Monday, August 15, 2005

Chessboard Parleys, Episode I

Since Matt (see links at right) gets so many comments on his blog, I'm going to try getting more comments vicariously through him. I know I'm artificially enhancing the quality of my blog, but I guess I'll just have to admit that I'm comments-greedy. Besides, Matt and I have such fascinating and highly intellectual conversations at Chessworld, the rest of you can't help but benefit. ;o)

So, without further ado, here's one of our best discussions to date:

mgam: Yodeling is fun!!
angeltwist: your mom's fun.
mgam: Especially when she's yodeling...
angeltwist: could she be persuaded to demonstrate?
mgam: Perhaps if you treat her with kindness and respect.
angeltwist: hey, i *always* treat your mother that way. i admire her for her patience.
mgam: I see. Hey it was good to see you while you were in the states!!
angeltwist: hey, right back at ya! oh wait.......no.......i guess that wasn't you, was it. oh yeah, you decided to go *somewhere else* while i was there. for shame, matthew! ;o)
mgam: Hey now, I waited and waited but once Eduardo told me you were banning me for a short while then I had to succumb to the pressure of others and depart qucikly....
angeltwist: what? banning you? io no comprendo, senior. has eduardo been spreading rumors about me again?
mgam: I hate to break it to you, but he has. He told me you were married!!!
angeltwist: oh dear. that's really going to cramp my dating style if word gets out.
mgam: I think George*** will be crushed!
angeltwist: oh no, don't worry. i've been saving him for you.
mgam: He does think I'm rather charming!
angeltwist: he really missed you this summer, you know.
mgam: I know. He writes me all the time and reminds me...
angeltwist: does he call you 'scrumptious'***? that's what he called april.
mgam: Did he really? That's so awesome. I wish he'd call me that!!
angeltwist: i dunno, you might not like it. april wasn't too thrilled about it.
mgam: Did he know what he was saying?
angeltwist: well, he said it in german, so i would hope so!
mgam: That sly devil...... How did Clint feel about that? I'm sure he was very jealous....
angeltwist: well, i think there ended up being a duel, but te pistols were loaded with blanks, so it all turned out okay.
mgam: Aren't 'te pistols' usually filled with blanks?
angeltwist: no, those are 'ta pistols.' the 'te' ones are meant to be loaded, but that's rare knowledge that you can only learn in the german education system.
mgam: See I knew I was missing out. on something by being educated in america.
angeltwist: hey, would you mind if i copy and paste some of our conversations into my blog? i think others need to benefit from the gems of philosophical wisdom we've been sharing.
mgam: No problem at all. The world needs some enlightnment...
angeltwist: then i shall proceed to do it the favor.


*** Changed to protect a certain individual’s privacy.

Sunday, August 14, 2005

my blog got spammed!

In my sojourn here on earth, there are only a few things in my personal experience that really make me see red. Arrogance, rudeness, and obstinate stupidity are three of the culprits. UNWANTED ADVERTISING happens to exemplify all three of these distasteful characteristics.

This morning, a Blogger registered under the username glok41kcab arrogantly and rudely spammed my blog with a stupid healthcare ad! When I checked my email, I found that this person had left two comments on my blog, both of them a page-long ad for some health care product or somesuch. This really irritates me. This person just blatantly uses MY blogspot to try pandering their silly product! Good grief, if I WANTED their silly product, I would've gone out searching for it!

Hey glok41kcab , if you want to advertise on a blog, THEN GET YOUR OWN!!! Stay off of mine!

I managed to find one of this intruder's comments and delete it, but I haven't been able to track down the second one. I will send a package of neat German paraphernalia and goodies to any of you, my friends out there, who care to hunt down this elusive piece of sludge for me so I can eradicate it.

I hate uninvited advertising! And that goes for all ads on TV and radio, too!

Whew. Okay, thanks for listening. I feel better now. ;o)


********** 4:57 p.m. **********

They got April, too! On April's blog, under the username cboo6jqlt48peir, they posted the same rude, stupid ad! Batten down the hatches, my blogging friends--apparently, we're all under attack from these arrogant spammers!

Never give up, never surrender!!!

Friday, August 12, 2005

answers and the big bang

FYI, I've answered all comments you few dear, wonderful people have made on my blog. For those of you who just lurk, read, and don't say anything...let me hear from you!!! ;o)

In other news, I'm still reading Lee Strobel's The Case for a Creator. It's not exactly "light" reading, so, to my shame, I've been reading it sporadically. But, my fickleness aside, here's something I read yesterday that got me all excited to share some more of this great material with you:

"In arguing for the existence of God, thirteenth century Christian philosopher Thomas Aquinas always presupposed Aristotle's view that the universe is eternal. On the basis of that difficult assumption, he then sought to prove that God exists. Why did he take this approach? Because, Aquinas said, if he were to start with the premise that the universe had a beginning, then his task would be too easy! Obviously, if there was a beginning, something had to bring the universe into existence.

"But now, modern astrophysics and astronomy have dropped into the lap of Christians precisely the premise that, according to Aquinas, makes God's existence virtually undeniable.

"Craig [William Lane Craig, PHD, PHD] offered that story to punch his next point. 'Given that whatever begins to exist has a cause and that the universe began to exist, there must be some sort of transcendent cause for the origin of the universe,' Craig told me.

"'Even atheist Kai Nielsen said, "Suppose you suddenly hear a loud bang...and you ask me, 'What made that bang?' and I reply, 'Nothing, it just happened.' You would not accept that." He's right, of course. And if a cause is needed for a small bang like that, then it's needed for the Big Bang as well. This is an inescapable conclusion--and it's stunning confirmation of the millennia-old Judeo-Christian doctrine of creation out of nothing.'"


--from Lee Strobel's The Case for a Creator, p. 107-108

Wednesday, August 10, 2005

Two Hooplas In Eight Days--Parts I and II of III

PART I—The Return

Greetings to all you wild and wonderful people out there! Yes, I am back in the land of the blogging, which means I’m also back in the land of the Germing. That is to say, I’m back in Germany. When we left Dallas at nearly 6 p.m. on Monday, we were experiencing comfortable (to me, anyway) temperatures of about 100 ºF (approx. 40-45 ºC, I believe). In the last 31 hours since we arrived in Germany, the local temp hasn’t gotten above 59 Fahrenheit. Right now, it’s raining.

I’m cold. Even Ed’s cold. He just went around turning on the heaters.
IT’S AUGUST!!!

Our trip back, by the way, took 10 minutes less than 27 hours. First, American Airlines apparently forgot that our flight was taking place, because they didn’t bring a plane from the hangar to our gate until about 20 minutes before scheduled take-off. Hence, we didn’t head for the runway until nearly an hour after said take-off was supposed to have taken off. Then, the weather decided to play a few tricks on us, sending what the pilot called a “pattern” shifting from east to west across the northern runway of the Ft. Worth airport. Finally, someone decided it might be a good idea for us to take off to the south instead of the north. When we finally got in the air after sitting on the runway for three hours, there was a line of at least 25 other planes waiting for their turn behind us. Sometimes, it’s really nice to be leader of the pack. ;o) Ed and I were just thankful that we didn’t miss our train to Dresden. Somehow, I doubt we could’ve talked American Airlines into the acknowledgement that our missing the train would have been their fault.

So that, in a comfortable walnut shell, is the Brief Story of Our Return. I’m sure most of you are more interested in hearing about the two events that took us on our whirlwind journey to the US of A. The second event, I won’t write about until the key players are cognito again (meaning, until they are no longer INcognito, ha ha, get it?). Translation: I’d feel weird writing about Clint and April’s wedding before *they* have a chance to write about it and share pictures themselves. So, I plan to wait until they’re back in country before I tell you all about this most beautiful and wonderful wedding I’ve ever been to and about how I sniveled and cried through the whole thing. ;o)

In the meantime…I’ll regale you with a heart-warming tale about the first marvelous event of which we partook, namely:

PART II—The Anniversary: Sixty-Five Years of Marriage

On August 3, 2005, my paternal grandparents, W.F. “Bill” and Frances Weger, celebrated their 65th Wedding Anniversary. I can’t even express how profoundly these two people and their marriage have affected my life. For one thing, without them, I wouldn’t exist. I know that seems like an obvious “duh”-statement, but I have to mention it. Several times during the weekend we were all together, Grandma and Grandpa told us how pleased and grateful they were that we all turned out to celebrate with them. My response is, how could we not? Their children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren owe their existence first to God, and second to the solid foundation of the relationship between these two wonderful people. Not only are these two a great example to all of us in their walk with God, they have a marriage 65 years strong. In these days of drive-thru weddings and ‘round-the-corner divorce lawyers, a 65-year-strong marriage is unusual, if not unheard of. Aside from divine, God-given pattern, I can’t think of a better example to look up to.

Oh, not that my grandparents haven’t had their ups and downs. I’ve seen them fuss and fume and argue and disagree plenty of times. I’ve heard them gripe about each other (as close to griping as either of them get, anyway). From other family members, I’ve received hints of more serious difficulties in the past, trials that my generation was too young to remember. Trials that might even have taken place before my generation came along, I don’t know. But there are shades of tough times in the past.

