homily by Leithart

Paul determined to know nothing but Jesus and the cross. Was that enough? To answer that question, we need to answer another: What is the cross?

The cross is the work of the Father, who gave His Son in love for the world; the cross is the work of the Son, who did not cling to equality with God but gave Himself to shameful death; the cross is the work of the Spirit, through whom the Son offers Himself to the Father and who is poured out by the glorified Son. The cross displays the height and the depth and the breadth of eternal Triune love.

The cross is the light of the world; on the cross Jesus is the firmament, mediating between heaven and earth; the cross is the first of the fruit-bearing trees, and on the cross Jesus shines as the bright morning star; on the cross Jesus is sweet incense arising to heaven, and He dies on the cross as True Man to bring the Sabbath rest of God.

Adam fell at a tree, and by a tree he was saved. At a tree Eve was seduced, and through a tree the bride was restored to her husband. At a tree, Satan defeated Adam; on a tree Jesus destroyed the works of the devil. At a tree man died, but by Jesus' death we live. At a tree God cursed, and through a tree that curse gave way to blessing. God exiled Adam from the tree of life; on a tree the Last Adam endured exile so that we might inherit the earth.

The cross is the tree of knowledge, the tree of judgment, the site of the judgment of this world. The cross is the tree of life, whose cuttings planted along the river of the new Jerusalem produce monthly fruit and leaves for the healing of the nations.

The cross is the tree in the middle of history. It reverses what occurred in the beginning at the tree of Eden, and because of the cross, we are confident the tree of life will flourish through unending ages after the end of the age.

The cross is the wooden ark of Noah, the refuge for all the creatures of the earth, the guarantee of a new covenant of peace and the restoration of Adam. The cross is the ark that carries Jesus, the greater Noah, with all His house, through the deluge and baptism of death to the safety of a new creation.

The cross is the olive tree of Israel on which the true Israel died for the sake of Israel. For generations, Israel worshiped idols under every green tree. Israel cut trees, burned wood for fuel, and shaped the rest into an idol to worship. Now in the last days, idolatrous Israel cut trees, burned wood for fuel, and shaped the rest into a cross. The cross is the climax of the history of Israel, as the leaders of Israel gather to jeer, as their fathers had done, at their long-suffering King.

The cross is the imperial tree, where Jesus is executed as a rebel against empire. It is the tree of Babylon and of Rome and of all principalities and powers that will have no king but Caesar. It is the tree of power that has spawned countless crosses for executing innumerable martyrs. But the cross is also the imperial tree of the Fifth Monarchy, the kingdom of God, which grows to become the chief of all the trees of the forest, a haven for birds of the air and beasts of the field.

The cross is the staff of Moses, which divides the sea and leads Israel dry through it. The cross is the wood thrown into the waters of Marah to turn the bitter waters sweet. The cross is the pole on which Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, as Jesus is lifted up to draw all men to Himself.

The cross is the tree of cursing, for cursed is every man who hangs on a tree. On the tree of cursing hung the chief baker of Egypt; but now bread of life. On the tree of cursing hung the king of Ai and the five kings of the South; but now the king of glory, David's greater Son. On the tree of cursing hung Haman the enemy who sought to destroy Israel; but now the savior of Israel, One greater than Mordecai. Jesus bears the curse and burden of the covenant to bear the curse away.

The cross is the wooden ark of the new covenant, the throne of the exalted savior, the sealed treasure chest now opened wide to display the gifts of God – Jesus the manna from heaven, Jesus the Eternal Word, Jesus the budding staff. The cross is the ark in exile among Philistines, riding in triumph even in the land of enemies.

Jesus had spoken against the temple, with its panels and pillars made from cedars of Lebanon. He predicted the temple would be chopped and burned, until there was not one stone left on another. The Jews had made the temple into another wood-and-stone idol, and Israel must have her temple, even at the cost of destroying the Lord of the temple. Yet, the cross becomes the new temple, and at Calvary the temple is destroyed to be rebuilt in three days. The cross is the temple of the prophet Ezekiel, from which living water flows out to renew the wilderness and to turn the salt sea fresh.

The cross is the wood on the altar of the world on which is laid the sacrifice to end all sacrifice. The cross is the wood on which Jesus burns in His love for His Father and for His people, the fuel of His ascent in smoke as a sweet-smelling savor. The cross is the wood on the back of Isaac, climbing Moriah with his father Abraham, who believes that the Lord will provide. The cross is the cedar wood burned with scarlet string and hyssop for the water of purification that cleanses from the defilement of death.

The cross is planted on a mountain, and Golgotha is the new Eden, the new Ararat, the new Moriah; it is greater than Sinai, where Yahweh displays His glory and speaks His final word, a better word than the word of Moses; it is greater than Zion, the mountain of the Great King; it is the climactic mount of transfiguration where the Father glorifies His Son. Calvary is the new Carmel, where the fire of God falls from heaven to consume a living twelve-stone altar to deliver twelve tribes, and turn them into living stones. Planted at the top of the world, the cross is a ladder to heaven, angels ascending and descending on the Son of man.

