Velo News analyzes why the powerhouse European cycling squad can’t seem to generate big wins from its star cyclists. Case in point is this year’s Giro d’Italia winner, Discovery rider Paolo Savoldelli, who was a great disappointment with T-Mobile, but proved his mettle by coming back to take maglia rosa this year. Further fueling speculation about mis-management at T-Mobile is that fact that the team may have three riders who could challenge Lance Armstrong at the Tour de France this year. Jan Ullrich, Armstrong’s closest rival, has yet to really race this year, though he is acknowledged to be the team’s leader for the race. However, Alexandre Vinokourov and Andreas Kl?den could challenge Ullrich’s position as leader. Kl?den finished on the podium last year when Ullrich faltered, and Vinokourov has performed well thus far this season, winning Liege-Bastogne-Liege. The lack of a clear leader for the Tour could hamper the chances of another rider preventing Armstrong from leaving the sport on top.

Posted on 9 June 2005

There’s been nearly too much stuff going on to write coherently about any of it. So, I’ll merely provide some quick hits…

I’ve basically dropped out of the pacificism discussion on Gideon’s site. I’m still not sold on either side of the debate (just war v. pacificism), but Caleb Stegall makes a good point:

I’ve written elsewhere about the “discipline of place.” “It is the idea that to suffer one’s place and one?s people in the particularity of its and their needs is the only true basis for finding love, friendship, and an authentic, meaningful life. This is nothing less than the key to the pursuit of Christian holiness, which is the whole of the Christian adventure: live in love with the frailty and limits of one?s existence, suffering the places, customs, rites, joys, and sorrows of the people who are in close relation to you by family, friendship, and community?all in service of the truth, goodness, and beauty that is best experienced directly. The discipline of place teaches that it is more than enough to care skillfully and lovingly for one?s own little circle, and this is the model for the good life, not the limitless jurisdiction of the ego, granted by a doctrine of choice, that is ever seeking its own fulfillment, pleasure, and satiation. The Puritan heritage of America has long chafed against this discipline as it necessarily limits one to a small field of action in a world with seemingly little hope for eschatological fulfillment. Thus have American Evangelicals historically pined after their great mission of ‘giftedness’ and ‘calling,’ forsaking that foolishness of the Gospel of our Lord which has ever lain at their doorstep, in need of nurturing care.”

Maybe burning all this time trying hash out morality in what is an amoral space is a waste of time. I am not, and will doubtless ever be, directly involved in the governance of citizens. Perhaps I simply need to concern myself with practicing peace within my own community and let things spiral outward from there.

After a brief discussion with a few co-workers about evolutionary theory, and it’s place in Christian theology, I found myself wondering something — if I subscribe to the literary perspective on the creation story in Genesis, does that mean that the Fall is nothing more than metaphor? And, how does evolution (and, more to the point, the fossil record) fit with that literary theory? If there wasn’t death before the Fall, how can we explain the fossil record? So I started down the rabbit hole with my father-in-law, and we shared some links, that I’ll pass along here.

Here are two articles from the American Scientific Affiliation:

Because It Had Rained

Space and Time in the Genesis Cosmogony

And here’s a post by Maclin Horton regarding this thoughts on the dilemma these questions pose.

All that said, I’ve only read the Horton post, so I’ve got nothing further to say. For now.

And finally, Keith has an open invitation to join the dialogue regarding Catholicism and postmodern Christianity. Interesting stuff.

Posted on 8 June 2005

There has been a long discussion happening at Gideon’s blog about pacificism, just war theory, the current action in Iraq, and faith. While I find myself pulled toward the pacificist position, I’ve yet to read enough to formulate an informed position on the matter. Currently in the reading hopper are essays by Stanley Hauerwas and Dietrich Bonhoeffer‘s Cost of Discipleship, and the next gathering of our church’s philosophy “club” will focus on the just war theory and pacificism. I’ve been thinking about these questions:

1. Pro-war advocates generally see armed conflict as a way to administer justice. The war in Iraq is good because the Baathist leadership was cruel and unjust to the citizens of that country.

