Resuming Broadcasting

I have returned from my unofficial absence/sabbatical. I originally planned on only being gone for a week or two, but eventually stretched it to over a month. Partially because life kept getting in the way, and partially because I have felt for some time that this blog has become un-anchored.

My suspicion is that much of it is internal- I am trying to orient myself right now because I don’t feel that I am doing what I should. Deep Strength has a recent post where he talks about how you should “Do you job.” I found it timely, because I am less sure than I have been in a long time about what, exactly, my job is. Not my secular job- that is fine. Rather, it is my vocation- my calling to serve the Lord.

So much of my blogging energy will be directed towards examining that, in addition to my usual fare. In the meantime, I hope to get some regular posts up starting in the next few days.

A Helpful Reminder

In my life I have heard plenty of Christians complain about what was in the Old Testament. They complain of the violence, the treatment of people, especially women, and the overall awfulness of the law and on and on. What I have explained to many of them is this: those were pagan times- awfulness is to be expected.

Most don’t get it. I don’t think it is because they are incapable; rather, I think most don’t want to really process what it all means. It demands too much of them, especially giving up on comfortable notions of how things are, or should be.

Which brings me to the main point of this post, and the reminder I try to keep in my mind all the time now:

America is a pagan country.

[And by extension, so is the whole of the West.]

When something horrific happens here, we shouldn’t be surprised. That kind of behavior is to be expected of pagans. Which is what the vast, overwhelming majority of Americans are.

Sure, the majority of the country might identify as Christian. But their everyday actions show them to be anything but disciples of Christ. The percentage of actual Christians, and I use that term very broadly, is probably in the low single digits.

My experience has been that some people (folks sincerely trying to be Christians) will not get this.

Others will get it on a surface level. They will know it is the case, but have trouble really grasping the full extent of what that means.

Only a handful will be able to appreciate the full magnitude of what living in a pagan country entails.

Unfortunately, I think that as events move forward, more and more people will end up in that latter camp. The cruel instructor that is reality has many harsh lessons in store for all of us in the years ahead.

However, I think we can do ourselves a service by keeping that reminder in place. We can prepare ourselves for what is to come, if only mentally.

 

An Inquiry About Love

I am hoping that my Christian, and Catholic/Orthodox in particular, readers will do me a favor here. I have something I want to try and nail down, and could use help.

You see, something which is not uncommon to run across is a variation of the following notion:

Women love more than men.

Sometimes it is as simple as that. Other times you will see it as “wives love more than husbands.” Or “mothers love more than fathers.” And so on.

The point being, it is all an example of the above idea that women are more loving. Nevermind what particular notion/definition of love is intended.

What I am asking from my everyone is if there is any scripture which justifies this notion. Anything at all, please mention in the comments. And for my Catholic/Orthodox readers, are there any writings of the Church Fathers or saints which say something along these lines?

I am quite curious about this. My gut tells me this is a modern notion, something which has appeared since “Chivalry” in the west was perverted. [If I was Rollo I might say something along the lines of “feminine primacy socialization” or the like] However, I might be wrong. So I’m asking for your help here. Anything you find, just leave in the comments.

Masculine Monday- A Positive Approach

Rollo Tomassi has kindly reminded me that his newest book- Positive Masculinity, is now available. I would encourage my readers to give it a look. I haven’t had the time to grab or read it myself, but I intend to when time permits. A review will hopefully follow shortly after. While Rollo and I don’t agree on a fair number of things, I find that his work is always worth reading- if only to provoke one to reexamine his own beliefs.

Works like his are all the more necessary in this age, when masculinity is openly derided and masculine role models are all but extinct. Rediscovering the ways of the past will be the work of generations, and an endeavor that must be started right away.

It is especially necessary for Christian men to stand up and establish examples of Christian masculinity. For the most part most of the role-models out there, the purported Christian ones, that is, are basically just secular examples with a dash of Christianese painted on. That needs to change. I hope to explore how in future posts in this long dormant series.

 

Saturday Saints- #132

It has been a while, but we return at last to the letter W. Today’s saint is Saint Willehad of Bremen:

Willehad or Willihad (Latin: Willehadus/Willihadus); c. 745 AD – 8 November 789 AD) was a Christian missionary and the Bishop of Bremen from 787 AD.

A snippet from his life:

Willehad was born in Northumbria and probably received his education at York under Ecgbert. A friend of Alcuin he was ordained after his education and, about the year 766, he went to Frisia, preaching at Dokkum and in Overijssel, to continue the missionary work of Boniface who had been martyred by the Frisians in 754. At an assembly in Paderborn in 777, Saxony was divided into missionary zones. The zone between the Weser and the Elbe, called Wigmodia, was given to Willehad.

Learn more about him from his wiki, located here.

