Welcome to chapel! Now with 40% more interactive content!

Dear freshmen: I'm dreadfully sorry that you had to miss out on the glory that was today's chapel. I'm sure your campaign videos were riveting.

Hooray for no longer having to scan in! Thank you administration, for re-realizing the complete idiocy of an idea that had already been attempted in previous years. It seems that students' pleas to the chapel committee have paid off. *Hint, hint.*

I tried something new today. As I was sitting and waiting for chapel to start, my eyes happened to wander up to the screens just about the time the scroll came back around to the student prayer requests. One of the requests said something similar to, "Please pray for my friend who is in the hospital right now. Please pray that the doctors do their jobs well." I was immediately struck by the oddity of this appeal. Most of the time I hear people say, "Please pray that God will heal ____", but there's something infinitely more thoughtful [and far less ignorant] about asking for God to help the doctors do their job well.

Thank you, Your Holiness, for leading us in prayer for our government and school administration. I especially enjoyed your suggestion that we take a few moments to pray for our country's flailing economy. "Dear God, please drop $700 billion down from your Heavenly storehouses so that Freddie and Fannie can continue to pound us in the ass some more."

It was nice to see some new faces onstage [and welcome back Elizabeth]. I like seeing something other than a brooding, lonely guy with an acoustic guitar or a stereotypical worship band up on stage. It's great that the somewhat unknown musicians are finally coming out. Oh, and they really pulled all the stops out with "It is Well." There was hand raising and shrieking. . . .yes, shrieking. Maybe if they had continued to sing the chorus for a forty-third time someone would have stripped down and started dancing for the Lord.

Dear Coach Martin, I was wondering what it would take for me to get a picture of you in that terrifying wrestling stance you struck so powerfully on stage this morning. I'd like to hang one above my desk so that I can be properly motivated to get my homework done.

Since when were the words "balls," "testicles," "nuts," "groin," "jewels," "nads," "gonads," "sex," "junk," "cajones," "teabag," and "penis" banned on this campus? Granted, the switch from "dick" to "knee" was entertaining, but it would have been way funnier to hear the phrase, "He kicked him in the penis. He was injured. Injured bad."

Oh, and way to go with the acronym. I don't think there's a better way to unconsciously alert your listeners to the fact that you've been a coach all your life. . . .

In fact, I was so inspired by P.A.C.E. that I came up with a little version of my own:

P is for Pointless chapel sermons that don't say anything new.
A is for Albatross. Because an albatross might have actually had something useful to say.
C is for Coach. We've been over this one.
E is for Excursive. :) Go look that one up.

Thanks for closing with a call for unity. And to illustrate this call. . . . an insanely depressing story.

Let me see if I'm following you here, coach. What you're saying is, if we don't all join hands in symbolic, Christ-like unity, little boys will freeze to death. That reminds me of this other super-convincing argument I heard one time. . . .



"Keep near me and you will be safe."

Daedalus

Rock me, rock me, rock me sexy panel!

And what a marvelous Wednesday it was.

Thumbs up for discussion panels! It's nice to have discourse in chapel and be presented with an opportunity to pose our own questions and thoughts. [No matter how silly some of them may be.]

It may have worked better if the middle school students in attendance hadn't been giggling the entire time . . .

Question: "Are all sexual acts permissible after you are married?"

Jimmy Knight: ". . .Yes. . ."

Skip forward ten minutes.

Question: "My husband does not want to have sex as much as I do, how can we keep the spark going?"

Jimmy Knight: "Well, if I had gotten married and expected to have sex 18 times a day, I would've been disappointed. . .but only slightly. . ."

That's top notch hilarity. Top notch. [Just in case any of us had any questions about what goes on behind the door of the Knight residence. . .]

Dr. Crutcher was especially well spoken this morning, as always. Two thumbs up for articulate, thoughtful reflection.

