Overflow

Oh Please, what’s the big deal? I am already tired of the Christian protest spam I am getting against the faux threat of the children’s movie “The Golden Compass.” Much ado about not much.

There’s more subversive, damaging material in one violent summer blockbuster or teen sex comedy than in the entire Body of Phillip Pullman’s work. He may wish to “Kill God,” but it’s the wrong God he’s trying to kill. He may want to subvert the Church, but the Church he thinks he’s subverting is the wrong Church. Church done wrong, something all should be against. A teddy bear named “Jesus” would be more threatening than this movie.

I’ve never been in league with the Catholic League. I’m more inclined to agree with the reviewer for the US Conference of Catholic Bishops:

Will seeing this film inspire teens to read the books, which many have found problematic? Rather than banning the movie or books, parents might instead take the opportunity to talk through any thorny philosophical issues with their teens.

Yeah, let me be the one to “protect” my children from evil atheist subversion, please.

I wrote this as a talk I was supposed to give to a group of men in my parish, a meditation of John Chapter 9, “I was blind and now I see.” I figure since I took the trouble to write it up, I’d post it here, especially since it is a message I need to hear fairly frequently:

As is usual when I am supposed do something like this, I prayed over this theme in Adoration.

God chose to start off by showing me the various ways I am Blind:
· Distraction: Focused on something else (ADD child)
· Overload: “Snow Blindness” Too much going on to focus (overwhelmed – unable to pick which voice to listen to)
· Agenda: Confirmation Bias. We see things as we are, not as they are.
· Persona: Masks, Reputation. Wanting to project a persona distorts the way we interact with the world.(wanting to be intellectual or sophisticated blinds me to the wisdom of simple faith)
· Truth itself – Being “Right” can be an insidious source of Blindness. Have a new hammer and everything looks like a nail…

“Seeing” can be a source of blindness.

Jesus said to the Pharisees: “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin, but now because you claim that you can see, your guilt remains.”

Beware of being right. Usually I find that if I am assured of how right I am about something, it is almost certain I am blind to something important that I am missing. Even if it is compassion and mercy for those who are “wrong.”

I was impressed by the lyrics from Steve’s theme song he wrote for us, something like “If I don’t see you then take my sight away.” Wow. That is some wisdom – if it is not Christ we see then it’s better to be blind than be “right.” Sight can only be restored, as with the young man in our reading, via an encounter with the living Christ. That’s why it’s so important to pray. Without prayer I am, we are, all blind.

I was inspired by the discussion from last week, how “blindness” and “sight” is not an either/or proposition. How we can be both blind and see at one time. How “sight” comes in varying degrees, in different ways. We all have our clear and blind spots. That’s the wisdom form this group.

That to me is some deep wisdom. Two apparent opposites held at the same time in harmony and tension.

Jesus was big on giving us such paradoxes to live with. He was always challenging us to hold two seeming opposites in harmony and tension:

Death/Life (paschal mystery)
Master/Servant
Greatness/Humility
Weakness/Strength

And, in John chapter 9, Sight and blindness. At the same time. In harmony and tension.

I want to say two 50 cent words to you and then I want you to immediately forget them. It is the idea behind them that is important:

Kataphatic and Apophatic

Our Catholic faith has a Kataphatic and an Apophatic tradition. The Kataphatic tradition concerns itself with statements of positive belief. It’s where our Church’s Creeds and Catechism come from. It is the source of Doctrine and Dogma and all Church teaching. Insofar as our faith is “right” about God, that comes from the kataphatic tradition.

The apophatic tradition comes from recognizing the overwhelming incomprehensibility of God. It focuses on what we do not know and cannot know about what God does and who He is. It’s closely aligned with the mystical tradition in the Church. When Jesus told us to be like the little children, when he praised the meek and the poor in spirit, he was coming from the apophatic side of things. Insofar as our Church is humble about the “rightness” of its teaching, that comes from the apophatic tradition.

