By Lars, I think he's got it!

Even though I posted an initial facetious response, I think Lars Walker over at MereComments has our age pegged about right in his post, The Post-Ironic Age :

I think we live in the first age in history in which such nonsense is possible on a worldwide scale. There have always been totalitarian societies where the subject of the emperor's clothing deficit has been dangerous to bring up, but only today is such delusion acceptable everywhere. And not merely among the “ignorant masses,” but most especially and vociferously among the intellectuals.

Yes, I think that's about right.

ADDENDUM:

Who knew? I mean, really, who knew the kum-ba-yah-lefties had invaded the criminal justice system of Saudi Arabia? Turns out, the plotters of the Christmas Day Almost-terrorist-attack were released from Gitmo into the custody of the government of Saudi Arabia which, in turn, placed them into an art therapy rehabilitation program . Lydia McGrew, over at What's Wrong with the World has it right. Place this one in the, "Let's not learn anything from this" file.

It's a very big file.

Why doesn't it ever occur to them . . .

On Egalitarian blogs, C.S. Lewis is often extolled as a voice of reason (on subjects other than Priestesses, that is). Now, just this morning, I skimmed another post on yet another Egalitarian blog warning against the dulling of the mind and extolling the virtues of reading:

G.K. Chesterton

C.S. Lewis

Charles Spurgeon

John Flavel

Jonathan Edwards

This blog's owner is also a fan of Blaise Pascal.

So, my question is this:

Why does is never seem to occur to Egalitarians that NONE of their literary heroes would recognize Egalitarianism as even remotely orthodox?

After Christmas Kitchen Happenings!

Well, I finally unpacked "Big Bert" - my Christmas present from my mother was a professional Cuisinart, the Williams-Sonoma exclusive one. She shocked me when she bought it because I had drug her to W-S to pick up a few gadgets for myself (strainer, mini-muffin pan, etc.) and she disappeared behind one of the mid-store display walls and I found her staring at the Cuisinarts. To make a long story short, I talked her out of the one she was looking at, I said, let me do a little research -- and before we left the store, the very nice clerk we asked questions of had sold mom the brand new one - 3 interlocking bowls so you don't have to use the big 16-cup bowl if you're only chopping a few nuts or slicing an onion. My goodness, the thing even came with an instructional video.

And, to inaugurate it today, I also pulled out my Christmas present to myself, The Flavor Bible. THIS is the recipe book to end all recipe books - and not a single recipe in the entire book. It is simply (or not, as the case may be) a compendium of flavor charts. It will help teach you to cook without recipes and encourage you to try new combinations. For instance, if you are tired of the old applesauce-with-pork-roast routine, you can look up, "pork" and see what other flavors will complement your roast.

Today's inaugural recipe wasn't too complicated as I just wanted to get going and try something. So, when the grocery store put cauliflower on sale this week, I bought 3 big heads and boiled them today (the excess cooking liquid will go to stretching the turkey soup I made last night since the noodles keep soaking up all the broth!). I then pureed them in the big bowl (almost all three, but reserved a few florets for the soup) with a bit of butter, milk (too much, as it turns out) and garlic, salt, pepper, thyme and chervil. The thyme and chervil ideas came from the book -- and voila! I have a great big bowl of mashed cauliflower that tastes divine.

Next up is my famous red cabbage. But first, a trip to the grocery store for stuff to store all this food in and some Tarragon, which I discovered I don't have and which was listed under cauliflower as well. And, just maybe, I might be brave enough to get a Chia Herb Garden. I may do OK with cooking, but I have black thumbs as far as growing . . .

Anthropological Modalism, exhibit #29

A while back, Steve Hutchens over at MereComments made a reference to the Anthropological Modalism of Egalitarians. When I asked him for clarification, he was kind enough to post, A Note on 'Anthropological Modalism' . I initially disagreed with his assessment, believing the primary error of Egalitarianism to be a sort of gnosticism. And while there is evidence Egalitarians believe themselves to have accessed a knowledge not previously available to the Church and that they certainly denigrate the human body and our glorious differences as male and female, it has become increasingly apparent that this denigration of our sex difference is the key to their rebellion. In other words, evidence is accumulating that Hutchens was right in his assessment and I was wrong (ouch!).