The cross tears Jesus and the veil so that through His separation He might break down the dividing wall that separated Yahweh from his people and Jew from Gentile. The cross stretches embrace the world, reaching to the four corners, the four winds of heaven, the points of the compass, from the sea to the River and from Hamath to the brook of Egypt. It is the cross of reality, the symbol of man, stretching out, as man does, between heaven and earth, distended between past and future, between inside and outside.

The cross is the crux, the crossroads, the twisted knot at the center of reality, to which all previous history led and from which all subsequent history flows. By it we know all reality is cruciform – the love of God, the shape of creation, the labyrinth of human history. Paul determined to know nothing but Christ crucified, but that was enough. The cross was all he knew on earth; but knowing the cross he, and we, know all we need to know.

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

St. John Chrysostom's Paschal Homily

Is this not the finest homily to teach everything one needs to know about Orthodoxy and to express the inexpressible joy of Pascha at the same time? I was told by Fr. Lawrence it was composed sometime in the late 4th or early 5th century; this homily is a delight to hear year after year, one of the finest treasures of our Orthodox inheritance.

The Paschal Homily of St. John Chrysostom

If anyone is devout and a lover of God, let him enjoy this beautiful and radiant festival.

If anyone is a wise servant, let him, rejoicing, enter into the joy of his Lord.

If anyone has wearied himself in fasting, let him now receive his recompense.

If anyone has labored from the first hour, let him today receive his just reward. If anyone has come at the third hour, with thanksgiving let him keep the feast. If anyone has arrived at the sixth hour, let him have no misgivings; for he shall suffer no loss. If anyone has delayed until the ninth hour, let him draw near without hesitation. If anyone has arrived even at the eleventh hour, let him not fear on account of his delay. For the Master is gracious and receives the last, even as the first; he gives rest to him that comes at the eleventh hour, just as to him who has labored from the first. He has mercy upon the last and cares for the first; to the one he gives, and to the other he is gracious. He both honors the work and praises the intention.

Enter all of you, therefore, into the joy of our Lord, and, whether first or last, receive your reward. O rich and poor, one with another, dance for joy! O you ascetics and you negligent, celebrate the day! You that have fasted and you that have disregarded the fast, rejoice today! The table is rich-laden; feast royally, all of you! The calf is fatted; let no one go forth hungry!

Let all partake of the feast of faith. Let all receive the riches of goodness.

Let no one lament his poverty, for the universal kingdom has been revealed.

Let no one mourn his transgressions, for pardon has dawned from the grave.

Let no one fear death, for the Saviour's death has set us free.

He that was taken by death has annihilated it! He descended into hades and took hades captive! He embittered it when it tasted his flesh! And anticipating this Isaiah exclaimed, "Hades was embittered when it encountered thee in the lower regions." It was embittered, for it was abolished! It was embittered, for it was mocked! It was embittered, for it was purged! It was embittered, for it was despoiled! It was embittered, for it was bound in chains!

It took a body and, face to face, met God! It took earth and encountered heaven! It took what it saw but crumbled before what it had not seen!

"O death, where is thy sting? O hades, where is thy victory?"

Christ is risen, and you are overthrown!

Christ is risen, and the demons are fallen!

Christ is risen, and the angels rejoice!

Christ is risen, and life reigns!

Christ is risen, and not one dead remains in a tomb!

For Christ, being raised from the dead, has become the First-fruits of them that slept.

To him be glory and might unto ages of ages. Amen.

manliness

So it appears that Maddox has published a book on manliness. I am certain the book will be hilarious and profoundly manly at one and the same time. Mathematically, as Maddox expresses it, the book's manliness limit is limitless:>

lim
Manliness → ∞

I still think that Maddox has yet to read Judges 19 to understand what untamed manliness is like. Whoever thought the Bible records only the rosy and lovey-dovey tales is mistaken. Of course the type of manliness described in Judges 19 is manliness-falsely-so-called. But Maddox's book should be a howl.

QW: the best first person shooter!

The finest game I have ever played, quake, has an online version called quakeworld. I have played this game since 1997-1998. I started my gaming life by playing a great shooter called DooM. That was in 1993-4. I remember Dave Folster got me set up with the game. I played the game without a mouse, using only the keyboard to move and look around. I enjoyed DooM a lot and still like to deathmatch against another person or a bot. Occasionally I still load up the game and play it through in single player. I have to admit I've seen everything DooM can offer, yet the game can at times freak me out because of the in-game atmosphere. The single player game of Quake teaches you to engage in battle with demons; which I must say is a very good activity for the manly spirit in all of us. In QW, it is much the same. The main difference being that QW is about playing deathmatch against other humans, most often in 4 versus 4 matches. There is little doubt that QW involves the most demanding skill-set of any first person shooter; the speed of the game, the hard-to-learn movement skills and the team communication skills and tactics are challenging to master. QW is like chess with a boomstick.