Okay, you can forget the words now. What’s important is that we hold these two ideas as important, at the same time, in harmony and tension. Be blind and see at the same time.

To have one without the other is dangerous. But we like to flirt with danger by having preferences for one or the other.

Some people prefer the kataphatic tradition, Shorthand for them might be “conservative” Catholics. Stereotypically, they embrace all things dogmatic and are quick to proclaim and defend the teachings of the Church. They attend “Fullness of Truth” conferences, go to hear Scott Hanh speak when he’s in town. They trust the Magisterium of the Church and are a little skeptical of the “watered down” Catholicism of the mystics.

Some prefer the apophatic tradition. Shorthand for them might be “liberal” Catholics. They tend to prefer direct experiences of God over “Churchy” experiences. Some describe themselves as “Spiritual but not Religious”. They read Thomas Merton and go to hear Richard Rohr speak when he’s in town. They like a little eastern spirituality mixed in with their Catholicism. They tend to be wary of the structure and rules of the Church and and seek “contemplation”.

Both are right. Both are wrong.

Insofar as we prefer one tradition and think the other tradition is a little “wonky,” we are blind. If we see these traditions as “sides” in a conflict in the Church, we are blind.

The correct answer is “both” in harmony and tension. If we are naturally drawn to the one “side,” then our faith demands that we come to know the “other side” as well and work to hold them both in our own lives. In harmony and tension.

I would say I have been and am one of those liberal catholics. I came back to the Church as an adult through the mystical tradition. I started seeking spiritually in my twenties through Buddhism and was directed back to my very own faith via the writings of guys like Thomas Merton. My challenge was to learn enough about my faith to overcome my prejudice against “churchy” things and people and embrace my whole faith. I am still working on it. I used to describe myself as spiritual but noit religious. I now realize there can be no such thing if you follow Christ.

My beloved Thomas Merton, the “patron saint” of liberal Catholics everywhere, says this:

“The Dogmas defined and taught by the Church have a very precise, positive meaning which those who have the grace to do so must explore if they would live an integral spiritual life…”
“The understanding of Dogma is the proximate and ordinary way to contemplation.”
“Everyone ought to breathe the clean atmosphere of orthodox tradition and explain his belief in correct terminology.”

“YET true contemplation is not arrived at by an effort of the mind… God gives true theologians a hunger born of humility, which cannot be satisfied with formulas and arguments, and which looks for something closer to God than analogy can bring you.”
“This serene hunger of the spirit penetrates the surface of words and goes beyond the human formulation of mysteries and seeks intellectual solitude and interior poverty, the gift of supernatural apprehension which words cannot signify.”

That is the key idea – the GIFT of apprehension. Everything God reveals to us through scripture and Church tradition is a GIFT from Him. It would be rude of us to downplay it or refuse it. It is incumbent upon us to study it, to teach it when called, to live it.

Yet God also makes available to us GIFTS of contemplation – direct experiences of Himthat go beyond words and ideas. And we would be negligent to not seek God beyond where our positive statements of belief can take us.

Faith involves holding these two things in harmony and tension. Our Church is built upon mystery, important places in our faith where reason will not help us, where we need to have different ways of seeing and knowing. Insofar as we only have one way of seeing, we are blind.

Insofar as we do not develop our knowledge of church teaching, we are blind. Insofar as we do not develop our capacity to encounter God with different ways of seeing, we are blind.

Good thing we have each other to help each other. All of us have our blind spots.

All this stuff about theology and mysticism, belief and experience of God, is, as Thomas Aquinas said “all straw” if it does not lead us to the person of Christ and transform the world in tangible ways.

The words of our theme were spoken by the blind young man when he was badgered repeatedly by the Pharisees about what he thought the origin of his healing. He said to them: “I don’t know, but I do know one thing — I was blind and now I see.”

