Reliquiae

Think I'll pass on seeing the Relics of Mother Theresa here in St. Louis at Sts. Theresa and Bridget Catholic Church on Thursday. Curious as I am to see what might be there, according to the paper, the relics include the following: sandals, crucifix, hair and blood. I can understand the sandals and crucifix, but how does one even collect the other two? Sounds somewhat creepy to me. Who gets the job of collecting the biologicals even? Thanks for the invite, but no thanks.

Ripped from the Headlines

Three news stories and one ad measured on the BO-radar today.
1) The Today show has changed its wedding contest rules to allow same-sex couples to participate. If the squeaky wheel gets the grease, then it's little wonder same-sex rights are becoming mainstream. The secular media and church denominations have become so accepting of such that it is eroding family values. Sorry, guys, family values are not "make your own family of whomever you want" and call it good. Sure, there is a human bond of people, but a family is still mom, dad, children. We've eliminated dads from the picture long ago, now we're working on the rest.
2) An article in today's Post-Dispatch outlines why a person has decided not to say the Pledge of Allegiance. The reason given is as follows:

I've been uneasy with it for awhile, ever since I genuinely paid attention to the fact that I've been making a loyalty oath to a political system. In my heart, my life, I want no king but Jesus, and I want no association--political, geographic, ethnic--that transcends the Kingdom of God. The tension goes far beyond a pledge, of course, The question, as Shane Claiborne says, is not whether we ARE political, but HOW we are political.

Luther reminds us in his Table of Duties that scripture says we are to submit to the governing authorities. It is not wrong to formally declare loyalty as a citizen to the United States, our government under which we live. We're not merely addressing niceties to a scrap of cloth, but saying that we will submit to the authority of "the Republic for which it stands." It's better than being deported to Russia.
3) Presbyterians in their convention supported a proposal to encourage the U.S. government to end aid to Israel if the country doesn't stop expansion into disputed territories. It's fine to be globally concerned as a church body, but maybe the Presbyterians should work on getting their doctrine and church body in order before worrying about international incidents which do not involve them. Work, instead to realign your doctrine and practice. I encourage all church bodies so to do.
4) Need a bed? Try a John of God crystal healing bed. I don't even want to know.

From the File of Things That Make You Go, "Hmm"

Perusing a blog I frequent frequently (Is that redundant?), some of the comments there made me wonder. Why is it that in a world, land, society, fill-in-the-blank where "everyone is entitled to their own opinion" and were nobody is supposed to step on the rights of others, those who assert their opinion contrary to popular opinion are squelched? I guess that's a convoluted way to ask.
What about Sarah Palin? Why is she branded whatever she is because of who she is? Why can anybody get away with it with her and not with, say Sotomayor? To pick on one woman is acceptable, to do the same to another is racist. Same goes for the president. Why is it forbidden to ask the hard questions and not be labeled as racist, narrow-minded, or just "totally out of touch with reality"? Policy is considered separately from the person. If Bush had the policies of Clinton, I would never had voted for him, truly. Have we really come so far that we have forgotten how to think and debate civilly? We resort to ad hominim attacks and that wins the debate in our book?
It especially falls hard on Christians, especially those who still hold to theology, doctrine, and vocation. Now we try to rule the world with religion. We are closed-minded to new ways of doing things. If I recall my history correctly, the Christians were opposed to slavery. The Christians helped make Europe a kinder, gentler society in the Middle Ages.
I hear it now: "But that history was written slanted," or "What about the Christians who owned slaves?" or "What about the Crusades, huh?" There is no quick rebuttal if one does not believe in sin. Christians aren't perfect ("Boy, haven't I heard that one before?"), but to say that all Christians are a certain way because of the Crusades is as prejudiced as saying all green people are the same because of the actions of the Wicked Witch of the West. (I'm sure there are green people out there who are truly decent people and do not cackle menacingly and threaten little dogs and girls wearing ruby slippers.)
This is the long way of saying this: I'm not all those labels one slaps on Christian conservatives. Sure, I'll think for myself and make up my own mind. I'll speak up when I need to, and I will work to show others their errors. Maybe that's what's forbidden--"have your own opinion, but I don't want to hear it because you'll just tell me I'm wrong." Or maybe it's okay to tell me I'm wrong to tell you you're wrong because that's just wrong. Welcome to post-modernism, I guess.

A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words

In proper Lutheran fashion I ask, "What does this mean?"

Commentaries on Recent News

The bishop prayed to "The God of our many understandings." It’s like singing “Happy Birthday.” He’d like it to be when the singers reach the point when one inserts the name into the song and some people say “Mom” and some say “Aunt Julie” and some say “Mrs. Brown,” yet all mean the same, erstwhile it commences on cacophony. In reality, the “God of our many understandings” is more like singing “Happy Birthday” to multiple people, and some say “Becky” while others say “Jim” and others say “Mr. Rumpleheimer.” The incoherent babble blathers on, and none ever get recognized for who they truly are.

In other news, embryonic stem cell trials moved ahead at Washington University. It is not testing to see if it works; it is testing to see it is safe. This is the next step in clinical trial procedure moving toward FDA approval.
The researcher’s comment was interesting:. "The most important part of course of the Hippocratic Oath is 'due no harm.' And this is the test to see that we do no harm." I would like to pose this question: “What about the harm it causes the embryo?” Perish the thought that society doesn’t “continue its medical pursuits” at the cost of embryos made just to be used for their parts. Do the parts really equal more than the whole? If society cannot recognize the value of one life, how can it determine whose life is valuable to save?