is commanded in the Bible can be other than sinful, we paralyse a great deal of ordinary human life... But the underlying point is wholly serious. The Bible is neither a complete nor an incomplete law book. We have to break through the sterile opposition between Catholic and puritan error, Catholics arguing that all sorts of things are obligatory under divine law that are not contained in the Bible, puritans countering with the claim that everything not commanded in Scripture is in effect prohibited. Both extremes, by couching their question in terms of what will please God and further their salvation, miss the main thing, which is that Scripture uncovers the ‘abundant’ purpose of God in creation and redemption, the glory that human creatures in communion with Christ are made to manifest.”

What purpose?

| Comments

What is the purpose of the Church?

Irregular Lifestyles

| Comments

From "What's New" at Netscape. It pays to be married, partnered, or at least have a roommate!

"Lonely, single men in their 30s, especially those who are living alone, are much more prone to developing high blood pressure than married men of the same age who live with their families, according to new research from a team of doctors in Japan, reports Tokyo's Mainichi Daily Times.

"Researchers from Chuden Hospital in Hiroshima surveyed 1,570 male employees of a Japanese company. Among this group, 217 of the men lived alone, including some married men who were living apart from their families. They found that the number of men in their 30s who lived alone and suffered from high blood pressure was 3.6 times higher than the men of the same age who lived with their families. Specifically, 14.9 percent of the 30-something men living alone had hypertension, compared with 4.1 percent of the men who lived with their families. By the time they reached their 40s, 21.4 percent of the men who lived alone had high blood pressure, compared with 13.8 percent of those who lived with their spouses.

"Why? The doctors theorize that men who live alone do not eat as well, specifically missing out on fruits and vegetables, and did not exercise as frequently. Also, because they tended to dine out more frequently, they often consumed foods with too much salt. Excess salt is a known cause of hypertension.

"The study results are noteworthy because they clearly show the damaging effect irregular lifestyles can have on health. "The ratio of those in their 30s living alone who have high blood pressure is almost equal to that of those in their 40s living with their spouses," study leader Dr. Hiroyuki Hiraga told the Mainichi Daily Times. "Men living by themselves are prone to suffer from diseases caused by irregular lifestyles. They should be careful to take a balanced diet." The study findings will be presented on Thursday to a study session of the Japan Society of Internal Medicine in Osaka."

Sigur Ros

| Comments

Watch the video from Sigur Ros, an Icelandic group.

Lust, Faith, and Making Love

| Comments

A good opinion piece on lust, faith, and making love in the Guardian, UK.

Click here to read the article.

An exerpt:

But Christians - and, of course, others - insist that sex should primarily be the climactic expression of affection and tenderness: of love, indeed. Human beings (uniquely?) have sex face to face - a posture that symbolises relating to, rather than simply using, another person.

It is true that two people may happily agree to give their bodies to one another without any kind of mutual commitment, and that is a long way from the rape of Tamar. But offering one's body in this way is also a long way from offering one's self, a long way from saying: "I give myself to you because I love you exclusively; and there is no more intense and beautiful way of doing so than what we share together in this act."


| Comments

The Great Society program may have begun with a sincere desire to help, but... One the problems resulting from the governmental programs, putting aside the debate centered on ideological differences between conservatives and liberals, is that the loci of help shifted from individuals, private organizations, and religious institutions to the government. The perception in the American mind is that we turn to the government first for any help we need, and the expectation is increasing that the government is to meet our every need.

My belief is that the Church for Christians is the locus of help not only for our own, but for the greater need in our nation and the world. With the taking on of responsibility for the needy (in what ever form) by the government, Christians and churches in many cases have relinquished this God given responsibility, and I think it is to our own detriment. We become self-centered, stingy, and greedy. Love of neighbor, love of enemy, and an altruism that goes beyond the expectation of personal gain or return has been waning for decades.

Americans are very generous people, yet we turn to government in most instances of need - even slight individual need. There are times when the scale of a tragedy demands a governmental response - like Katrina. Yet, we also see the failing of government in such times and we need to be willing and capable of striving to meet our own needs and to help others with like needs without government. The government will never be able to be meet our expectations.

I think it is a mistake to place our hope in government. For Christians, helping the needy IS our responsibility.

New Group Found

| Comments

I was listening to NPR's Morning Addition on my way to St. Paul's this past Sunday. They featured an interesting band, Halloween Alaska. I think I really like them, as least what I have heard thus far. I will certainly buy their new CD.

Kate Bush is finally coming out with a new CD, too. It is supposed to be released on November 8th in the U.S.