Fr. Chris, Thomas Aquinas, Temporality, and the end of deeds

Earlier in Lent, I was discussing the relationship between time and the end of actions with Fr. Chris of Vancouver. The insight of that conversation led me to think about what Thomas Aquinas had written on the topic.

Why should there be a final judgment when God judges in time?

Thomas Aquinas answers: "Judgment on something changeable cannot be rendered fully before its consummation. Thus judgment cannot be rendered fully regarding the quality of any action before its completion, both in itself and its results, because many actions appear to be advantageous, which by their effects are shown to be harmful. Even a human life continues after the human life is ended: it must be observed that although a person's earthly life in itself ends with death, it nevertheless remains to some degree dependent on what comes after it in the future. In one way, one's life continues on in people's memories, in which, sometimes contrary to the truth, good or evil reputations linger on. In another way, one lives on in one's children, who are, as it were, something of their parent. In a third way, one lives on to a degree in the result of one's actions, as in the case of how, from the deceit of Arius and other false leaders, unbelief continues to flourish down to the end of the world, just as faith will continue to derive its progress until then from the preaching of the apostles. In a fourth way, one lives on as regards the body, which is sometimes buried with honour and sometimes left unburied, and finally turns completely to dust. In a fifth way, one lives on in the things on which one's heart is set, such as worldly concerns, some of which are ended quickly, while others endure longer."

Given this, God must render judgment not only actions and persons in the middle of their history but also at the end: "a definitive and public judgment cannot be made of all these things during the course of this present time."

In a way this doesn't do much to answer the original question, since Aquinas believes that the final verdict will be the same as the verdict passed at the time of a person's death (a person will be in heaven or hell before their actions are "ended"). He suggests that one reason for the final public judgment is to overturn and correct "the imperfect judgment that human beings have made" in the course of history. Plus, although the judgment rendered at death is not reversible, there can be a kind of intensification of judgment: "Arius, at his death, could be judged for his erroneous beliefs about the Trinity; at the final judgment he could also be held accountable for the evil effects of his teaching on later generations."

Apart from the context of final judgment, Thomas' comments here are very intriguing. First, it suggests that endings are as problematic and elusive as beginnings. Second, it suggests some grounds for thinking that the meaning/significance of things appears to change over time. The reason Aquinas gives is that actions are not complete until all the consequences of the action have been taken into account. Precisely, Thomas does not believe that the significance of an action changes over time, but rather that the action is not complete without its effects, and that the meaning of the action cannot be known until it is complete. Thus, for instance, the final meaning of my speech-act today is deferred until all the effects of my speech-act are realized. This puts Thomas intriguingly into conversation with Derrida, with the absolutely critical difference that Thomas believes there is an end, a final summing up, a final judgment. (Thomas also believes that there are judgments within history as well as at the end; this also seems to be an important qualification to his recognition of dissemination.)

Finally, this passage discloses something about Thomas, whose theology is often characterized as static and rigid. To that we can say: not at all. As Fr. Chris said to me, "Thomas stop thinking linearly." In some ways I am like the great Schoolman, yet I fail to possess any of his non-linear mystical fire. "O for a Muse of fire that would ascend the brightest heaven of invention," as the Poet wrote. O that I would ascend!

Apple Allows Windows on Its Machines

April 5, 2006

Turning a decades-long rivalry on its head, Apple Computer introduced software today that it says will easily allow users to install Microsoft's Windows XP operating system on Apple's newest computers.

The software, Boot Camp, is available as a free download on Apple's Web site and will be part of the next version of Apple's operating system, Leopard. It works on Apple's three lines of computer that run on Intel chips — the Mac mini, the iMac and the MacBook Pro.

Apple's move is a recognition of the growing interest among some users in running Windows on Macintosh computers now that they are using Intel processors, which power the majority of Windows-based personal computers. Many technology enthusiasts have already been sharing software and tricks on the Internet to allow Mac users to add Windows to their new machines, though those approaches involve a far more complicated installation than Apple's new software does.

In a statement today, Apple said it does not intend to support Windows for customers who install Boot Camp and run Windows XP on their machines. Still, the company said it is providing the software because it recognizes a sizeable demand — and opportunity.

"We think Boot Camp makes the Mac even more appealing to Windows users considering making the switch," Philip Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide product marketing, said in the statement.

Investors seemed to think the strategy would help Apple expand its share of the personal computer market beyond the 3 percent to 5 percent level where it has stood at for many years. Shares of Apple jumped $4.23, or 7 percent, to $65.40 in morning trading. Shares of Microsoft were up 6 cents, to $27.70.

