The Two Easter Syndrome

bun

This year, as with most years in the past, we have two Easters. The western church, those known as Catholic and Protestant, celebrated last Sunday, April 13. We of the Eastern Orthodox world will celebrate this coming Sunday, April 19. While you of the west are enjoying your lamb and ham and chocolate bunnies, we are still making do with a Lenten diet of greens and beans. But Pascha is coming (virus or no virus) and we will rejoice and celebrate, even if only virtually.

Why is it that we have this difference? I will tell you one thing certain, it not because of  the calendars. The starting point has to be that though there are two celebrations and two (three if you consider the Jewish lunar calendar as well) calendars, we all celebrate the same day in the west and the same, though often different day in the east.

Keep in mind two basic facts while we try to untangle this weed patch. First, we are all in agreement as to what to call each day. The days of the week are not in dispute and it has been so since the time of Moses. You can be dead certain that 14,000 days ago (which is 2,000 weeks or about 38 years) was the same day as when you read this. The second concerns the cornerstone of our time and date keeping. We can calculate the day and time of the Vernal Equinox to a fare-the-well. This is so because that celestial event occurs without reference to anything human. It is outside our capability to modify our world. But is is readily calculated.

Why the Vernal Equinox? Firstly, because the execution of Jesus of Nazareth took place at the end of Passover. The date of Passover is determined first from the Jewish calendar which is in turn a lunar calendar with its own peculiarities. It has served the Jews for millennia and the date of Passover is always 15 Nisan. The Wikipedia entry  for “Jewish Calendar” makes for interesting reading. Of primary interest is the fact that months can be either 29 or 30 days in length to compensate for the fact that one lunar revolution is about 28.5 days.

Of course, the crucifixion is not a concern to Jews, but it has long been held in the Orthodox Church that the observance of that event and of His resurrection, Pascha, should always follow Passover. After the Great Schism in 1054 AD, the western Church went its separate way. At some point, the west modified the means of determining the appropriate date and the difference has existed ever since. Try the Wikipedia entry for Computus for a brief explanation. While not fully correct, the rubric is that the west determines the date as the first Sunday after the first full moon and after the Vernal Equinox. The Orthodox version adds “after Passover” to the formula.

800px-Julius_Caesar_Via_dei_Fori_Imperiali_2
Statue of Julius Caesar, Via dei Fori Imperiali (Rome) – Wikipedia

Note that in all this, the solar calendars still in use, the Gregorian and Julian, have no bearing on this determination. And here is where an interesting difference occurs within the Orthodox Church. In the Roman world, the calendar was somewhat arbitrarily decided and could often be a political plaything. There was a method but by the time of the reign of Julius Caesar, it was a mess and he determined to reform it. Enlisting the aid of Greek mathematicians and astronomers, a formula was developed that took the adjustments made to compensate for the sun’s rotation time (approximately 365.25 days) and it took effect by edict on January 1 of the 709th year since the founding of Rome, the year we now know as 45 BC.

 

Pope_Gregory_XIII_portrait
Pope Gregory XIII – Wikipedia

 

 

 

That calendar held until 1582, by which time it had slipped* about 10 days. Pope Gregory XIII decided that a correction must be made but rather than simply adjusting the date, he had further adjustments made to the calendar scheme to reduce the rate of slippage. Thus, October 4, 1582 was followed by October 15th and in 1584 for the first time , many children were born on a day that would not occur again for four years. They should consider themselves lucky. Under the old, pre-Julian calendar, there were frequent periods when the date could not be known.

How the two calendars come to bear requires another dip into history. The short story is this. Once the Gregorian calendar was adopted by Catholic countries, then most western countries followed suit. This lead to a real division in the Orthodox Churches, as many Orthodox churchmen refused to adopt anything related to the Catholic Church, and surely, the Gregorian calendar was foremost among them. The last European country to adopt the Gregorian calendar was Greece and then only in 1923.

As things now stand, many Orthodox jurisdictions, the Serbian and Russian most prominent among them, still use the Julian calendar which now is 13 days different from the Gregorian. Thus, we of the Greek Orthodox Church celebrate Pascha on April 19. Our Serbian friends down the street will celebrate on that same day but their date will be April 6. It is important to note that we celebrate on the same day, regardless of how we name that date. This is why our western friends mostly observe a different day, because they use a different method to set the day.