But still, through it all, past and present, Grandma and Grandpa presented a united front to the world. I’m not talking about a false store front. I’m talking about a front in a war, with my grandparents as two soldiers fighting for their marriage and for the will of God against the evil of Satan, who wants to destroy them. A solid, God-centered marriage is one of Satan’s most deadly enemies. I know that in their 65 years together, my grandparents have dealt Satan some severe and crippling blows. Especially since their relationship has lasted this long, and since with God’s help, they raised all four of their children to be Christians. And since those four children raised all of their own children to be Christians as well.

God has fashioned a great tool out of Bill and Frances Weger. I look up to them. I respect them. And I feel honored that I was able to be present to celebrate their 65th anniversary with them. God has blessed me richly by crossing my path with theirs.

So here are some pictures from the anniversary celebration (held on July 30th) and the rest of the weekend our family spent together:





The Family



This is the Weger Family Tree that I made as a gift for my grandparents. I asked everyone in the family to send me pictures, so it’s something of a collaboration. Aside from hand-drawing the vines, leaves, and roses, I did the rest of it on the computer. I also got it framed and matted, and it now hangs in my grandparents’ den. Sorry you can’t see any details—the image size is huge, and this is the largest I could post here.


The "Ancient" Wegers

Wilborn Foster “Bill” and Frances Lovena Hair Weger
Grandma coined the term “Ancient Wegers,” so please don’t think I’m being disrespectful by calling them that! It was her idea! ;o)




The "Old" Wegers


Grandma and Grandpa with daughter Anita and sons Bill (my dad, left) and David. (Their second son, Mark, passed away in 2002.)



Grandma and Grandpa with Bill and Kay (my parents), Anita and Wes, on the sofa; Elayne (Mark’s wife) and her new husband Clay, Judy and David.


The "Young" Wegers



A family tradition is for all us cousins to line up by age for group photos when we’re all together. I don’t know if other families do this—with us, it’s an Absolute Necessity bordering on a Central Truth of the Universe. I love it! ;o) For this and two other pictures, we were in a Chinese restaurant that was, for some reason, amusingly patriotic. For your viewing pleasure, I cropped out the remains of Kung Pao Chicken and various fried things.
From left to right: Sara, Courtney, Amanda, Luke, Jonathan, Micah, Aubrey, Paul, Josh, Andrew, Nathan.

The "Baby" Wegers



The two ex utero great-grandchildren are Jordan and Piper, Sara’s girls. The great-grand-to-be is Amanda’s, and *she* will be joining us in December!

The Married "Young" Wegers



Somebody let us run wild and get out of age order for this one. Dear me, what is this family coming to.
Left to right: Courtney and Ed; Luke and Lauren; Micah and Marilyn; Jonathan and Sarah; Amanda and Aaron; and Sara, whose husband Jeff unfortunately wasn’t able to be there.



If any of you assorted Wegers out there want any of these pics (or others that you think I might have), let me know, and I’ll email you better copies. And let me know if there are other pics you want to see in my blog. I plan on posting more later, but for now, this particular post has worn me out. ;o)

Hugs to all,
Courtney


Bill and Frances Weger

married
August 3, 1940

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Freud and the Old West: A Short Discourse on the Nature of Techno

Just FYI, this'll probably be my last post for a couple of weeks. As some of you know, I'll be in the States for two really super events taking place during the next ten days, and I'm guessing I might not have much email access. So please forgive me in advance for being incognito.

In the meantime, I leave you with this totally-unrelated-to-my-post but amusing quote from Curt Niccum's blog:

"Music has made a significant impact upon me in the last twenty-four hours. Perhaps this stems from the fact that I was lulled to sleep late last night by the constant thumping of the techno music broadcast from the neighboring hotel room. For those of you unfamiliar with this genre of music, picture fifty Sigmund Freuds hitting their heads on a brick wall in unison on beats one and three to a fast dance rhythm while fifty cowboys expectorate into brass spittoons and one hundred children rub heavy grit sandpaper on a chalkboard on beats two and four. Now, that describes GOOD techno. What I heard definitely never made that category."

--Curt Niccum, posted on July 8, 2005

Friday, July 22, 2005

cursing Christians?

Somewhere out in the big, wide world of Blogland, in someone else’s blog, I ran across a post entitled, “Why do We Swear?”, discoursing on whether or not it is acceptable for Christians to curse. Some commentors responded with yes, some with no. Some said that words are only words and don't matter; some said that God's grace covers all sins, even cursing; some that how we speak has nothing to do with loving Christ.

My thoughts on the matter are as follows:

Words do matter. Words do have meaning. And words can hurt. Even worse than sticks and stones. Ask an abused person if words are just words. Ask an abused child if it didn't hurt him when his parents cursed at him. Ask an abused wife if it didn't hurt her when her husband cursed at her.

II. Peter 2:11-12 and 3:15-16 tell us that as Christians, we represent Christ on earth.
Titus 2:6-8 tells us to exercise self-control, and specifially mentions "sound speech."
James 3:5-14 tells us how destructive words can be, and that cursing does not come from a pure heart.
Ephesians 4:29 tells us that our speech should be for building others up and giving grace to those who hear us.
In Matthew 12:35-37, Jesus himself warns us that our words come directly from what's in our hearts. And that we will be accountable to God for every word that we speak.
I. Corinthians 10:31 reminds us to glorify God in everything we do.

When I think about whether or not swearing/cursing/cussing/whatever-you-want-to-call-it is right for a Christian, I have to ask myself this:

Do I show self-control if I curse?
Am I building others up if I curse?
Do I want to stand before God one day and give account for every bad or negative or discouraging word that I have ever spoken?
Will nonbelievers glorify God because of me, if I curse in front of them?
Am I glorifying God if I curse?

Being a Christian is a process of spiritual growth. I pray for wisdom, that God will change my heart, so that I will not even curse in my thoughts. With God's help, I eradicated cursing from my speech a long time ago, but it's still in my thoughts sometimes. I know that God forgives me for these sins...but I still pray for his guidance and his wisdom, so that I can allow his Holy Spirit to change me fully into the kind of person he wants me to become.

The kind of person who glorifies him in every deed and every thought.

According to God's Word, it is not okay for a Christian to curse. But according to God's Word, he forgives us our sins, and he will help us to wipe them out. If we stop willfully sinning (Heb. 10:26); if we stop using God's grace as an excuse to do what we want; and if we make up our minds to submit to his will and let him change us.

Ed has a blog!

Just thought you all should know. Check it out:

http://edlovscourt.blogspot.com

And it has a cute address, too! ;o)

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

something stupid

Want to find out what Courtney really believes? Then check out this nutty “church quiz” I did online. If I believe the results of this quiz, then I must conclude that my faith is schizophrenic at best. Or maybe I have “Multiple Faith Disorder.” At any rate, I apparently don’t think at all the way I thought I think. But here are my results, so you can understand what I’m talking about:

You scored as Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan. You are an evangelical in the Wesleyan tradition. You believe that God's grace enables you to choose to believe in him, even though you yourself are totally depraved. The gift of the Holy Spirit gives you assurance of your salvation, and he also enables you to live the life of obedience to which God has called us. You are influenced heavily by John Wesley and the Methodists.

Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan: 82%
Fundamentalist: 61%
Reformed Evangelical: 54%
Neo orthodox: 43%
Emergent/Postmodern: 43%
Roman Catholic: 29%
Classical Liberal: 29%
Modern Liberal: 18%
Charismatic/Pentecostal: 11%

What's your theological worldview? created with QuizFarm.com

Good thing I’m more Roman Catholic than Anything Liberal or Pentecostal. I’d hate to think my depraved self is anything less than something highly traditional.

Good grief, Charlie Brown. :oP

Monday, July 18, 2005

two random gripes

1. Chessworld is slow tonight, so moving on my boards is a bit frustrating.

2. It's almost midnight, and I'm hungry.

Sunday, July 17, 2005

Announcing Free Drinks

For anyone who's interested, I just started a second blog. You can view it here:

http://havesomewater.blogspot.com

This new blog will be my place to post my notes from Bible lectures, seminars, classes, sermons, etc. Since I seem to enjoy taking down practically every dot on every i that the lecturer, teacher, or preacher voices, my notes are what one would call copious. They come in handy on occasion, so I thought someone else might find them useful. If not, that's okay, too.

Feedback on the notes is welcome (especially if I'm wrong about something!) but not obligatory. ;o)

Friday, July 15, 2005

Biblical Scroll Fragments Found In Israel

By DANIELLE HAAS, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 41 minutes ago

JERUSALEM - A secretive encounter with a Bedouin in a desert valley led to the discovery of two fragments from a nearly 2,000-year-old parchment scroll — the first such finding in decades, an Israeli archaeologist said Friday.

The finding has given rise to hope that the Judean Desert may yield more treasures, said Professor Chanan Eshel, an archaeologist from Tel Aviv's Bar Ilan University.

The two small pieces of brown animal skin, inscribed in Hebrew with verses from the Book of Leviticus, are from "refugee" caves in Nachal Arugot, a canyon near the Dead Sea where Jews hid from the Romans in the second century, Eshel said in an interview with The Associated Press.

The scrolls are being tested by Israel's Antiquities Authority. Recently, several relics bearing inscriptions, including a burial box purported to belong to Jesus' brother James, were revealed as modern forgeries.

More than 1,000 ancient texts — known collectively as the Dead Sea Scrolls — were discovered between 1947 and 1956 in 11 caves overlooking the western shores of the Dead Sea.

"No scrolls have been found in the Judean Desert" in decades, Eshel said. "The common belief has been that there is nothing left to find there."