After years of stagnant or declining computer sales, Apple has seen a steady and significant rise in its desktops and laptops in recent years as more consumers have purchased its iPod music player and bought songs through its online iTunes music store.

Though Apple's shift to Intel from chips made by International Business Machines and a former division of Motorola has been considered risky from a technical and business standpoint, the move could help the company capitalize further on the so-far modest gains it has made in the computer business.

Many personal computer users have been reluctant to switch to Apple, because they cannot use software that is written to run exclusively on the Windows operating system, said Charles Wolf, a veteran technology industry analyst at Needham & Company. By making it easy for users to run Windows software on its machine, Apple has taken away "one of the most significant barriers to switching," he said.

The key test will be whether computer buyers will be willing to spend more money to buy an Apple computer to run the same software they can run on a far cheaper Windows-based machine from manufacturers like Dell and Hewlett-Packard.

Mr. Wolf calculates that Apple's biggest market share gains will be among residential users, who are more likely to be swayed by Apple's design and media savvy than corporate and government customers who will likely to stick with cheaper hardware and software configurations.

The shift could mean a significant increase in sales for Apple over time, especially after Leopard becomes the standard Mac operating system late this year or early in 2007. But the company's gains do not have to mean big losses for other hardware makers, Mr. Wolf said, because they will only lose a small fraction of their market share.

"You are starting out with a market share of 2 or 3 percent and maybe going to a market share of 6 or 7," he said. "Apple is not going to take over the world."

Users who download and install Boot Camp must buy a copy of Windows XP software, which starts at $141.98 for the home edition. The Boot Camp software serves as an intermediary that creates an installation disk (users will need to provide a blank compact disk for this step) that lets the Windows software operate the Apple hardware, including its networking, audio and graphics devices and controls. Certain other features like a remote control for Apple's media software will not work with Windows software.

Once the installation is complete, users can select which operating system, Apple or Windows, they want to use each time they start the computer. Sounds sweet?!

Schmemann's Journals and Thomas Hopko on Prayer

The journals of Alexander Schmemann were published in 2000 by St Vladimir's Seminary Press, and they are simply mesmerizing. The same rich voice — the same rich soul — that is evident in Schmemann's classic published works shines through in these journals. His semi-"outsider" status as an Orthodox Christian in a Protestant nation gives him a unique perspective on American life. His long experience as a theology teacher with pastoral responsibilities gives him rare insight into the church and human personality. And he is altogether human. A moment of solitary silence at a train stop fills him with overwhelming joy, but in the next entry he is despairing of the direction of his life (he began the journal when he was 52). As a man of 40, I can relate to this type of spiritual self-questioning: should I have not stepped back from becoming a deacon, should I have had coffee with that person or enjoyed that mountain view, should I have not wasted time fly fishing or reading about tying knots or how to code in C? And so it runs on.

Schmemann's descriptions of his several intense encounters with Solzhenitsyn are worth the whole book; Solzhenitsyn, by Schmemann's account, is absolutely committed and obsessed with his own calling and vocation, uninterested in anything outside of that, ascetically single-minded. The description rings true, and indicates one of the key reasons for the later strain between the two men, given that Schmemann describes himself as a man who instantly sees both sides of a question.

The whole volume is wonderful, but I confine myself to just one sample:>

Why am I drawn from America to Europe and from Europe back to America? I feel that the usual answer is, Europe is culture, roots, traditions. America is freedom and also lack of culture and rootlessness. This answer is incomplete, one-sided, simplified and incorrect. Tentatively, I would say that in America, one finds everything that Europe has, while in Europe there is hardly anything of what America is. One is drawn, not so much TO Europe as OUT of America because in Europe one is spiritually more comfortable. There is always something to lean on, almost physically, whereas America is spiritually difficult. For years, people have rushed to America for an easier life, not realizing that deep down, life is much more difficult there. First of all, America is a country of great loneliness. Each one is alone with his own fate, under a huge sky, in the middle of a colossal country. Any culture, tradition, roots seem small there, but people strongly cling to them, knowing full well their illusory character. Secondly, this solitude in America demands from everyone an existential answer to the question, to be or not to be, and that requires effort. Hence so many personal crashes. In Europe anyone who falls, falls on some ground; in America he flies into an abyss. So much fear, such angst.

What draws a person to America is the possibility of having one's own individual fate. Once you have tasted it, it becomes impossible to be just a Finn or a Frenchman; in other words, to be determined once and for all. One is liberated from it. And although liberated, one is often drawn again to the illusory stability of Europe, to dreams and fantasy . . . While walking from Notre Dame to the Seine, to Place des Vosges, I realize that all that I like so much is illusory, not needed, that it has no relation with the France of Mitterand and others. The real France wants to become America. America does not want to become Europe, therefore it is genuine, while Europe is steadily losing its genuine character.

