The Million Dollar Question

"The Million Dollar Question! Take this, it has the Gospel message on it!"

Being both a Christian and banker (well, bank teller at least) a combination of money and Gospel is something that at least piques my interest, particularly if they are being used in conjunction to evangelize.

The story was sort of an odd one. I had just arrived at Ballston via the metro after a day of "gaming" with a few friends, and my wife who was working at our second job (a small teddy bear store in the Ballston Commons Mall) called and asked if I could relieve her so she could run an errand. I said that was fine and began walking towards the mall, which is only about 5 minutes from the metro station. As I was walking towards my destination a woman, short (mind you I'm 6'3 so "short" is rather relative), dirty blond hair, somewhat large in build, glasses and a smile approached and spoke the quotation at the top of the post. I nodded politely, took her fake million dollar bill and continued walking. I stopped at the crosswalk just across from the mall and took a few seconds to skim paper that had been handed to me. Aside from being the wrong color and size for real currency (which makes sense; you wouldn't want to get in trouble for printing fake money that isn't even an attempt to scam people) the front had a portrait of Rutherford B. Hayes and patriotic pictures of Bald Eagles, American flags etc. The back of the bill had an image of Washington crossing the Delaware and forming a parenthesis around the image were two blocks of text.

This is where I started to cringe slightly. The first block of text began by listing various sins, using the Ten Commandments & The Beatitudes as references, referring to blasphemy, lust, drinking, and the list went on. Goal? Establish guilt in the reader and set them up for the second paragraph. The text asserted that the reader must be a sinner and that their soul was going to be damned. Rather Calvin of the text at this point, given that it just flatly assumed damnation, rather than simply making clear that my soul was in peril, but not guaranteed to go to hell.

I began to cringe even more at the second block of text, asserting in rather Arminian terms, that I had a choice. Jesus had suffered and died for my sins, that he had, in an almost legal sense, gotten me off the hook of God's wrath, and if I embraced this suffering and death I would be saved (emphasis on the past tense). It also may very clear that I had to "trust" in Jesus ALONE (it actually had "alone" in caps lock, so apparently the person who made this must have been expecting Catholics or Orthodox to be handed this?), read and obey my Bible as the only authority (and then some side reference to the Holy Spirit as guidance. Apparently the third person in the Trinity isn't as important as the Bible).

I think I can honestly say that all of this went through my head in the one minute I was waiting for the walk signal to give me the OK to cross the street.

I walked into the bear store, and my wife was getting ready to head out when I announced that I had been given a tract and that I wanted to go back and talk to the person who had given it to me. My wife reminded me that I needed to close the store first. As she left I grumbled something about how the text was like one of her interim pastors sermons.

As I closed the store and made my way back to my apartment (which is also only about a five minute walk from the metro and would take me back past my would be evangelizer, I read the text again. It struck me then that, as much as I disagreed with how she had approached me, her method of simply dropping a piece of paper, and with some of the explanations for how Christianity works, there was still truth. The first block of text soon reminded me of an Examination of Conscience, and yes, I do believe that Jesus death conquers Sin and Death (though I always find it odd in such tracts/sermons that the Incarnation is never explicitly mentioned, and the Resurrection and Ascension seem like side notes), and I think the Bible is very informative on matter of the faith, and is a staple of authority on such matters(we can talk about the role of Tradition in another post). With this in mind as I walked back towards the apartment I was suddenly no longer upset at having the piece of paper, but eager to have a discussion with the woman, should she still be there.

I approached the Ballston metro and spotted my evangelist. I made a point of walking towards her, and she quickly tried to hand another of her Million Dollar Bills to me. I politely held up the first she had given me, which made her smile, but then the kicker. I think the conversation went something like this:

Evangelist: "The Million Dollar Question! Take this, it has the Gospel message on it!"
Me: "Actually, you already gave me one."*hold up fake money*
Evangelist: "Oh, excellent!"
Me: "And actually, I'd like to give it back to you."
Evangelist: *gives me a confused look* "No, don't worry. Just leave it on a bus or throw it in a trash can."
Me: "Well, that seems like it would be rather rude, and I would really like to give it back to you."
Evangelist: *more confused tone* "Well, did you READ IT?" (her voice did get louder, as if it seemed impossible that I could have read it and either not thrown it away or had my sudden conversion)
Me: "Yes I did read it."
Evangelist: *takes fake money from me* "Well...have a nice evening".
Me: "You too."

As I walked away I realized that I think I was just as much let down as she was. I had been hoping she would have asked me WHY I was returning the fake money, aside from simply thinking that I would either read-and-reject or read-and-convert. I wonder if it had occurred to her that she was in some way wasting her ammo, given that I was already Christian and agreed with some of the points and that this could have been a point of contact, a chance for us to both share some of Christ with the other. Then again, this could just be my pride talking, and I think I equally could have been looking for a debate, a chance to blast the points I disagreed with her on, out of the water. So perhaps NOT having the conversation was a better outcome, if not the best. I probably won't know, or at least not anytime soon in this world.

I blame my wife...in a very loving sort of way...

So two years go by since I even looked at this, and in fact, I had forgotten this blog even existed. I'm surprised it's still here.

Anyways, the wife started blogging, and then after asking me to respond to a post of her own (which I of course filled with plenty of typos), discovered by accident that my blog was still around, frozen in time, and so she suggested maybe I give this another go around.

Vatican Approved Index of Waffle Reciepes

March 4, 2009. The Vatican Newspaper has recently released a collection of waffle reciepes that have met with the approval of Pope Benedict XVI and much of the Roman Curia.