Now, he said, scholars may be spurred on to further excavations.

Archaeologist and Bible scholar Steven Pfann said he had not seen the fragments. If authenticated, they would "in general not be doing more than confirming the character of the material that we have from the southern part of the Judean wilderness up until today."

But "what's interesting and exciting is that this is a new discovery," Pfann added. "This is the first time we've seen anything from the south since the 1960s."

Eshel said he was first shown the fragments last year during a meeting in an abandoned police station near the Dead Sea.

A Bedouin said he had been offered $20,000 for the fragments on the black market and wanted an evaluation.

The encounter both excited and dismayed the archaeologist who has worked in the Judean Desert since 1986.

"I was jealous he had found it, not me. I was also very excited. I didn't believe I would see them again," said Eshel, who took photographs of the pieces he feared would soon be smuggled out of the country.

But in March 2005, he discovered the Bedouin still had the scroll fragments. Eshel bought them with $3,000 provided by Bar Ilan University and handed them over to the Antiquities Authority, he said.

"Scholars do not buy antiquities. I did it because I could not see it fall apart," Eshel said.

The finding constitutes the 15th scroll fragments found in the area from the same period of the Jewish "Bar Kochba" revolt against the Romans, and the first to be discovered with verses from Leviticus, Eshel said.

The Dead Sea Scrolls were written by the Essenes, a monastic sect seen by some as a link between Judaism and early Christianity. The scrolls comprise more than 1,000 ancient texts found a half century ago in the caves above Qumran in the West Bank, one of the most significant discoveries in the Holy Land.
______________________________________


Courtney's Note:
Here's the news link, if anyone wants to check it out in person.

Sunday, July 10, 2005

in honor of Serious Matt

I spilled a pot of coffee on the floor of the auditorium of the church building. Any recommendations?

Thursday, June 30, 2005

work-in-progress pic 1



Well, this is a tiny little picture in comparison to the two-foot-tall original, but here are a few shots of the painting I'm currently working on. I can say 'currently' because I worked on it yesterday for the first time in two months. *sigh* I so wish I had more time to paint...I really need it.

Just as an FYI....the gap in the middle of the bridge is intentional, as the bridge is broken there (see detail pic beloew). The gap on the far right, though, isn't supposed to be there and will be covered up at some point. "Where She Hopes" is very much a work-in-progress: the foreground isn't finished, the trees in the background need work, the stone pillar on the far right is incomplete, and even the girl needs touch-ups. So, though feedback is welcome, please reserve judgment till you see the final product!

Provided, of course, that I ever find time to finish. ;o)

in-progress pic 2


A close-up of the girl, though the image quality isn't the best here, either. The painting isn't anywhere near this blurry in real life. Oh well, at least this gives a better impression of her facial expression. The hair was fun to paint. ;o) I think I spent more than two hours on the eyes alone!

in-progress pic 3


This is one of my favorite sections in the whole painting so far. I'm just really pleased with how well the sledgehammer and the shadows turned out.

in-progress pic 4


Last but not least, a detail pic of the broken bridge. I had such a blast painting the cracks in the stone! It was an intimidating task at first, but I loved it once I got into it.

Wednesday, June 29, 2005

just a thought

This morning, I'm briefly pondering how so many Christians are willing to discard the abolsute truths in God's Word in favor of "acceptance" and "tolerance" and "being non-judgmental". It seems that more and more Christians are choosing the ecumenical over the scriptural. I find that scary and way too post-modern.

I don't want to expand these thoughts right now, but..... Somewhere, years ago, I read the following, and it stuck:

Be open-minded. But not so open-minded that your brains fall out.

Hmm.

Tuesday, June 28, 2005

'Benny & Joon'

After seeing the movie 'Benny & Joon' several times, and then buying it on DVD a few months ago and watching it at home, I’ve decided that this is one of my all-time favorite movies. The actors all give terrific performances, and Johnny Depp is just spectacular as Sam. I’ve also decided that Depp is one of my favorite actors: He’s one of very few actors so flexible and so un-typecast that he can perform a huge variety of roles. Watching him act is a pure pleasure; he *is* each of his characters in a way most actors aren’t able to be.

Those of you who know me well know how much I love quotes. I actually sat down and watched ‘Benny & Joon’ with pen and paper in hand, so that I could write down all the great one-liners. This movie always has me glued to the screen with fascination; wiping at a poignant tear; or rolling on the floor laughing. So here are some of my favorite quotes from ‘Benny & Joon’. Most of them are from Mary Stuart Masteson’s character, Joon. Enjoy!

Have we an internal sequin issue to deal with, Benjamin?
So, are you and Ruthie considering itemhood?
Having a Boo Radley moment, are we?
(I love that one!)
Who died and made you Ed McMahon?
She was given to fits of semi-precious metaphors.
(See my tagline at top of blog!)
Beware! The winds of reason shall blow stern!

Benny: Did you leave the house alone?
Joon: …Define ‘alone’.

Will someone get some air to his brain?
In Ireland, we have a saying: When the boat runs ashore, the sea has spoken!
Some cultures are defined by their relationship to cheese.
(a favorite!)
[Raisins] taste sweet, but they’re really just humiliated grapes. (and another favorite!)

GO RENT THIS MOVIE!!! ;o)

Thursday, June 23, 2005

The Reason Why Courtney Stays Out Of The Kitchen


WARNING: This blog post is not for the faint of heart or weak of stomach!

This is a picture of the nifty gadget that Ed bought me a few weeks ago. In my efforts to adopt healthier eating habits, I’ve been trying to eat more vegetables. Okay…I’ve just been trying to eat vegetables, period. Most of my life, I’ve been a meat-bread-potatoes girl, and green veggies have never been particularly appealing. But the last few years have taught me that wow! my body really does function better if I put fresh, uncooked things into it—the whole natural-sources-of-vitamins-and-minerals thing really is effective. God created broccoli and cabbage for a reason, it seems.

Okay, so I’ve been trying to eat more veggies, which means salads for me. But there’s a serious drawback: Salad-making is, for me, a tedious process. Which means I’m less likely to do it. Not necessarily because I’m lazy (though I’m sure that’s part of it), but because I can always think of more productive things I could be doing with my time while I’m trying to turn that piece of tomato into something that could conceivably be called diced.

So Ed bought me that nifty gadget, designed to lighten my load and goad me on to health and wholesome eating. This natty doodad slices and shreds and basically need nothing more than elbow grease and a good rinsing after use. As a result of its entry into our home, my salads have been looking more and more appealing, as well as being more enjoyable because I’ve been having oodles of fun preparing them. And when I have fun with food, it tastes a whole lot better.

That is, until yesterday. The following picture shows what I did with my new toy yesterday. If you get all fluttery at the sight of blood, stop reading and looking now.

If you're one of those rare, brave souls, however, please continue on to the post below:

***


This, friends and neighbors, is why Courtney generally stays out of the kitchen. Bad things happen. Sometimes, things break. Sometimes, she gets things to catch on fire that aren’t supposed to be flambéed. Sometimes, she hurts herself. This is why she leaves the cooking to Ed: because while in the kitchen, she doesn’t pay enough attention to be trusted with sharp objects.

It was really my own fault, because I got a bit too enthusiastic with the slicer. I’m fortunate that I didn’t do more damage; that thing is razor-sharp. I trust Larry when he says I don’t need stitches (not that there’s enough left to stitch together, anyway)…but this sure does hurt. Even under pressure, it took two hours to stop bleeding, and then I made it start again when I put a bandage on it before going to bed.

And it’s on my right hand, which means that I’m now slightly impaired. I brushed my teeth with my left hand this morning, I can’t shower properly, and right now I’m having to hunt-and-peck a great deal more than I usually do when typing. And it’s my middle finger, too, so when I’m holding my hand up in order to make the throbbing stop, I have to be careful not to flip everybody off.

*sigh* So many cookbooks, so little skill. Just call me “The Girl Who Could Ruin Cereal.” ;o)

Sunday, June 19, 2005

a few things that tick me on

Back in December, I wrote a list of “a few things that tick me off”. Since then, I’ve been meaning to sit down and compile a list of positive stuff in my life. Yesterday, I led part of our ladies’ breakfast devotional on thankfulness…so I figured it was high time for me to blog about a few things in my life with which God has blessed me. This is a pretty random list...just involving a few things swirling around in my head.

The magazine National Geographic. It’s no accident that this has been one of the most popular geographic and scientific publications since 1888. Every issue I read, I’m more amazed at how much info they manage to pack into it about this beautiful world God has created. And that, of course, is part of what I enjoy the most. The National Geographic Society is most obviously Darwinian and anti-Creation/Design in their thinking. However, the more I learn from NG about science and the way the world works, the more in awe I am…not of men’s wisdom, but of God’s power. Every tidbit of scientific knowledge strengthens my faith in my Lord and Creator. So much for NG’s efforts to “enlighten” me from what I’m sure they would consider my primitive beliefs. ;o)

Though I haven’t worked on it lately, I’m still enjoying my newest painting. I started it, oh, six weeks ago, I suppose. If it turns out the way I imagine, it’ll probably be my best to date…and my most meaningful, because it expresses an integral and not always beneficial part of my personality. I’ll post a work-in-progress pic here sometime soon.

