Don't Help

I'm going to say this point blank and out loud: the Olympic organizers fully intended to mock Christianity, and their apology wasn't even half hearted. They went too far yet won't accept their fault. Full stop.

Shame on them for all sorts of reasons, not the least because such ham fisted distractions take away from the celebration of the athletes and their accomplishments. The ceremonies openly mocked Christianity. I will not watch the Games merely because I cannot support that, and there's no other recourse than a boycott.

Don't defend them: this was not Dionysius or Greek bacchanalia. It was so pitifully obvious of an insult that there can be no reasonable denial, no rational defense. Don't even try. And I haven't even mentioned the sick display of a headless Marie Antoinette.

Rant over.

Christmas in August?

This is August, right? It is August? I want to ask and establish that up front.

I realize too that this has been a very odd year, so that perhaps the months don't mean so much this time around the calendar. But this is August, correct?

As I took my daily constitutional this morning I saw all kinds of bulk trash on the street curbs. Nothing special there: Friday is our trash pickup day here in Woodbridge, and every other Friday is bulk trash day. This is simply the other Friday.

However, what caught my attention was, not one, not two, not even only three, but four live Christmas trees (well, the remains of live trees I should say) set out for pickup. Okay, maybe one was not from Christmas. But the other three had the tree stands still attached to the trunks at the base. 

Were they left from Christmas in July festivities? One might suppose such. Yet two were so brown and dried out that I must imagine they were left about, perhaps in basements, since the real deal in December. 

So, Christmas in August? Did I miss the memo?

Christianity and rightness

One of the most blithe dismissals of Christians and Christianity is that they're (both the individuals and the creed) mercenary. They only do good because it gets them a reward, the story goes. What are we to make of this?

A good many things may be had from this observance. The first and clearest is the insult: you high and mighty fellows only do good because you get something from it. But if that's true, then isn't anyone who does good likewise condemned? All good after all either entails the presumption of rightness or the expectation of reward, doesn't it? The pagan or the atheist might well do well simply because of the immediate, shall we say earthly, reward, namely the sanction of their peers. Yet interestingly, they aren't condemned so far as the Christian seems to be. Yet, really, it's the same or very nearly the same thing anyway, isn't it? Given that, why should believing in God make an iota of difference?

True, if you're only doing it for the reward then something is lacking. Yet how many folks are willing to suggest that one ought to do wrong merely on principle? "If you're only being mercenary and being mercenary is automatically wrong then you might as well do evil" is the natural corollary, isn't it? If doing the right thing only to receive reward is by itself wrong then it should be more right to do the wrong thing, uh, right?

Uh, wrong. Doing right for the weakest of reasons nevertheless trumps ever doing the wrong thing. You're still doing the right thing. And that is far better than ever doing the wrong thing isn't it?

Those who condemn Christianity as little more than mercenary speak with forked tongue. Why would you do right except to do right, even when encouraged by nothing more than censure? All people are subjected to that quandary. Why is it that only Christians are condemned by it?