At one point during a response this morning, Dr. Crutcher flipped the concept of 'sin' on its head. He pointed out, correctly, that certain actions and patterns of living are not 'sinful' because they are in the Bible, but rather they are mentioned in the Bible because God takes issue with them for other reasons. [No way! Really? That is mind-blowing!] The primary question is "Why does God take issue with [insert forbidden act here. [That's what she said.]]?"

I would like to reiterate what I said in yesterday's post. The question about the Christian understanding of sexuality that remains ever unanswered is, "Why does God say that [insert forbidden sexual act] is wrong?" Crutcher's answer to this question is that God has a problem with pre-martial sex [I'm just using that as an example] because that act is detrimental to human relationships. This might be satisfactory as an explanation, except that one could levy the same criticism against almost any form of human relations. Are all non-martial sexual relationships harmful to the individuals involved? Nope. Are some? Yes. Does it make sense to hold the position that non-marital, sexual relationships should be avoided at all costs simply because some of them don't turn out so well?

If that logic held, the church would have ceased to exist a long time ago.

His Holiness contributed a few comments to the discussion this morning. One of my favorites was his assertion that sexualtiy is a community affair. This was later followed by the psychologist's spiel about those who suffer from sex addiction. "Hi, my name is Daedalus, and I am a nymphomaniac." "Hi, Daedalus." Everybody take some rubbers.

One last thing. I think it's probably safe to say that most of the students attending SNU were raised in Christian families. I also think it's safe to say that most children who are raised in Christian families are, to some degree, sexually repressed. [It's inherent in the system.] So, what happens when you put a bunch of sexually repressed college kids together on one campus, away from their homes? In case you haven't already guessed, the answer is that they have sex. I know we're doing it, the administration knows we're doing it, our roommates know we're doing it, and we know we're doing it. So, let's all agree to abide by one rule when it comes to figuring out the sexuality that we were forced to tuck away all those years: If it makes you, or your partner, uncomfortable, don't do it. [Thanks Nicky.]

Oh, and the word "orgasm" was used in chapel today, fulfilling its quota of one use every millenia. [And causing the servers at www.dictionary.com to overheat because of all the students rushing to find out what "orgasm" means.]

"Keep near me and you will be safe"

Daedalus

Get down on your knees...

Greetings, earthlings. We have come, once again, to that most treasured of moments in our collective Tuesday: the posting of a new blog. Let's all revel in the majesty of this moment together.

Okay, now to business.

Prints of the masterpiece that dangles betwixt our trusses are now available! Contemplate its complex symbolism! Meditate on its relevance to your life! Bask in the glow of its brilliant execution! Buy one NOW!!!!

Just in case you didn't know, our music this morning was provided by Banning Dawson. Well done, Banning. Overall you seemed very genuine. [*Hint, hint* to anyone who might want to perform in chapel.] My only point of contention with your presentation concerns the menial subject of song choice. "How Great is Our God" has always seemed odd to me because the chorus of the song presents the singer [and ironically, God] with a question, "How great is our God?" that never really gets an answer. [Except from God. He thinks he's pretty great. He told me.] Of course, Chris Tomlin never was one to pen the most thoughtful of lyrics, but that might just be me.

Identity and Imagination are our themes for the year, per His Holiness.

Imagination? Really? Since when have we discussed imagination, Brad? We recited the Apostles' Creed this morning. Our students, and you too, Mr. VP, lack even the imagination to say those words with conviction. If Christians ever learn how to voice their beliefs outside of the format of zombified prose, then we can start having discussions about imagination. Until then, [I hate to say this] please stick to putting us to sleep by droning on about identity.

Oh, and about identity, His Holiness marched up on stage this morning and said, roughly, "...as we are working through this semester and the problem of finding our identity in Christ..."

Wait. I thought we were just working through the problem of identity. If you tag "in Christ" onto the end of it, then we're really not investigating much, are we? On this note, you will find a discussion board thread on the Flying In Circles Facebook group titled, "Identity." Please post your thoughts on the following question:

Is it important that Jesus be the sole source of a Christian's personal identity? Or are they free to look to other sources, even other religious teachings or teachers, to find a model for who they want to become?