Some months ago, I noticed one such instance over on the CBE blog. You can read the entire post and comments here: What is most important? But I wish to highlight the relevant portion of one particular response:

I think to take the focus off flesh (female flesh or male flesh) and place it on character would take us out of those two categories and free us to develop real character–fruit of the spirit character. Look at Jesus’ character… his love, justice, compassion, courage, holiness, righteous anger, active faith, kindness, sharp wit and ability to think about what is good, what would bring shalom (justice and well-being).

Then I don’t need a feminine face for God or a male face for God… I need a human face for God and a human model of godliness. We are then in God’s image because we are human and made in his image…and there is not a feminine way to be that image and a male way to be in that image. It is freeing for both men and women to focus on the Spirit… and character… not on flesh.

This is a textbook example of Anthropological modalism - the human is reduced to mere humanity. And sex? Male and Female? Reduced to mere accident, a distracting inconvenience.

Although, there is that focus on spirit to the denigration of flesh . . .

And the last shred of fig leaf falls . . .

I had been working on a re-assessment of an earlier post wherein I had commented on the CBE blog, but this is so very much sadder.

I am still following the discussion on Denny Burk's blog , which I posted on here .

The form of religious feminism which likes to call itself "Egalitarian" is falling into increasing chaos and rebellion. It's sad that so many who might once have legitimately considered themselves a sort of orthodox Christian are bringing their rebellion into the open with full-bore, unapologetic denial of the essentials that all Christians, whether Orthodox, Catholic, Reformed or other Protestant hold. No longer can it be said that they are merely deceived.

Now we have open rebellion and denial of the ministry of the Holy Spirit. It makes me shiver, chills me to the bone, that the same could have been my fate if I haven't heeded the promptings brought on by the prayers of the faithful. Only by God's grace do I suffer such deception any longer.

Read response #24 on Denny Burk's blog post linked above and weep for this lost soul. Weep for the state of Evangelicalism. And pray this man leads no precious soul astray. He is listed as an "Elder" and an "Overseer" on a large Egalitarian discussion board and is a commenter on CBE's blog where, as far as I can determine, his theology has never been corrected or rebuked. So please don't dismiss this is an outlier - he shows here the direction Egalitarianism's rebellion will increasingly take.

The littlest constituents

Well, Senator Nelson has accepted his bag of silver and betrayed the littlest constituents in his state, you know the ones too young to vote, even too young to breath air? Yes, those are the constituents I'm talking about. Nelson has betrayed them for a few extra dollars for his state and has signed on to the Senate Healthcare (talk about irony!) bill.

In response, Congressman Stupak has issued a statement making it clear he remembers the most vulnerable of *his* constituents and his duty to them and to God.

Please pray Rep. Stupak will be strengthened for the battle ahead and will prove a godly and effective leader in this fight.

Slippery Slope, exhibit #479

Sure as the Christmas goose follows the Thanksgiving turkey, sure as the Republicans becoming a Congressional minority is followed by losing their backbones, and sure as ER visits for indigestion masquerading as chest pain follow the holiday pig-out . . .the embrace of homosexuality follows the acceptance of pastorettes.

In just the latest example of, "Slippery Slope? We don't see no stinkin' slippery slope!", sigh, a church right here in the Denver area has decided for themselves to embrace homosexuality as a valid Christian lifestyle. I'll say nothing about the creepiness of whatever it is on the screen behind the equally creepy thing that is, apparently, an "altar".

This story is also exhibit # 972 in the long line of reasons I no longer call myself an Evangelical. Denny Burk has it right. "Evangelical" indeed.

Winter Wonders

World's Tiniest Snowman reminds me of a January visit I was privileged to pay to the grand and beautiful city of Kiev, Ukraine. The city was beautiful, even in the midst of January snow and ice. Gold and blue onion domes, the Dnieper, matryushka dolls - every blessed frosty moment of that day will be treasured.

Little factoids I remember:

By the natives, it is pronounced Keev, not Ki-yev which is the Russian pronunciation.

The country is simply Ukraine, no "the" in front. "The Ukraine" refers to Ukraine as a Soviet region, not the independent country

Pepsi is Pepsi, even there.

Pan fried potatoes are delicious in any language.

Orthodox churches have no pews because you do not sit in the presence of a king, much less the presence of God.

Touristy little things will seem cheap to you, and the vendors will think you're stupid Americans for paying so much.