"These reciepes have been reviewed with much contemplation and thought. I have great hope that all Catholics will benefit both spiritually and physically by partaking in their consumption" reported L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO. His Holiness made the comments while traveling throughout Africa and the comments were seen as helping to smooth over earlier comments made by the Pope regarding AIDs and condom use in Africa.

Many reacted to the Pope's comments with joy.

"For so long I had been worried that consuming Eggo Waffles was somehow sinful because they were pre-packaged and that they were not a natural product of my own labor and materials. Benedict has restored my faith and I look forward to breakfast tomorrow morning!" said one man outside an IHOP in Northern Virginia.

Some Catholics however, have seen this step by the Vatican as overreaching, while others have said it does not go far enough. Fr. Kung, a well know dissenter in the ranks of the Catholic Priesthood, decried the index as just another example of "Vatican medeling". Meanwhile, the head of the recently restored Society of Saint Pius X, said the Pope should do more in guiding the faithful towards proper breakfast foods, especially during this time of Lent.

The United States College of Bishops has realesed it's own statement, stating that a full implimentation of the index will not go into effect until 2012, after they have given time to review the list, and determine the best ways to ensure the index well benefit the faithful.

According to Church historians, the list began under John Paul the Great in 1995, and that John Paul the Great relied heavily on then Cardinal Ratzinger and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to ensure the index was theologically sound and in accord with Vatican II documents.

Here is a sample of some of the Receipes that were included in the index posted by L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO;

Whole Grain Blueberry Waffles

Apple Cinnamon Waffles

Apple Waffles

Applesauce Waffles

Bacon Cheddar Waffles

Bacon Swiss Waffles

Bacon-Cornmeal Waffles

Banana Cinnamon Waffles

Banana Oatmeal Buttermilk Waffles

Banana Sour Cream Waffles

Banana Split Waffles

Banana Waffles With Pecan Maple Syrup

Belgian Coconut Waffles

Best Chocolate Chip Waffles

Best Peanut Butter Waffles

Pill Inventor Slams...of all things...the pill!

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=11004

Perhaps a bigger irony than when Roe of Roe v. Wade came out against the very court decission that is her namesake, one of the three chemists responsible for the creation of "the pill" has recently declared that his invention has created "demographic catastrophe."

Perhaps the logic that population declines usually preceed the failure of a culture/civilization might start to click for more westerners. The U.S. is only barely better than Western Europe, ... and that is through immigration and not natural increase (even with our teen pregnancy rates which are always lauded as more reason for more contraception and legality of abortion). Most European countries are moving into negative population growth, and France most recently has implimented a government funded system which will pay women to be mothers of more than one child (I believe the more children they have, the greater the tax breaks they are given, in addition to other government support).

History is always a good way to test how thing in the political/social play out. Within the Roman Empire, high rates of abortion and contraception among the native Roman population (who were the greatest benificiaries of the Empire) while freeing the husbands and wives for more social and political activities, reduced the number of native born Romans, which led to a decline among native Romans in the military, which combined with the Imperial Throne moving to Constantinople, left the Western Empire (which encompassed pretty much all hat is Western Europe; irony?) to resort to foriegn mercinaries...and history shows us how effective that was!

Much of the significance of this comes on the 40th Anniversary of Humane Vitae (as the link to the article makes known); Pope Paul VI is lauded as being prophetic in his encyclical, where he reaffirmed the classic stance of the Church against artificial contraception and abortion. Both not only violate the most fundamental right to life, but they have the added dibilitating effect upon society on a larger scale. Less people leads to less creativity, art, literature, philosophy, industry, whatever you name it. A civilization literally kills itself off, preventing growth in all areas.

What perhaps makes this even more bizzare is that with abortion and artifical contraception, there has been a rise in invitro fertilization, and other extra-natural means of procreation. In effect, pregnancy is something unwanted unless it can be controlled to the point where it can only take place where and when we want it to, and anything else is an inconvience. Now the number of people who can actually take advantage of all these technologies prevents it currently from having and even larger impact; only the very wealthy can afford the total trinity of birth control. But considering that healthcare will no doubt be turning into one of our inaleinable rights with the incoming administration, access to such technologies might increase, and one thing I have learned as a budding historian is not to place your faith in humanity.

In his "Abolition of Man" C.S. Lewis was convinced that the advent of such technologies, coupled with a moral relativism that was growing during his own time (and is taken for granted in our own; though most people straddle the fence and are only relative until something directly effects them, then morals suddenly become objective realities again) would lead to humanity not only conquering nature through science, but humanity conquering itself. Humanity would have everything controled, even it's own body chemistry.

The funny thing about what Mr. Lewis said almost 60 years ago, was that the things he feared (which sounded to many like science fiction) are quire real. Lewis saw the "abolition of human nautre" as the end result of our push to control. With no doubt in the coming decades, not only will we see people able to control when they have children, but they will no doubt be controling how the children biologically turn out. It will of course start with the good intentions of ending certain dibilitating diseases that are genetic in nature, but why stop at preventing the bad, when you can also encourage the good? Why should we even stay as limited as we are, when we no doubt at some point will be able to improve our bodies and minds beyond their limits as they are?

Of course, would we still be human anymore?

Test Blog?

Does this thing even work? And if it does, what good does it serve other than potentially exposing more people to my rambles which may or may not be healthy for them?

Oh heck I have a bad feeling about this...