Discuss.

Now we can get on to our lady speaker. [That's what he said.]

Dr. Winner, thank you for being honest in your presentation of sexuality as a subject that needs to be discussed within the church. Heaven knows Christians are far too sexually repressed to be healthy, and I thank you from the bottom of my heart for re-opening the subject for substantive discourse. Thank you for telling us a little of your own story in order to help us understand your perspective on the subject. Thank you for pointing out that the church ought to spend a little less time telling its members not to have sex and turn its focus to other, more pressing, issues. [The environment, peace, human exploitation, mercy, etc.]

For all the good points that you made this morning, I thought your presentation on human sexuality, the meat and potatoes of your talk, was a little disappointing. [I realize you're going to say more about this subject tonight, but, well, we aren't there yet, are we? Oh, and if you were hoping to say anything meaningful to the SNU student population about sexuality, this morning was your opportunity. If SNU stays true to its record, you'll have about thirty students in attendance tonight. Sorry we suck so hard. [That's what they said...]]

First, you said you did not grow up within the Christian moral structure. One of the liberties this afforded you was the freedom to explore your sexuality without fear of a creepy old dude and his son peeking in on you. However, after you became a Christian you said that it became clear to you, over time, that God was not pleased with the way that you had been conducting yourself in the sexual arena. My question is this: was your behavior wrong or "sinful" before you became a Christian? Here it is tempting to say that, "Yes, my behavior was wrong, I just didn't know it at the time." But this answer is not satisfactory, for two reasons.

1. Follow me here. Raccoons have sex. Ocelots have sex. Elephants have sex. [Yuck] Humans have sex. As I have already espoused in my discussions with Platter the Elder, humans, as much as we might like to deny it, are simply animals. More advanced? Yes. Bigger brains? Yes. Ego? Yes. But still animals. So, does it make any sense to put forth that God, taking into account his ambivalence toward the sexuality of the remainder of the animal kingdom, gives a rat's ass about the sexuality of humans? Be careful how you answer that.

2. How do Christians know that sex outside of marriage, pornography, and other sexual sins, are wrong? Because God said so? Not good enough. Every sermon on Christian sexuality presents the idea that any expression of our sexual natures outside of wedlock separates Christians from God. What everyone, yes everyone, fails to address is how and why. Even if God is viewed as the moral authority for Christians, the question still needs to be asked, "Why does God say that this is wrong?" And when is anyone going to offer an explanation for how human sexuality is destructive to the Christian faith? I'd be excited to hear that sermon.

Honestly, whenever I hear talk about the Christian perspective on human sexuality I am reminded of Lowery's The Giver or Orwell's 1984. If you can control the sexual behavior of an individual, you control the individual. [That's a quote. You can put a dash and my name after it.]

I know that corporate America does not put forth the healthiest messages about sexuality and its role in our everyday lives. However, the fact that the secular perspective is flawed does not mean that the Christian perspective is completely righteous. All I'm asking is whether or not the Christian point of view is the only alternative to the over-stimulation and over-saturation of our Carl's Jr. commercials and PETA advertisements.

I have one last question, Dr. Winner. When you are repenting for sexual sin, do you get down on your knees?

"Keep near me and you will be safe"

Daedalus

Revenge of the thespians

Good afternoon, my young padawans. Good to see you it is. Returned for more training you have. Much to learn, have you. Begin we shall.

With props.

Props to the new chapel music coordinator, our nouveau Darla, Brandon Whiteside for presenting his music with passion and conviction. It was refreshing.

Props to . . . . . . . .

I think that just about covered it.

With demerits.

Demerits to our resident Thespians for presenting us with a completely absurd and melodramatic representation of what life as a college student, or life in general, is like.