It is good for a man with a very small spiritual stature to read the thoughts of a great man who knows how to give thanks. And according to Fr. Thomas Hopko, the prayers of a thankful man lighten the heart of despair and put a man into a right relation with God the Maker. The brilliant fly fishing priest notes the classification of prayer into four types: asking (for oneself and others), thanking, praising, and questioning or complaining to God. "To learn to come to God in every situation," explains Fr. Hopko, "and with each of the four categories operating all the time, is a very important achievement: the achievement of a prayerful life."

What may we ask for in prayer? "For everything good; and nothing good is too small. For what should we thank Him? For everything. For what should we praise? For everything. About what may we question? About all things not understood. About what may we lament and complain? About all that is frustrating, confusing, and tragic in our lives. But in all things: thanksgiving and praise, for this is the essence of faith." And in all things, Fr. Hopko stresses: "Thy will be done."

Prayer must be private, personal, and secret. It cannot be limited just to the liturgy 'the common work' of the Church. Strictly speaking, the liturgy of the Church is not merely a form of personal prayer, a form done corporately and openly, together with others. Liturgy is more than a prayer. It is gathering, being together, singing, celebrating, processing, announcing, teaching, listening, interceding, remembering, offering, receiving, having communion with God and each other, being sent into the world with an experience of something to be witnessed to… Its efficacy depends upon our personal prayer done alone in secret. The liturgy cannot be our only prayer. If it is, we should seriously question its meaning and power for us.

How can we begin to pray? Just by beginning. But how to begin, with what sort of methods? Everyone's way will be different, but the saints give two absolute rules: be brief, and be regular. These are the pillars of prayer. Brevity to ensure humility, to discourage despair, and to enable us to do what can reasonably be done. And regularity to build the rhythm of prayer into the rhythm of life as an unchanging element of our existence. It is a million times more effective and pleasing to God to have a short rule of prayer rigidly kept at regular times than to "do a lot" just any old time, whenever we happen to do it.

This bolded bit is particularly pleasing for me to know. I will end this post with a thought by my favourite novelist:

Young man, do not forget to say your prayers. If your prayer is sincere, there will be every time you pray a new feeling containing an idea in it, an idea that you did not know before, which will give you courage. Then you will understand that prayer is an education...

Auden and Worship

W. H. Auden said, "In my opinion sermons should be [a] fewer [b] longer [c] more theologically instructive and less exhortatory. I must confess that in my life I have very seldom heard a sermon from which I derived any real spiritual benefit. Most of them told me that I should love God and my neighbour more than I do, but that I knew already."

His first experience of worship was of "exciting mysterious rituals" rather than sermons, and this "implanted in me what I believe to be the correct notion of worship, namely, that it is first and foremost a community in action, a thing done together, and only secondarily a matter of individual feeling or thinking."


I don't agree with Auden regarding points [a] or [b]. Against point [a], I do think a weekly homily is a needed aspect of life in our age in our North American environs. Because we are living in such a violently materialistic time, the spiritual weapons of Christ's Gospel need to be forged in us on a weekly basis; perhaps even more so during Lent. Again, with regard to point [b], I think longer homilies are counter-productive; too much listening leads to most people turning slightly dull of hearing. A short and focussed sermon makes a few points that will have a better chance to stick. But oddly in the light of his thoughts on homilies, I confess that I concur with his experience of worship. Surely as any Orthodox would? He seems to be touching upon the sacramental aspect of worship; and aren't these the types of heavenly realities for us in the Church? Does he not also touch upon the fundamental authentic Christian truth that worship is corporate and not individualistic?

Batman's chucks!

These cruisers own; they are so manly. For Pascha I am going to try to get a pair of these babies for my tender toosties. Batman shoes, good red wine, some aromatic pipe smoke and some meat and cheese: I will be giving up thanks to the Big Guy! Bring on Pascha, yes indeed! I look forward to digging out my hobbit pipe and playing a tune or two on her. How much longer until Pascha is it, again? Ah, time to dig deeply and live out life by grasping with my lenten hands :)

Jack Johnson and Curious George

Somethings go together, like rapsberry jam and butter on sourdough toast. Other things don't fit so well, at least on the surface. I came across this latest offering from Jack Johnson while searching for some Ben Harper music. But it would be better to say, "I stumbled upon it;" because I did stumble spiritually by starting to think ill thoughts of Jack for working on this project in the first place. I mean seeing this soundtrack by Jack Johnson for this movie was much along the lines of running into Queen Elizabeth while at a strip joint or at the neighbourhood drug dealer's home: "...... excuse me, what are you doing here....moreover, why am I here?" Consider that even my children wouldn't want to see the movie for this soundtrack. And that shows good taste. Does anyone know whether this music is worth checking out? I like Jack Johnson's music, but I hesitate with this Curious George soundtrack. Let me know what you know in the comments.