One more thing to add to the confusion: While the Serbian Church will mark Pascha on the  same day as we do, their calendar will have them celebrate Christmas in January. It will still be December 25, Julian calendar, even though we call that day January 3.

  • calendar slippage.  Neither the earth’s rotation around the sun or that of the moon around earth, are exact multiples of the earth’s spin period. All calendars try to take this into account and schemes such as leap years are a means of compensating. Ultimately the date for events such as the Vernal Equinox will change, as from March 21 to 22 or 20, for example.
The image at the top of this entry is from an episode of The Simpsons and is copyright by Disney and Twentieth Century Fox TV.

The Beach at Peraia

Peraia, Greece, August 2019: Life on the beach of Peraia in summer is one long succession of  swimming, walking, relaxing, with leisurely lunches by the waterside. That is true for the human inhabitants. Maybe less so  for the other denizens.

IMG_20190731_234722_979The beach of Peraia is a four mile stretch of sandy beach varying in width from a few feet to a hundred or more. What sets it off from other like places is that the water is shallow well out from shore. Even as much as a hundred yards out it is possible to stand on the bottom. Though lacking in significant surf, it is still a popular recreational area and locals and foreigners alike flock here every summer.

Less recognized is the wildlife that also occupies these waters. The wide sandy bottom looks at first like an aquatic desert  but in fact there is an abundance of life to be found. It may not be a National Geographic coral reef with clouds of exotic fish but there is more to be found than meets the uncritical eye.

DSCF0259
Small fish abound along the beach. They seem unphased by human presence.

Stand for a moment a few yards out and watch. Very likely a number of small fish will come to investigate. Characteristically, they are elusive and well camouflaged, as are all the species here. There is little vegetation and no hiding place so species that thrive here are those that can blend in to the point of being invisible. At times those small fish seem able to bury themselves in the sand.

A note for would be fishermen: Forget your exotic tackle. No poppers, hoppers, droppers, no wooly buggers or redwing whizbangs. No spoons, spinners, none. What works for these little guys is bread. Throw a piece of bread in the water and you will start a feeding frenzy. Put a piece on your hook and expect a catch. Of course, they are barely bite size. For bigger fish, you need to get out on the water.

DSCF0465
A  conch snail still occupying his shell.

The keen eyed observer will ocasionally come across other oddities. Small conchs and snails are frequently found, usually by stepping on them. They are typically adorned with barnacles, the immobile barnacles taking advantage of the snails to bring them to food. Rocks of varying size are present sans barnacles, since they tend to get buried which would be unfortunate for any attached barnacles.

DSCF0479
This mildly perturbed Hermit crab is investigating the sudden change of scenery.

Many of the snail shells have been vacated in favor of small hermit crabs. I am not sure how the change in occupancy takes place but it is likely that the snails are the losers. Hold one of these for a minute or two and the crab will nervously investigate and sometimes try to escape.

DSCF0189
A razor clam shell left behind by a feeding crab(?)

A variety of shells litter the sea floor. Razor clams are present but only the empty shells will be found.  Michael was able to find a live razor clam a couple of years ago. Curiously, they were offered at a Madrid food court but there seems to be no market for them here.

Above, tiny crabs vie for exposed clams.

At the waters edge, tiny clams seem to be the choice of numerous small crabs. Since there is constant wave action (mostly from the wake of boats and ships in the bay) these clams are churned up and become crab bait. Numerous clam shells testify to their aundance -and fate. There are also tiny fish, typically about 1″ long,  frequently seen but which are so perfectly camouflaged that it takes considerable concentration to spot them.

DSCF0542
These little “now you see them, now you don’t fish are maybe an inch long. With an underwater camera, they are more visible. From above it is just lusck to spot them.

Of all the creatures found here, the oddest is the salp. At least, that is what I believe it is. The locals call them medusa, a generic for jellyfish, but they are not that. There are no tentacles. They are about 6″ in length and appear like a small, transparent cucumber. They pulse slowly and tend to stay near the surface. Probably filter feeders, they do not seem to have any predators.

DSCF0178
Salps can be elusive and difficult to photograph. It is bad enough that they are nearly transparent, but in bright sunlight and without my glasses, this is a lucky shot.