Let us now observe a moment of silence for Dionysus and the Muses. May they rest in peace.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

While I appreciate the efforts of fellow students to bring something different to our stage - and truly I do - the skit was juvenile and utterly devoid of meaning. Does Jesus really, literally hold the "armies of Satan" back with his bare hands? I'm gonna go ahead and say 'no.' Unless, of course, you want to argue that Jesus is still a spacial-temporal entity, which I suppose you could do.....[It should be clarified at this point that the classification of alcohol, vanity, substance use, lust, and desire for monetary gain as the instruments of Satan is unfair. Even Paul advocated everything in moderation. Everybody take some rubbers. Oh, and as long as we're on this track, what happened to all the other "deadly sins?" Gluttony? Wrath? Envy? Sloth? If I were one of those sins I would be pissed off that I was considered less of a threat than substance use. I mean, come on.]

It has been my experience that even when an individual is a Christian, the temptation to act outside of the Christian moral system still exists. In the skit, "Jesus" kicks vanity's ass, but I hardly think that such a representation is indicative of reality. Just look around our own campus! If you can't find all seven sins, and the additional curses of alcohol, substance use, and general jackassery active within your own social circle, you are 1) completely insulated [possibly home-schooled] from real life and in line for a huge wake up call or, 2) best friends with the Platter brothers. Either way, you're screwed. :)

Cue the Imperial March.

Enter the dark Lord, Palpatine.

It goes without saying that the skit's portrayal of the "evils of the world" would not have been complete without the inclusion of the venerable Sith Lord. And he was the right choice for the role; Beelzebub, Vader, O'Reilly, and Dobson were all previously committed.

As soon as Palpatine revealed his presence, my Jedi instincts kicked in. I reached into my backpack for my limited edition, titanium cast replica of Luke Skywalker's light-saber [with high performance LED technology, for authentic aura] and began to rise from my seat so as to vanquish the evil Lord. Leia be damned, I had to save Charity! But then, just as I was preparing to strike, the conniving Lord brandished a blaster, proof enough that he had not come prepared for a duel, and I decided to postpone our sure-to-be-epic encounter. Do not rest, Palpatine, for I shall find you.

In all seriousness, this skit was not meant for adult audiences - it is traditionally performed at junior-high church camps. By this point in our spiritual lives I would hope that we have moved past this over-simplified view of life and Christian salvation.

Nice try, thespians. Thank you for attempting to shake things up. Next time please, please, please bring us something age appropriate.

Oh, shit. I almost forgot to comment on Brad's lecture today...shows you just how memorable it was.

Brad decided to use his degree today [finally] and incorporated some psychology into his thoughts about identity. The main thrust of his talk was that personal identity is formed, not by what we "fill" ourselves with, but rather by what we "empty" ourselves for. His idea was that if we're constantly consuming, we will always feel that we need more [that's what she said...], but if we're emptying ourselves for the benefit of others, we will not feel that we are without love and grace ourselves, because Jebus has more than enough of that to go around.

Today was Brad's second sermon on identity this year and he's already running out of material, so there wasn't much to work with. Nevertheless, thoughts: 1) Feeling like we are receiving enough "love and grace" from God only matters because we are told, repeatedly, that it matters. If we were simply conditioned to care for other people and to place their needs and concerns before our own, we wouldn't worry about what we're getting out of it, or care if we weren't. That sounds much more in line with the teachings of a certain first-century, curly-headed, dark-skinned Jew than the idea that we must worry about what we're getting in return for our service. 2) The "consumer" mentality that His Holiness warned us about today does not only exist in the secular arena. In America, Christian individuals are encouraged to: go to church, read Christian books, listen to Christian music, go to Christian schools, buy Christian novelty t-shirts, and wear their favorite gold cross or ichthys lapel pin everywhere they go. If that's not consumerism, I don't know what is. [And I dare say that Christian consumerism is, in some cases, much more dangerous than its secular counterpart.] Perhaps the desire to consume is so American, so deeply woven into the fabric of our society that we cannot escape it, religious or not.