Understood.

But what about Sudan? The U.S. has called the government’s actions there “genocide,” yet our leaders have allowed the discussions to languish in the United Nations. Where’s our sense of justice here?

2. Caleb Stegall, in the discussions on Gideon’s site, advocates the need for the understanding of the amoral space that war and the administration of justice reside within. While I tend to agree with the premise of Caleb’s argument (both just war theorists and pacificists are looking for morality in a place where none will ever exist), his conclusions make me shiver a bit:

It strikes me that neither the right nor the left understand (or admit) that war takes place in an amoral space where civilized people bound to moral codes must behave immorally. For this, both are contemptible. True pacifists have integrity, as do the Colonel Kurtzs and Jessups. But their integrity is cut from the same cloth; that is, from a general denial of the tragic nature of life and order. Both are intolerable because neither can face up to a reality in which violence must be done, but civility–the conditions of being human–must not be annihilated in the process. It is unfortunate that the neo-con/neo-just-war advocates are our best hope for a new martial class and code (which has to be unabashedly masculinist and patriarchal) that aims to produce civilized killers who are willing and able to risk–and often sacrifice–their humanity so that we can have ours. However, as should be apparent to anyone listening to Bush/Neuhaus/Novak/etc, just war theory is just as entangled in the pursuit of moral purity as is pacifism. The truer martial traditions from Augustine to Washington to Lincoln knew “just war” was not just or moral by any ordinary definition.

3. It’s my understanding that we are called by God to be counter-cultural. We are to think and act differently than the rest of the world. Pro-war types often argue that Christian pacificists in the United States can say this only because we have armed police officers protecting our right to be counter-cultural. Historically, however, we see Christians working non-violently in rather counter-cultural situations, more often than not effecting the change they desired.

Posted on 6 June 2005

Hat tip: Eli

Coffeeshop Turns off Wi-Fi on Weekends.

[Owner Jen] Strongin said that the five-year-old cafe added free Wi-Fi when it seemed their customers wanted it a couple of years ago. It initially brought in more people, she said, but over the past year ?we noticed a significant change in the environment of the cafe.? Before Wi-Fi, ?People talked to each other, strangers met each other,? she said. Solitary activities might involve reading and writing, but it was part of the milieu. ?Those people co-existed with people having conversations,? said Strongin.

But ?over the past year it seems that nobody talks to each other any more,? she said. On the weekends, 80 to 90 percent of tables and chairs are taken up by people using computers. Many laptop users occupy two or more seats by themselves, as well. Victrola isn?t on the way to anywhere; it?s in the middle of a vibrant stretch of shops and restaurants on Capitol Hill?s 15th Ave. It?s exactly the kind of place that you want to sit down in, not just breeze through.

Posted on 1 June 2005

There has been an interesting news story flying under the national radar: recently divorced parents in Indiana cannot teach their Wiccan beliefs to their son, according to a local judge. Apparently, Wiccan is not a “mainstream” religion, and because the child is enrolled in a local parochial school, the judge has decided that the disparity between the belief system is not good for the child. Since the belief system at issue here is Wiccan, and not Christianity or Catholicism, few people have caught wind of the story. Get Religion, however, has found that this case is important to people of all faiths, and I agree:

Religious liberty is only as strong as the rights of miniorities. Take away the rights of parents to advocate their own faith to their children and the next thing you know you?ll have evangelical kids forced to sit in school classes that openly attack the faith taught in their homes. Wait, that?s happening already, isn?t it?

But the point remains the same. Parents have a right to pray with their kids and even preach to them. If Christians ? even very conservative ones ? want that right they should defend that right for others.