Hard to argue with results. The blind man had an encounter with Jesus that transformed him. It was hard to argue that Jesus had power – the results were right there for all to see.

And all these beliefs and all this prayer, all this “being right” and having “direct experiences” of God – if it gives us genuine sight – comes down to results.

I dunno, all I know is that I was blind and now I see…

So I leave you with this: We as Christians are supposed to provide the world a real encounter with Jesus Christ. So how is the world different because of our beliefs and our prayer? Are the hungry fed? Are the lonely comforted? Are sinners and enemies loved and forgiven? Can anyone say by encountering us that they were blind but now they see? At least a little bit more?”

I really try to ignore the fact that, reddit, one of my favorite aggregators on the web has devloved into a community of distinct progressive bias. I tend to be progressive myself, but I like my information sources to be balanced. I don’t mind hearing from the Atheist viewpoint, really I don’t.

But come on. If Christians preached on reddit the way Atheists do, they’d rightfully be run off. I sure wish they’d keep the evangelization of any kind off of my favorite aggregator.

The problem with most Chrsitian/Atheist dialogue is that most atheists have as incomplete an idea of who God is as most Christians do. They argue over the existence of an idea that we expect most Christians to grow out of by adulthood. The “God” they so predictably fight over is a devlopmentally-appropriate version of God for children. We’re supposed to grow deeper in our understanding, but rarely do so.

Personification of God is a convenient shorthand - a way to apply words to something that is way beyond words. A “handle” we use to relate to a transcendant reality. We start with God as a person because we are persons and we relate better that way.

At some point, though, we’re supposed to get beyond the convenient personification of God as “Father in the sky” and experience him in more mature form. God as Love. God as Good(ness). God is not *a* being — God *is* being.

By my faith, God made atheists too and the impulse to love is written on their hearts. Why would we be surprised that a sample of atheists would be more charitable than a sample of Christians? I bet the sampling was not normalized for spiritual maturity.

I know Atheists that are Good. I know Atheists who Love. I know Atheists who are masters of being who they were created to be. So, they don’t say “Lord, Lord” all the time, but by their fruits I can know them. Some of the best Christians I know don’t go to church.

I know “devout” Christians who are stuck in self-centered modes of being. Sometimes I am one of those Christians. The dividing line that matters is not so much belief/non-belief as it should be selflessness/selfishness. If you live a selfless life, then I call you my brother regardless of what you believe.

And if you are selfish, then I can identify with you too. I just wish I didn’t. So much.

Apparently “Angry Atheist” Authors are Hot Property right now. They’ve simply had it with religious fundamentalists of all stripes and want to “fight back.” They think it’s time for thinking, reasonable atheists to “take back” society from “superstition” and they’re willing to go to cultural battle to do so. Atheism has been around forever but what’s new is the strident and, dare I say it, evangelical tone they are taking.

Does anyone else see the irony here? Their increasingly confrontational rhetoric they are embracing is the essence of the very thing they are fighting against.

Christopher Hitchens famously says that “Religion Kills.” I say ego-driven, self-righteous outrage kills.

Apparently it sells well too. Religious fundamentalists of all stripes have known this forever. And now the Atheists get a cut of the action as well…. Good for them?

Slate has published a very good response to the recent craze over the glorified infomercial called The Secret. Like everything evil, The Secret is wrapped around a core truth — having a vision of a positive future can help you achieve your goals.

Absolutely. I am a big believer in vision. But the absurdity of letting the Law of Attraction short-circuit your ability to plan critically is dangerous. Have a positive vision, yes, but be clear-eyed about the potential negatives that may happen and incorporate them into your plan.

Here’s how it should work — positive vision guides and motivates your actions, and each positive action puts you ever closer into the vicintiy of your dreams. But at least some of those positive actions need to be concerned with anticipating and addressing risks from potential negatives that may bite you. Balanced planning, people! Critical thinking!

