Catch-up entry
It's been insanely busy here: with everyone having cook-outs/barbeques, work has been utter chaos; I think I did something to my shoulder, because right at the end of my shift Friday, I got this stabbing pain under my right shoulderblade. It seems okay now, but I'm leery of it. Plus, I seem to have a bit of ringing in the ears from having small children scream in them (I still don't know how we got past the Pliocene Era without going the way of the dinosaurs; a small child yelling at the top of his lungs would have attracted the attention of every velociraptor and sabre-toothed tiger for a five mile radius).
Thursday was my parents' wedding anniversary; after Mass at St. Francis (It was the feast of the Ascension) the three of us had dinner at the Cracker Barrel here in town. My folks had pork chops and mashed potatoes, I had shrimp and... fried breaded okra, which was somewhat adventurous on my part, since sometime ago we once cooked steamed okra, which was something of a mistake: eating steamed okra is like eating slimy steamed celery. Fried okra is much more tasty -- and less slimy.
And this just in for the "God, Shoot Me Now" file, re: the Damn Book and all it's hype --
There is a "Da Vinci Code" movie tie-in computer game, as I found out from flipping through "Electronic Gamer" recently. I have no idea how much of Dan Brown's anti-Catholic polemics made it into the game (I've heard the more honest critics say the movie is extremely unexciting and boring), but considering who buys computer games, usually -- the teens through early twenties bracket -- I'm worried that some young folks might have their faith shaken to the foundations. Mind you, I realize that adolescence is a time to start striking out on your own and questioning things, even things like the faith you were brought up in; I've skirted toward different faiths in the past, including Messianic Judaism, Mormonism, Rosicrucianism (I was sick of Catholicism being the media's pet whipping boy so I went for the most obscure thing I could come across that made sense to me at the time; who mocks Rosicrucians or writes novels about "OMG TEH BEEG EVOL ROSICRUSHUN CONSIPIRACY!!!!11111" ?), and even Paganism of the worshipping the male aspect variety (what do you call that actually?) as opposed to the Goddess-worship variety, since I just get plain anNOYed with the "embrace your inner Goddess" nonsense. It's a sacchrine version of the "Wymyn RULE; men DROOL" variety of feminism, which I just can't *stand*. I just don't want young folks to be misled into thinking Dan Brown's gross mis-information is actual, historical fact and actual theology, and so have their faith eroded. But... I suppose as they say, faith that's never been tested is no faith at all.
The pastor at St. Francis is optimistic about the whole matter, I have to agree with him, but I'm still trying to be realistic about it: he's hoping that people who read the Damn Book will get curious about what early Christianity was *REALLY* like and go searching for the answers and that they might just have their faith strengthened. Trouble is, I think I might know human nature at its most crass a better than he does: I realize that most people who read the Damn Book are just going to be wowed by the concepts and not give it any more thought. They consume it and move on to the next sensational tidbit that everyone's talking about. If they do think to examine anything beyond the Damn Book, they're likely to reach for Lincoln and Baigent's "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" or Margret Starbird's "The Woman with the Alabaster Jar", Dan Brown's primary sources for his ludicrous stuff. They're not likely to read the early Church fathers and see what those fellows like Gregory the Great and Ambrose and Athanasius really said... but there again, what do I know.
Thursday was my parents' wedding anniversary; after Mass at St. Francis (It was the feast of the Ascension) the three of us had dinner at the Cracker Barrel here in town. My folks had pork chops and mashed potatoes, I had shrimp and... fried breaded okra, which was somewhat adventurous on my part, since sometime ago we once cooked steamed okra, which was something of a mistake: eating steamed okra is like eating slimy steamed celery. Fried okra is much more tasty -- and less slimy.
And this just in for the "God, Shoot Me Now" file, re: the Damn Book and all it's hype --
There is a "Da Vinci Code" movie tie-in computer game, as I found out from flipping through "Electronic Gamer" recently. I have no idea how much of Dan Brown's anti-Catholic polemics made it into the game (I've heard the more honest critics say the movie is extremely unexciting and boring), but considering who buys computer games, usually -- the teens through early twenties bracket -- I'm worried that some young folks might have their faith shaken to the foundations. Mind you, I realize that adolescence is a time to start striking out on your own and questioning things, even things like the faith you were brought up in; I've skirted toward different faiths in the past, including Messianic Judaism, Mormonism, Rosicrucianism (I was sick of Catholicism being the media's pet whipping boy so I went for the most obscure thing I could come across that made sense to me at the time; who mocks Rosicrucians or writes novels about "OMG TEH BEEG EVOL ROSICRUSHUN CONSIPIRACY!!!!11111" ?), and even Paganism of the worshipping the male aspect variety (what do you call that actually?) as opposed to the Goddess-worship variety, since I just get plain anNOYed with the "embrace your inner Goddess" nonsense. It's a sacchrine version of the "Wymyn RULE; men DROOL" variety of feminism, which I just can't *stand*. I just don't want young folks to be misled into thinking Dan Brown's gross mis-information is actual, historical fact and actual theology, and so have their faith eroded. But... I suppose as they say, faith that's never been tested is no faith at all.
The pastor at St. Francis is optimistic about the whole matter, I have to agree with him, but I'm still trying to be realistic about it: he's hoping that people who read the Damn Book will get curious about what early Christianity was *REALLY* like and go searching for the answers and that they might just have their faith strengthened. Trouble is, I think I might know human nature at its most crass a better than he does: I realize that most people who read the Damn Book are just going to be wowed by the concepts and not give it any more thought. They consume it and move on to the next sensational tidbit that everyone's talking about. If they do think to examine anything beyond the Damn Book, they're likely to reach for Lincoln and Baigent's "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" or Margret Starbird's "The Woman with the Alabaster Jar", Dan Brown's primary sources for his ludicrous stuff. They're not likely to read the early Church fathers and see what those fellows like Gregory the Great and Ambrose and Athanasius really said... but there again, what do I know.