 

Shoot The Messenger

Dalrock has been on a roll lately in his take down of one “Pastor Wilson.” See the two most recent posts, here and here.  The most recent post was inspired, in part, by an attempt to defend Wilson from those assailing him. The thing is, I can understand why someone might defend him. At least from a Protestant perspective, he is normally pretty good about standing up for (Protestant notions) of the Truth. Most of what he teaches is close, or even spot on. One might be tempted to argue that we shouldn’t tear him apart if he manages to get one or two things wrong.

However, this defense is misplaced. The fact that someone like him gets so close and yet fails is what makes him dangerous. How so?

Well, to begin with he makes the errors he defends seem that much more reasonable to the unaware. After all, if Wilson defends something, and since he is such a stand up guy, it has to be correct, right? The fact that he is right, say, 95% of the time means that people will be more likely to accept that 5% of error without thinking.

Second, he makes it harder to actually defend or teach the truth. Opponents (feminists, etc.) can point out to him, and say something along the lines of “even Pastor Wilson disagrees with what you are saying.” Thus they can push anyone who tries to tell the truth out of the periphery, labeling them as “truly extreme.”

There are probably other reasons as well which I am forgetting, but both of those suffice for the situation. Keep in mind also that these are not periphery issues. Rebellion, especially female rebellion, is one of the principal crises afflicting the church right now. It can only be solved when it is fulled exposed and explained. And messengers like Wilson are getting in the way of that.

I believe that until men like Wilson are dealt with, there really is no chance of “fixing” what is wrong with the Church in the West. Unless they are converted to the truth, or cast down from their high places, they will be effective obstacles to reform. Of course, my readers can offer their own thoughts on the manner. I encourage them to do so, as I wonder if others share these views.

[Much of this post is more oriented towards Protestants than it is Catholic or Orthodox Christians. But everyone is free to chime in.]

A Lofty Double Standard

Vox over at Alpha Game has a great new post up today. Post being a somewhat loose term, as it is just an image. But as they say, a picture is worth a thousand words. And boy does this 1k worth of words say a lot:

 

I have seen and heard women be vicious about a lot of things. But without a doubt my experience has been that women are the most consistently savage when it comes to critiquing a man’s height. If you are of below average height… lets just say this: most women these days wouldn’t care if the average guy lived or died- but if you are short, well, many would rather you were dead.

Fortunately I’m not below average in height, much less short. But I have a lot of sympathy for men who are. A man needs to bring a lot more to the table to compete in the present SMP/MMP if his height is lacking.

Short Digression: One of the critiques aimed at my LAMPS/PSALM model was that there was no real place for height. I lumped it in with Looks, but given how much value women place in height, that moves Looks up way ahead of where I normally allocate its value. A few commenters have suggested I add Height as a separate attribute, and part of me is tempted. It is just that Looks is where it would fit naturally. Of course, in the simplified “APE” model it fits better into Appearance overall.

That aside done with, the response of the guy in that chat was the right one. There is a huge double standard out there when it comes to height. Women, for all their talk about not judging by appearance, will judge men unmercifully on that particular trait. And of course they blow up if men try and flip the tables on them. Imagine if that guy above had started by asking the woman’s weight. It would be the 4th of July. But her asking his height? Totally acceptable- or at least seen that way.

I am curious if any of my readers have been involved in conversations, discussions, debates, arguments where this particular topic has come up. If so, I would ask them to talk about how it all went. I don’t recall having been in one myself, so I am curious what would be said. And of course, I would like to prepare myself for that argument ahead of time too. So comment away if you have anything to add.

Leaden Weights

Apologies to everyone for the lack of posts these past few weeks. Free time has been sparse, and I have been trying to spend it wisely. Which usually means away from my computer. One of those activities as of late has been dancing. I’ve written on it before, when talking about the importance of a good smile for women. Now there are a few things I want to talk about: weight and following

One of the first things I noticed after taking up social dancing was how much of an impact a woman’s weight had while dancing. It is more difficult to lead around a woman who is overweight. And much more difficult to lead a woman who is significantly overweight. Not to mention, it is also less fun as well.

And being so close, I cannot help but notice that a woman being overweight is a huge turn off (pun intended). Weight has a significant impact when it comes to a woman’s SMV/MMV. A few dozen or so pounds really can be the difference between several points on the 1-10 scale (Deep Strength’s post here includes good example).  At the same time, a woman who can keep a healthy weight (18-22% body fat or so), can usually rate at least somewhat attractive for most men. All of which means that single women who want to have a chance of grabbing a good man should take care to keep their weight at a healthy level. As for married women, keeping the weight as close as possible to that level will help keep your husband attracted to you.