You need a healthy dose of “Stinkin thinkin” to make your dreams come true. No amount of positive thinking can overcome the realities of life, the world, and the systems that comprise them.

So, if you are going to comprise a cockamamie life philosophy around a TV show, you’d be a lot better off with Earl Hickey’s Karma List System.

Let’s get this straight: Whether it’s Morality or Near Death Experiences, just because there’s a physical explanation doesn’t mean that it’s not a spiritual reality. In fact, for those of us who really believe God was our creator, the evidence of physical basis for religious and moral behavior serves as confirmation of our faith.

I think the problem comes from the mistaken belief, from believers and non-believers alike, that the spiritual world and the physical world are somehow basically separate with a few rare intersections that appear to us as “miracles.”

A quote from the article on NDEs: “People say that because there’s a common thread running through them all there must be a spiritual element… I look at that common thread and I see a biological process.”

Why can’t it be both, pray tell? There is no separating spiritual reality and physical reality.

I’ve been reading some pretty interesting, yet kind of scary, futures scenarios lately. There’s been a sharp uptick in stories recently depicting various scenarios of economic collapse/decline. A few:

After the Oil Is Gone
Countdown to a Meltdown

These are not exactly the “Long Boom” we were promised by Peter Schwartz and his compadres back at the turn of the century.

I think it’s too early to say which way things will break, but I think both views need to be considered in futures planning. I can definitely see how our current arrangements depend on complex infrastructures — energy, monetary policy — that are appearing increasingly fragile. Our high comsumin’ high debt ways will come to an end eventually, but will the techno-optimists’ silver bullet of reforms and technology hit before the crisis hits us between the eyes? Am I willing to bank on it?

Either way, I still maintain that the optimum strategy, boom or bust, is to simplify our lifestyles, build community and support networks, deepen our spiritual lives, develop interests and hobbies that do not depend on complex infrastructures, support local culture.

“The church is like a swimming pool in which all the noise comes from the shallow end.”
— W. H. Vanstone, Anglican Theologian

Hey Daddy! Here are some questions that i need to ask you for my project.

1. What is your job in futures officially called?

My title depends on the organization that is paying me. I have been a freelance environmental scanning researcher, strategic planner, and futures facilitator. Right now I am a Senior Consultant for Impact of Future Technology at IBM.

2. What trainging did you have to take?

I have a Masters Degree in Studies of the Future from the University of Houston at Clear Lake. University of Houston is one of the few universities in the world with a degree in studying the future.To get my degree I had to successfully complete an internship and demonstrate my abilities. To keep my job as a futurist I always have to be training. If you want to stay at the leading edge of anything you have to learn continuously. School is never over.

3. When did you begin your job dealing with the future?

I started doing freelance futures work when I was still getting my degree. I have worked for a bunch of different organizations on a part time basis. My full time work started with IBM in April of 2006.

4. Can you give me a few stories (senarios) that you have made for countries?

This is a problem for me because I sell intellectual property. The work I do is owned by the people who pay me, so I can’t give to you what I did for them. I can give you a few descriptions if I don’t get too specific, though.

Futurists tell stories about what the future could be like, so I have told stories about:

Augmented reality. Virtual objects mixed up with real life objects so that, for instance, you can run around and “play” an online video game throughout the streets of your city with the game objects “overlaid” onto the buildings, cars, and people. For a major government in Southeast Asia, I told a story about a professional sports league in 2015 that competed in augmented reality stadiums and was a hit on the “YouTube” version of ESPN. The technology got so popular that it sparked a revolution in education.

Automated Swarms of Robots. I wrote a story for a military client that involved trained swarms of small robots called “MEMS” the size of dust mites that could “think” together and form the appearance of everyday objects to spy and search past enemy lines. So the swarm could infiltrate the enemy and pose as a water bottle while it records where they put their landmines and warn our troops. When one of them goes to grab the bottle, the swarm disperses and the bottle “disappears” to form somewhere else as another object. That was for the year 2032.