The most mysterious* aspect of them is that they will appear suddenly, a few one day, hundreds the next. And then they vanish just as suddenly. If you Google “salp”, a different creature wil be found. Out in the Mediteranean proper, they are found as long chains of individuals forming a tape like entity that can exceed 100′. These however, do not combine and merely float along, alarming the unwary and uninformed.

  • “Mysterious” is the favorite adjective of hack science writers everywhere.

The video above is probably the business end of a razor clam. The fronds appear as a black spot on the sand but when disturbed, they quickly hide.

One might think that the featureless seafloor along the Peraia beach would be bereft of life. It is anything but and a visit here will soon show otherwise. Maybe you should take a trip and swim here. You never know what might be under your feet.

 

They Also Serve…

Today, May 30, 2019, is a good day to contemplate service, as in service to your country. It is the original date designated as Memorial Day, and was originally called Decoration Day. You should consider a visit to one of the many cemeteries and monuments that dot the land. As with the rusting hulk of the USS Arizona, the tomb of nearly 1,000 sailors, it can be a moving and educational experience.

Military service runs through my family. We aren’t a military family on the order of, say, John McCain, but we have done our share. When I dig into my family history, the fact that many of my ancestors, both recent and as far back as I can go, served in one capacity or another is a bit surprising.

My own service was a curiosity. I joined the Navy to see the world, as they say, and spent

Bob Sexton w/ John (Spike) Marlin (rt) and friend at Treasure Island 1959
Bob Sexton w/ John (Spike) Marlin (rt) and friend at Treasure Island 1959

my hitch in San Diego and San Francisco. I never went to sea. That was in part a consequence of having a talent for things electronic and no command wanted to part with any technically capable personnel. The stint in San Francisco was while attending electronics school on Treasure Island. San Diego was for boot camp and three years tending radio transmitters at a now abolished naval radio station.

More immediately, my nephew also served in the navy, along with a brother-in-law who retired from the navy as a four-striper, that is with the rank of captain, no mean feat for naval officers. My father put in a stint in the army joining the 76th Field Artillery at

lyle sexton scout
My father, Lyle Sexton, served in the army but in civilian life wore another uniform. Service came naturally to him.

Camp Ord near Monterey during the height of the depression .

John Hepburn
Sgt. John Hepburn in full field regalia, though he probably thought bib overalls and a straw hat more appropriate to his duties.

Further back, an uncle of my mother served in World War I. He made it to France but with the veterinarian training he had received , he was assigned to tending horses and he never got close to the front. Another of my mother’s cousins was part of a special forces unit. He made the news at the end .of the war by going into Tokyo without permission. Another cousin by marriage was not so lucky, dieing in Normandy in September, 1944.

There are others, not all of them lucky enough to return home. Two of my wife’s cousins died in WWII, one in a training flight accident, the other somewhere in the Pacific near the close of the war. Her father served in the Greek Army on the Albanian front, until Greece was overrun by the Nazis who came in support of Mussolini’s hapless Italian Army.

Even further back, you will find the

Dr Marshal Perkins
Dr. (and Captain) Marshall Perkins, veteran of Gettysburg and other campaigns.

gaunt looking gentleman (below) in uniform.* He is Dr. Marshall Perkins, who served in the Union Army during the civil war and was present at Gettysburg. He would tell of an orderly who tried to catch a cannon ball and got his arms ripped off for his troubles. Even into colonial times, I have historical information concerning William Perkins and his military service. William was the first of the family to arrive in the new world and seems to have had some difficulty establishing himself. Records still exist that describe bis occasional lapses of judgment. Still, he was given the rank of Sergeant and served for many years in Roxbury.

 

All this is not to single out my family, or extended family. I suspect that many families have a similar history. I recently saw Cold Blue, the restored Wiliam Wyler footage taken at great risk to record the efforts of the Eighth Air Force during World War II. Some 127,000 men served and 28,000 died in the air war against Germany. The numbers are staggering and starkly underline the cost of service.

harold criswell
Harold Robert Criswell, a cousin by marriage, lost in Normandy in September 1944.

Kevin Williamson, who writes for the National Review (and briefly for The Atlantic) wrote recently “A friend who is a lifelong military man says that he wishes sincerely that people would stop thanking him for his service as though doing so were a kind of mandatory social convention somewhere between Welcome to Starbucks! and Have a nice day!” I am much in sympathy with Kevin’s friend. I have encountered that greeting frequently. When I compare my service to what many others endured, I feel not a little embarrassed to stand along side those who gave their all.