Back in January/February, I rejoiced in visiting Barnes & Noble while Ed and I were in Oklahoma. Wow. Talk about a rush. Do you have any idea how fantastically wonderful it is to walk into a place like that filled with books in your native language??? Yeah, yeah, I read and understand German without any trouble…but it’s pure enjoyment to read my favorite authors in the language in which they actually penned their works. Some things, no matter how skilled the translation, just get lost in translation. I stocked up on about ten books, I think. And I still have enough to tide me over till I am next privileged to walk the hallowed halls of B & N! ;o)

God brought me to Saxony, and the Saxons introduced me to coffee. Coffee is wonderful. Coffee is great. Coffee tastes best with sugar and coffee creamer. YUM!!!

Friends, I am pleased to tell you that IT IS FINALLY SUMMER HERE. In May, things started warming up enough to become slightly uncomfortable. (Well, not for me, but the rest of the mortals don’t seem to like the heat too much.) Then, it started getting colder again. Last week, we had temps in the 40s. That’s FORTIES. As I type this, it is 19:21 (FYI, that’s 7:21 p.m.) in Chemnitz, the sun is shining, and it’s 70.9 degrees Fahrenheit. Ahhh…… I went for an hour-long walk earlier and enjoyed thinking about God and watching the baby ducks in the big pond.

More and more people are realizing that teaching someone about God doesn’t mean just having a Bible study with them.

More and more people are realizing that teaching someone about God doesn’t require being in a paid position with a title.

Though not so advantageous for my hip region, chocolate makes me happy. As for the hips, that’s why God made parks to walk in and lakes to stroll around. ;o)

I’m so thankful that God gave me his Holy Spirit to live in me, guide me in decisions, and change me from the inside out. Without him, I would be nothing.

The other day, Ed and I were sitting on the couch, and I was watching him talk. Suddenly, it was as though I were seeing him for the first time, and I thought, “Wow. I am married. That’s a weird concept. And wow. I’m married to a wonderful man who wants to serve God and help me get to heaven. I can’t begin to understand what a great blessing this man is in my life.”

And that’s all I got to say about that. ;o)

Wednesday, June 08, 2005

in need of him

I’ve been reading further in Strobel’s The Case for a Creator, and the more I read, the more fascinated I am. I know most people—including many Christians—find this stuff to be dry, boring academics…but I get SO excited about it, I just can’t keep my mouth shut!

If I had been better in math and physics in high school, I seriously think I might have gone into a field of scientific study. So many Christians believe that science is irrelevant; that science can add nothing to their faith (that science will detract from their faith, in fact); and that science and faith are fundamentally incompatible. But I believe exactly the opposite: In Genesis 1:28, God commanded us to “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it…” Well, we’ve fruited and multiplied and filled, but we haven’t yet subdued. I believe that part of what God meant by “subdue” is that he wants us to learn and understand and benefit from his physical creation as much as we possibly can. This means learning from his physical creation. This means studying it. This means science.

Everything I have learned from science has not only supported my faith in God but actually increased it. Cell biology, cosmology, quantum physics…they all point toward God, if Christians and non-Christians will only open their eyes to see it. I read the following in Strobel’s book this morning and thought it would provide something interesting to consider…and perhaps something challenging, as well:

“…[W]hat we know today gives us heightened confidence—from science—that God exists. The weight of the evidence is very, very impressive—in fact, in my opinion it’s sufficiently conclusive to say that theism provides the best explanation for the ensemble of scientific evidence…

Science and faith are not at war. When scientific evidence and biblical teaching are correctly interpreted, they can and do support each other. I’d say to anyone who doubts that: investigate the evidence yourself.

“…And here’s what the scientific evidence for God does for me: it realigns me. It helps me recognize that despite my natural tendency toward self-focus and self-absorption, I can’t ignore what God has accomplished in this world to let everyone know that he is real, that he is the Creator, and that we need to get right with him.

“I see this not only in cosmology and physics and biology, but also in the historical revelation of the Bible, principally in the revelation of Jesus Christ himself. He is so compelling! Einstein thought so. Napoleon thought so. This Nazarene captivated their attention, and he continues to captivate mine.

“…Jesus is so beyond what I can comprehend! And the evidence for God in nature constantly challenges me to a deeper and fuller relationship with him. My study of the scientific evidence isn’t separate from my life as a Christian; it’s marbled throughout that experience.

“…I look at the stars in the night sky or reflect on the structure and information-bearing properties of a DNA molecule, and these are occasions for me to worship the Creator who brought them into existence. I think of the wry smile that might be on the lips of God as in the last few years all sorts of evidence for the reliability of the Bible and for his creation of the universe and life have come to light. I believe he has caused them to be unveiled in his providence and that he delights when we discover his fingerprints in the vastness of the universe, in the dusty relics of paleontology, and in the complexity of the cell.

“So exploring the scientific and historical evidence for God is not only a cognitive exercise, but it’s an act of worship for me. It’s a way of giving the Creator the credit and honor and glory that are due to him. To attribute creation to a mere natural process is a form of idolatry to which we’re all prone. I don’t judge my naturalistic colleagues for being prone to that. That’s how I’m constituted as well. All of us have a tendency to minimize God, to think and behave as if we weren’t really immersed in his creation and that we aren’t ourselves the product of his unimaginable creative power.

Looking at the evidence—in nature and in Scripture—reminds me over and over again of who he is. And it reminds me of who I am too—someone in need of him.

--Stephen C. Meyer, PHD
Director and Senior Fellow, Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, Seattle, WA
in Lee Strobel’s The Case for a Creator
(emphasis added)


“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.”

--Romans 1:18-21

Tuesday, May 31, 2005

I found my motto!

Okay, so I've been shocking even myself with how much I've been blogging lately. Maybe I'm expanding my communication skills. Or maybe I'm on the verge of a nervous breakdown. Since my verge keeps getting swung past my rim absolutely, who could tell one way or the other?

Anyway, all of that to say that I heard my motto on TV today. It was so profoundly me, I scrambled for pen and paper in order to write it down while I still remembered it. The irony is that I never watch the show I'm quoting. Had I not been here in range of Armed Forces Network broadcasting, I might never have heard this. You can't tell me there's any such thing as coincidence. ;o)

So here it is:

Ray: You know that little part of your brain that doesn't think things all the way through before you say something?
Robert: That's not the little part of *your* brain.

~Everybody Loves Raymond

Friends and neighborinos, is that me or what??!?!??!?!?!!!!????!

*big grin*

Monday, May 30, 2005

once more, cheese badly goes

I thought that I struck something in mine blog to amuse myself just. I did not know how about that what to write, I decided to join to the request from Weakly and some things by this big translator in http: // www.online-translator.com/ to lead.

Apparently, nobody’s blogging a lot recently, like I note that mine has begun blog to suffer from this discomfort about which have already complained Weakly and Amy; since, the lack of remarks. Or commentors. Or annotators. Or such a thing. However, I have not come to the point completely to offer the kind of the bribe which Amy on hers blog offered whose challenge I submitted myself shamelessly. (Just so know, I write only like this to impress the on-line translator.) And why do I not offer a bribe in the way, did Amy act? Because I am decayed. They want that I write a post, that would require me to *think* really??? ;o)

I am in the house of my parents at this moment. Like normal people my parents observe and read the news. And because I am here, I also observe it. And this reminds me, why I do not observe in general the news. I bend often to too much cynicism anyhow, and I suppose the whole negative stuff in the news - and that on television generally! - would serve only to make my opinion worse.

Me reminds that I have one more positive list to write, to make up for the list of negatives in December. Maybe morning. ;o)


Translation into something we can all comprehend:

I thought I’d post something in my blog just to amuse myself. I didn’t know what to write about, so I decided to accede to Matt’s request and run a few things through that great translator at http://www.online-translator.com/.

Apparently, no one’s been blogging much lately, as I notice that my blog has begun suffering from that ailment of which Matt and Amy have already complained; namely, the lack of comments. Or commentors. Or commentators. Or whatever. However, I haven’t quite gotten to the point of offering the sort of bribe that Amy offered on her blog, to the challenge of which I shamelessly subjected myself. (Just so you know, I’m only writing like this to impress the online translator.) And why do I not offer a bribe the way Amy did? Because I’m lazy. You want me to write a post that would actually require me to *think*??? ;o)

I’m at my parents’ house right now. Like normal humans, my parents watch and read the news. And since I’m here, I watch it, too. And this reminds me why I generally don’t watch the news. I often tend toward too much cynicism anyway, and I suspect that all the negative stuff in the news--and on TV in general!--would serve only to worsen my attitude.

Which reminds me that I still have a “positives” list to write, to make up for the list of “negatives” in December. Maybe tomorrow. ;o)

(P.S. Matt, I’m really sorry that the translator translated your name as “weakly.” I promise you the most veralid promise I know, I had nothing to do with the translation!)

Friday, May 27, 2005

Debunking Darwinism

I just found this fascinating quote in Lee Strobel’s latest book, The Case for a Creator. This is great stuff! I highly recommend this book to everyone. I'm only through the first three chapters, and I'm already wishing I'd had this info at my fingertips countless times in the past. It's one thing to know, as a Christian, that Darwinism makes no sense...but it's a completely different ball game to be able to explain to people WHY. This book provides the academic tools for the task.

Anyway, the quote:

“My conclusion is that the case for Darwinian evolution is bankrupt…The evidence for Darwinism is not only grossly inadequate, it’s systematically distorted. I’m convinced that sometime in the not-too-distant future—I don’t know, maybe twenty or thirty years from now—people will look back in amazement and say, ‘How could anyone have believed this?’ Darwinism is merely materialistic philosophy masquerading as science, and people are recognizing it for what it is.