Woe unto them that call evil good

Is. 5:20 reads like a sword of war against equivocation:

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

In my En.11 classes we are studying Macbeth wherein this concept of equivocating is very important to understanding how Shakespeare uses the speech of the witches to characterize them as being evil. Hence, anyone who speak such-and-such a way, is that way as a person. Accordingly when we first meet Macbeth, he equivocates, saying, "So foul and fair a day I have not seen." As the story continues the equivocation takes on more serious consequences than merely suggesting there is no distinction between good and foul weather.
This reversal of values and equivocation continues in our time: . 'Woe unto them that call evil good,' but that is exactly what we have done. We have lost our spiritual focus and reversed our sense of what is virtuous:
We have exploited the poor and called it the lottery. We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare.
We have killed our unborn and called it choice. We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable. We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self esteem. We have abused power and called it politics. We have coveted our neighbor's possessions and called it ambition. We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom of expression. We have ridiculed the time-honoured virtues of our forefathers and called it enlightenment.
Reading Isaiah is a good way to put a stop to the spiritual wickedness which is equivocation.
Washing clean the concepts we think with and the words we use to express our concepts with is necessary.
This is when it is wise to recall Christ's saying about "Yea and Nay".

OpenBSD 3.9 on May 1st.

Pre-orders are up for 3.9, so you can all whip out your plastic and support the project. The artwork theme this time is a supremely cool "attack of the binary blob" with a nifty "Stop BLOB!" shirt, aimed against the increasing proliferation of vendor supplied unmaintainable inscrutable binary blob drivers. Wear yours with pride and stick your favourite assinine vendor logo on the back in the blob (now where is my nvidia swag?).

To School on a Fire Engine

luke and i and two of his friends took a ride to school today on this fire engine. it was cool; we were able to sound the siren, wear fire fighter helmuts, sit in the driver's seat and hang out with two of fort langley's finest fire fighters. when they dropped luke and his buddies off at school, the boys had had a good 30 minute tour. i enjoyed watching luke's face as they arrived at school, being the envy of most other young dudes. he and his friends were 'it' for a brief moment. but that's what happens when you get a lift to school on a fire engine!

and me in all this? i was just a schmuck who had to walk home after being dropped off at my son's school :P

St. Ephraim

When it came time to name my son I suggested to my wife that one of his middle names be Ephraim, after a great Syrian saint. The name means 'fruitful' or 'prosperous' in its Hebrew etymology and I thought that was a very strong reason for giving my son this as one of his middle names. I am glad Ramone agreed, though her reasons were founded more on the great spiritual insight found in the Lenten prayer composed by St. Ephraim:

O God, cleanse me, a sinner.

O Lord and Master of my life,
take from me the spirit of laziness,
despair, lust for power and idle talk.

But rather the spirit of chastity, humility,
patience and love to your servant.

Yea, O Lord and King,
grant me to see my own sins
and not to judge my brother:
for you are blessed
unto the ages of ages.

O God, cleanse me, a sinner.
Amen.

My favourite line of Saint Ephraim's is from his second of nineteen Hymns on the Nativity of Christ in the Flesh, wherein he writes: "Blessed be the Fruit, Who lowered Himself to fulfill our hunger!" What literary critic would not be drop-jawed at that figure of speech?!

One of St. Ephraim's re-occurring figures of speech is that of Christ as painting a self-image. Speaking of the Jewish law, the Gospels, and nature, he wrote:

You have mixed them together as paints for
your portrait; you have looked at yourself,
and painted your own portrait.
Here is the painter, who in himself has painted
his Father's portrait,
two portrayed, the one in the other...
you in your coming brought it to completion.

Here are a couple photos of the church to which St. Ephraim devoted so much of his energy and a snippet from Wikipedia on St. Ephraim:




Ephraim was born around the year 306, in the city of Nisibis (the modern Turkish town of Nusaybin, on the border with Syria). Internal evidence from Ephraim's hymnody suggests that both his parents were part of the growing Christian community in the city, although later hagiographers wrote that his father was a pagan priest. Numerous languages were spoken in the Nisibis of Ephraim's day, mostly dialects of Aramaic. The Christian community used the Syriac dialect. Various pagan religions, Judaism and early Christian sects vied with one another for the hearts and minds of the populace. It was a time of great religious and political tension. The Roman Emperor, Diocletian had signed a treaty with his Persian counterpart, Nerses in 298 that transferred Nisibis into Roman hands. The savage persecution and martyrdom of Christians under Diocletian were an important part of Nisibene church heritage as Ephrem grew up.

Jacob, the first bishop of Nisibis was appointed in 308, and Ephraim grew up under his leadership of the community. Jacob of Nisibis is recorded as a signatory at the First Council of Nicea in 325. Ephraim was baptized as a youth, and almost certainly became a son of the covenant, an unusual form of Syrian proto-monasticism. Jacob appointed Ephraim as a teacher (Syriac malp̄ānâ, a title that still carries great respect for Syriac Christians). He was ordained as a deacon either at his baptism or later. He began to compose hymns and write biblical commentaries as part of his educational office. In his hymns, he sometimes refers to himself as a 'herdsman' (`allānâ), to his bishop as the 'shepherd' (rā`yâ) and his community as a 'fold' (dayrâ). Ephraim is popularly credited as the founder of the School of Nisibis, which in later centuries was the centre of learning of the Church of the East.