The practice of thanking anyone in uniform for their service began some time after the Vietnam war. During and after the war, the treatment of servicemen and women was terribly shabby. Public expressions of gratitude seems to be the product of a collective guilt complex, a means for making amends for past mistreatment. A far better expression of gratitude would be to add your service, whether it be military or in  many civilian capacities. Which would be better, remembering those lost in that rusting hulk at Pearl Harbor, or posting more signs of faux gratitude that no one will observe?

 

    • Dr. Perkins was a captain, an officer and a gentleman, as were all doctors. Just think of M*A*S*H. As such he was required to wear a sword when in dress uniform. I had a 
      physics teacher who recounted once his experience as an officer in WWII. He was even then required to wear a sword with his dress uniform and found it particularly troublesome when going to a movie theater.
IMG_20190530_083835611_HDR
These have been springing up around town lately.  Is anyone checking?

 

Loyal to… ?

A recent poster on Facebook lamented the possibility his son might have to join the service under that “moron-in-chief” obviously referring to the current president. What he seems not recognize is that every president in recent times has been disdained by some portion of the populace. Thus the epithet would have been used in regard to presidents every party.

This is a minor matter but there is a an underlying principle that is being forgotten. Those who join our military services swear an oath to “preserve and protect” the constitution. This oath remains in force regardless who is in the White House. In fact, many military members serve through the terms of more than one president and no repeat oath is needed.

Why is this? As I stated, the oath is to preserve the constitution not the president, or any other person for that matter. The founding fathers wanted no royalty and that oath is an expression of that desire. Thus presidents, governors and all the rest can come and go but “the Union stands as she stood, rock-bottomed and copper-sheathed, one and indivisible” as Stephen Vincent Benet phrased it in The Devil and Daniel Webster.

There will always be those who find it onerous to serve a particular president and that will be true of presidents of either party. This will not be a problem unless it develops as a widespread sentiment. But that will only happen if the military lets up on its dedication to serving the country.

Das Boot, Max!

This is not about submarines or the movie Das Boot. It is about the strange journey of one Max Boot, late of the conservative world and his conversion to a fire breathing true believer of climate change.

Max Boot was a familiar figure in the conservative world and was generally recognized as well versed in Middle East matters. He was, that is, until 2016, late 2016. Evidently nonplussed by the victory of Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton, Max went deep into the “Never Trump” camp and pretty much vanished from the pages of the various conservative sites to which he was previously contributing.

He had company. Among others, writers such as George Will, columnist for the Washington Post, and Bill Kristol, editor and founder of The Weekly Standard, abandoned the Republican Party on the grounds that the GOP had become unmoored from its professed principles. They had a point, as The Donald certainly displayed no perceivable moral principles. But in the minds of many Trump supporters, the Democratic Party’s continuing support for Bill Clinton seemed to negate that as a matter of concern. Sort of an “if they can do it, so can we” stance.

That obviously did not sit well with Max who began issuing a stream of vitriolic laden commentary making it clear that he was against Trump and any who might side with The Donald even slightly. Conservative pundits have taken note of this and have, here and there, commented on him. Now it seems, he has completely rejected the conservatism he once espoused and has embraced the progressive side. The climate issue is only the latest manifestation of his “conversion”.

There are others in the Never Trump camp who have been on the receiving end of Boot’s ~and others’~ disdain. Jonah Goldberg, for example, has been subjected to endless anti-semitic assaults. he gets it from both sides, the right for being against Trump and the left for being on the right and thus supposedly pro-Trump. it is a messy scene.

So climate alarmists* ought to think twice before deifying max Boot. It is hardly likely that he is concerned about climate above all else. Characteristic of his stance since 2016 is a clearly reflexive opposition to Trump. If the Donald goes to McDonalds, max will prefer Burger King. There is not one matter nor one event about which Max will allow himself to agree with Trump, no matter the outcome or the ultimate facts. Goldberg, while clearly and emphatically not in favor of Trump, will at least give due credit when Trump gets something right. Max Boot  has simply gone off the deep end and completely changed his supposedly closely held philosophy simply because of Trump. The contrast between him and Goldberg is stark. Jonah opposes Trump because The Donald does not appear to hold true conservative values. Max opposes Trump only because he is Trump.

