Just some random thoughts

I'm at work. No one's here-they're all on vacation for the holiday. Because no one's here to give me work, I have no work to do. I asked the Main Boss if I could leave, since I have no work to do. He says no, I have to stay until quitting time. ...Does that make sense to anyone else? Because I don't get it. They'd rather me stay here and use their electricity and be absolutely unproductive than send me home to use my own electricity?

So I've been reading online about - what else? - Katrina and the chaos in New Orleans. It's surreal, isn't it? For those of us who wake up normally, take our showers, eat our breakfast, don't have to worry about anything, it's surreal to think that just a few states away, a city - one of our cities! - is in anarchy. And there's no food, no water, everything's contaminated, looted, destroyed. I want to yell, "I HAVE FRESH WATER! TAKE MINE!" But there's nothing I can do. No- I can pray.

-----

A man after my own heart.

Have you ever seen Joe Vs. the Volcano, that movie with Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan? (If you haven't, you should. It's great.) There's that first scene where he's plodding into his factory job with all the other identical workers, through the high chain gates and across the gray cement lot into a gray cement building. The soundtrack plays "Sixteen Tons": Saint Peter, dontcha call me cause I can't go- I owe my soul to the company store. My job isn't as thankless as Joe's, and I certainly don't owe my soul to the DoD, but every time I get off the metro and shuffle along with the hundreds of other people bottlenecking up the multiple escalators, all wearing identical badges and sensible dark shoes, I think of that scene. (Especially when they make me stay despite the fact that I have no work to do...but I mentioned that already.)

Try this. I don't know if it's authentic, but it's yummy.

Those Frilly Miniskirts and Why They Need To Stop

I do not understand the frilly miniskirts that every single girl in the country seems to be wearing. They defy every fashion rule I've ever been taught.

1. They make your legs look short, particularly when paired with flip-flops, which, although a wonderful shoe, do nothing to enhance your gams. Worse, they are sometimes paired with Uggs. It creates the Stubby Leg Effect, and which of us really wants to be known for her stubby legs?

2. They sit below your natural waist and the frilliness begins right above the largest part of your caboose. This has two effects: making your derriere look about twice as large as it is (You know what they say about horizontal lines making things look wider? It's true.) and highlighting that little pudge above your hips and below your waist. I have nothing against the Pudge. It is a natural part of a woman's body. But it's nothing we need to highlight, is it? It can be wonderfully incorporated into an outfit that makes you look slimmer instead of stubbier.

3. They are usually made out of the sort of cotton that pills, fades, and generally falls apart. I notice that the skirts on the street in August are significantly duller than the skirts I saw in June. Maybe it's the bright sunlight. Maybe it's my eyes. Maybe it's the cheap quality of said skirts.

Thank you. I am done.

Various Articles for Your Edification

A New York Times op-ed I wish I had written. (For those not yet tired of hearing about the Gaza pullout.)

Why is everyone named John Roberts? What if they get confused? It could be embarrassing...

And this is just weird.

How do you say "daytime television" in Arabic?

In my CSIS days I did a bunch of research on Oprah's popularity in Syria (go figure) and here, I have this to prove it!

On an unrelated note:
Oh, to have Paris Hilton's worries: "It's very heavy," she revealed, "so we got two other bands that are just lightweight for when you're iet-skiing and doing water sports. I don't want it dropping in the ocean." She was talking about her diamond engagement ring.

Six Happy Weekend Events

1. 8 o'clock, summer Saturday morning, good friend Lisa, Tryst coffeehouse, mocha in a tall clear glass with lots of foam and a long spoon.

2. New pair of size 6 jeans. Yes, size six. S. I. X. On sale.

3. www.gizoogle.com and this fresh take on White House news.

4. Habana Village's mojitos with sugar cane and fresh mint.

5. Homemade (by me!) mini peach pies, one for Sunday, one to make everyone at work jealous on Monday.

6. All Things Bright and Beautiful by James Herriot

Maybe it's Just Me

Does anyone else think it's sort of...ironic how some Israeli settlers are so upset that they are being evicted from their homes in Gaza?