An Edible City. I told a story about a large city of millions of people covered in flowers, fruits, herbs, and food plants. Everywhere you went there were plants that were not only beautiful, but delicious. Almost every citizen grew plants in their homes and window boxes and the government helped connect them to people who wanted to buy what they grew. The City got a big environmental benefit from all of the plants, they sold the products from the plants to countries around the world, and the”Edible City” became a tourism sensation with the help of the Food Network. All the famous chefs wanted to open restaraunts there because the food was so fresh. Everyone was happy.

Sometimes it is the job of a futurist to tell stories that inspire people. People need a Vision that describes what they want to be in the future.

Sometimes the stories futurists tell are very dark and gloomy, kind of like a warning. Al Gore tells stories about Global Warming. These are stories that you don’t want to come true, but they could. I once told a story about a global plague that ended in humanity reverting to the stone age. I imagined that an oil-eating microbe developed to clean up oil spills mutated to eat plastic. Essentially it ate all the plastic and civilization collapsed. Can you immagine what would happen if all the plastics suddenly diappeared?

5. Could you give me a few predictions? (elaborate on what you told me in the car about everything being computerized ect.)

Okay, here’s an important thing about futurists — futurists don’t predict the future.

They look at trends (which are mostly about the recent past) and evidence in the present. They extrapolate (project) trends out into the future. From this you get the “most likely” or “baseline” future. But the farther you go out, the more uncertain any statement about the future becomes. It just so happens that the farther you go out, the more value a statement about the future can have because you have more time to act on it.

Another important thing futurists do is take the “most likely” future and then talk about how it could be different than you’d expect. Any futurist worth the money you pay him will talk about multiple futures instead of just “the future.”

But there are things we can say with reasonable certainty about the “most likely” future just because the evidence is overwhelming. It would take a pretty big surprise for the following not to happen eventually:

China or India will likely overtake the United States as the global superpower within 30 years. They each already have more honor students than the total number of children in the US. And they have children at greater rates than us. The numbers are against us.

Electronics will get increasingly intimate with humans, resulting in electronic devices woven into clothing and even implanted into the bodies of their owners.

Recent breakthroughs in imaging of the human brain will eventually lead to the ability to directly manipulate the contents of the brain. We’re talking about programming behaviors, editing memories, mind reading, direct learning, that kind of thing.

The ability to give every object the ability to compute and communicate using wireless technology will create an “internet of things.” Ordinary objects will talk to one another. Your milk bottle will be able to tell your refrigerator that its contents are about to go sour and your refigerator could then call you and tell you to pick up a new bottle on your way home. Your car will likely spy on you and to be able tell on you for speeding. But the upside is that you’ll never lose your keys — they will find you.

Biotechnology will be to this century what computer technology was to the 20th century. It’s hard to anticipate where genetic technology will take humanity, but you can be sure that it will take a while for our social systems to catch up to a world transformed by genetic technology. For instance, will it be fair to compete in school against richer students who can afford to augment themselves with genetic enhancements? Will they have special schools? And further down the line, will the “haves” split themselves off into a different, superior species to “regular” humans?

Potential wildcards — deal breakers that could change everything beyond recognition:
The collapse of the ecosystem of the world’s oceans (a real possibility with global warming)
A breakthrough in quantum computing that renders every computer on earth obsolete at once
Development of clean, abundant energy source using technologies such as zero point energy or cold fusion
Breakthrough in immortality research which extends ordinary human lifespans into the hundreds of years — Old age “cured” and people only die of diseases, murder, and accidents.
An acheivement in artificial intelligence yields living, conscious machines — this is called the “singularity” by many people.

6. Anything else you want to share with the class?

Most of you want to live to age eighty and beyond. Most of you have goals in life. To grow old and achieve your goals in life you need to have a vision for the future and work toward it over sixty years or more. That’s a long time to plan for and a lot of change to cover. Think how much has changed in just the last ten years. The Internet itself is barely over ten years old.