"Girls were bleeding, and there was pushing..." -Brad Strawn

I highly doubt that powderpuff football is as intense as a delivery room. But thanks for allowing me to reexperience breakfast.

I have been hearing whispers around campus that some individuals are afraid, because of my presence, to take the stage in chapel. This was not the desired result. My goal with this blog, as with the Facebook group, is to foster a constructive dialogue about the problems with chapel, encourage student ideas about how to make chapel [and our school] better, and also to push my readers into new intellectual arenas by presenting some challenges and refutations of the points of view presented by different chapel speakers.

As I mentioned in a comment left on one of last week's posts, "[T]ell your friend[s] not to worry [about taking the stage in chapel]. [A]s long as they present something that is forward thinking, challenging, and honest, they will not have to."

Hugs and kisses.

"Keep near me and you will be safe"

Daedalus


P.S. - Jairo: about the "legitmate musician" comment: I was probably out of line.

Assume the missionary position . . .

Welcome to Chapel! It's almost Christmas!

Gee Brad, I know chapel is a product you're selling, but I never thought you would take it so far as to begin operating on the retail calendar.

Hooray for Ethos Groups. Seriously, great idea. It's always good to see Christians get off their pew-hardened asses and actually do something that puts their faith into action. Oh, and I've decided to start a betting pool. $5 buy in, taking bets on what the average membership in the Ethos Groups will be. If SNU holds to its historical standards, each group should see a turnout of about five to ten people. [Three cheers for apathy!] And they're off!

Hooray for a tiny change in the "worship" experience!

I'm glad to see that even without Drew's prompting, the ladies remembered to echo at the end of the first song all by themselves. Pat yourselves on the back for remembering your years of training.

Elizabeth Chrisman graced the stage for the first time today. [Way to pop that cherry.] It's a shame she had to play with the Maldonator. His hyper-affected voice completely drowned out her violin. Here's a thought, Jairo - why don't you tone it down a bit and let a legitimate musician shine for once? When we could hear her [such as in the beginning of the second song] she sounded beautiful - wish we could have had more of that.

Speaking of the wonders of the second song, [which sounded an awful lot like a Jonas Brothers ballad - I'm surprised girls weren't throwing their panties onstage for Jesus] Jairo busted out his siren for that one. At first I thought it might be a police raid, then I realized it was just the man himself on stage. There were some moments where our man looked as if he was suffering from a case of Johnmayerstagefacitosis. [See fig. 1.]

Fig. 1


It's a shame he wasn't suffering from John Mayer voice. Lord knows we were suffering from Jairo's.

At this point I'd like to give a shout-out to all my peeps in the Mez. It's good to know that someone has finally recognized the spiritual superiority of the people who sit in the Mezzanine. They've been the holiest among us all along, but now their secret's out. I know where I'll be sitting tomorrow...

It's always interesting to listen to missionaries speak in church. Why? Well, for one, they always tell stories, and are always very excited about the stories they tell. This is not terribly interesting within itself, but it becomes so when one realizes how few people are actually paying attention to what they are saying, and how the few audience members that are listening are not nearly as excited to hear the story as the missionaries are to tell it. Oh well, I guess that comes with being an evangelical American. [Answer Mia's question for me: "Do you listen, or do you wait to speak?"]

It is my unfortunate pleasure to report to you at this time that, despite my best efforts, I have been foiled. It was, and still is, the purpose of this blog to try and provide meaningful reflection and challenging commentary regarding the goings on in chapel. However, after two weeks of exciting blog posts, facebook debate, and IM conversations, His Holiness the Strawn seems to have uncovered my Achilles heel. If the purpose of my efforts is to enrich the intellectual lives of the student population by commenting on chapel services and challenging some of the views and positions presented therein, then it follows that I need something to comment on. However, His Holiness has discovered this and has thwarted any and all attempts to have this blog become anything beyond a gleaming beacon of satire by removing from chapel all subjects of substance, educational value, or student interest. Touché, o enlightened one. But I'm not worried, I'll get you yet! And your little dog too!

