Most orthodox Anglicans that live in the United States are alarmed at the spiritual state of their church (The Episcopal Church). We are worried about what is happening, and we want it to turn around in the right direction. Because of the continued obstinate adherence to heterodoxy on the part of our leaders, however, many feel that they themselves ought to leave. There are people in our parish who are considering this.
I am sympathetic to their concerns. It hurts to be involved with a body of unfaithful Christians. It rends our soul and destroys our witness to the world.
However, schism is dangerous. It is like a rock that you roll down a cliff - bouncing ever higher, fragmenting into smaller and smaller pieces until only dust remains.
Exhibit A: Those who have already attempted to solve the problem with the Episcopal Church by leaving. Whatever happened to them? A Touchstone editor, Dr. William Tighe, lets us know in this elucidatory post: Anglican Taxonomy.
Such evidence confirms me in my resolution to be schismed from, rather than to schism - let the Anglican church provide us with a new, orthodox arm for North America, and I'll be happy to join it. Until then, I don't see how it's better to be in one of these unfaithful bodies (unfaithful in their persistance in disunity).
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Friday, October 20, 2006
Ha ha!
You may not have noticed that I posted a post about Harry Potter. I did, but it's before the Salamander post. How? I posted the salamander post first, but I wrote the Harry Potter post before it, and saved the draft. I only posted it a couple days ago.
I wish that Blogger actually would have posted it after it, but there you go. As things stand, I can totally screw with chronology on my blog. That's real power.
Real power to screw things up!
I wish that Blogger actually would have posted it after it, but there you go. As things stand, I can totally screw with chronology on my blog. That's real power.
Real power to screw things up!
Friday, October 13, 2006
Giant Whats?
Did you know that there are giant salamanders in the world?
Now, when I think of a salamander, I think of a very small amphibian (rumored to dwell in fire). I do not think of a behemoth lizard-like slimy pebbly gargantua lying quietly in wait for its prey in a rushing Japanese stream. But this is factually the actual situation in several Japanese streams at this very moment!
That's because the largest salamander in the world - the Japanese Giant Salamander - exists. Though this may seem a cause of concern to mothers around the world, I think most are ignorant of this grave threat to their children!
Giant Salamanders are up to 6 feet long, and can weigh more than 55 pounds. That's some frog (salamander)! That's like a dog - only without hair, warm blood, or lungs. There is another species (smaller) in China, and a similar species (smaller still) in the Eastern U.S. called - get this - a hellbender. I think I know my eldest's son's name!
Anyway, any California mothers reading this blog may be heaving sighs of relief - it seems California hasn't got its share of these monsters. Breathe no more, O concerned parents of California, there are accounts of an even larger monster of the deep in Northern California! The Trinity Alps Giant Salamander is reportedly up to 9 feet long.
*shiver*
Now, when I think of a salamander, I think of a very small amphibian (rumored to dwell in fire). I do not think of a behemoth lizard-like slimy pebbly gargantua lying quietly in wait for its prey in a rushing Japanese stream. But this is factually the actual situation in several Japanese streams at this very moment!
That's because the largest salamander in the world - the Japanese Giant Salamander - exists. Though this may seem a cause of concern to mothers around the world, I think most are ignorant of this grave threat to their children!
Giant Salamanders are up to 6 feet long, and can weigh more than 55 pounds. That's some frog (salamander)! That's like a dog - only without hair, warm blood, or lungs. There is another species (smaller) in China, and a similar species (smaller still) in the Eastern U.S. called - get this - a hellbender. I think I know my eldest's son's name!
Anyway, any California mothers reading this blog may be heaving sighs of relief - it seems California hasn't got its share of these monsters. Breathe no more, O concerned parents of California, there are accounts of an even larger monster of the deep in Northern California! The Trinity Alps Giant Salamander is reportedly up to 9 feet long.
*shiver*
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Parry Hotter
Libby just finished her first read-through of the Potter series on Sunday. I just finished my second read-through on Tuesday.
That means its time to post my thoughts on the series (as it exists thus far). And that's going to include spoilers - so don't read this post past this paragraph if you don't want all the surprises ruined.
I should start off by saying I find the books very enjoyable to read. They're quick, light, and fun. I think they exhibit a competent control of the English language, plot design, and character development. Character development is probably Rowling's highest skill. She's made millions of people care deeply about Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Lupin, Dumbledore, Sirius, etc. In reading her site and an interview with her, I've found that she's backstories for even the most minor characters in her universe. This shows - and its a proper emphasis. Most of the interesting things in this world are a result of people and their interactions with each other.
Thematically, it's pretty obvious her twin obsessions are death and love. The book is about an orphan who survived an attack by the most evil wizard alive (the only one to ever survive his killing spell) because of his mother's love-driven self-sacrifice. Throughout the book, I think that she exhibits she believes Christ's words to be true: the greatest love is to die for your friends.
Slowly, Harry's life is altered by death and love. He discovers in the third book that he does have family: a godfather. But, his godfather is cruelly taken from him. Then his mentor, Dumbledore, is taken from him. He's left more and more alone in the world.
