| (no subject) |
[Jul. 7th, 2011|02:38 pm] |
Sometimes I have trouble deciding which medium I love more: film or video games. On one hand, I get more hours of enjoyment from a mediocre game than from several great movies combined, and I’m less likely to be bored by games or wish I hadn’t bothered renting them. On the other hand, even decidedly classic games usually have pulpy (if any) writing. The medium may get more respect now than ever before, but it shows less overall maturity than modern Hollywood, and that’s saying something.
With that in mind, it’s not surprising that cinema has done a better job of conveying Christianity. I can think of several devoutly made movies, some of them highly esteemed to this day, but so far the only indisputably Christian game I’ve encountered is Gospel Champions, which I bought largely to support a monastery. It succeeded in getting me to pray more often, and perhaps it is good for teaching children NT stories; but it sure wouldn’t have gotten any contemporary awards for graphics, music, or gameplay mechanics.
By contrast, when mainstream games give any hint of religion, it tends to be either paganism -- with magic as evidence for its truth -- or a mockery of Christianity. This is understandable, since my preferred genres thrive on fantasy or sci-fi premises, typically to the point that the setting can’t be Earth, and other genres (e.g., sports, military) seldom lend themselves to anything religious. Personally, I won’t begrudge Hyrule its multiple gods or Arcadia its moon worship; they may add to the fun of world building. But with the exception of the nameless yet helpful abbeys in the Shining Force series, fake religions made to resemble Christianity, especially the flashy Catholicism, are almost always corrupt and/or based on lies.
It’s especially troubling how many examples are among my favorite games. ( ”Spoilers” )
Strictly speaking, this pattern isn’t of concern only to Christians. A Jewish friend of mine has complained about a whole trend of games in which the final boss is effectively God. Presumably, not all of them mean to preach a contrary creed, even if most Japanese makers subscribe to one. They may have a thing for dripping irony, but their likeliest reason is the excitement of the extreme underdog. Said friend bitterly reminds us that WWII’s underdog was not the good side.
Maybe this will change with time. As more gamers grow up, we can expect a greater variety of themes. Overt Christianity may never be fashionable, but hopefully its values won’t stay relegated to lamer titles. In the meantime, I'll content myself with religious movies. |
|
|
| Confession by iPhone |
[Feb. 10th, 2011|07:55 am] |
| [ | mood |
| |  amused | ] |
In the age of the Internet, one long-standing joke among Catholics is that we might someday be able to go to confession online. Now it seems closer to a reality than any of us suspected. A New Scientist article, Forgiveness via iPhone: Church approves confession app, discusses a new application, Confession: A Roman Catholic App now available from iTunes for $1.99. The article goes on to mention other apps available for churchgoers but this is the first to be sanctioned by the church.
Not surprisingly, the application is only intended as an aid and not as a substitute for going to confession, or as it is properly called, receiving the sacrament of reconciliation. I don't think the church will ever allow any of the sacraments to be administered by anything other than a real live person. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Jan. 20th, 2011|02:49 pm] |
I may be wrong, but I think just found a subtle example of media bias against the RCC.
D.C.'s free Express, as you may have guessed from the name, specializes in short articles. One of today's stories, "Vatican Clarifies Sex Abuse Letter," abbreviates an AP article in an unfavorable way. The resulting blurb consists of five paragraphs, each being a single long sentence, plus a box titled "Smoking Gun" that contains two long sentences. Despite what you might expect from the main title, only the first and last paragraphs of the running text give even the briefest glimpse of the Vatican's response to allegations, with no direct quotes. The second paragraph summarizes the controversial content of the letter by way of a partial direct quote. The third paragraph says flatly that the letter "has undermined persistent Vatican claims," and the rest is about opponents' responses to the letter.
OK, I have to qualify my "no direct quotes" claim. There is a single word in both the article subtitle and the first paragraph that appears in quotation marks. Unfortunately, there is no good reason to have it so:
Church: '97 message sent to Irish bishops was 'misunderstood'
Vatican -- The Vatican launched a new round of damage control Wednesday over priestly sex abuse, insisting that a 1997 letter warning Irish bishops against reporting abuse to police had been "misunderstood."
In both contexts, we already get that this is a given party's claim, and the one word isn't especially distinctive, so why bother treating it as a direct quote? The original AP article, I found, had a more justifiable "deeply misunderstood." But in the context of abbreviation, I suspect that an editor wanted to make the claim seem extra questionable with redundant punctuation.
Again, maybe I'm just a little paranoid, but I sure would've covered the story more kindly. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Jun. 25th, 2010|05:35 pm] |
| [ | mood |
| |  sad | ] |
In the last few weeks, my faith has taken a big hit. I still go through the motions of worship, but with more hope than trust in God.
