Most Likely to Secede

Why are Texans so obsessed with the idea that Texas is "the only state that can secede from the Union?" I don't get it. For one thing, it's dumb. Don't be ridiculous. We all know that every hardcore Texan has some sort of fantasy that if the War(you know which one I mean) suddenly broke out again, they could grab the nearest firearm and start shooting Yanks. But that's not going to happen, so stop being silly. And secondly, it isn't true. Vermont joined the United States upon the condition that it could leave at any time, as did other states, such as New York and Virginia. Furthermore, according to Texas v. White, even if every single person in Texas voted to secede, it wouldn't be legal. I'm pretty sure that after the Civil War, the federal government made sure that secession was no longer a legal option. So I don't know what people are going on about, it's all a rather large amount of ballyhoo over nothing. Texans are strange. Just get over it, y'all.

EDIT: This is actually kind of interesting. More than a few states, including Vermont, have current secession movements. Most of the websites for the Vermont movement cite a lot of pre-Civil War material, such as quotes from the Founding Fathers, the Constitution, things of that nature. But they conveniently seem to ignore the Supreme Court case I mentioned, which interprets secession as unconstitutional. I mean... if you can't do it, you can't do it. I'm not saying I don't think they're right in some respects, but it looks pretty rock-solid to me. It's illegal, no matter what Thomas Jefferson might have said.

"An island in the sun..."

LOST has been one of my favourite television programs for the past few years, and I've recently decided to try and catch up with the story line. I've gotten a little behind, given my lack of a television and all. So, the show has taken a decidedly science-fictiony turn. I was a bit skeptical when people began labelling the series as "science fiction." Yeah, it had some supernatural/unexplained elements, but it's mainly about survival and getting off the Island, right? Apparently not, since in the current season, everyone is trying to get BACK to the Island. I was prepared for the show to go down a completely ridiculous and implausible road, especially when the concept of time travel was introduced. But I'm quite pleased to find that this is one of the better applications of time travel that I've seen. It doesn't involve alternate realities or time streams or anything ridiculous like that. They've taken what could've been a really bad plot twist and kept it under control. The writing team behind this show has always kept a pretty long range view with regards to their plots. With Alias, they kind of messed things up a bit, but I think they've done a great job with LOST so far. I was beginning to have doubts about whether or not the story would remain cohesive, but for the time being, my faith has been restored, so to speak. Now, about Cloverfield...

"And did those feet, in ancient times, walk upon England's mountains green..."

As much as I love Britain and her culture, the growing difficulties which Christians face there are more than a little disturbing. The Anglican church is headed towards crisis, as far as I know. Islam is given more and more allowances, especially concerning Sharia law and the direct subversion of British law. In Canada, too, it will soon be more or less illegal to criticise the homosexual lifestyle. I remember one story of a Canadian pastor who was accused of hate speech because he was preaching concerning the sinfulness of homosexuality. There is a reason why our brothers and sisters in Rwanda have seen fit to send missionaries our way. The American Mythos tells us that America is still a great beacon of Christianity in the world, but that is not the case. Do you know where the Gospel has seen the most growth? Asia. One of the places in the world where the Gospel is heavily persecuted and even forbidden is the region that has seen the most growth for Christ. I have a feeling that America will soon forsake the Gospel even more than she already has. It is quite possible that my generation will see the beginnings of actual persecution in our country. I'm not talking about prayer being banned at schools or the Ten Commandments being taken out of courthouses. Those are ridiculous little occurrences that really shouldn't surprise anyone. I'm talking about men and women being imprisoned for Christ. This is right outside our door. Let them come, I say. If they want to bring charges against me for "indoctrinating" young Christians and speaking truth in the classroom, then so be it. If it takes persecution to bring about genuine revival in the United States, then I welcome it with open arms. They covet the kingdom, but the kingdom is Christ's already. They hunger for blood, but Christ's blood has already sealed their doom and our victory. The Lord has raised a standard up. Let us follow it quickly.

Sissero or Kickero? Sayzar or Kaiser? Which sounds more manly to you, eh?

As a student of the Latin language, I am somewhat conflicted when it comes to pronunciation. There are two ways to pronounce Latin, the Classical, which is as close to original Roman use as we can get, and the Ecclesiastical, which is the pronunciation adopted for use in the Church. Now, the biggest difference between these two, and the one that you'll most often hear new Latin students talk about is the V sound. Classical Latin sounds the V like an English W, Ecclesiastical sounds the V as we would. In Dr. Heckel's Latin I class, we used Ecclesiastical pronunciation, for the most part. Under Dr. Haskell's tutelage here at SU, we use Classical pronunciation. It's fine, I've gotten used to it. I prefer the Ecclesiastical. EXCEPT for the C sound. We did not use the soft C in Dr. Heckel's class, and I am incredibly glad that we didn't. Choral Latin uses the Ecclesiastical pronunciation, and this involves using a soft C in front of e, i, ae, or oe. For example, the word "caeli" starts with a "ch" sound, not a "k." To my ears, this makes Latin sound like Italian. Ok, ok, so Romans, Italians, what's the difference? I don't know, I just think the soft C sounds really ridiculous and wimpy. I really, really, really hate having to sing the soft C in choirs. I just hate it. So, I'll keep my hard C and my English V, put my high horse back in the stable, and go on my merry way. As Dr. Haskell's wife reminded us on the first day of Latin I at SU, everyone who spoke Latin as their native language is dead. They don't care how you pronounce it. SPQR in the house. Where my proconsuls at?