Thematically, I think this can have two implications, depending on how the book turns out. One, because death isn't the worst evil in the world, Harry's life wasn't so bad. He continues on fairly happily because he's accomplished what he came to do. However, I think it more likely that a second implication of the theme will be applied: I think Harry will die in the seventh book. What better way to teach appropriate beliefs about death than to kill your main character? (Hint: it's to bring him back to life - see the gospels).
Anyway, I think that the book will probably end with Harry and Voldemort both dead. I'm not sure, of course, I can see it going the other way. I'm probably about 51% sure of this opinion.
What're other people's opinions of the big questions after book six?
1) Is Snape evil?
This read-through made it really seem like he was. To use the killing curse you've got to be full of hate for the person you use it on - and the book says Snape's face shows this emotion at the critical moment. I'm not sure you can occlumens your way out of a spell, can you?
Of course, I can see the point of view that Dumbledore might have told Snape to even go to the length of killing him to keep undercover, but I can't see why, really. The Order won't trust Snape now at all, and it will probably cost him his life unless he can somehow aid Harry in actually killing Voldemort. Can anyone see his character doing that?
2) Is Harry a horcrux?
There are a few reasons to think that he is. He exhibits Voldemort-like attributes throughout the books, and this would explain why. Dumbledore thinks that Voldemort only had made five when he went to kill Harry; Harry was to be the murder that was his sixth. Of course, Harry's mother's death could of screwed this plan up.
The reasons against it seem to be that Voldemort is set on killing Harry. That doesn't seem like a good idea if he's a horcrux. How can you make a horcrux on accident (as would seem to be the case here)? Also, if Voldemort can't even touch Harry after his mother's sacrifice, how can Voldemort's soul be contained in him?
A third option is that Harry was a horcrux but was already used by Voldemort when he returned to full power. Remember the "triumphant gleam" in Dumbledore's eye when he heard that Voldemort had used Harry's blood. That hasn't been accounted for. Of course, if that was the case, why didn't he tell Harry when he was teaching him about horcruxes?
I guess that's all I've got to say in this really really long post about the Harry Potter books. I'd apologize for the length - but hey - it's my (and Libby's) blog.
Till next time.
That means its time to post my thoughts on the series (as it exists thus far). And that's going to include spoilers - so don't read this post past this paragraph if you don't want all the surprises ruined.
I should start off by saying I find the books very enjoyable to read. They're quick, light, and fun. I think they exhibit a competent control of the English language, plot design, and character development. Character development is probably Rowling's highest skill. She's made millions of people care deeply about Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Lupin, Dumbledore, Sirius, etc. In reading her site and an interview with her, I've found that she's backstories for even the most minor characters in her universe. This shows - and its a proper emphasis. Most of the interesting things in this world are a result of people and their interactions with each other.
Thematically, it's pretty obvious her twin obsessions are death and love. The book is about an orphan who survived an attack by the most evil wizard alive (the only one to ever survive his killing spell) because of his mother's love-driven self-sacrifice. Throughout the book, I think that she exhibits she believes Christ's words to be true: the greatest love is to die for your friends.
Slowly, Harry's life is altered by death and love. He discovers in the third book that he does have family: a godfather. But, his godfather is cruelly taken from him. Then his mentor, Dumbledore, is taken from him. He's left more and more alone in the world.
Thematically, I think this can have two implications, depending on how the book turns out. One, because death isn't the worst evil in the world, Harry's life wasn't so bad. He continues on fairly happily because he's accomplished what he came to do. However, I think it more likely that a second implication of the theme will be applied: I think Harry will die in the seventh book. What better way to teach appropriate beliefs about death than to kill your main character? (Hint: it's to bring him back to life - see the gospels).
Anyway, I think that the book will probably end with Harry and Voldemort both dead. I'm not sure, of course, I can see it going the other way. I'm probably about 51% sure of this opinion.
What're other people's opinions of the big questions after book six?
1) Is Snape evil?
This read-through made it really seem like he was. To use the killing curse you've got to be full of hate for the person you use it on - and the book says Snape's face shows this emotion at the critical moment. I'm not sure you can occlumens your way out of a spell, can you?
Of course, I can see the point of view that Dumbledore might have told Snape to even go to the length of killing him to keep undercover, but I can't see why, really. The Order won't trust Snape now at all, and it will probably cost him his life unless he can somehow aid Harry in actually killing Voldemort. Can anyone see his character doing that?
2) Is Harry a horcrux?
There are a few reasons to think that he is. He exhibits Voldemort-like attributes throughout the books, and this would explain why. Dumbledore thinks that Voldemort only had made five when he went to kill Harry; Harry was to be the murder that was his sixth. Of course, Harry's mother's death could of screwed this plan up.
The reasons against it seem to be that Voldemort is set on killing Harry. That doesn't seem like a good idea if he's a horcrux. How can you make a horcrux on accident (as would seem to be the case here)? Also, if Voldemort can't even touch Harry after his mother's sacrifice, how can Voldemort's soul be contained in him?
A third option is that Harry was a horcrux but was already used by Voldemort when he returned to full power. Remember the "triumphant gleam" in Dumbledore's eye when he heard that Voldemort had used Harry's blood. That hasn't been accounted for. Of course, if that was the case, why didn't he tell Harry when he was teaching him about horcruxes?
I guess that's all I've got to say in this really really long post about the Harry Potter books. I'd apologize for the length - but hey - it's my (and Libby's) blog.
Till next time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)