Rotundus.com

Even though I'm now ex-Canadian-Reformed, a recent post by Yinkahdinay made me think a little bit more about an issue that was in the back of my mind for a while:

In our churches, we have this strange habit of referring to ministers as "Reverend." We criticize the Roman Catholic Church for calling their priests "Father." But when the exegetical rubber hits the road, there is more Scriptural defense for calling your pastor "Father" than there is for calling him "Reverend" or (much, much worse) Dominee (a Dutch title derived from the Latin dominus, Lord)

Perhaps I've been contaminated by the academic world. I think that the average attitude in academia amongst Ph.D.s these days is to be annoyed or even offended if someone that they know even remotely were to drop a Dr. in front of their name. (Titles like Dr. and Sir. when used in a university setting seem often more than not an indication that someone's name has been forgotten).

For the moment my approach is to drop all titles and stick with just a name. (Pastor is a word that I see as more a role description than a title). To toss the question back to you: what do you call your pastor?

Yesterday I took the scenic route to Canmore in an attempt to enjoy some of the fall colours, and also deal with the barrenness of my walls. I didn't hit the road until about 1pm, and was back around 6pm so it wasn't a particularly long trip. Almost all the shots along the road are morning shots, but I took a few photos nethertheless.

Canmore is - if you've never been there - a total tourist trap and roughly half the shops around there seem to be art galleries. I ended up picking up a total of 4 photo prints mounted on a wood backing from a gallery there. Much better than plain old posters IMO. For those who think that I'm some traincrazy psycho, I'd like to note that there is not a single locomotive or other railroad apparatus present in any of the stuff that I bought.

• Five photos from my surprise visit home on Labour Day
• On the road to/from Canmore
• Art on my walls

Since at the moment one of the ranges of channels which we pick up here is Movie Central, my roommate and I took advantage of the opportunity today to watch the movie Saved!. For those of you who've never heard of this particular movie before, it's a satire centered around activities at a "Christian" school. (Incidentally, I think that some bits and pieces of this movie were filmed in Surrey).

I thought that the movie managed to bring out quite well the sillyness of much of the "Christian" subculture that has developed over the past years (Things that stuck out were a "christian" shooting range whose slogan was "eye for eye", and talk of winning the area's "christian" interior decorating competition). It also brought out the shallowness of many "conversions," such as an individual who "converted" to be able to go on a "Christian" ski trip.

A third thing that it brought out was just how poorly the behaviour of many Christians matches their expressed beliefs, and a corresponding failure of those around them to confront them regarding this. Perhaps it's my calvinist view of total depravity, or maybe my life experience, but I guess that my general expectations of people are that they will sin. I guess that one of the biggest questions and challenges is how will we react to sin around us. Will we be judgemental and fail to acknowledge the sin that also stains our lives, or will we confront them with the truth while at the same time not hiding our own weaknesses? Definitely a tough challenge to live up to!

While I thought that the movie brought out some interesting points, at the same time it had some fairly serious flaws that in the end doomed it. In the end, the movie painted a picture of a god who only wanted people to do whatever seemed good to them. In addition, while the movie brought out some interesting points, frequently it was somewhat disrespectful in just how it did so.

A class that I'm taking this semester has required that I read a number of papers. I figured that would share a couple of short quotations from a paper written by the founders of Google while they were still students at Stanford:

Quote 1:

We expect that advertising funded search engines will be inherently biased towards the advertisers and away from the needs of the consumers.

Quote 2:

We believe the issue of advertising causes enough mixed incentives that it is crucial to have a competitive search engine that is transparent and in the academic realm.