Most corporations only plan five years into the future. Whole governments plan maybe 30 years into the future. Ordinary individuals like you must be “extreme futurists” in order to survive and thrive in the world over the next sixty years. Learn to anticipate change and make it work for you instead of reacting all the time. Envision the future you want for yourself and work for it.

I wonder if the atheist religion is as embarrassed about their obnoxious proselytizing fringe element as we Christians are of ours?

I am encouraged lately by Ron Rolheiseir’s article from the latest US Catholic called “Knock it Off”. I have been discouraged by how the Church appears to be follwing the rest of society in becoming increasingly polarized between “liberals” and “conservatives.”

Being an Adult Minister of my parish, I have my own leanings, my own preferences, but I am very careful to not let them come out. My job is to represent my Church and help people develop their faith, not lead them down my own path. So I try to stay away from the “partisan” debates about what parts of Jesus’ message we should emphasize and which “sins” are the ones we should crusade against. And when someone brings up this polarization — from either side — I feel a tension between my own natural desire to give my opinion and my need to represent all the Church and not just some points of view.

Until now, I have compromised by always trying to speak for the unrepresented viewpoint. But Rolheiser has given me another thing to say. Forget “liberal” or “conservative”, go deeper. The article is a must read for every Catholic who takes sides as “liberal” or “conservative.”

“So what you’re seeing today inside of the church and inside of society is a fierce and a powerful conservatism. This conservatism actually feeds off an unbalanced liberalism. Excessive liberalism sparks excessive conservatism, then excessive conservatism sparks excessive liberalism, and so on….there has to be a grounding in faith. As Jim Wallis of Sojourners magazine says, ‘Don’t be a liberal, don’t be a conservative, be a man or woman of faith. Don’t turn right, don’t turn left, go deeper.’ It’s simple but it’s true: Don’t act liberally or conservatively, just act out of faith, and that will take you where you should be. “

Everyone should read this article, especially the advice for both Liberals or Conservatives at the very bottom.

I can see that the parts of Christianity I disagree with come from a good place, a good basic idea, however tortured and distorted by polarizing agendas they may be. My job when I am confronted with stuff I disagree with is to find that good place it came from and embrace it. Find the good place. Go Deeper into Faith.

I love this dialogue between Daddy and Daughter. People who know me will recognize me in there somewhere. I am not a chemistry professor, but I did spend 30 minutes recently trying to explain the concept of process variaton to my daughter Girlzilla who keeps missing the bus, requiring a ride from me.

I started charging her $30 per ride. She was outraged. So I explained to her:

Think of all your morning out-the-door times as a population that has an average and a standard deviation
Not all of your out-the-door times meet standards (you miss the bus)
You can look at your morning prep from waking time to walking out the door as a process that produces this critical measure — out-the-door time
You can choose to change your process to make your average out the door time earlier, allowing for your current level of variation in your morning prep process (scoot the average)
You can choose to change your process to reduce the variation in your process (be more consistent) thus allowing you to have the same average, but make the bus more consistetly (squish the standard deviation)
But I admit change is painful. Especially if it involves getting up earlier in the morning
So you can also decide to live with a certain amount of non-conformance (missing the bus)
Apparently you have been deciding that the considerable pain of change is greater than the incovenience of missing the bus for you
But you have not accounted in your considerations the inconvenience to me
So I am charging you $30 (or six hours of babysitting) for each ride, thus shifting the pain back to you so you can make an informed evaluation of your morning preparatory process results
Now that your non-c0nformances are sufficiently painful, you can do any combination of three things:
Wake up earlier or do something to “scoot” your average ready time earlier, thus making it to the bus in time
Streamline your process to reduce the variation, allowing you to wake up at 6:15 and leave by 6:40 on a consistent basis and still make the bus in time
Or pay me for each non-conformance
Now you get to make the decision of how much money you wish to spend to avoid the pain of change, and thus I am treating you like an adult

Having explained everything so well, can you be surprised that she still was not convinced? Apparently my logic “Sucks.” But her on-time performance went up over 80% over the next month. So Daddy does know best. Heh.

