Random Thoughts
Here are some random thoughts that I have been thinking about blogging but haven’t gotten to it. So you have to put up with one-liners.
In case you didn’t know, Creighton took away Anne Lamott’s invitation to speak long after she accepted it. Richard Dooling had a great editorial in the Omaha paper about it and, thankfully he put it on his blog.
Macfuse’s sshfs works much better without the GUI than with. Although maybe I should try MacFusion
A creative non-violent protest. It makes the subjects of the protest seem like the idiots that they are.
Anyone use ElementTree with Jython 2.2? Because I can’t get it to work. It seems to want Expat, and it doesn’t seem to be in Jython. Same with Distutils, which is probably more important.
Great hint at getting a web color picker for OSX. Especially if you install HexColorPicker
September 6th, 2007 at 5:30 am
“In case you didn’t know, Creighton took away Anne Lamott’s invitation to speak long after she accepted it. Richard Dooling had a great editorial in the Omaha paper about it and, thankfully he put it on his blog.”
…
You’re right! They should never have asked her in the first place. Perhaps they could ask Charles Manson as long as he promises not to speak about how best to incite cultic violence and murder.
This pandering to the leftist murderers who feel that because they are an “artiste” makes me puke. The idea that we have to support idiot whacko nutjob killers because they write a book or have some sort of mental impairment is half the reason that the church is going to hell - and the fact that others in the ‘evangelical’ movement buy the outrage of humanist supporters of this bilge with handwringing is the other half.
Does that make me a right wing bigot? If that’s the label folks want to use, fine - I’m comfortable with that. Richard DroolingIdiot would doubtless call me worse.
Kudos to the Doctors who wrote Creighton and urged to, you know, have the balls to stand up WITH their profession of faith and shame to all the handwringers and killer-kissers of all stripes who thought it was a good idea to have her there in the first place.
September 6th, 2007 at 6:14 am
I think that if you simply look at Anne Lamott as a women’s rights activist and pro-abortion advocate, then you are correct in all that. Yet that isn’t want she would consider herself. She considers herself a writer and she’s a fantastic one at
Look, I don’t agree with her politics or with everything she says. But I when I read “Traveling Mercies” I learned more about the overwhelming power of grace than I have with probably any other living writer. Yes, you read that. Not because she went to school and has tons of initials in behind her name. Not because she can interpret the Scriptures in their original language. But because God pursued her throughout her life and, no matter how far she ran and how low she got (and she was low, let me tell you) God was always there to pick her up and set her straight. And Lamott was brave enough to share that experience with the world.
And, yet, if we refuse to have anything to do with the left-winged Christians like Lamott, will they ever learn that they are wrong? If we set people in the corner and refuse to have any dialog with them, will the state of the church ever get better? And is it right for them to talk to the world and we stay in our own little holy huddles and complain about the state of the world? Or do we go out and engage the world?
And I will finish this by stating that Anne Lamott is Presbyterian:
https://www.pcusa.org/today/cover/june02/cover.htm
September 6th, 2007 at 6:56 am
“I think that if you simply look at Anne Lamott as a women’s rights activist and pro-abortion advocate, then you are correct in all that. Yet that isn’t want she would consider herself. She considers herself a writer and she’s a fantastic one at [that]“
Never did I question her writing chops. Pagan, abortionist, murderous blasphemers are no less likely to be able to write well than anyone else. But poignant prose is no indication of regeneration. And your statement ‘that isn’t what she would consider herself’ is, patently, absurd. I’m sure the delusional crazy who eats his own excrement and thinks he is Jesus doesn’t consider himself a problem either. Or Bishop Spong who denies the deity of Christ, the Virgin Birth, the death on the Cross: I’m sure he doesn’t consider himself a son of Belial either – but he is…
What does God consider her? “Not everyone who says to me in that day ‘Lord! Lord! Did we not cast out demons in your name?’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. I will say to them ‘Depart from me, you cursed, for I never knew you.’”
“Look, I don’t agree with her politics or with everything she says. But I when I read “Traveling Mercies” I learned more about the overwhelming power of grace than I have with probably any other living writer. Yes, you read that. Not because she went to school and has tons of initials in behind her name. Not because she can interpret the Scriptures in their original language. But because God pursued her throughout her life and, no matter how far she ran and how low she got (and she was low, let me tell you) God was always there to pick her up and set her straight. And Lamott was brave enough to share that experience with the world.”