Next to one of the churches was a little museum exhibiting tiny carvings, as little as the head of a pin, but gorgeously detailed under magnification -- that's what the snowman reminded me of.

Pigeons are pigeons in any language and inhabit train stations, seemingly the world over.

The people we were with were friendly but most were not - 70 years of trying to be grey and not stand out had made their mark on the Ukrainian people.

But then, that was nearly 15 years ago. I am sure things have changed.

It's certain I will feel the need to take fewer showers . . .

This, from a friend's blog, about a year ago:

After twenty-five years of listening to, and reading, feminists who purport both to be Christians and to honor Scripture, a few years ago I stopped. Their scholarship was so bad, non-sequiturs so constant, lies so bald-faced, and impiety so obvious, I couldn't bear it any more--keeping up with them was too caustic to my heart.

Me, too. Not the twenty-five years, but everything else.

The Liturgy of Tea

Steve Skojec, over at Inside Catholic has a great meditation on The Rubrics of Coffee .

I have little to add, just a few words about my brew of choice, tea.

I disagree with good Fr. Rutler - herbal teas are indeed real teas. It is the fruit based ones that aren't, being Tisans, instead. Herbal tea has a fine medicinal and pleasurable tradition that I won't gainsay.

As far as making tea - Steve is right, the water must be right. I am not a strict purist in that I do use filtered tap water.

The water must be cold to start and boiled in a proper tea kettle, the microwave is anathema. I recommend a cordless electric kettle - it sits on an electric base and you can pick it up, and move it, etc, to pour without a cord hassle.

The pot must be properly warmed, first. So boil more water than the pot holds.

Loose leaf tea is best and should be strained when poured. Second best is a tea ball or filter insert in your tea pot. Tea bags are only to be used as a last resort.

For plain black tea, PG Tips is the best generally available brand, but don't use it for iced tea.

If you want to go out for tea, Peet's is the only place.

And, for you coffee purists, if you ever find yourself in Portland, OR, Stumptown is the only place to get the black brew.

And, because I am a poseur (in the words of my British friend), I recommend Luzianne for iced tea. It brews quite well if left overnight in the refrigerator.

Hooray for Babies!

The Babies are Coming!!!

OK. I give in. I'm an Egalitarian. I admit it.

I believe in gender equality. Spengler's Universal Law of Gender Parity states that in every corner of the world and in every epoch of history, the men and women of every culture deserve each other.

--David Goldman

I am so very, very weary . . .

. . . of the dirty looks I get in the library, simply for laughing quietly to myself. A little giggle here, a quiet snort there, shaking with mirth while covering my mouth -- it all brings those librarian looks. And generally not from the librarians themselves!

How can you not laugh at things like this?:

The Bad Catholic's Guide to Wine Whiskey and Song, by the irrepressible John Zmirak, who is rapidly becoming one of my favorite columnists,

Or this cartoon with Sarah Palin:

Help! Mom! Liberals are ruining my country!

Or this dog, who understands joy:

Bailey, the unknown reindeer

I wish my fellow library patrons joy, or at least a bit of mirth. But please, they must stop being so unhappy!

Wise words to begin the last month of the year

In looking over some old posts at Baylyblog, I came across these words:

Much of what he's written . . .is of a tone and demeanor that would warn any godly souls away. . . .if you come across . . .you may wonder why I don't respond to his specific complaints. The answer is that life is short and it's clear to me that no truthful answer will satisfy him.

I've edited the specifics to highlight Tim's admonition and its applicability to so many situations we allow ourselves to get sucked into with this marvelous tool, the internet.

And, today, I agree with David Bayly who encourages us to go read this post by the ever challenging Doug Wilson.

Now this from my friend, Greg Laughlin, via an email discussion:

My experience is that essential issues are those on which the person making the distinction is orthodox and non-essential issues are those on which he is not.

Finally, via the same email conversation, David Mills gives us an excellent illustration of the just plain wrongness of the high dudgeon some Anglicans are getting themselves into over the Vatican's recent offer to disaffected Anglicans:

This often comes with the news that -- Shock and Horror! -- the offer actually requires agreeing with Catholic teaching. It's like giving your wife a necklace and finding the old lady down the street coming to the door to tell you, "I won't take that. I have my own necklaces.What are you trying to pull?"