Christians should be appalled that a judge has attempted to define what mainstream religion is, and what belief systems are appropriate to teach children. While many evangelicals promote the idea of teaching Christianity in public schools and further shrinking the separation of church and state, they often too short-sighted in their goals. The Christian Church is a terribly complex beast, and denominations and churches regularly split over issues like singing Psalms or women praying aloud during a worship service. Certainly, most of them believe in God, and believe that Christ died for our sins, but the similarities often end there. Government should not be in the business of telling us what belief systems are valid.* Isn’t this what Kuyper fought against?

* At this point, many will argue “but what about a faith that promotes the sacrifice of innocents? Well, faith should not infringe upon the rights of others. certainly the slope here becomes slippery, but it is one we must tread nonetheless.

Posted on 1 June 2005

Moon wonders what our culture’s germ phobia really says about us:

Decks instead of porches. Television instead of book circles. The internet instead of coffee houses. How many layers must we place between each other before we lose all sense of other people? And how much of an impact will this endless intermediation have on our essential humanity? How is it that those things so many of us search for these days entail the abandonment of so many other things?

Posted on 27 May 2005

This is what I’m talking about:

More info here.

Posted on 25 May 2005

For some time, I had been purchasing coffee beans at La Prima‘s cafe in the Strip District. The beans were almost always freshly roasted, and it gave me an excuse to stop on the morning commute, drink an espresso, and thumb through the New York Times. The beans weren’t cheap, but they weren’t terribly expensive (cheaper than Starbucks), and I felt good about giving our money to a local roaster. A few months ago, we became members of the local food co-op, and I kicked around the idea of ordering coffee there. Being members, we received a 20% discount(!) on special orders, but I didn’t want to give up my precious and tasty La Prima. Then, when bean supplies in the house were dwindling, Jen picked up a pound of Dean’s Beans Moka Sumatra. Goodness. I had assumed it was a bit pricey, being tasty, organic, and free-trade, but it wasn’t. In fact, it was the cheapest coffee the co-op sold. A few days later I placed our order for five pounds of the stuff. Finally, last Friday, we got the call that our coffee was in. Total cost for five pound of freshly roasted, organic, free-trade coffee? $31.

Posted on 24 May 2005

Water falls down, down over rocks, splashing into a pool below us. Spray douses us, and the mist becomes a rainbow in the Spring sunshine. The sound of the waterfall is deafening, and we shout to make ourselves heard. I tie into the already damp rope and slip into my climbing shoes, doing what I can to keep the soles dry. I check and re-check the knot at my harness, then reach up and grab the first chalked holds. They are dry. I’m cautious until my rope is safely clipped into the first bolt, then I relax a bit. The rock is crisp and dry despite the spray from the waterfall, and soon I settled into rhythm of movement. The roar of the falls, which I assumed would make me a bit nervous, instead causes me to focus on the rock around me. My world is narrowed to the circle of rock around me. Moves flow into one another, and it isn’t until I clip the anchors that the world snaps back into focus.

* * *

Sunlight trickles through the canopy of pine needles. Sounds are muffled by the gentle din of the waterfall. I’m surrounded by green — tall, old trees, some pines, and little seedlings, some only a foot or two tall. The rhododendrons are beginning to bloom, their bright pink flowers a sharp contrast against the shiny green leaves. I’m sitting on a bed of browning needles, back resting against the trunk of old tree, itself resting against the tall expanse of sandstone. The boy is sitting on my lap. He’s been rustling in the layer of fallen leaves below a roof in the cliffline, and they cling to his fleece shirt and his mop of hair. He is quiet now, flipping the pages of Brown Bear, Brown Bear, pointing to the duck and the bird and the cat. Soon enough, the boy’s energy returns, and he’s off, digging in the leaves with a red shovel, and running up and down the trail.

* Work in progress.

Posted on 23 May 2005

I posted an entry over yonder about this NYT article.

We’re heading to the New River Gorge for three days for some climbing and camping fun. Pictures will be forthcoming.

Posted on 20 May 2005