“…I believe science is pointing strongly toward design. To me, as a scientist, the development of an embryo cries out, ‘Design!’ The Cambrian explosion—the sudden appearance of complex life, with no evidence for ancestors—is more consistent with design than evolution. Homology, in my opinion, is more compatible with design. The origin of life certainly cries out for a designer. None of these things make as much sense from a Darwinian perspective as they do from a design perspective.

"…(O)ne of the main functions of Darwinian theory is to try to make design unnecessary. …So showing that the arguments for evolution are weak certainly opens the door to design.

“And then…when you analyze all of the most current affirmative evidence from cosmology, physics, astronomy, biology, and so forth—well, I think you’ll discover that the positive case for an intelligent designer becomes absolutely compelling.”

--Jonathan Wells, PHD, PHD
Senior Fellow with the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, Seattle, WA
in Lee Strobel’s The Case for a Creator

Someday, our children will learn these things in schools. You know…TRUTH.

Thursday, May 26, 2005

You're Not Wanted

Today, I ran across the following quote in Lee Strobel’s The Case for a Creator. Strobel writes about late evolutionary biologist George Gaylord Simpson, who said Darwinism teaches that “man is the result of a purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind” (Simpson, The Meaning of Evolution, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1967, p. 345).

In conversations and discussions, people often ask me the rhetorical question of what is wrong with today’s society. They don’t expect me to give them an answer, of course—they’re only thinking out loud. But these questions plague them. Why are people so rude to each other? Why are people so impatient with each other? Why are people generally so angry? Why do school shootings happen? What ever happened to common courtesy?

Just two weeks ago in nearby Zwickau, a married father of two was on his way to a job interview. He was dressed properly, in a suit and tie, ready to live his role as a good citizen of society. On the morning before his afternoon interview, he stopped his car on the street, got out, grabbed a six-year-old girl walking by, shoved her into the trunk of his car, and drove away. A witness got the license plate number of his car and phoned the police. An hour-and-a-half later, the police arrested the man. During that hour-and-a-half, the man raped the six-year-old girl and slit her throat.

Well, if society tells him that he’s only a highly evolved animal, and the girl is only a highly evolved animal, then why shouldn’t he rape and kill her? Animals don’t treat each other with kindness and compassion. The stronger kill the weaker all the time. Why should humans behave any differently?

When I consider these things, I think it’s no wonder that there’s something fundamentally rotten about today’s society.

Then I consider the quote from Simpson. Over my admittedly short lifetime, I’ve had contact with several people who grew up knowing that their parents didn’t want them. These individuals knew that they were “accidents.” They knew that they didn’t come into this world by anyone’s plan. Some of them knew that their parents were actively trying to prevent their conception. Can you imagine being a child and hearing your parents tell you that they didn’t want you? The two people in the world who should want you the most…and they tell you that you weren’t part of their plans at all. When they envisioned the rest of their lives, you weren’t in the picture.

What does that knowledge do to a child? It creates a lack of self-worth. It creates anger. It creates hate. If the two people in the world who should love you the most don’t love you, then why in all the universe should you love yourself? Why shouldn’t you treat yourself with as much contempt and disregard as you can muster? Why shouldn’t you lash out with anger and violence against everyone around you? (By the way, to parents out there: Even if you never wanted your children, don’t ever tell them that. There’s little you could do to them that would be more psychologically abusive.)

After all, you were just an accident. Something horrible that was never meant to be, which draws the revolted stares of the morbidly curious.

Humankind has evolved into such a child. Darwinism informed us that we were categorically unplanned, undesigned, and unwanted. Simpson interprets Darwinism to say that unfeeling natural processes did not have us in mind. We were not part of a plan; we are not part of anything greater than ourselves. We are nothing but an accident that was never meant to be.

Is it any wonder, then, that our race has no self-worth? Is it any wonder that more and more frequently and intensively, our race lashes out against itself with anger and violence and hatred? If we believe that we are nothing more than accidental animals, why shouldn’t we treat each other with as much contempt and disregard as we can muster?

People ask the rhetorical “Why?”
I answer with a rhetorical “Why not?” If Darwinism is fact, then why not?

Thank God for God, that it is not so.

Friday, May 20, 2005

It burns me to ash...

One of my favorite verses that Marion recently reminded me of, and I want to share it here:

If I say, "I will not mention him, or speak any more in his name," there is in my heart as it were a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I am weary with holding it in, and I cannot.

~Jeremiah 20:9

Wednesday, May 18, 2005

More fun with the translator!

Okay, so I found a new toy. I promise, I won't break it by playing with it too much. ;o)

So anyway, if you run this:

Ignorance is bliss. Knowledge is power. Power corrupts. Cheese corrupts. Therefore, knowledge is cheese.

several times through that online translator I mentioned in my last post,
you get this:

The lack of the experience is a bliss. Knowledge is power. Runs down goes. Cheese badly goes. Therefore, knowledge is cheese.

Modern technology totally rocks my world!

(Modern technology completely swings my verge!)
(Modern technology dangles my edge absolutely!)
(Modern technology allows to my rim to hang absolutely!)

...What???

Dream #74

Also, ich dachte, ich würd euch meinen neusten Traum schildern, und zwar auf Deutsch. Die englische Übersetzung findet ihr unten. Ich habe meinen Text durch die Übersetzungs-Maschine (heißt das so?) http://www.online-translator.com/ geschickt, die Leenda gefunden hat. Ich denke, die Übersetzung wird euch was zum Lachen geben!

Traum #74
10. Mai 2005

Ich Lasse Mir Die Lippe Piercen

Vergangene Nacht hab ich geträumt, ich hätte mir die Lippe gepierced. Das Piercing war in der Mitte meiner Unterlippe. Es war ein kleiner, silberner Ring, mit dem ich immer mit der Zunge spielte. Ich habe Ed das Piercing gezeigt, und er fand es echt sexy. Dann bin ich plötzlich (immernoch im Traum!) aufgewacht und merkte, daß ich gar kein Piercing hatte. Aber meine Unterlippe kribbelte, as sollte dort irgendwas sein. Ich hab’s Ed erzählt, der dann meinte „Jetzt willst du dir wohl die Lippe piercen lassen, oder?“ Ich sagte ja, also gingen wir ins Piercing-Studio, und ich ließ mir die Unterlippe piercen—wieder in der Mitte, und wieder dieser kleine Silberring. Und ich hab wieder mit der Zunge damit gespielt, und Ed meinte, es wäre echt sexy. Dann war der Traum zuende.

Als ich wirklich aufgewacht bin, hat meine Lippe wieder so komisch gekribbelt, genau wie im Traum! Diesmal, als ich Ed davon erzählte, hat er nur amüsiert gen Himmel geschaut und gemeint, ein Ring in meiner Unterlippe wäre keine besonders gute Idee. Soviel zum Thema sexy Piercings!

Translation:

Thus, I thought, I would describe my newest dream, namely in German to you. You find English translation below. I have my text by the translation-machine (is called thus?) http://www.online-translator.com/ skillful, which has found Leenda. I think, the translation will give to you what to the laughter!

Dream #74
10th May, 2005-05-18

I Leaves Me The Lip Piercen

The last night I have dreamed, I would have to me the lip gepierced. The Piercing was in the middle of my lower lip. It was a small, silver ring with which I played always with the tongue. I have shown the Piercing to Ed, and he found it really sexy.

Then I am sudden (immernoch in the dream!) woken and noticed that I had no Piercing. But my lower lip prickled, should be as there something. I have told it to Ed, that meant then " Now you probably want to allow to the lip piercen, or? " I said yes, thus we went to the Piercing studio, and I let myself the lower lip piercen—again in the middle, and again this small silver ring. And I have played again with the tongue with it, and Ed meant, it would be really sexy. Then was the dream catches fire.

When I have really woken, my lip has prickled again so funnily, exactly how in the dream! This time when I told Ed about it, he has looked only amused heavenward and has meant, a ring in my lower lip would be no especially good idea. So much on the subject sexily Piercings!

more communication

FYI, friends and neighborinos, I have updated my blog with my latest witty responses to comments. So if you've left a comment since February, my response is now posted beneath it.

In other news, it seems some of my recent posts have irritated or outright angered some people. Well, that happens. I never promised you a rose garden. Not that I desire controversy, not that I want to come across as an angry, hostile person...but I won't apologize for truth, either.

I welcome all corrections from anyone and everyone. If God's word is the foundation of your opinions, then I'll post a retraction of whatever I've written that irks you. ;o)

Hugs and fried locusts to all!

Sunday, May 08, 2005

Ripley


Posted by Hello

June 22, 2002 - April 15, 2005

Also known as:

Ripleycat, Ripley Anne, Brat Cat, Miss Priss, Miss Brat, Baby, Babycat, The Kitty, She, Ripplecat, Psycho Cat, Crazy Kitty, Queen of Sheba, Sweet-Kitty-Good-Kitty-Fine-Kitty, Kampfkatze, and Biting Cat.

As Ed put it, “She lived randomly, and she died randomly.” She was one of the weirdest friends I’ve ever had, but also one of the best.