Archbishop Robin Eames, Primate of All Ireland, delivered another lecture - this time for the 2005 Pitt Lecture at the Berkeley Divinity School at Yale. He issued a warning on the future of World Anglicanism.

Here is a short paragraph from the lecture describing a crucial element of Anglicanism. Click below to read the whole lecture, which is long.

The concept of 'communion' lies at the heart of Anglicanism. At once it provides us with our raison d'etre and at the same time as giving us our uniqueness provides the basis for much of our self-analysis. Our understanding of KOINONIA, our analysis of what it means and our attempts to share those conclusions with other Christians provides us with our ethos. Our pain over the past few years, well documented across the world, stems from our failure to embrace what we have learned of KOINONIA and to translate that learning experience into practicalities. If we have a virtue it must surely be that there is a transparency about our quest – and we have not hidden our pain from others. It is my submission that in trying to find a way forward Anglicanism will do more than indulge in house-keeping – it will in fact help other traditions to see more clearly what the Easter message means for the institutional Church.

From: Episcopal News Service

It's about Truth

| Comments

You know, when it all comes down to the ground, this issue for me is no longer about homosexuality per-se, but it is about Truth, and it is about our own human arrogance, and about following the model of Christ, and about the whole phenomena of forcing Scripture to conform to our own proclivities. Too much of the Fundamentalist Church (and many Evangelicals) finds itself rejecting anything that challenges what they WANT Scripture to say - what they WANT Scripture to bless or condemn.

Here is a commentary written by Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., who "serves as president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary — the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention and one of the largest seminaries in the world." He will argue that if we accept homosexuality we MUST reject most everything about Scripture and most everything held true by the Church. This is a ludicrous belief.

Here are a couple paragraphs:

"Put bluntly, if the claims put forward by the Homosexual Movement are true, the entire system of the Christian faith is compromised, and some essential truths will fall.

Lest this be seen as an overstatement, consider the issue of biblical authority and inspiration. If the claims of revisionist exegetes are valid, then the very notions of verbal inspiration and biblical inerrancy are invalidated. But the challenge is yet deeper, for if, as the revisionist interpreters claim, Holy Scripture can be so wrong and misdirected on this issue (to which it speaks so unambiguously), the evangelical paradigm of biblical authority cannot stand."

Read it all.

What he fails to understand is that WE can be wrong and misdirected in our attempts to interpret and apply Holy Scripture. Just because exegetes, theologians, pastors, regular ole' lay people, UNDERSTAND parts of scripture differently does not impinge upon inspiration or validity of the Scriptures one iota! Who are and who are not the true Christians between those who understand Scripture to support Calvinism or those who understand Scripture to support Arminianism? Are we going there, still?

Was Scripture proven wrong when most Christians came to believe with Galileo in The Copernican Model of the solar system? The Vatican declared Galileo a heretic because he believed the earth revolved around the sun. This was a belief that contradicted "Biblical Truth" as the Church understood it from the beginning of the Church! Scripture was not proven wrong, but OUR understanding and application of Scripture was proven wrong.

This guy, and those who steadfastly follow this line of thinking, believe that we have all the wisdom and understanding we need right now, right now during the beginning of the 21st century, to competently and fully understand God, God's ways, and Holy Scripture. How arrogant and profoundly prideful! I guess we know all things at this point, huh?

I am convinced that they do not really want to know Truth, but want to find justification and consolation for what they WANT to be truth.

A False Assumption

| Comments

"If you are truly humble, you will always be ready to seek (and accept!) help from others. The present genteel, self-loving brand of piety assumes, 'I don’t need anybody; I can set things right with God myself.' But as long as you quietly try to work out your own salvation, you won’t get anywhere. Only when you recognize your need for others and reach out and open up to them will things move forward."

J. C. Blumhardt
Source: J. C. B., in Friedrich Zuendel, "The Awakening"
Daily e-mail from the Bruderhof Communities

What Communion?

| Comments

Archbishop Robin Eames, Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland spoke at Virginia Theological Seminary (that finishing school down south -hehe) concerning his interpretations of how the world-wide Church has conducted itself since the Windsor Report was published.

Here is the text of his address. I think it is important and encouraging as we move forward. I don't think some of the "conservatives" will agree with his interepretations, but that's the way things are.


Yesterday in my first lecture I tried to suggest that there is a relationship between the historic growth of the Anglican Communion and the emergence of difficult issues which threaten our common life. I also suggested that it is possible to turn crisis into opportunity.

In this second lecture I want to say something about Anglican understanding of what 'communion' means, the implications of the relationship we call 'being in communion' and then to look ahead into the future of the Anglican Communion.