From an NPR interview with a settler: "It is a national calamity...if we give away this land to murderers, then we're bringing the terror...closer and closer..."

That's probably what the Palestinians thought when they were evicted from their homes at the creation of Israel.


...That being said, over 50% of Israelis are in favor of the pullout: compromises have to be made for peace!

More on Religion: Miroslav Volf

On Sunday I heard a fascinating interview with Miroslav Volf on NPR's Speaking of Faith about the relationship between religion and violence. He articulated so clearly the difference between "thin" and "thick" religion: the religiosity that one can manipulate according to one's own desires is thin. Thick religiosity looks at the contexts: scriptural, historical, and tradition, that don't lend themselves easily to extremes in violent expression, cultural manipulation, or social programs. He argues that the problem with religious violence is a problem of "thin" religion, and he particularly looks at Christianity in the Croatian context, which only makes sense, as he is Croatian. It was refreshing to hear such an obviously intellectual man speak about something so delicate (and potentially inflammatory) with a balance of conviction, intelligence, and godliness. If you have a chance, listen to the interview!

He also questions Thomas Friedman's claim that the three monotheistic religions need to give up their claims to truth in order to get along. What these three religions need to do instead is engage in scriptural reasoning: read their own scriptures together and come to understand each other better (appreciate, challenge, etc.) It is an insult, he says, to say that you can't disagree with someone and still be nice to them! And I agree: obviously, we can't all be right. But it doesn't mean we can't be nice to each other. And if it's intolerant for a religious person to make a truth claim, isn't it equally intolerant to ask that person to give that claim up? In each case, someone is "forcing their morality" on someone else, and we have no clear standard by which to guage which "morality" should prevail: do we go with the popular vote? The one with the longest historical tradition? The person who has the most education? So it's a dead end and Volf's point stands: the way through it is to come to a point as an individual where you decide not to be threatened by other people, faiths, beliefs, and choose to pursue relationships and reason instead of sound byte philosophy.

Coffee?

Hi, my name is Lisa and I'll be your server today. Can I start you off with some coffee?

...Loay, I'm talking to you. (See Jan. 16 post.)

Poor Luther

The Internet Monk has delved into how evangelicalism is attempting to "throw Luther from the train." It got me thinking.

I grew up in a red-state evangelical environment and scarcely knew anything else until I boldly moved from the Evangelical mecca (how's that for a mixed metaphor?) that is Colorado Springs to a mecca of another sort, Los Angeles. This was a little scandalous, and I was warned about What Could Happen if I up and moved There... but I didn't become a heathen, or get mugged, or get plastic surgery or meet celebrities every day. But I did learn a lot about my faith and I met a lot of people who challenged it and I began thinking about how to apply head knowledge to the practical issues of my life. And since college, I have been questioning the actions of some of the more outspoken Evangelicals. More particularly, I have been questioning the "movement" itself: what people are doing in the name of evangelicalism, which has come to equate, for many people, Christians and non-Christians, "American Christianity."

First a note on the literal meaning: Dictionary.com (it's on the internet, it must be true!) defines evangelical as "1: relating to or being a Christian church believing in personal conversion and the inerrancy of the Bible especially the 4 Gospels; 2: of or pertaining to or in keeping with the Christian gospel especially as in the first 4 books of the New Testament 3: marked by ardent or zealous enthusiasm for a cause." By this definition, I am an Evangelical Christian. But by the modern American connotation of the word, well, I'm not so sure, and I'm not sure the word "evangelical" (or any word) can even accurately sum up everything that a Christian is.