*So you think the term climate alarmists is a slur? Please then explain why the term climate deniers is not. Those who use it are either utterly tone deaf to the obvious comparison to Holocaust deniers, or are deliberately taking a cheap shot. The argument that “you are a Nazi because…” appears over and over again. It is unwise and undeserved. The use of alarmists, on the other hand, is not pejorative. In fact, if you truly believe there is an approaching climate catastrophe, being called an alarmist would be appropriate. On the other hand, being called a denier is to be excluded from any possible dialogue. This is a matter of science, not dogma. No scientific proposition should ever be accepted without question. It is shameful how much the “scientific community” has abandoned the principles of true scientific inquiry.

IOT: Internet of Trouble

As I dabble in electronic gadgetry, owing to my professional occupation, I frequently am made aware of the so called Internet of Things. In this universe, gadgets of every imaginable purpose are designed so as to be accessible and controllable through the Internet. Just add the appropriate interface and the code to match and Voila, you can turn on your oven from half a world away, from the moon even, should you ever get there.

Why is this so wonderful? Certainly it satisfies the curious and the tinkerers. There is a comical scene in a Big Bang Theory episode when the boys, true geeks that they are, make it possible to control their lights in this way, not to mention the RC cars similarly enabled. In their case, nothing untoward occurs, but it ought to be recognized that much mischief might result.

What provokes this line of thinking is an article on the Weekly Standard website discussing how Internet connected driver-less cars might be turned into WMDs. The thrust of the article is to insist that more must be done for cyber security but never asks the question as to why they should be connected at all. One troubling possibility is that the desire to inform the rider that there are three coffee shops nearby or the nearest McD is just 1.5 miles away overrides the obvious potential for disaster.

On a larger scale, occasional mention is made that there just might be cyber attacks on the power grid. Our entire power generating capacity is Internet connected, but why should we give access in any form to hostile actors. Really, does anyone ~anyone~ in Kazakhstan need to know what PG&E or Southern Cal Edison are doing? And worse, should it be possible for them under any circumstances to be able to control any element of that or defense systems or anything?

Perhaps we need to step back and address the wisdom of the IOT concept. There is little benefit to be had from connecting a myriad of devices that heretofore were working just fine thank you without remote control. It might just be time to start disconnecting things from the Internet. Do we really need our lawnmower ~or the neighborhood nuclear reactor~ to be at the mercy of someone in say, Tehran?

Let barking dogs lie…

There is one thing that will not be missed when we return from Greece, that is the dogs. Especially the barking dogs. Especially the loud, really loud barking dogs. I don’t know where they find them, but they can be so loud that it is not possible to hear normal conversation because of them.

Greeks are particularly fond of dogs. They are numerous and usually kept in the small, cramped apartments typical of Greek city life. Dogs are by nature gregarious pack animals. Yet they are most often left alone when their owners are gone, in a yard, on the ubiquitous balconies. One near us was kept on a rooftop.

We once had a dog, a cairn terrier, inevitably named Toto. He was a good dog but nervous. Once when we went camping, we tried to leave him outside our tent. In the pleasant summer weather, it seemed a reasonable thing to do. It quickly became obvious that our nervous little dog was afraid of the dark. He began barking continuously and the only thing we could do was bring him inside our tent. It was not unlike the plight of many dogs left by themselves by busy owners.

Neighbors can do little about this, other than to pass suggestions or complaints to the owners. This is true in Greece and anywhere else. Dogs left alone are lonely and nervous and express their anxieties by barking. As long as people keep dogs, this will be so.

 

Roe, Roe, Roe…

With the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy from the Supreme Court, Right to Life advocates see the prospect of the overturn of Roe v. Wade looming on the horizon. Perhaps it would be best not to be too eager. The politics of the matter, plus the question of precedents, does not make for an easy process. Leave both the political and legal issues aside. Roe presents a stark decision point for any society, and especially for a secular, pluralistic one such as ours.

The decision point is how to treat matters of faith. To understand the dilemma, it is necessary to consider how the unborn are considered by the Right to Life movement, and most religious communities. That must then be held in contrast to the atheistic view. I subscribe to the principle that life begins at conception. This is not technically correct, as life is in reality a continuum. To say that life begins is to suggest that inanimate materials have somehow been endowed at some moment with those characteristics we recognize as life. None the less, the phrase is useful if it is taken to mean that the life of an individual begins at conception. This is inarguable as we can infer from genetics. The DNA that identifies an individual (human or otherwise) is established at the time of conception.