--

Nunc dimittis servum tuum, Domine, secundum verbum tuum in pace:
Quia viderunt oculi mei salutare tuum
Quod parasti ante faciem omnium populorum:
Lumen ad revelationem gentium, et gloriam plebis tuae Israel.

Another Thing I Overheard at Work

Well, I didn't overhear it, since it was part of a conversation I was involved in with my coworkers, but oh well. We were discussing rap music and the rhymes involved therein, particularly words that rhyme with "rims." One of the servers had this to say: "Seriously, don't underestimate the ability of rims to rhyme with itself... that's totally what they'd do."

Don't you hate it when that happens?

"A collision at sea can ruin your entire day." - Thucydides

Unrest Among the Victorious

Post number 80! Two things before you begin. First, this is one of those posts where I begin talking about one thing, and then apply my observations of that thing in a broader and more general sense. I never mean to write this much, or to go off on tangents, it just happens. Secondly, I wrote all of this on my iPod Touch with my own two thumbs. I didn't actually realise how much I'd written until I put it on the blog. Anyways, the post proper begins below.

I recently watched a documentary about the infamous Westboro Baptist Church, produced by the BBC, called "The Most Hated Family in America." The Westboro Baptist Church is famous for their slur-filled pickets, where they employ signs that declare, "God Hates Fags," and give voice to other forms of venom, including vehement criticism of U.S. troops for participating in the war. Now, obviously, I'd have certain qualms about saying that this group is certifiably Christian, but that judgement is not mine to make. I will, however, explain why I have this hesitation.

To begin, I'd like to point out just how gratingly these people are deliverng their message in the name of the Gospel. For Westboro Baptist parishoners, the word "fag" has become a sort of catch-all term for everything that is apparently wrong with world. Our military are "fag-troops," there are "fag-enablers," a term that basically describes anyone who disagrees with them, and a lot of other rhetoric that would offend just about anyone. Indeed, at their pickets, they are cursed by Christians and unbelievers alike. This is partially because their rhetoric is so blantantly offensive. I don't agree with the supporters of the homosexual lifestyle. I think that way of living is sinful. But in my efforts to speak the truth, I do not think it is wise to use such a vulgar term to describe our fellow sinners! Let us not forget that in his letter to the Romans, the apostle Paul exhorted Christians to "be at peace with everyone." Christians being cursed in the streets? May it never be! Yes, Christ told us that we will be persecuted for his sake, but that persecution comes from being faithful witnesses, not purveyors of vulgarity. The parishioners of WBC seem to be gluttons for punishment. That's not exactly the way Christ taught us.

Also, based on the things I saw in the documentary, as well as what is published on the church's website, one can observe that as far as the ministry of WBC goes, the Spirit does not seem to be fully present. I am reluctant to completely discount the church as unorthodox, but there are many aspects of WBC's work which cast heavy shadows of doubt across the whole affair. For one thing, according to Fred Phelps, WBC's pastor, his is the only congregation which has salvation. Somehow, this ideology concerning America's evil deeds has given Phelps a monopoly on the salvation market, as it were. There is no concept of the Church Universal, in all of her splendor and diversity. All other believers would probably fall into the category of "fag-enablers," and would thus be considered out of fellowship with the WBC. This is utter foolishness. The entire body of the elect is contained in one group of Baptists living in Kansas? Come now.

In addition to this, the BBC reporter who was conducting the documentary attempted to ask Phelps some honest, sincere questions about the doctrine behind Phelps' teaching. Phelps flat out refused to comply because his interviewer did not have enough knowledge concerning the Bible to understand what he was talking about. This is more a personal fault of Phelps', to be sure, but his attitudes are part and parcel with the beliefs of the rest of the church, given the fact that the parishioners who were featured in the documentary backed him wholeheartedly.

Personally, I think Phelps genuinely has something wrong with him. But even so, he has a good number of people following him, claiming to be followers of Christ, driven by a psuedo-religious political ideology and moral agenda. Their message has no place for forgiveness or mercy. They WANT to be hated. The informational videos on the WBC website are supposed to "dull your ears and blind your eyes." That's parable language! God closed the hearts of an erring Israel to the truth by speaking in parables through his prophets. The verses that are used on the site to back this up lead me to believe that they view their message as something that no one will understand. And is it any wonder? They call their slur-ridden pickets "Love Crusades," after all! Now, maybe the Westboro Baptists are easy targets because of all the radical things that they do. But this is an example, albeit exaggerated, of a problem with modern American evangelism. Spitting the truth into the face of the mob will not speak to the souls of unbelievers, nor will it glorify our savior. You can distribute all the tracts you can print and shout scripture at strangers in the streets until Christ returns. But the reality is that the Spirit works through personal connections. not confrontation. Personal relationships, kind words, the quiet display of Christ's love and the results of his work on the cross. That is how the Gospel advances. We are not the riot in the streets, we are not the revolutionaries. We are to be the meek ones. And yet, despite our seeming weakness when compared to the power of secularism, we have already conquered this world through Christ! There's no need for any sort of "Christian revolution," because the Gospel, at its core, is not a revolutionary concept. Death and sin have already been taken as prisoners of war, because they embody the revolution of Man. Why do the restless heathen madly rage, what haughty schemes are they in vain contriving? Yahweh, who sits enthroned on high laughs them to scorn, he holds them in derision! We are the children of this same Yahweh, Christ is our brother! Who shall then stand against us? Therefore, let us go forth, and make good the victory of Christ.