In 337, Emperor Constantine I, who had legalised and promoted the practice of Christianity in the Roman Empire, died. Seizing on this opportunity, Shapur II of Persia began a series of attacks into Roman North Mesopotamia. Nisibis was besieged in 338, 346 and 350. During the first siege, Ephraim credits Bishop Jacob as defending the city with his prayers. Ephraim's beloved bishop died soon after the event, and Babu led the church through the turbulent times of border skirmishes. In the third siege, of 350, Shapur rerouted the River Mygdonius to undermine the walls of Nisibis. The Nisibenes quickly repaired the walls while the Persian elephant cavalry became bogged down in the wet ground. Ephraim celebrated what he saw as the miraculous salvation of the city in a hymn which portrayed Nisibis as being like Noah's Ark, floating to safety on the flood.

One important physical link to Ephraim's lifetime is the baptistery of Nisibis. The inscription tells that it was constructed under Bishop Vologeses in 359. That was the year that Shapur began to harry the region once again. The cities around Nisibis were destroyed one by one, and their citizens killed or deported. The Roman Empire was preoccupied in the west, and Constantius and Julian, struggled for overall control. Eventually, with Constantius dead, Julian the Apostate began his march into Mesopotamia. He brought with him his increasingly stringent persecutions of Christians. Julian began a foolhardy march against the Persian capital, Ctesiphon, where, overstretched and outnumbered, he was forced into an immediate retreat back along the same road. Julian was killed defending his retreat, and the army elected Jovian as the new emperor. Unlike his predecessor, Jovian was a Nicene Christian. He was forced by circumstances to ask for terms from Shapur, and conceded Nisibis to Persia, with the provision that the city's Christian community would leave. Bishop Abraham, the successor to Vologeses, led his people into exile.

Ephraim found himself among a large group of refugees that fled west, first to Amida (Diyarbakır), and eventually settling in Edessa (modern Şanlıurfa) in 363. Ephraim, in his late fifties, applied himself to ministry in his new church, and seems to have continued his work as a teacher, perhaps in the School of Edessa. Edessa had always been at the heart of the Syriac-speaking world and the city was full of rival philosophies and religions. Ephraim comments that Orthodox Nicene Christians were simply called 'Palutians' in Edessa, after a former bishop. Arians, Marcionites, Manichees, Bardaisanites and various Gnostic sects proclaimed themselves as the true church. In this confusion, Ephraim wrote a great number of hymns defending Nicene Orthodoxy. A later Syriac writer, Jacob of Serugh, wrote that Ephraim rehearsed all-female choirs to sing his hymns set to Syriac folk tunes in the forum of Edessa. After a ten-year residency in Edessa, in his sixties, Ephraim succumbed to the plague as he ministered to its victims. The most reliable date for his death is 9 June 373.

OpenBSD info & link

If you were ever curious about the operating system I have sometimes posted
about or alluded to by mentioning 'Puffy', then just check out this short interview. It is in .avi format.

In memory of Simone Weil

While reading this poem Simone Weil had the experience of the presence of Christ. I hope that in reading "Love" by George Herbert, you might get at least a sense of what Simone Weil experienced.

Love

Love bade me welcome, yet my soul drew back,
Guilty of dust and sin.
But quick-ey'd Love, observing me grow slack
From my first entrance in,
Drew nearer to me, sweetly questioning
If I lack'd anything.

"A guest," I answer'd, "worthy to be here";
Love said, "You shall be he."
"I, the unkind, the ungrateful? ah my dear,
I cannot look on thee."
Love took my hand and smiling did reply,
"Who made the eyes but I?"

"Truth, Lord, but I have marr'd them; let my shame
Go where it doth deserve."
"And know you not," says Love, "who bore the blame?"
"My dear, then I will serve."
"You must sit down," says Love, "and taste my meat."
So I did sit and eat.

Beginning....a puzzle.

A man went searching for the beginning of the road he was traveling. He traced his footsteps back the way he had come, until he came to where he started. But the beginning of the road was not a beginning. Something lay on the far side of the road's beginning, a beginning before the beginning. And the road had no sooner begun than the beginning was over, and the road itself appeared.

There was a man who sought a spring. He wanted to locate a spring that was nothing but a spring, not a spring that had a stream of water flowing from it from it. No matter where he searched, he found only springs with streams. He could not find a pure spring, a spring uncorrupted by a supplemental flow of water.

He went home in despair, and on his way met the man looking for the beginning of the road. They found a roadside tavern, and went in for a pint.

