Bishops Apologize for War

Mark Tooley of the Weekly Standard covers a recent document released by bishops of the Anglican Church, in short, condemning the war, the American response to it, the support of evangelical Christians for it, and calls for evangelical Christians to apologize to the Muslim community for it. The full text is here, but honestly, why would you want to read that? It's 100 freaking pages long and full of some of the strangest liberal/"Christian" reasonings you can find.

The entire subject gives me pause, though. My pastor commented to me once that American Christians would have 3 things to answer for before God. I only remember two of them, those being our materialism and our militarism. The latter, being the relevant aspect, causes me to wonder.

To what end should Christians accept war and military action? Should we support it as a governmental tool but deny it personally? There's no easy answer to be found in the scriptures. None of it was ever addressed to governments, and since the writers of the New Testament were writing to people who held no political authority, such concepts simply don't appear. As such, we have to try to interpret the authoritative source (and that always leads to problems).

Jesus speaks of turning the other cheek and loving one's enemies. This would seem to deny any sort of military solution if Christians took this as a governmental mandate. On the other hand, the Bible talks much about seeking justice, helping those who cannot help themselves, and punishing the wicked. It certainly would seem to be in the interests of justice to, say, depose Saddam Hussein. Additionally, it would give the Gospel more opportunity to spread (well, some might debate that point). On the other hand, "Vengeance is mine" sayeth the Lord. Nothing we can do to someone else here on Earth will compare to their true reward when they meet up with the Lord and he says, "Away from me, I never knew you."

It would be unfair to simply wipe our hands of it and say, "Well, it doesn't matter what I think, I don't make such decisions, the government will simply do what it wants, it's an imperfect world so we have to choose the lesser of two evils, etc." The world is different since Paul wrote his letters, and only a small amount of the vast library of human needs and conflicts were addressed in scriptures. Responsibility for Christians is to further develop the theology here, applying what we know already to what today's situations bring us, and attempt to find a God-glorifying path.

The bottom line is simply that I don't have the answers here. I can tell you that I support American military action in the Middle East (for now), but I certainly can't tell you whether or not that's a Godly response. If it isn't, then Christians certainly ought to hold themselves accountable for our support of war. But in the meantime, the Anglican Church would do better to discuss the theology of the issue, rather than act in such a political fashion.

How I Feel Right Now

I Might Be A Liar

Like you didn't already know.


I may have underestimated how much time I shall have to spend on my homework/grading this weekend. Ridiculous amounts, apparently. Don't be shocked if nothing appears. Since everything and its grandmother is due on Monday, expect some real blogging by then (and I promise I actually do have real things to write about).

Things Not to Say to Students

So, today, I was talking to a professor about our first homework assignment, which I really screwed up badly. When I told him that I had concerns about the first homework assignment, his response was, essentially, "Yeah, I'm worried about your performance on the first assignment. It's indicative of a poor handle on the math, and I foresee you having more trouble in the class as the math gets harder and more complicated."

Let's not forget that I cannot get a grade lower than a B in any of my 7 classes this year. So, the results of my first homework set indicate that I will not "get it" in the rest of the class, thus spelling out my doom for passing the class. By not passing the first class, it doesn't matter how I do in any of the following classes because the school will kick me out in June either way.

I'm three weeks in and I'm already FUBAR. Will doubling down help me at all? My professor didn't seem to think so.

I guess I'll be back in Freeburg flipping burgers by June. What a waste of a good college education.

Blog Down! Blog Down!

If you can read this, good for you! That means that the blogger failure eitherisn't as catastrophic as I seem to think it is, or Blogger has fixed the problem.

Carry on.

Speaking Truth to Power

Hat Tip: Wuzzadem

On Time and Blogging

I know my blogging has been sporadic and superficial lately. I've just been so very busy. Curse this first year of graduate school! As much as I did enjoy my first late night session of grading several hundred exams for the chemistry 101 class, I can't wait for some sort of Christmas break.

As far as news and politics goes . . . I don't have much to write about. There just isn't much happening (in the US, at least)! Let's see, what are the big things to talk about right now?

1) 2008 Candidates: I don't like any of the Republican potentials so far. Big stinkin' deal.

2) DeLay's Troubles: Earle appears to be full of crap, as everything he's done so far indicates that he doesn't have anything on DeLay. The only thing really interesting about this is the media coverage of said event (but then I didn't have to tell you that the media coverage was unbalanced, did I?).

