Safe Haven

I like a lot of women, I suppose. That's just me. I'm comfortable with them. In a limited sense, I can say I may even understand them somewhat. [In a very limited sense, apparently.--ed.] There's a meme floating around today featuring a nerdy guy and his moderately pretty high-school girlfriend. The message is something like, "Stick with it... [picture of same nerdy guy, and his lady is now a "10"] ...because sometimes it works out." I'm not gonna go on about super-unrealistic ideals of attractiveness, because even that fuels unhealthy attitudes about body image. I'm angry more about how this thing portrays men. Let me say it this way: Real men don't care that much about your looks or body. It matters some. Of course it does. It matters to you, doesn't it? But if we like you, we like you. End of story. Personally, I don't really care if no one else does. That's the point. I'm not showing a museum-piece; I'm loving the ...

My friend, Russ Ramsey, was on the show. Yes, really. He knows people. This is just the sort of big thing that ought to happen to good guys, and sometimes, it does. If you're wondering, it's not that I wouldn't enjoy a show like that, because I totally would. But I made the prudential decision that it wouldn't be good for me. Just go with it. Besides, it's not like I have time anymore; I'm in graduate school. I'm not one of those "TV is the devil!" types. Quite the opposite. Stories are important, and TV is one of the big ways we tell each other stories. But a Christian says, "Is this a good story? Why or why not?" It may be more my calling to read the great works of theology, so I feel the question of, "Why are you watching TV instead of reading Newman or Vatican II?" more than most. But I think one is a traditionalist in the Pelikan sense more than a Christian when he blames things and not people for sins. Call me a sinn...

Joshua Lim : “Barth was of little help here. His constant criticism of all human knowledge, a consistent overflow of the Protestant notion of total depravity mixed with Kantian skepticism, led to a point where no one church or person could be trusted–for God is ever the Subject and can never be made into an ‘object’ that is controlled by man. Though Barth was undoubtedly reacting to the Protestant Liberalism of his time, his own christocentric solution only held things in abeyance without giving a permanent solution. Ultimately, by insisting so heavily on the event character of revelation, the focus on the actual content of revelation itself could only be blurred. As one Catholic theologian put it, Barth’s “insistent cry of ‘Not I! Rather God!’ actually directs all eyes on itself instead of on God. Its cry for distance gives no room for distance.”   For my part, the precise content of revelation is exactly what is at issue in this debate. The positing of a fundamenta...

You all know what has happened in Oklahoma, I'm sure. I pray for those who have died, that they soon enjoy the Beatific Vision, knowing God face-to-face very soon, if they do not see it right now. I pray for those here who have lost loved ones, including children. You alone, O Christ, know their sorrow. Give the Holy Spirit abundantly to all in need of comfort. Turn the hearts of the wicked toward You, and remind us all to seek the things that last, since we have seen that so much does not. We pray this through Christ, Amen.