Because if you say "evangelical" to an average American, what reaction do you get? I usually get rolled eyes, or a suspicious stare, or raised eyebrows. I think they equate me with Jerry Falwell, who has somehow become the spokesman for evangelicalism through his poignant observations such as, "Theologically, any Christian has to support Israel…If we fail to protect Israel, we will cease to be important to God." (I just...just...yeah...it renders me speechless. There's enough in those last 14 words for many rants. Next post, maybe.) No matter who they equate evangelicalism with, it's not who I want to be equated with: Jesus. Why is that?

I can't answer that thoroughly, let alone on a blog post. But I think the iMonk is onto something when he lists the ways modern evangelicalism has strayed from Luther's Reformation. To name a few:
-The rejection of confessions, creeds or any meaningful statements of faith for churches or their members.
-The widespread abandonment of constitutional church government, and in many cases the modeling of the church after business models.
-Increasing opposition to accountability relationships and structures, whether through denominations or regional/local oversight.
-The distressing proliferation of the self-credentialed ministers claiming direct authority and communication from God ("anointing") and accountability to no one.
-The steady decline of the place and quality of preaching and the increasing place of entertainment in worship, especially through music, drama and technology driven visuals.
-The decline of the Bible in every aspect of worship and church life, and the increase in the place of secular worldviews or direct spiritual experiences as authoritative.
-The dividing of the congregation into segments based on demographics, "felt needs," and the resulting loss of congregational identity.

So my point is that when Christianity becomes more concerned with attracting new members to church, or making people feel good, or aligning themselves politically, instead of knowing and serving Jesus Christ and living by his Word, the result is those raised eyebrows and suspicious stares. Why should people listen to me talk about Jesus if they suspect that I'm doing it for a political motive? Or if they suspect that I'm not serious, it's just so much cotton candy that tastes nice and then disappears? Or if they think it's just a fad religion, a result of modern society and nothing else?

It is dangerous to forget our history: not only Jesus' teachings (which of course take precedence) but those who have reminded us, sometimes very harshly, of what is important in the faith: Calvin, Luther, Edwards...and all those others we don't really talk about so much. When we forget those, and we forget the Great Foundation Christianity has, we are so much more easily tempted to embrace a feel-good version of religion, one that satisfies our wants instead of teaching the Truth. And if people can't detect the Truth (Jesus) in our lives because it is covered with cotton candy, well, they *should* look at us suspiciously.

Dessert and Coffee

The Guest of Honor, Loay, who is about to leave us for the Egyptian Winter and whom we will all miss terribly.



Lisa in her elegant dress and Jed, who wears fedoras with aplomb.

The Keeper of The Matrix

My job varies from the very boring to very urgent (and urgent=exciting.) Some days I stare at the computer screen until the gray walls start to throb around me and I can taste the air getting stale. Some days I meet fascinating people and they say fascinating things and I leave feeling like I know a little bit more about the world, or at least know how to ask better questions. Sometimes we have to deal with the beast of bureaucracy.

I am The Keeper of the Matrix. The Matrix, which is our fancy name for an excel spreadsheet, has all sorts of information that is changing every day. In order to eliminate an excess of matrices, everyone is supposed to forward the information to me, and I update The Matrix. Otherwise, we have many matrices, and many informations, and none of them match and that is inefficient times ten. Then I send out the update to everyone who needs to know. This is not that hard. If it were just our office that dealt with The Matrix, things would go swimmingly.

But there is a different office, one who thinks they are in charge of The Matrix, although they clearly are not, since I am The Keeper. They think that they are helping out by taking an old version of The Matrix, changing to format to be more user-friendly, and then sending it out to everyone. This, as you intelligent readers can clearly see, only serves to confuse every single person who gets the e-mail. This New Matrix has different colors and outdated information and then I get to go through it - again - and update all the information, which has already been updated on The Original Matrix. This is a Royal Pain. I keep telling them that it is a pain and that if they do not want to upset The Keeper, they should leave well enough alone and stop messing wth my Matrix without my permission. But they heed not.

I think from now on I will put at the bottom of my e-mails, "$20 reward to anyone who finds, tars, and feathers those who are sending out obsolete matrices without my permission."