I’d say at this moment, this is my favorite hymn. We sang it in church occasionally for years, and I let it just wash over me and never paid attention to it until I heard it at the funeral of Fr. Walter Sheffield, one of our parish’s most beloved priests. It was his favorite song. It was him to a tee.

Fr. Walter gave of himself right up to the end of his life. Toward the end, he would try to say mass and get confused. But he loved to say mass and loved to be there with people. You’d definitely go to other priests to discuss canon law or theology, but you’d go to Fr. Walter for a friendly chat or for a supportive ear. He was that kind of guy.

When I was younger, I wanted to be the type you’d go to to discuss philopsophy and theology and other heady topics. That’s how I wanted to be known (and still do on my weaker days.) But when I grow up, I think I’d like to be more like Fr. Walter, known for love and service that never gives up. Always a friendly and supportive shoulder to lean on.

So the Servant song was his his favorite song. And I guess I want it to be my favorite song too. I sing it for morning prayer often. As a reminder.

Brother let me be your servant.
Let me be as Christ to you.
Pray that I may have the grace
To let you be my servant to.

We are pilgrims on a journey
We are brothers on the road.
We are here to help each other
Walk the mile and share the load.

I will hold the Christ light for you.
In the nighttime of your fear.
I will hold my hand out to you,
Speak the peace you long to hear.

I will weep when you are weeping.
When you laugh, I’ll laugh with you.
I will share your joy and sorrow
‘Til we’ve seen this journey through.

When we sing to God in heaven
We will find such harmony
Born of all we’ve known together
Of Christ’s love and agony.

— Richard Gillard

Once in awhile I am so grateful that I am not traveling through adulthood without children to protect me. I am newly 41 years of age, and without kids I would truly feel it. Or worse.

Once again, my kids have stumbled me over a great fun find, Who Needs Donuts by Mark Alan Stamaty. I found the book sitting on a table at the library in the kids section. I read it to the kids last night and then spent about thirty minutes myself just looking at the details in the pictures, like a kid myself. I might have to buy my own copy while it is still in reprint.

Each page of Stamaty’s book mixes the detail of a “Where’s Waldo” scene with a gently surreal absurdist outlook on life. Turns out that the absurdist style got the book panned by overly conservative reviewers at School Library Weekly (they obviously didn’t have children to protect them like I do!) when it was published in the 1970’s and Stamaty gave up children’s book publishing for a life of writing comics for the Village Voice, New York Book Review, and Slate. He was poor and needed to focus on forms that would actually earn him a living. (read a great interview about the book at Rands In Repose) Years later, one of the reviewers apologized to him and said her review was wrong, but it was too late, he had moved on.

So it turns out that if it weren’t for a few stuffy reviewers, Mark Alan Stamaty might well have been be one of the best loved children’s authors both kids and parents alike could adore. Then there would have been the animated series, the merchandising, and just maybe my kids would be watching Stamaty-toons instead of insipid-toons on cable today.

But instead, “Who Needs Donuts” is a rare gem and a “cult classic.” And it looks as if I am joining this particular cult. Thanks to my kids.

The Washington Post tried to make him look as stern as possible — “Pope Warns About Loveless Sex”. Can’t blame them too much because that’s what I expected his first encyclical to be like.

Haven’t read it all yet, but from the summaries it looks like a back-to-basics look at the nature of love and the mission of the Church. It’s said that a Pope’s first encyclical letter is supposed to set the tone for his papacy. Okay.

He’s kind of surprised me. I have to admit that before he became Pope Benedict XVI I didn’t like him that much. Now he has my sincere benefit of the doubt.