In the materialist view, this is all that happens. But there is more to consider. We are, we believe, endowed with a soul, something that is not of the material world. It has been argued (and there are diverse views on this even among the religious) that abortion might be acceptable at any time before the developing embryo/fetus becomes human. The soul is essential to humanity and when ensoulment occurs is thus a critical moment. Again, I subscribe to the idea that ensoulment occurs simultaneously with conception. This is the only time that is not an arbitrary choice. Any other point further along depends on an arbitrary choice with unclear delineation. If you say that a beating heart is necessary, you cannot pin down the moment it starts. Brain development and other physical characteristics take place gradually and the clear moment is not readily discernible. Though we cannot easily detect that moment either, conception takes place almost instantly and thus it is a certainty that this new individual has both soul and body. it follows that abortion at any stage takes the life of a soul-endowed individual.

But does it matter. I certainly believe that it does and it is a matter of great importance to that God that endows us all with soul. Absent God, it does not matter at all. Then any arbitrary moment can be regarded as a dividing line, or no point at all need be established. It is entirely up to the people to decide, and it can change on a whim. There is nothing to stand in the way of any decision taken. But the words of the Declaration of Independence should matter, both because of the clear meaning and the understanding of the Founding Fathers who certainly believed in a creator, even if they could not agree on how to worship. “We hold these truths to be self-evident,” Jefferson wrote, “that we are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Truly, we cannot live up to those words if we have no respect for life, even at the earliest stages. Remove life, and liberty and happiness have no meaning.

Overturning Roe v Wade, will not be the panacea that some think it would be. It would only mean returning to status quo ante, wherein the matter is returned to the states. This will satisfy the federalists among us, allowing the matter to be resolved state by state. It will be an almost dead certainty that some states will retain legal abortion, perhaps legalizing even more extreme methods and circumstances. This will also mean that the socio-political divisions will likely become even sharper. In that future, Roe might be gone but chasm that exists between us will grow ever deeper.

Should Roe be upheld or retained? Consideration must be given to the dilemma judges face when such questions are brought before them. As has been rightly observed, the word abortion appears nowhere in the constitution. Thus there is no clear statement as to how it should be treated. In that circumstance, a judge must resort to other sources, or try to distill some reasonable conclusion from thin air. it is worth noting that there was a decided interest in considering Roe or a like case at the time. Given that there was nothing to go by, it is reasonable to think the decision was made before the case even came to court. Should Roe be overturned, there will inevitably follow a further effort to solve the matter “for once and for all”, meaning that it will not be put to rest, and attempts to litigate it will continue into the indefinite future. Without Roe, the attempt would be to effectively make the Declaration into law, something that could have profound, unforeseeable consequences.

The real solution is, as it has been all along, to convince the people of the rightness of the Right to Life cause. And too, to emphasize Lincoln’s admonition that a house divided cannot stand. Even if, as with the Founders, we cannot agree on the manner of worship, we must ultimately be of one mind on this issue. For me, I will continue to believe that all human life is precious, that it begins, both in soul and body, at conception. All this I have derived from observable facts and right reason and I am firmly committed to the words of the Nicene Creed. “I believe in One God, Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and everything visible and invisible…”

Belief: A Choice

via Home

To begin with, you should know that I am an Orthodox Christian.* More importantly, I am a believer. I believe in One God, Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth. If you do not recognize that phrase, it is the opening line of the Nicene Creed, which is the essential expression of the core beliefs of the Orthodox Church.

The title of this page indicates what I wish to convey in this essay, that belief in God is one’s to choose, not something to be imposed. Yes, you may quibble by suggesting that raising a child in your faith is an imposition of belief, but all parents have a need, an obligation even, to provide their children with the tools and knowledge necessary to make their way in the world. Certainly, given that the majority of the world’s population holds religious beliefs, ignorance of religion, with or without belief, is a significant handicap.