Again, so? Do you think Satan is called an angel of light because he is all wrinkly, evil and sulphur stinky? Of course not. It’s the parable of the leaven. It’s not that the bread you are eating is made of crap, but mix a little crap in with the flour and it will sicken you just the same. And make you likely to come back and eat it again as you are not able to pinpoint it as the source of your infection.
And “any other living writer” Really? You’ve read everything? Wow – no wonder you’re tired! And since when did living writers become an order of magnitude over dead writers? Your strident anti-intellectualism, evidenced in the snaps at education, degrees, linguistics, does nothing to bolster the claim that because she throws around a word of jargon or three and waffles on about how Jesus met her strung out backside in a toilet, that she must be a Christian.
It’s fruit. Not how good the fruit makes YOU feel. And Scripture is plain that good fruit does not come from bad trees nor bad fruit from good trees. Abortion, rejection of the exclusivity claims of Christ, murder – these are not the fruit of a good tree.
Even if I grant the premise that this woman is a Christian; even if I concede every point you’ve raised above to this point – this does NOT give her the right to come into a classroom setting and teach with authority. All the theological issues aside, she’s a bad role model – and as much as it pains me to say anything good about the Catholic Putrescence, they did the right thing. Finally. The ‘righter’ thing would have been, as I said, never to have considered her a worthwhile choice to address a Woman’s Health conference. I mean, who are we kidding here. A pro-abortionist murderess speaking on Women and Health and we are not meant to infer that a tacit approval of her views is given? Despite how she may chose to ‘consider herself?’ Give me a break! The Creighton Doctors knew it, the Diocese eventually was forced to see it – all that remains is for the eye-covering, deliberately self-deluding, liberals (and their “Six progressive Christian churches), to see it.
“And, yet, if we refuse to have anything to do with the left-winged Christians like Lamott, will they ever learn that they are wrong? If we set people in the corner and refuse to have any dialog with them, will the state of the church ever get better? And is it right for them to talk to the world and we stay in our own little holy huddles and complain about the state of the world? Or do we go out and engage the world?”
You’ve misrepresented the point! The point, surely, is not that we invited Anne LaMott to a place where she had the opportunity to sit under sound teaching and hear the gospel intelligently and comprehensively defended. Rather, she was invited to TEACH in that very institution. Teach, address, exhort, semonize, whatever you like to label it. In other words, play a role in the developmental process of students who are seeking how best to assemble a world and life view. So, yes – it IS wrong to invite the enemy into the ‘holy huddle’ of an educational sanctuary. You don’t answer my point about Manson – do we invite him if we writes well? If you support the position that we invite pro-abortive, suicide assisting, Jesus is just a manifestation of the divine and not exclusively the way to God spouting pagans who dress up their ideological pornography in words like “jesusy”, then the emphasis is on YOU to show me how that is either in line with Scripture or edifying to the body – not on me to show you why it must be resisted. To this point, you have failed to accomplish that.
“And I will finish this by stating that Anne Lamott is Presbyterian:
https://www.pcusa.org/today/cover/june02/cover.htm”
Ooh, a snipe! I might suggest that she’d feel much more at home in a certain ethnic based denomination but, nah – they have enough problems, what with women in pulpits, paedocommunion, and the umpteen other quirkisms without adding her to the mix.
September 6th, 2007 at 8:44 am
Part of me wants to smack you. But I’ll refrain for now.
I don’t think that Charles Manson (or, really, Marlyn Manson) would be a good fit because I know what they stand for. I think Anne Lamott would be a good fit because I know what she stands for. And even though I don’t agree with everything she says or believes, I know that she does believe in Christ and has accepted that forgiveness that is so freely given.
And why do I know that? Because I know about her because I’ve read what she says about those subjects. Yes, she is pro-abortion but I also know that she isn’t about that. She has a quirky faith, but a real faith.
And how do I know that? I didn’t learn it by reading and listening to what other people say about her. I read what she said about it. She has never said she’s perfect (quite the opposite, in fact) and she has never claimed to be the full authority on anything. I find her outlook on life and faith refreshing after reading modern theologians who scoff at anyone who dares disagrees with them. As a lot of these men and women put themselves on a pedestal (or allow themselves to be) here is someone simply saying “Hey, I’m not perfect, but my Saviour is.”
Am I being anti-intellectual? I sure hope so. It seems to be me that intellectual Christianity has lost touch with the basics a long time ago. It’s not about baptism, not about predestination, nor it is really about Catholicism vs Protestantism. It’s about “Love your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind.” And “love people as you love yourself.” Anything that gets in the way of those two commands need to be thrown out in the fire.