Thursday, April 14, 2005

More Fun Quotes

Just something for your reading pleasure. Larry gave me these, so I thought I'd translate them into English and share them here:

"Ministers really have it hard. As in the past, they still have to fight against sin today. But they no longer remember what falls under that category."
--Author Unknown

"If you think you're a Christian just because you attend a church, then you're kidding yourself. You don't become a car simply because you walked into the garage, either."
--Author Unknown

"The church is often like a house that has been renovated too often. It would be good to remove some of the old paint in order to find out what was originally beneath it."
--Author Unknown

"During religion class, the teacher asks the student, 'What happens if you break one of the Ten Commandments?' The student thinks for awhile, then answers slowly, 'Then there will be only nine left...'"
--Author Unknown

"What the church cannot prevent, that it blesses."
--Karl Tucholsky, 1890-1935

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."
--Albert Einstein, 1879-1955

Wednesday, April 13, 2005

"The time has come," the walrus said, "to talk of other things..."

“…of shoes and ships and sealing wax, of cabbages, and kings…”

…and popes.

I was going to refrain from commenting about the Catholic Pope’s demise…however, since the media are all in a frenzy about it, and I am in the middle of a church history course, I suppose I’ll deign to express some thoughts on the matter. ;o)

Okay. So, in my previous post, I told y’all about the church history course, for which I spent a week in Bremen. The details of that terrific week are too many for me to give now—suffice it to say that I enjoyed it immensely, I learned a lot, and I’m still trying to process all the information that Jim gave us. After I returned to Chemnitz, I promptly got sick again and have spent the past few weeks recovering and trying to get back into a schedule of sorts, so that’s why I haven’t blogged recently.

And now, the whole world is talking about nothing so much as the death of Pope John Paul II and who his successor will be. It seems that most people have expressed shock that he actually passed away, as though his dying was completely unexpected.

Friends, I have news for you. He was always going to die. How do I know? Well, he was human.

Now, before I go any further in what will probably be a diatribe, let me assure you that I don’t mean to attack John Paul personally. Many years ago, I read a biographical article on him, describing his thoughts and actions when he was first elected (named? commissioned? the correct terminology escapes me) Pope. What I read in that article caused me to have respect for the man, as he seemed to be a genuinely kind, caring, and generous individual. My opinion of him in this respect has not changed. Furthermore, I saw him in person (from a distance!) in Rome several years ago, and his frailty—coupled with the weight of his man-made responsibilities—caused me to pity him. He carried a burden no individual human was designed to bear.

Which, of course, is the crux of the matter. The heart of the problem. I hope some of you have steel in your boots, ‘cause I’m about to stomp all over your toes.

After learning what I have about church history, 33-500 A.D., I can say with absolute certainty that the Catholic Church really screwed up. I won’t give you a history lesson on it, but what basically happened is this: Christians started listening to human teaching instead of focusing on the word of God. They ignored II. Timothy (which describes the leadership of the church) and passages such as Ephesians 4 and Colossians 1, which describe Christ as the head of the church. In the 4th century, Emperor Constantine had the brilliant idea of making Christianity required by law. Of course, when you have an emperor running things, you gotta have plenty of pomp and circumstance. And with pomp and extra ritual comes the necessity of someone special to maintain the ritual, hence, you gotta have specially ordained priests and so forth. Never mind that I. Peter 2 describes *all* Christians as a priesthood.

Meaning, if you’re a Christian, you’re a priest. I’m a priest. You, if you’re a Christian, are priest. We’re all priests together. No more clergy vs. laiety. God did away with that when he gave us Jesus as our ONLY high priest (see Hebrews).

Anyway, back to the happy people of the first few centuries. When they started calling all these Rome-connected churches the “Catholic Church,” they had some great unity all right. You know what “catholic” means? It means “universal.” Basically, it means that instead of diversity, you’ve got lots of little churches that are carbon copies of the big one in Rome. Instead of individuals’ taking responsibility for their own salvation, you’ve got a bunch of people listening to priests and bishops interpreting scripture for them, while the people themselves don’t have a clue what the scriptures actually say.

And heading it all is the Pope, also known as “pontifex maximus.” This is a Latin term meaning “greatest bridgebuilder.” According to Catholic theology, the Pope is the bridgebuilder between humanity and God. He’s it. He’s the summit. He’s the one we should all be following, because he’s our only link to God.

There’s nothing I can say to this. Someone else said it better than I ever could:

I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” Jesus spoke those words. They’re recorded in John 14:6.

The writer of Hebrews says of Jesus: “The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, 'You are a priest forever.' This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant. The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office, but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them. For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens” (Hebrews 7:22-26).

The Catholic Pope is in no way qualified to be a bridge between me and God. Why? Because he is sinful. Yes! The Catholic Pope is just as much a sinner as you and I and any other human who walks this earth! He is sinful, he is stained, he is not separated from sinners, and he is not exalted above the heavens. He is prevented by death from continuing in office—this fact was obviated by John Paul’s death less than two weeks ago. THE POPE IS ONLY A MAN. Imperfect and impure, unqualified to be a high priest for anybody. “…(T)here is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:22-23). This includes every archbishop, every bishop, archdeacon, deacon, priest, preacher, teacher, every so-called “saint”…and every Pope.

According to the passages of scripture quoted above, only Jesus Christ is qualified to build a bridge between me and God. Only Jesus is qualified to intercede for me. Because he is the only one who is perfect, unstained, eternal.

As a side note, the Papal title “pontifex maximus” has interesting origins. History tells us that this title belonged to the Roman Emperors, who were considered the “high priests” of the Roman state cult. You know, the cult that worshiped the pantheon of gods, including Jupiter, Mercury, Mars, Diana, etc. As “pontifex maximus,” the Roman Emperor functioned as the high priest and bridge between his subjects and the gods. So, “pontifex maximus” was a pagan and political title. Eventually, thanks to Constantine’s gifting the head of the Roman church with so much power, the Popes took that title for themselves. It’s no accident that the pagan and political title “pontifex maximus” is nowhere to be found in the Bible. And neither is the title “benedictus papa” or “Pope.” “Papa” is Latin for “father.”

Jesus said, “And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven” (Matthew 23:9).

As I hear of the media frenzy over the Pope’s death, and as I read online that thousands have already visited John Paul’s tomb to pay homage to this sinful human, I can only shake my head in disgust and sadness. This is not what God intended! This is a perversion, a mix of politics, pagan beliefs, twisted scripture, and wishful thinking.

Today, I read in a Yahoo! news article that many people visiting John Paul II’s tomb believe that he is a “saint.” They are praying to him and asking him to perform miracles in their lives. If it weren’t so sad, I would laugh at how ridiculous this is. Why aren’t they praying to Jesus, as the above-mentioned scriptures command? John Paul II was a great activist for human rights and morality, but he was not holy. He didn’t sacrifice his life to save the world. He didn’t function as the bridge between God and one single human. He didn’t do anything to deserve all this attention. Frankly, he’s just not worth all the fuss.

In closing, allow me to pose the following. Think about it carefully, and try to answer yourself honestly.

If Jesus, the homeless, penniless, dusty, dirty, ugly, unpopular, simple carpenter walked into the Vatican today, would he be welcomed? Would he fit into the grandeur of the Catholic cathedrals? Would he fit into the splendor of the church buildings “Christian” religions like to build today?

Thousands of people are honoring the Pope’s grave, and they are praying to the Pope. Would so many thousands of people turn out to honor Jesus Christ?

I think we all know the answer to that.

Saturday, March 12, 2005

Another Away Message

Dearest Friends and Neighbo(u)rs and Occasional Lurkers!

Well, it’s that time of year again, when a young man’s fancy turns to thoughts of cleaning cars and slinging a baseball across a field….

Oh— …Wait a sec….. Wrong season. It’s still winter. And wrong gender, considering the fact that I’m female.

Okay, so, I’m writing this to let you all know that I’ll be without Internet access from tomorrow until next Saturday. Tomorrow, after worship service, I’m taking a train to Bremen, a city in northern Germany. Jim and Elsa Springer, who’ve worked with the church in Bremen for about thirty years, offer a Christian leadership training program in German, with one class in the spring and one in the fall. Ed and I took their introductory course last fall, and I’m now taking one of the advanced courses.

Every spring course is different; this year’s happens to be Church History of the First Five-Hundred Years. The class officially started two weeks ago, and we students have been working on assignments at home. During the coming week in Bremen, we’ll have class with Jim eight hours per day (probably about four hours on Saturday). It’s called an “intensive week.” Hmm, I wonder why. ;o) I’ll return back to Chemnitz on the train next Saturday evening.

So far, the at-home assignments have been challenging. For one thing, I’d planned to get a head-start on the reading (a 350-page church history book); on the 50-word glossary we have to compile; and the leadership interview we have to do. But when I was sick for two weeks in February, my brain just wasn’t functioning well enough to do anything intellectual. Thus, I’ve spent the last two weeks frantically trying to catch up, and I’m still not finished. Hopefully, I’ll be able to complete my glossary on the train tomorrow, provided reading-while-moving doesn’t make me sick at my stomach.

For those of you who are the praying type, I’d appreciate your prayers—not just while I’m in Bremen, but also for the duration of the course. Please pray for my health, which is a near-constant trial to me, and for my clarity of thought, so that I can make the most of this opportunity to learn. Over the last few years, I’ve discovered that I enjoy and covet the challenge of being a student, and I’d like to be able to learn this new material well enough that I can use it to help teach more people about Jesus and the truths in God’s Word.

