Safe Haven

 My brother from another mother, Nathan H., made a highly pertinent comment on my post, "Jesus' Skin Color (Again)." Essentially, we can venerate a White icon of Jesus, as long as we're equally ready to venerate any other one as well. I am, and I have. It got me to thinkin': Anyone remember a comedy skit where the dude is praying in a church, calls upon Jesus, and a legit Black American Jesus shows up? I wanted to laugh, but it does get uncomfortable at points. Jesus is Jesus; we gotta be careful, because His character is still something we're bound to, and that's easy to mess up whilst making a point. Jesus is a Jew, for clarity's sake, so I'd be as stunned if he looked Swedish (Sorry, Max) as I would if he looked West African. But I'm expecting brown, for the record. I want the Apostles to make fun of us in Heaven: "Man, there are a lot of really white people here! I'll bet they didn't like the sun on the old Earth!" There a...

 I've known people whose faith is way too entwined with politics. I've known priests and pastors who can pick out who will leave, if they cross one of those political shibboleths. I've seen political "arguments" that are so simplistic and so bad that it scares me. As an image or an idol, I can grant you that MAGA Jesus exists somewhere. The problem with some of you is that you don't think the opposite image exists. NPR Jesus? Is it too unfair to maybe call it Colbert Jesus? Granted that human beings are disturbingly good at worshipping idols. In a rare attack of good sense, John (Jean) Calvin said that the human heart was an idol factory. But maybe we don't have to go around accusing each other of the most damnable and scandalous errors all the time. Do politics better. Listen. Try to debate issues better. Try to understand each other better. And fight it out in the political arena, shake hands, and do it again next time. Let me note once again that presid...

 Stand-up comedian Dan Cummins has a brilliant bit about getting out of jury duty. In it, he says, "I get paid to make snap judgments about people, and stickin' to 'em, and I plan on doing that here in this courtroom." It's funny, but it's true. Pay attention to how often ignorance  is part of a bit. Nate Bargatze is the absolute master of, "I'm so dumb, and it's funny." Smart people have to turn off their gift to enjoy it sometimes. Because if they colonized a planet, it would be called "Well, Actually." Deep knowledge kills a lot of jokes, and so does nuance. I remember the day I stopped enjoying Stephen Colbert's Trump humor. It was in the midst of the Russian collusion narrative, and maybe something Tom Darrow posted from an official report got read by me. And I happened to catch Colbert's monologue that night. Let's put aside the fact that if Trump were as bad as Colbert and his audience thinks, it wouldn't be f...

 The last 10 years or so has been a grand demonstration of the Dunning-Kruger effect, especially as the internet and associated technologies have democratized information. I'm not a fan of the consequent populism, either here in the US, or worldwide. I went to college. I believe in vaccines. I would have hoped Q-Anon was a 12-step program for people obsessed with the actor John de Lancie. [Aren't you in that?--ed.] Hey, we're not talking about me right now, OK? But the problem with public health for quite a while is that even though you'll never lose money betting on the stupidity of a large group of people, actual persons hate when you talk down to them. These experts do it all the time. And they think they have to lie to ordinary people in order to get them to make the right choice. Seriously, don't do that. The WHO is this arrogance on steroids. I can't think of one time I have thought, "My life would be so much worse, without the World Health Organizati...

 It's part troll, part ploy. President Trump thinks like this: "I want the rest of NATO to fund their own defense. Who is the most credible threat to any other NATO country?" The US. He'll say some blustery stuff, but he wants the Europeans to arm themselves. He also knows that the press will overreact to everything he says and does. He's counting on it. For the record, I am nevertheless appalled. I would never act like this. I'll be glad when these days are ended. But the first principle in realpolitik, or foreign policy realism, is to assume rational actors. If the president is not sick or crazy, he's trying to get out of the Cold War framework.

 Skip down to Section 4. The president himself or herself ends up being the final arbiter in most scenarios that s/he is able to discharge the duties of the office. I do not see 2/3 of both houses of Congress declaring a permanent incapacity here. President Biden was clearly struggling, and we didn't get close to a 25th Amendment scenario. In addition, President Trump's unorthodox methods to achieve fairly sensible ends are well-known enough that the current cycle could be argued to be part of that, i.e. re-armament of NATO. It will be extremely hard to prove that he's literally out of his mind.

 Much like the two notable works of le Carre in the so-called "Karla Trilogy," Herman Wouk's "The Winds Of War" and "War And Remembrance" were made into celebrated miniseries that aired on TV. Also like the George Smiley stories, Wouk's televised adaptations are now barely distinguishable from the books he wrote. Robert Mitchum gives a masterclass in minimalist acting that perfectly captures "Pug" Henry as written. Polly Bergen must have understood the frivolous and irritable Rhoda Henry, because she's expertly unlikable. There was a lot of criticism of the casting choices, because the actors were much older than their characters in general. However, I think it works, because young people of these generations were more mature than people of 1983, or of young people today. I actively dislike Natalie Jastrow, but this testifies to how good Ali MacGraw was. On the one hand, Byron Henry is a loafer and a bum, so he deserves Natalie, good ...

 As a simple explanation, the nature of the dispute between Protestants and Catholics can be illustrated by what we do with the creeds and councils. For the Catholic, the Nicene Creed is a definitive dogmatic declaration from the Church founded by Christ, concerning the nature of God and His work in the world. The definition of Chalcedon more specifically focuses on Christology: the hypostatic union, the two natures--divine and human--united in the divine Person Jesus Christ. Again, for the Catholic, these definitions must be true, because God in Christ is protecting the Church which declares them. Likewise, the Holy Spirit takes from what belongs to Christ, and declares it to us, to paraphrase John's Gospel. For the Protestant, the conclusions of these Councils are deemed true, and explicitly taught in the Scriptures. Since the Catholic Church believes everything she teaches is taught in the Scriptures, we have no cause to disagree. However, as we have argued for about 5 centuries...