What brought on this hit? Probably a theological debate in which I was barely a participant. Debates on the literalness of early Genesis -- be it Creation, the Fall, or the Flood -- always threaten to bring me down, with the literalist position backfiring: If I can't believe both scripture and science, I'll choose science. Debates on issues of free will and divine justice don't help either; they often seem internally contradictory.
At some point, I admitted to myself that while Christianity may be plausible, it raises more questions than it answers. I was getting dog tired of waiting until Kingdom Come for those answers (and there's no biblical guarantee we'll understand it all even then). For those who crave resolution over paradox, no faith is more satisfying than atheism. I expressed this on the same mostly Christian forum that featured the above debates, and the immediate response was to try to get me to appreciate mystery. No avail. Pascal's Wager? Worse.
One moral issue that has been largely avoided in my circles bears mentioning here: What happens to murdered babies? Frankly, I can think of no good Christian solution. If they all go to Hell, then God never gave them a chance. If they all go to Heaven, then why shouldn't we kill all the babies? It may put our own souls on the line because of the rules, but God appreciates altruistic intentions, right? If some go to Heaven and some to Hell, there must be an awfully fine, seemingly arbitrary line for determination. There may yet be a good solution that requires more intellect than mine to devise or comprehend -- possibly the mind of an archangel -- but authoritative vagueness on the matter doesn't help.
Part of my temptation to atheism, I suppose, is embarrassment in the eyes of nonbelievers. You may think it silly to value their approval over others', but it seems to me that Christians can all have a fair idea of where atheists are coming from. When I step back from pure theism, especially in its ritualized form, I have to wonder whether I ever really believed it or have been willfully ignoring Occam's Razor. Maybe the realization late in life that Christianity could be true was enough to get me drunk on the idea, much as I once got drunk on the Baha'i Faith before letting myself notice how far-fetched it was.
Perhaps the funniest thing about my doubts lately is my reluctance to pray. I've prayed every night for years now, but at the nadir of my willingness to believe, I could barely spit the words out in a whisper. What was I afraid of? If nobody's listening, who cares if I lie? Later I found myself praying for a reinforcement of faith, "but only if You really do exist." Like that addendum makes a practical difference. I guess my thinking was that my previous occasions of boosted faith after prayer might have been self-induced by the power of suggestion, so the proviso would make it less likely to happen that way.
If atheism is incorrect, then I hope to come out of this phase better than ever, in a different sect if necessary. But again, if it's just a pipe dream, I'd rather hold to a moderately dreary reality. Please help me decide. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[May. 17th, 2010|04:56 pm] |
You may have heard recently that a Boston Catholic school expelled a third-grader for being raised by a lesbian couple. The Archdiocese of Boston takes a different attitude, stating the student's welcome and looking for a replacement school. The Catholic Schools Foundation likewise refuses to lend support to the contrary school. Nevertheless, the Archdiocese of Denver ruled differently on a similar case last winter.
Now, even if homosexual intercourse is a considerable sin, and even if same-sex couples as a rule do not make good role models, I do not see the wisdom in expelling their kids. Catholic schools have been known to accept non-Christians. Catholic dogma does not call for children to suffer for the sins of their parents. And why not accept the students most in danger of falling into sin?
My mom forwarded me an email from the Human Rights Campaign asking that we sign an email to Cardinal Francis George, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, urging him to standardize the tolerant response. Unfortunately, the HRC did not leave any way to personalize the wording of the email, nor did they provide the address of its destination. I don't quite see eye to eye with the HRC, so I'd hate to send their words as my own.
Anyone know where to find that email address, or should I resort to snail mail? |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Feb. 3rd, 2010|10:34 am] |
Boy. I was aware of a few Christian holidays getting secularized (which I suppose is fair game, considering that some of them had their dates set to replace pagan festivals) while others were relatively obscure, but I had no idea that Groundhog Day had Christian origins. It's Candlemas, a.k.a. the Feast of the Presentation of Jesus at the Temple, a.k.a. the Feast of the Purification of the Virgin, a.k.a the Meeting of the Lord. Under Mosaic law, mothers would be deemed purified 40 days after giving birth. As one of the alternate holiday names implies, the final day involved taking the newborn to a temple for a redemptive ritual.
Only in the mid-19th century do we get any written reference to groundhogs in connection with Candlemas. Apparently, we have the Pennsylvania Deutsch to thank for it. |
|
|
| Prayers for Darkwolfie |
[Dec. 14th, 2009|08:41 pm] |
Please offer prayers for my friends Darkwolfie who is suffering from a long running illness and has been in the hospital for at least two months now.
He and his wife Tashabear are in desperate need of them.
Dominus vobiscum |
|
|