Free will is, in the Orthodox Christian faith, absolutely essential. This is in opposition to the materialist view that everything and everyone is at the mercy of the inexorable laws of nature. In the material universe, there are no accidents, no coincidences, no lucky ~or unlucky~ occurrences. All is determined from the very beginning by the interactions of the multitude of atomic and sub-atomic particles created in the big bang. We only lack complete knowledge to predict everything that will happen in the future.

Free will changes all that. We become responsible for our actions, for the choices we make, for what we believe. And there are ramifications. Along with free will, we believe that God wants us to love Him, and to do so freely.** A side effect of this belief is that it makes it futile to prove the existence of God.

The material universe is still bound by the laws of nature. Thus, when Isaac Newton observed the apple falling, it did not take a random direction. Obedient to the force of gravity, it fell to the ground, as does any dropped object. We, however, are the intersection of the material and spiritual realms. While our physical body will fall, our spirit is not so restricted. To fully love God, we must be free to choose. That being so, it must follow that not one atom of the material world can have been arranged to force our belief. Evidence of God’s existence abounds, if you choose to recognize it, but that Q.E.D proof that would force the logical thinker to believe simply cannot exist.

Now I did not come to Orthodoxy as most do, that is, by birth. For the “cradle Orthodox” all the beliefs and habits of the faith are ingrained. For me, it has been a long learning process. It is possible to reason one’s way to faith, but as I have demonstrated, there is a point at which that “leap of Faith” is necessary. Reason will take you to this point, but not beyond.

All this does not fully explain why I choose to believe. If it is not possible to reach a hard logical conclusion that compels a choice, then there must be more than mere whimsy involved. Indeed that is so and there are benefits that accrue to the individual as well as the society. Most important of these is the foundation for morality. Without God, we can only be regarded as so much animated mud. In this state, even though a moral code can be constructed, in the end it fails and degenerates to a question of power. In it each individual can do whatever is necessary to survive and to prevail. The society then must impose the moral code all the while knowing that it is in the end entirely arbitrary. With no higher authority to answer to, the inevitable outcome simply resolves to who has the most power. Put God in the picture and there is at least some restraint on behavior and an understanding that there is a morality that exists in all time and every place.

Thus, I make my choice. Πιστεβω I believe.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

*You will find that Orthodox Christians often call themselves simply, Orthodox. I have had the experience of being thought to be Jewish because, of course, there are Orthodox Jews. And since Christianity is divided among the Orthodox, Catholics, Protestants and more, it is better to keep the Christianity in Orthodox.

**In referring to God, it has been fashionable to argue that God is not specifically male. This is erroneous, I think, as Jesus prayed to Him as Father. Moreover, the Trinity is the expression of God as Father, as well as Son and Holy Spirit. However, unless it is clumsy to do so, I try to refer to God as GOD, to avoid the more biological image.

Why Blog?

This site is intended to be a general blog in which I will record various and sundry rants on whatever comes to mind. The title is taken from the Lewis Carroll poem, The Walrus and the Carpenter, which has been strip-mined by so many in so many ways that it is near impossible to make a clear reference. Try it. Look for, say “sailing ships and sealing wax”. You will find blogs evidently started and forgotten as the poem was likely the only inspiration. Once accomplished the authors seem to have nothing further to say. But the URL stays on whirling around in a digital never-land for nought.

What this blog is not is a cooking or recipe page. While I dabble from time to time with desecrating sundry pieces of meat and occasionally shove some flour in a bread machine, I am not a serious cook and have no expertise. For that I direct you to http://www.mostly-greek.com, wherein you will find excellent recipes and more by a superb cook and blogger. It is greek but much more than greek so do not hesitate.

What I intend is to have a place to record thoughts on many subjects that have been occupying my mind for a long time. There is much in the world of socio-politics that deserves attention and clear minded analysis. Too much of our politics is taken up by booga-booga drum beating that only muddies the waters and leads nowhere. By that I mean the kind of thing which reduced to its basics is typified by the message, “booga boog [insert current issue here], send money”. We can do better and I have no other place that will allow such commentary.

I intend more. The theme, conveniently provided by WordPress, of travel is a good choice. I have traveled extensively and will add commentary and observations and pictures from my vast collection (30,000 and counting images) of photos. There ought to be a place to display what I have and this will have to do.

So stand by, there will be more to come. Certainly I should be able to do than just an empty title whirling around in virtual eternity…

Good company in a journey makes the way seem shorter. — Izaak Walton