...do battle against him...

The self-evidencing power of truth.

The word of truth is free, and carries its own authority, disdaining to fall under any skilful argument, or to endure the logical scrutiny of its hearers. But it would be believed for its own nobility, and for the confidence due to Him who sends it. Now the word of truth is sent from God; wherefore the freedom claimed by the truth is not arrogant. For being sent with authority, it were not fit that it should be required to produce proof of what is said; since neither is there any proof beyond itself, which is God. For every proof is more powerful and trustworthy than that which it proves; since what is disbelieved, until proof is produced, gets credit when such proof is produced, and is recognised as being what it was stated to be. But nothing is either more powerful or more trustworthy than the truth; so that he who requires proof of this is like one who wishes it demonstrated why the things that appear to the senses do appear. For the test of those things which are received through the reason, is sense; but of sense itself there is no test beyond itself. As then we bring those things which reason hunts after, to sense, and by it judge what kind of things they are, whether the things spoken be true or false, and then sit in judgment no longer, giving full credit to its decision; so also we refer all that is said regarding men and the world to the truth, and by it judge whether it be worthless or no. But the utterances of truth we judge by no separate test, giving full credit to itself. And God, the Father of the universe, who is the perfect intelligence, is the truth. And the Word, being His Son, came to us, having put on flesh, revealing both Himself and the Father, giving to us in Himself resurrection from the dead, and eternal life afterwards. And this is Jesus Christ, our Saviour and Lord. He, therefore, is Himself both the faith and the proof of Himself and of all things. Wherefore those who follow Him, and know Him, having faith in Him as their proof, shall rest in Him. But since the adversary does not cease to resist many, and uses many and divers arts to ensnare them, that he may seduce the faithful from their faith, and that he may prevent the faithless from believing, it seems to me necessary that we also, being armed with the invulnerable doctrines of the faith, do battle against him in behalf of the weak.

There is nothing like St. Irenæus to get me more firmly behind the Lenten discipline; I hope his manly logic lifted your spirits a bit.

Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus

This epistle admirably illustrates the temper taught by St. Paul (2 Tim. ii. 24), and not less the peculiar social relations of converts to the Gospel. Mathetes was possibly a catechumen of St. Paul or of one of the apostles. Many scholars think that his correspondent, Diognetus, was the tutor of M. Aurelius. The author names himself as Mathetes, but no one can say more of his identity. What interests me is the description he gives of early Church communities. Do you think Mathetes is describing the communities in an ideal or realistic manner? I am inclined to think 'both' for my answer. Read this excerpt and decide for yourself:

For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a lifewhich is marked out by any singularity. The course of conduct which they follow has not been devised by any speculation or deliberation of inquisitive men; nor do they, like some, proclaim themselves the advocates of any merely human doctrines.But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. They marry, as do all others; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. They have a common table, but not a common bed. They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. They are poor, yet make many rich; they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonoured, and yet in their very dishonour are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; they are insulted, and repay the insult with honour; they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.

So we read about surpassing the legal expectations of the secular laws; not destroying our babies; not condoning adultery. These three stand out as extremely early representations of Orthodox ethical notions. Also, the whole attitude of turning the other cheek and being rich through having little bleeds throughout the epistle and it astounds and inspires me. This epistle is a lot like the Didache in that it is more revelant and fresh than even the morning news! Why is it that Irenaeus, Ignatius and Clement are still such manly and pertinent figures?

Bad Hair and other Hard Truths

Let's be straight about this image: these people have spent way too much time grooming way too much hair with way too much hair spray. I mean the hard truth is that the hair style evident here is so 'jungle frew-frew' it is just begging to be hacked back. You'd need a weed whacker to take off enough to make a visible difference. I have no idea who decided that this style of hair was groovy, but we'd all agree that this way of setting hair is just embarrassing. But it is a hard truth -- albeit a funny hard truth -- to admit that many normal, hard-working middle-class folks in the 1970s actually thought this style rocked: anyone recall the Bay City Rollers? And do look more closely at the photo: doesn't that young family seem delighted with their 'jungle frew-frew' hairdos? You better believe it! "S-A-T-U-R-D-A-Y Night!" or "Let the good times roll...let them brush your rock 'n' roll hair, let them leave you up in the air..." Oh the frew-frew jungle blues!

Some truths are hard to grasp while others are hard to take in because they demand of us a difficult course of action or choice. Most hard truths follow the latter description, involving so much more than dealing with evidence that clearly shows you had an extremely poor sense of aesthetic judgment. Indeed, the hardest truths I can think of are these:

1. there is no eternal security; we must trust only in Christ's mercy
2. the two ultimate choices: we saying "yes" to God's will or God saying "yes" to our will.
3. not everyone will find blessedness
4. heaven may involve even longer and more frequent liturgies :p
5. you must hold your hands out in love to those you dislike

What are the hardest truths for you?