3) Harriet Miers: I can't talk about this. I just can't. It is all the biggest conservative bloggers are talking about, and I can't stand it. You go from such crazy extremes with Hugh Hewitt and Dafydd ab Hugh supporting her fervently; to Jim Geraghty, Captain Ed, and the Powerline guys falling somewhere in the middle; to folks like Michelle Malkin declaring their highest criticisms on Bush for this betrayal.

I normally look to the other conservative bloggers to help make up my mind on such matters, but they're like a pack of dogs fighting over scraps of food; there's a whole lot of scuffling over such a little amount of information that we have. I don't know what to think, and I guess it won't really matter since I have zero input on her nomination anyhow. Could we please cool our heads and remember that there are other important things happening in the world?

Please?

Blogging of real note will take place this weekend, unless my progress on my two homework assignments due Monday doesn't progress as I hope.

Wow

I don't have words to describe this . . .

Tim, just don't get yourself sued, okay? I know he's an idiot, but don't get yourself sued.

Data that isn't relevant

Because I'm a stats-junkie, I like to peruse the Site-Meter data every so often, just to see what brings people to my site. For example, to see what links (if any) they followed to get here or from where in the world they hail from. I chuckle when I see some of the searches that bring people here (lewd searches involving Japanese women seem to bring people to my essays from my study abroad fairly often). I also chuckle when I see the occasional international hit. I can't imagine what the readers from Brazil or India think of my little blog, although I suppose it's a sign of their thoughts that they don't return.

However, the most interesting one to me was one that happened the other day. It caught my eye because it came from Washington DC, but even more interesting was that it originated from the domain of the House of Representatives.

Hm . . . someone in the House stumbled upon my wee blog? They haven't come back, but I just wonder . . . who was it? So very curious . . .

Krugman on NPR

So, I was listening to NPR today, and I actually heard Paul Krugman debating this professor from Princeton and Heritage Foundation member (I can't recall his name) regarding the government's response to Katrina. (All quotes are my own synopsis of what took place)

The most interesting part was when they were discussing the school vouchers. Apparently, the Bush administration wants to give school vouchers to parents whose school needs to be rebuilt so that their child can attend school elsewhere. Krugman was having a fit that Bush is "slipping in" his ideological agenda through covert means with something that wouldn't fly anywhere else in the country (hogwash in itself). "Oh no, separation of church and State!" seemed to be the mainstay of his argument.

Unfortunately, when pressed to give an alternative solution, Krugman came up way short, sputtering something about just putting them in other public schools. His debate opponent rightfully asked, "Do you really think the standing schools can accept all of these students? Why not spread them out, share them with the private schools?" Krugman's response: "Uh . . . um . . separation of church and state!" Well, more or less. It was really apparent that he either hadn't thought about the issue at all short of his knee-jerk reaction to vouchers (and it's not like they'll be permanent, Paul) or that he was ridiculously outwitted by his opponent.

Ironically, Krugman was in favor of vouchers in every relief situation (housing, business incentives, rebuilding, etc.) except for schools. Once again demonstrating that there is no issue for the left that can't be overcome by petty partisan politics.

I'm a Bit Behind

And these are pretty good, too.

Howard Dean Alert

Ol' Howie's at it again. At least, this time he didn't say anything offensive. No, no, it was more like a Freudian slip:

Chris Matthews: Do you believe that the President can claim executive privilege?

Howard Dean: Well, certainly the president can claim executive privilege - but in this case, I think with a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, you can't play uh, you know, hide the, the salami, or whatever it's called.

My first reaction: Laughed until I cried.

So that is why Bush nominated Mier, eh?

Where will Google go next?

Who knows? I just hope it doesn't follow their trend in China . . . filtering out "radical" democracy-advocating websites because the government can't stand criticism over there.

Hey Google . . . do what is right, rather than chasing the almighty dollar, okay?

A Quick Word on Miers

Apparently, President Bush has picked White House Counsel Harriet Miers as the candidate for the Supreme Court.

The reactions, as I've seen them across the conservative blogosphere, have been mixed. Some skepticism, some optimism, some cries of cronyism. Myself? Well, I only know what I read, and I haven't read much about Ms. Miers. Hugh Hewitt's analysis so far gives me some reason to be optimistic.

I remember when Roberts was first announced, and many conservatives were skeptical of him in the beginning. Will that turn around with this candidate? I guess we shall see.