Font Rants on Many Subjects

Apparently not all the African Bishops feel the ECUSA should be excommunicated over the whole Robinson thing. Here's one who disagrees. I'm reminded of Matthew 9:16, "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder"

4% = 1 out of 25. From all the postulants who start, to those who train in seminary; watched by their spiritual elders and finally ordained and raised up to be fathers of the church; and 4% of those people will still molest you. Those are only the ones they know about.
In reflecting on these terrible numbers; I think back to the temptation of Christ; and how it speaks to the twin callings of all ministers. The first is the call to serve. I honestly believe that everyone who seeks to be a Christian minister legitimately hears the call to serve. The second calling is the call of power. I do not believe that those who come to be ministers do not hear this call. After all to be an ordained minister in the church in a powerful office. You are vested, and titled by the Bishop. You are held up in front of the congregation. You must have power to be a minister; and we must not think this power is necessarily evil. Power is a necessity of leadership. We ask our ministers to be leaders of our communion. We ask them to guide our spiritual lives; and trust them with our children. It is very easy to loose sight of the necessity of spiritual power; and trade it for temporal power and domination. So I think back to the temptation of Christ; where the devil tempts Christ before he begins his ministry. The temptation is for material power in this world.
These horrifying numbers; mean that too many ministers are falling into the trap of this temptation. I believe that the source of these perversions is not about celibacy, or other idiosyncrasies of the Roman Catholic orders; these perversions are found among all congregations. Abuse of powerless people like small children isn't about sex, it's about power. Its about becoming the great and powerful minister who dominates everyone. Often there is a pattern like the pattern one sees in all traitors. Some slight, or perceived slight occurs; and the traitor feels the need for vengeance; or control over the situation. Enter an innocent; or some opportunity for betrayal. Suddenly the traitor feels an opportunity to regain the power lost to the slight. The abuser gains the ability to regain their lost power. Then the terrible act occurs. Wash - Rinse - Repeat; a cycle or pattern emerges.
What can we do? We cannot get rid of priests. This would only make the problem worse. You would still have charismatic men and women leading the church; but it would be without any training or process. I do not believe we need an inquisition to root this evil from the church; we've tried that before and it failed. Perhaps all we can do is educate ourselves about the signs; and find the courage to take action when warranted. Though this seems like very little to do for something so terrible.

And now with feeling The Passion of the Christ. I havn't seen it; so my vision is colored by the reviews and the chatter. However everyone is talking about this movie; so I will address it context of the conversation it has spurred. Allow me to define
Point 1. I'm not going to see the Passion of the Christ. I know the story. I walked the Via Dolorosa in Jerusalem, and prayed at Golgatha, and within the empty tomb. I don't have the attention span to sit through 15 minutes of a man getting whipped. I get it. The crucifition was terrible.
Point 2. This is without a doubt the most ironic movie ever made. I believe every generation seeks to redefine Jesus in their own image. Preists and other proclaimed guardians of spiritual power, always seek to control the image of Christ we create. The crucifiction is always manipulated by the powerful; but the truth always comes through. Think about it. What is the passion more than Christ submitting to temporal material authority? In the fevered dreams of Mel, he is simply retelling the story of Christ's Cruxifiction; but he's edited to his own ends. He's broughtchrist into the temporal sphere one more time, and the result is yet another Crucifiction. And let us finally remember that in the hollywood version; it wasn't the jews, it wasn't the romans; it was the Director who crucified him.

Robert Samuelson thinks we shouldn't blame the President for the economy. He compares it based on "selecting a doctor based on palm reading." Lets look at his reasoning:

Jobs are created by employer's (true)
Employers create jobs when:
-demand justified new workers.
-labor costs aren't unprofitable.
-they think healthy conditions will last.

On the demand side. He seems to suggest that the President can't with his vast powers of office do anything to increase consumer demand. Yet the tax cuts did this; Yet the jobs got added in India and China. Maybe that's because of point #2 labor costs. So can the President do anything about marketing American workers. I mean he has Airforce 1, a friendly congress. Certainly we can do something to make the cost of labor lower, or make our labor force more attractive. On to point #3 will the healthy conditions last. Well by Bush's own admission that whole WAR thing kind of put a damper on confidence.

So by all three of these measures there is a lot the President can do. It makes imminent sense that we should choose a President based on performance. Samuelson seems to think that if we could do this unemployment would always be at 3.5%. But the reality is some people are better at doing their job than others. The only way to improve this is either improve the person; or remove the person. After 4 years of poor performance, its time to pick someone new. You don't have to hate Bush to reach this conclusion. Its nothing personal, or bitterly partisan we just say, "Sorry, Mr. President, you aren't cutting it." This scene is replayed at every level of corporate America every single day. Why should it be no different in the White House.

Remember when Talk about the Passion was just an REM song.

The latest terrorist organization is the NEA. An ad on the Move-On site compares Bush to the Nazi's and that gets play for a few weeks on Hardball, O'Reily and others as Outrageous. The secretary of Education compares the NEA to Al-Qaeda, and I'll bet it never makes any thing. Time to e-mail Matthews, Sullivan, and the usual suspects; call them on their hypocracy.

What do you make of this? , ok now what do you make of this. I think this is mostly just wishful thinking; the fantasy goes like this. Bush is outed, his evangelical base deserts him in November and the Republican party in general. The ensuing drop results in a landslide trifecta for the Democrats. Following our victory we fix social security; balence the budget and provide universal health care.