Here's to hoping something tomorrow presents me, and all of you, with something worth discussing.

"Keep near me and you will be safe."

Daedalus

These are the days of thoughtcrime.

Ah, Wednesday...Double holiness day here at SNU: chapel in the morning and an empty campus in the evening because we're all at church. Little do they know....

First, a response. In preparation for these next comments, it would be good for you to read the second and third comments on yesterday's post.

Jbeezy seems a little worried about the exact definition of "sin." The problem here, as some of the more intellectually astute among you may have realized, is that "sin" is not easily, if it can be at all, qualified. Some traditions define "sin" as trespassing on the laws of their divine while others expand the operational scope of "sin" to include transgressions against humanity. To some, "sin" is commited in action, to others, the crime exists only in thought. [Which, if I do say so myself, is rather Orwellian.] Regardless of how you choose to define "sin," the concept is not one that can be easily nailed down.

So, when we are encouraged by whatever esteemed orator we happen to be listening to in chapel to "confess our sins before God," I get a little confused about what exactly they are attempting to say. I suppose it could reasonably be assumed that the definition of "sin" expounded on our campus would follow a Biblical delineation, but even that is vague at best. So when I am confronted with the charge that I am pretending to be too holy by claiming not to have "sinned," [which is not what I said] or when I am asked to define "sin," I can respond in the same way. "I'm not sure exactly what you are saying."

Enough psychobabble, on to chapel.

This morning's chapel marked the long awaited return of...drumroll please...the Godfather of Soul himself, James Brown. [Ow! I feel good!] Oh, wait. Not that James Brown. Damn. All I really need to say here is that, "These are the days of Elijah." Yep. [Just to clarify, in case JBeezy is still wondering, if there is sin in the world, the foremost example of it was the authorship of that song.]

I also especially enjoyed the overtly brooding rendition of a Negro Spiritual we were treated to this morning. [Please, sweet chariot, swing lo and carry James home.] Apparently Ben Folds is not the only one who can show us what it's like to be male, middle-class, and white. Next time you perform please sing "Nobody Knows the Trouble I've Seen." I'm sure no one can understand the sorrow of a suburbanite like you.

Oh, by the way. I heard you singing. You sounded great. And God liked it too. [ha ha ha]

A letter:

Dear Mr. Gibson,

Please stop telling me how to do my job. If this trend continues the next time you are asked to speak in chapel, I will shoot you with a bb gun from the tech booth.

Love,
The Video Tech

A challenge:

Reverand Gibson, I hereby challenge you to take the stage in chapel and preach a sermon that the students in attendance have not already heard fifty times. I challenge you to move beyond the hell-raising and condemnation perpetuated by preachers of your father's generation and actually push people to grow in their spiritual lives. I challenge you to have an original thought. I challenge you to think more deeply about why an individual ought to commit their life to Christ and actually provide support, beyond the assertion that humans are inherently broken, sinful, and weak, for your argument. I challenge you to a walk-off. [Age before beauty, goat cheese.]

Your spiel today reminded of a scene from Mean Girls. You just need Jesus. Ok? Everybody take some rubbers.

The wax is melting.

"Keep near me and you will be safe."

Daedalus

Regurgiturgical

Good Tuesday, ladies and gents.

Is it just me, or did Brad sound exceptionally holy this morning? Thanks to the sound guys for that excellent echo. It really made it seem as though Brad was speaking for God. [Which I'm sure he enjoyed thoroughly.]

Prepare thyself: I'm about to say something marginally positive.

Though I think it's probably safe to say that most of the student population, if given the option, would not have chosen to follow the liturgical format in chapel this morning, I actually enjoyed it. Well, maybe not enjoyed . . . I didn't hate it.