See you on the other side of the week!

Sunday, March 06, 2005

seasonal peculiarities

*deepthoughts by Courtney*

So, it's about one o'clock in the morning here in Chemnitz. That's 1:00 a.m., in case the previous wasn't clear enough.

I looked out the window a couple of minutes ago. It's 1:00 a.m., it's snowing, and a man just skied past our apartment building outside.

A man just skied past our apartment building outside.

Am I the only one who's weirded out by this?

*/deepthoughts by Courtney*

Saturday, March 05, 2005

Flap your wings....see what happens.

Finally, after much wait and debate, I have found / made an opportunity to watch the movie “The Butterfly Effect.” Ed and I just finished watching it a few minutes ago, and I know it’s going to take me awhile to process all of my impressions. One initial thought is that I’m glad Ed and I watched this without anyone else present. There were some sex scenes in there that I sure wouldn’t want to watch in mixed company. Call me prudish if you will, but it just would have been weird. Plus, the language definitely made me wish we owned one of those TV-G (TV-Guardian?) devices, the things that bleep out whichever words you program into it.

However, I’m not trying to write an epistle on the rightness or wrongness of Christians’ watching R-rated movies. That’s a topic for another post, another day.

What I’m really trying to do is sort out my thoughts. The movie was pretty much what I expected—unfortunately, the previews give away most of the plot and the concept. (By the way, if you haven’t seen the movie but plan to see it, don’t keep reading. I’ll spoil it for you.) However, it still delivered quite a lot of food for thought.

Just to recap: Guy has blackouts as a kid; as an adult, figures out how to project himself into the past and change bad things that happened to him during those blackouts; ends up doing more damage than good; keeps going back over and over to try to fix things, but just ruins friends’ lives and his own life in the process; finally realizes that the only way to set everything right is to shut out of his life the one person who means the most to him.

So…of course, the question is: Could you ever change something for the better if you went back and altered something in the past?

We all have regrets, don’t we? I don’t think I know one person who has no regrets. I know at least one person who claims not to have any regrets. But that person has also told me of things in his life he wishes hadn’t happened, and that sounds like regret to me. Each of us has done and said things we wish we could take back.

But if you could take it back….what would it be?

What would I change? It’s hard to say, because I know that who I am and where I am today are a direct result of everything that I have done and said in the past. Were I to change something, it would be with the knowledge that I would be changing my present and my future as well. And that’s a frightening thought, because I can think back on a few choices that might have led me down different paths had I chosen differently—and some of those paths aren’t very pretty.

I’ve been sitting here, sifting through memories, wondering which one of them would be worth changing. Instead of a fistfight, a kind word to a younger kid when I was eleven? Instead of ignorance, giving a definitive answer for my faith when I was eighteen? Instead of passivity, a decisive “no” when I was twenty? Instead of criticism, a word of support to a friend when I was twenty-seven?

And my answer must remain: I don’t know. I don’t know if any of those incidents, altered, would be enough to change my life or another’s. Either for better or for worse. In the film, the main character made his life and his friends’ lives worse every time he went back and changed something. Each small alteration led all of them down a different, darker path than they would have walked had he left the past alone. Though he meant well, he entered a horrid, vicious circle that spiraled him and his friends down into despair and evil and madness. And the only thing that brought them out of it was his willingness to give up the love of the one person he loved the most. Hm. Somehow, loving sacrifice always ends up being the saving grace of every flawed hero.

Changing my past would make me a different person. And if I were a different person, I would have a different effect on those around me. Who knows what negative influence my smallest actions might have if I were a different person? Who knows what negative influence I have even now, without knowing it? Certainly, a change in the past might result in a better present Me, a better future Me…

…but then again, it might not. What are the chances that a change would turn out better? I’m no math whiz, but I’m guessing the odds are not particularly good.

God knew what he was doing when he gave us humans a linear, finite sense of time and the inability to move freely along the timeline. He knew what a mess of our lives and each other’s lives we would make if we could change our pasts. He knew that no matter how much we tried, we could never set right the things we’ve done wrong in the past. I’m grateful that he doesn’t expect us to.

Can the flap of a single butterfly’s wing cause a typhoon? One action you take, one word that you say, always leads to a reaction in someone else. You might never know about it…but that’s your influence on those around you. And your smallest action, your most insignificant word, could turn into something monstrous or something wonderful in someone else’s future. Your smallest good deed could turn into an heroic act of kindness by someone else somewhere continents away and years down the line. Conversely, your smallest meanness could turn into an atrocity by someone else, far away, far in the future. Either way, you’ll never know about it.

Either way, we’re all part of each other—all of us humans, who are butterflies causing typhoons.

If you could go back and change something…would you?

Sunday, February 27, 2005

Church Couture

(Sorry, y’all, this is gonna be a long one. Watch—see what I’m doing? ….I’m draggin’ out a big ol’ soapbox. Hang on to your hats, kids.)

There comes a time in almost every woman’s life when she feels the driving need to confess. (Actually, if you ask Robert Heinlein, *every* woman has that need *all* of the time, but I think Heinlein, though an excellent and very enjoyable science fiction writer, was a macho, chauvinistic, over-sexed pig, so we won’t pay any attention to his opinion. If you want me to digress on *my* opinion of *him*, please ask. I’ll do so.)

Anyway…the need to confess. Ladies and gents, I’ve got it. And, so, I am going to confess. Brace yourselves.

…...

I wore jeans to worship this morning.

Breathe, people. Please. You’re turning purple.

Okay, all joking aside. Why am I being so silly about this? Why the sarcasm? Well, according to communication experts, sarcasm is merely a tool used by people who are passive-aggressive in their communications with others. When they are upset or angry about something, they don’t display their anger openly and clearly. Instead, they needle the issue in a roundabout, manipulative sort of manner. Sarcasm is their way of addressing the problem without having to stand up strongly for their opinions and without having to take responsibility for their own anger.

So, I’m gonna drop the sarcasm. I’m upset. I’m angry.

I’m angry at those who would turn worship to God into a social event. I’m angry at those who use gimmicks—whether it’s in the seating, in the lighting, in the “order of worship” (and where in the world did *that* holy phrase come from, anyway?), in the technology, in the shape of the auditorium, in the clothing, in the decoration, in the song books, in the cool new Bible translation, just in the fact of constructing a building—gimmicks to enhance the worship artificially. I’m angry at those who turn worship to God into a staged event, something the audience can enjoy and admire and leave, feeling “pumped.”

This has been building up in me for a long time.

Right now, let’s put aside my anger about lighting, “order,” décor, etc. That’s all news for a future post. Perhaps, from my first outrageous remark, you have already deduced that tonight, my anger is directed at the so-called “clothing issue.”

Most Sunday mornings, I wear a skirt. Sometimes knee-length, sometimes ankle-length. I’ve given up wearing high heels because, let’s face it, in Chemnitz, it’s too cold. I get sick often enough already. So my black boots suffice. On rare occasions, when I’m feeling particularly classy, I might wear my black slacks. With the boots. A nice shirt or blouse to go with skirt or slacks, some jewelry here and there, and voilá, I’m fancy.

But what for?

Though I haven’t taken down any statistics—no head counts or anything—I would guesstimate that maybe a third of the Chemnitz church “dresses up” for Sunday morning worship. Skirts, slacks, ties, suits. Shiny shoes. What does the rest do? Take a wild guess. Yes. Jeans. Sometimes, not even “nice” ones. Ragged ones. With holes. And they’re low-rise, too.

And the thing is, nobody cares.

They’re not there for a fashion show. They’re not there to advertise their new clothes. They’re not there to look at one another and think, “Hmm…should she be wearing that? Couldn’t he have pressed those pants? What’s with the frayed pant legs?”

David danced naked. Now, I’m not advocating that we turn the church into a nudist colony. But Moses worshiped God barefoot. Philip taught a Bible study out in the desert—and you know he wasn’t wearing his Sunday best. Think dirt and hot sun and sweat. Peter was a fisherman, and though I don’t know much about the culture of Jewish fishermen in the first century, I seriously doubt he owned any item of clothing we would call “nice.” And Jesus wasn’t wearing a tie during his last supper with his apostles.

Recently, I was present for a “Bible class” in which the topic of clothing came up. I put “Bible class” in quotation marks, because that phrase would indicate that a study of the Bible was taking place. But—and I say this with no sarcasm—it wasn’t a Bible study so much as an exchange of opinions based on anything but scripture.

I won’t tell you who the people were, what city they were in, or even what country. It doesn’t matter. These kinds of attitudes are prevalent in societies throughout the world…and if you can find it in the world, you can find it in the church.

This “Bible class” carried the title “A Biblical Study on the Subject of Worship.” The study focused on Jesus’s conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4. The leader of the study pointed out that the Samaritan woman was focusing on the physical water, whereas Jesus was trying to show her the value of spiritual water. She was concerned with the place of worship (on a mountain vs. Jerusalem’s temple), but Jesus was trying to show her that true worship of God includes the attitudes of the heart, as well. In every aspect, her focus was on the physical, while he emphasized the spiritual.

I won’t digress with a point-by-point rendition of the class. But I was following along, agreeing with what was said, taking notes, looking up scriptures, when the discussion on worship took a turn that I just couldn’t believe. Long story short (yeah, right), the individual leading the study made the statement that people who “wear jeans and T-shirts to church” are not showing proper reverence for God.