Another problem is when your follow doesn’t, you know, follow. I don’t mind so much when it is due to inexperience. In fact, if she is open to learning and improving, then I don’t mind teaching at all (in so far as I am able). That can actually be an enjoyable thing, and demonstrates the right kind of mindset. However, I don’t care much for a follow who wants to do her own thing.

Even if I can adapt to her “technique”, it is a lot more taxing than it should be and takes much of the fun out of dancing. If I can’t adjust quickly enough, then the dance both becomes awkward, and would look bad to anyone observing it. And again, the fun is gone. Perhaps someone with more experience and skill with me wouldn’t mind as much, but for someone trying to leave beginner status I’d rather not deal with it. All of which means that I keep a mental note of who is a good follow and who isn’t, and will dance accordingly.

 

 

Saturday Saints- #131

Today’s letter is “V”, and thus we have as our saint of the day Vincent de Paul:

St. Vincent de Paul (24 April 1581 – 27 September 1660) was a French Roman Catholic priest who dedicated himself to serving the poor. He is venerated as a saint in the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion. He was canonized in 1737. He was renowned for his compassion, humility and generosity and is known as the “Great Apostle of Charity”.

He lived a truly fascinating life, and I would encourage my readers to follow this link to his wiki, which tells so much more about him.

Selected Sunday Scriptures- #132

Two passages from St. Paul’s epistles stood out to me in the last week, and I wanted to share them with you. The first is from the letter to the Galatians:

⁶ I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel— ⁷ not that there is another gospel, but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. ⁸ But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed. ⁹ As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.

¹⁰ Am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ.

(Galatians 1:6-10)

One thing about reading St. Paul’s letters is we know there have been other letters sent, often to him, but sometimes from him. So there is this sense of catching part of a conversation or dialogue. Yet, while we might like to know the full context, we are still hearing the authoritative (and thus important) part of that conversation.

Here we can see St. Paul lamenting several things. What I read from this is as follows:

• The Galatians are very quickly abandoning the true faith
• They are ditching the truth for the sake of another gospel
• Someone else is treading to lead them astray
• Anyone who tries to lead you from the truth is automatically anathema
• The Galatians are apparently doing this to please men

From the later context of the letter we can see what is going on: there has been a wave of “Judaizers” coming to the Church in Galatia who are trying to insist that Gentile converts to Christianity adopt completely the Mosaic law. This is leading the Church in Galatia astray- they are losing sight of the important of faith and think that following the works of the Mosaic law is all they need to be saved. And so St. Paul sent his letter to correct this.

What intrigues me is the last part, because it seems the most important to us today. The Galatians were evidently doing this in order to please other human beings (the Judaizers and presumably other Jews). While the particular currents of heresy might ebb and flow throughout history, the desire to please human beings remains. And now, just as then, it can lead us astray. Thus, the central lesson of this passage is to remind us that we must never forsake the truth for the sake of popularity.

The second passage that interests me is from the Second Letter to the Corinthians:

We want you to know, brethren, about the grace of God which has been shown in the churches of Macedo′nia, ² for in a severe test of affliction, their abundance of joy and their extreme poverty have overflowed in a wealth of liberality on their part. ³ For they gave according to their means, as I can testify, and beyond their means, of their own free will, ⁴ begging us earnestly for the favor of taking part in the relief of the saints— ⁵ and this, not as we expected, but first they gave themselves to the Lord and to us by the will of God. ⁶ Accordingly we have urged Titus that as he had already made a beginning, he should also complete among you this gracious work. ⁷ Now as you excel in everything—in faith, in utterance, in knowledge, in all earnestness, and in your love for us—see that you excel in this gracious work also.

⁸ I say this not as a command, but to prove by the earnestness of others that your love also is genuine. ⁹ For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that by his poverty you might become rich. ¹⁰ And in this matter I give my advice: it is best for you now to complete what a year ago you began not only to do but to desire, ¹¹ so that your readiness in desiring it may be matched by your completing it out of what you have. ¹² For if the readiness is there, it is acceptable according to what a man has, not according to what he has not. ¹³ I do not mean that others should be eased and you burdened, ¹⁴ but that as a matter of equality your abundance at the present time should supply their want, so that their abundance may supply your want, that there may be equality. ¹⁵ As it is written, “He who gathered much had nothing over, and he who gathered little had no lack.”

(2 Corinthians 8:1-15)

Generosity must come from the heart. It can never be ordered or compelled. Taxation is never generosity, no matter how the money is spent. It can never be charity, for charity is love, and again, love comes from the heart. “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and he who fears is not perfected in love.” (1 John 4:18). We pay taxes out of fear, so they cannot meet that requirement.

St. Paul understood this, and so his invitation to the Corinthians to be generous was itself an act of love. He was giving them an opportunity to perfect themselves in their faith journey.