I am concerned that the full implications of the Windsor Report and the process it involves returns to the centre of our thinking as a Communion, As I said in the Introduction to that Report, Windsor must be seen as part of a process. Windsor did not seek to address the rights and wrongs of the sexuality question. That was not the task given to the Lambeth Commission. It was a Report on how Anglicanism could address deep differences, deep divisions on principle and it is about methodology. It is my own conviction that in the history of the Anglican Communion the value or otherwise of Windsor must be judged by the process of which it is part -- but only a part. Windsor was not just born out of controversy. It was, I believe an honest attempt by a diverse group of Anglican scholars and leaders to address how bonds of affection, autonomy and diversity could face up to divisive issues -- and such issues will I am convinced continue to arise in the years to come. As we prepared the Report I often asked myself the question -- how much does Anglicanism really want to overcome obstacles to corporate communion when there is such diversity on the nature of that 'communion' itself?

Mindset List

| Comments

Beloit College in Wisconsin puts out a new "Mindset List"every year detailing interesting tid-bits on income college freshmen. These lists always make the rounds in higher-education, and I've always found them quite interesting. The Journal of Higher Education puts out a very detailed and comprehensive profile of new freshmen every year, for those who really want the low-down on our new students. The Mindset List is a bit more whimsical and fun.

Here is the Mindset List for the new traditional aged freshmen for the class of 2008:


1. Most students entering college this fall were born in 1986.
2. Desi Arnaz, Orson Welles, Roy Orbison, Ted Bundy, Ayatollah Khomeini, and Cary Grant have always been dead.
3. “Heeeere’s Johnny!” is a scary greeting from Jack Nicholson, not a warm welcome from Ed McMahon.
4. The Energizer bunny has always been going, and going, and going.
5. Large fine-print ads for prescription drugs have always appeared in magazines.
6. Photographs have always been processed in an hour or less.
7. They never got a chance to drink 7-Up Gold, Crystal Pepsi, or Apple Slice.
8. Baby Jessica could be a classmate.
9. Parents may have been reading The Bourne Supremacy or It as they rocked them in their cradles.
10. Alan Greenspan has always been setting the nation’s financial direction.
11. The U.S. has always been a Prozac nation.
12. They have always enjoyed the comfort of pleather.
13. Harry has always known Sally.
14. They never saw Roseanne Roseannadanna live on Saturday Night Live.
15. There has always been a Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.
16. They never ate a McSub at McD’s.
17. There has always been a Comedy Channel.
18. Bill and Ted have always been on an excellent adventure.
19. They were never tempted by smokeless cigarettes.
20. Robert Downey, Jr. has always been in trouble.
21. Martha Stewart has always been cooking up something with someone.
22. They have always been comfortable with gay characters on television.
23. Mike Tyson has always been a contender.
24. The government has always been proposing we go to Mars, and it has always been deemed too expensive.
25. There have never been any Playboy Clubs.
26. There have always been night games at Wrigley Field.
27. Rogaine has always been available for the follicularly challenged.
28. They never saw USA Today or the Christian Science Monitor as a TV news program.
29. Computers have always suffered from viruses.
30. We have always been mapping the human genome.
31. Politicians have always used rock music for theme songs.
32. Network television has always struggled to keep up with cable.
33. O’Hare has always been the most delay-plagued airport in the U.S.
34. Ivan Boesky has never sold stock.
35. Toll-free 800 phone numbers have always spelled out catchy phrases.
36. Bethlehem has never been a place of peace at Christmas.
37. Episcopal women bishops have always threatened the foundation of the Anglican Church.
38. Svelte Oprah has always dominated afternoon television; who was Phil Donahue anyway?
39. They never flew on People Express.
40. AZT has always been used to treat AIDS.
41. The international community has always been installing or removing the leader of Haiti.
42. Oliver North has always been a talk show host and news commentator.
43. They have suffered through airport security systems since they were in strollers.
44. They have done most of their search for the right college online.
45. Aspirin has always been used to reduce the risk of a heart attack.
46. They were spared the TV ads for Zamfir and his panpipes.
47. Castro has always been an aging politician in a suit.
48. There have always been non-stop flights around the world without refueling.
49. Cher hasn’t aged a day.
50. M.A.S.H. was a game: Mansion, Apartment, Shelter, House.

Click below for the list for the Class of 2007 -

April 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

About this Archive

This page is an archive of entries from October 2005 listed from newest to oldest.

September 2005 is the previous archive.

November 2005 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

My Stuff

This is a Flickr badge showing public photos and videos from blgriffith. Make your own badge here.

Visit Anglimergent


Monthly Archives

OpenID accepted here Learn more about OpenID