I was floored. Flummoxed. Flabbergasted. (Yes, that’s a real word. And here’s the passive-aggressiveness coming out again.) People began speaking up all over the room, voicing their shock that their fellow Christians could be so disrespectful, so irreverent, so uncaring. Now, don’t get me wrong: the issue was not modesty. No, I don’t think mini-skirts and spaghetti straps and other major skin-baring items are appropriate for worship—some clothes are designed for catching attention, and a Christian should think twice before donning such. But modesty wasn’t the issue. Appearance was the issue.

Their point was, anything other than “Sunday-morning-best” just looks bad, and God doesn’t like it.

Well, I’d had about all I could take and was getting antsy, so I raised my hand. I tried to be diplomatic, I really did. I asked Ed later, and he said I kept my cool. But at the time, I wasn’t sure how cool I kept. Anyway, I made some remark about how interesting it is that culture varies from church to church, and I explained about the various styles of dress in the Chemnitz church. I finished with, “Many Christians there wear nothing but jeans and casual shirts, and their worship is no less reverent than ours is here today.”

The leader didn’t miss a beat. Without saying it outright, he communicated to me that I was wrong and that my thoughts on the matter were not welcome. I noted that during the rest of the class, he prefaced several statements about clothing with, “Well, I know the scriptures don’t say anything about this, but…”

Since when is it acceptable for a Christian to form ANY sort of opinion that’s doesn’t have its roots in the word and will of God?

I didn’t say any more. I grumbled and fussed to myself and wrote furiously for a few minutes. I wondered what this group of Christians would say to the African woman who, wearing the single, ragged garment she owns, walks four hours just to reach the church “hut” and then breast-feeds her baby during the sermon. You think I’m kidding. I’m not.

And I wondered what they would say to the couple sitting three rows up from me: The two of them were dressed in jeans and casual shirts. Wonder what those two thought?

If the focus is so trained on clothing, then what are “nice” clothes but a gimmick to enhance the worship service artificially and turn it into a social event?

Some of you, reading this, will think that I am being judgmental of that Bible study group. Perhaps I’m a little too angry. Perhaps I’m a little too vocal about it. But in return, I would ask… If I choose to be angry (and yes, I believe anger is always a choice)—then shouldn’t false teaching be something I choose to be angry at? And if someone is teaching that God cares about skirts and slacks and button-down shirts…doesn’t that qualify as false teaching?

I remember one particular point the leader of that study made. He said (and I paraphrase), “If Jesus were sitting in a chair on the stage behind me, you would want to look your absolute best. You’d bring out the best of everything for him, and you’d want to look as good as you possibly could.”

I’m sorry, friends, but that is false teaching.

What would our reactions be if Jesus were physically present during our worship? As for me, various ideas come to mind. Most of them involve cold sweat and weak knees and crumpling into a sobbing heap on the floor. Honestly, my clothing would be the last thing on my mind.

And would Jesus ask me why I’m wearing jeans? No. He spoke to the Samaritan woman about living, spiritual water. He wasn’t interested in the appearance of her clothes; he was probing the condition of her poor, sinful heart.

She focused on the bucket and the H2O. The physical. “Clothing” would fit nicely into that category. Jesus focused on the living, spiritual water that he wanted to send flowing through her soul.

I’m not on this soapbox because I think I’m better than those Christians I disagreed with. No, I’m no better. I sin, so I’m no better. But I say these things because I choose to be angry about and speak out against false teaching. And because I’m concerned about false teaching in God’s church.

This morning, while I worshiped God with my fellow disciples, I wore jeans. I really don’t believe that God cared.

“…[W]e look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal.”

-- II Corinthians 4: 18

Thursday, February 24, 2005

communication

Well, friends and neighbors, I'm gonna attempt the heretofore unattempted--by me, anyway. Yes, indeed, in an effort to be more communicative, I'm going to go through my entire blog and answer all comments.

So, here I go, donning my pith helmet and strapping on my machete, ready to plunge into the dense undergrowth of the jungle known as Commentland. Be ye warned.

Later:

Well, I lost my trusty pith helmet somewhere along September, and the machete just broke right in half when I tackled mid-August, but......I made it! I have emerged on the other side of the jungle, victorious over The Daunting Task of Answering All Comments! I made it! I'm finished! Whoo-yah!

So, what does this mean for you, Dear Reader? It means that if you've ever commented on any of my blog posts, you can now turn back, face the jungle yourself, traverse the gnarled vines of blog-posts, brave the leech-infested pools of links and words and punctuation marks, and eventually arrive at Your Comment, where you will find My Reply In All Its Weird And Witty Glory.

And now, I bid thee all good evening. All this jungle-hacking and polite chit-chat has worn me out. ;o) Fare thee well!

Wednesday, February 23, 2005

Dream #70

Pythonpeople

recorded October 2, 2004

Last night, I dreamed that I was someone other than myself. I had been dating a guy who did a circus act with a green python. I think the python’s name was Cleo or something like that. My relationship with Cleo’s owner was about to end, because I had realized that I wasn’t really attracted to him at all, neither by his personality nor his physical appearance. He just wasn’t a nice person at all—for instance, I knew that he often partially starved Cleo, just to keep the snake aggressive so he would be more interesting for the circus act.

I went to the guy’s apartment building with the intention of breaking up with him and telling him he was no longer welcome in my life. When I opened the apartment door, I knew something was wrong. Furniture was overturned, glass was broken, the whole apartment was just in disarray. I stepped through the debris and headed for the livingroom, already sure of what I would find there. When I went in, what I saw confirmed my suspicions: There was my former boyfriend, sitting in his recliner, dead. Obviously squeezed to death.

I looked for Cleo and finally found him in his cage. Just a glance told me that he had grown considerably larger since I’d last seen him, and he was shedding his skin. Somehow, just squeezing his owner to death had given him nourishment enough to grow. I was afraid of how large he would become once he consumed his owner, which I knew he would do soon.

Before I could even think about being shocked or horrified or revolted, something even weirder began to happen: Cleo began to transform into something else. At first, I couldn’t tell what was happening—it seemed like the space around the snake became blurry, and I couldn’t look at it. Then, when details sharpened again, the snake was gone, and a man stood there in his place.

I couldn’t really determine what he looked like, but even so, he was very attractive and somehow seductive. He beckoned to me, and I found that I moved forward almost against my will. He was drawing me forward, toward him, and I couldn’t resist. And didn’t want to.

I suppose I would’ve walked right into his arms and let him squeeze me to death, but I tripped over something on the floor and broke eye contact with the strange pythonman. No eye contact, no spell, and I started backing away from him in a panic. I ran out of the apartment, and he came after me. He couldn’t move very fast, though: Because he changed from snake to man before completely shedding his skin, his skin was somehow still attached to his dead owner like a rope that bound the pythonman’s feet. While he was still struggling with the rope of skin and the dead weight of his former owner, I fled to the stairs.

Once outside the apartment, I realized my problem was more dire than I had thought: I not only had Cleo to contend with, but also Cleo’s mate. Apparently, circus man had purchased a female python without telling me, and she had undergone the same mysterious transformation that Cleo had. She came after me in the form of a woman, while Cleo changed back into a snake in order to complete his molting.

Somehow, it ended up with Cleo slithering up the stairs in human form, and his mate doing the same from the top of the stairs, with me in the middle. I vaulted the stair railing and made it out of the building, but the two of them were close behind me: first the female, then Cleo bringing up the rear of the chase. I ran through the streets, dodging people and traffic, but I wasn’t able to leave the two of them behind. I was starting to slow down, and I couldn’t breathe. I knew they were about to catch me.

I rounded a corner and saw a policeman halfway down the block. In a final burst of speed, I reached him and gasped out, “He’s after her, and he won’t leave her alone!” Then I kept running. When I looked back, the policeman had stopped Cleo and the female, since he thought the two of them were involved in some kind of domestic dispute. I knew this had bought me only a little time, so I kept going. Eventually, I reached a different part of town and slowed to a walk, safe for the moment but aware that I needed to find a good hiding place. Then the dream ended.

Monday, February 21, 2005

I give up

Well, I've tried to post something here three times in the last hour. Either through Blogger's inteptitude or mine, all three posts have managed to disappear before I could hit the "publish" button. Apparantly, I'm not meant to post any of my own thoughts in my own blog today. So I give up. I surrender. Cardinal sin, according to "Galaxy Quest," but I don't care. I've had enough, I tell you! ;o)

So here's a nice poem instead. Enjoy.

Warning

When I am an old woman I shall wear purple
With a red hat which doesn't go, and doesn't suit me.
And I shall spend my pension on brandy and summer gloves
And satin sandals, and say we've no money for butter.

I shall sit down on the pavement when I'm tired
And gobble up samples in shops and press alarm bells
And run my stick along the public railings
And make up for the sobriety of my youth.
I shall go out in my slippers in the rain
And pick flowers in other people's gardens
And learn to spit.

You can wear terrible shirts and grow more fat
And eat three pounds of sausages at a go
Or only bread and pickle for a week
And hoard pens and pencils and beermats and things in boxes.

But now we must have clothes that keep us dry
And pay our rent and not swear in the street
And set a good example for the children.
We must have friends to dinner and read the papers.

But maybe I ought to practice a little now?
So people who know me are not too shocked and surprised
When suddenly I am old, and start to wear purple.

Jenny Joseph