Let me explain. It is my opinion that the Christian religion, as we experience it in North America, exposes its inherent weakness by allowing itself to be a chameleon. I realize that adherents to the Christian faith will argue that the malleability of their religion is one of its positive characteristics, allowing the church to relate in new and relevant ways to each generation; however, I think this malleability, when allowed to persist over a course of time, becomes nothing more than reinvention. With each change the Christian religion becomes something completely different and foreign to the generation before. The Christianity that our generation practices is not that of their grandparents, and certainly not the Christianity of first century Judea. It may be true that a portion of the core ideology remains the same with each successive mutation, but the practices and theology do not. [If you don't believe me all you need do is go back for a cursory glance over the gospels. Jesus never promoted or attempted to instate a hierarchical structure within his teachings and never even went so far as to recommend that his followers organize themselves into a new religion, yet today it is all but impossible to locate an experience of Jesus outside the framework of the "Christian" church.]

Liturgy, then, is partially redeeming because it is a return to an earlier mutation of Christianity that allows us to avoid the curses the religion has brought upon itself since.

So thank you, Brad [a real one, sarcasm free] for allowing us to return to our roots, however briefly.

"Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another an, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him."
-Romans 14: 1 - 3

I thought it was interesting that this scripture was read in chapel today. I'll bet these words didn't come to mind the last time you used the loser-cough to call someone a fag, or when you called miss-makeout-in-chapel a whore.

One last thing. I think it's about goddamn time preachers stopped telling us how terrible, fallen, without, incomplete, and immoral we are without Jesus. The self-deprecation that is inherent in the Christian religion may be its most repulsive quality, and I honestly think it may be one of the tenets of the faith that keeps people outside the fold. Why should we confess our "sins" if we haven't "sinned?" Why should we operate under the primary assumption that humans are depraved creatures? Because scripture says so? Sorry, but when I look back over the course of history at the achievements of humanity, especially those of secular society, I simply cannot believe that humans are in need of the almighty to become "whole" persons.

"Keep near me and you will be safe."

Daedalus

I've got a fever . . .

Welcome to Wednesday. What a beautiful day to fall asleep in chapel.

Let's hear a big round of digital applause for Leaving 99 and their musical adventures this morning. Not since Blue Oyster Cult have we heard cowbell that rocked so hard. If Jesus had a fever this morning, I'm sure his prescription has been filled.

As for the rest of chapel, I have to be honest and say that I slept through most of it. I don't know what it is about the voice of The Gresh, but it has a certain poppyfield quality to it. Get the scientists from Nyquil on the phone, I've found their secret ingredient.

Identity is a tired idea. As college students, we've been pounded with lectures and speeches about "finding ourselves" since we were thirteen...do we really need to hear about this any more? It's like the eighty-seven year olds who have gone to church their whole lives and heard the same sermons over and over and over again but somehow still haven't figured out their most rudimentary theology. It's Groundhog day, ladies and gents, and we are all Bill Murray. [Punxsutawney Phil, where are you?!]

How about this: we'll find our identities when we're damn well ready to! Or, at the very least, if we're going to be lectured on the subject, plllllllease don't pull the trick of suggesting that we need to "find ourselves" and then turn around in the next sentence and tell us where "ourselves" are to be found [Hint: B7]. That's not helping, that's brainwashing.

In other news. Apparently SNU has decided to allow political campaigning on campus from outside groups. Let me make myself clear that I have no problem with an interest in politics. I think it would do us all some good to become more engaged in the political process. My problem arises when non-student groups are allowed to come onto our campus and harass students in the middle of their school day. [Especially when the ideologies of the candidates they are supporting are hateful, exclusive, and, if put into action, would only serve to push our nation further down the shitter.]

If we're going to allow groups, student or otherwise, to present their political opinions on campus, I think it's only fair that both sides be represented.

Stephen Vandervort, you're my hero.

"Keep near me and you will be safe."

Daedalus

Welcome back, your dreams were your ticket out...

Welcome to Tuesday, SNU chapel fans.

I'm sure you're all revved up for the new semester after that invigorating service this morning.

Some of you may have noticed there are a few new policies in chapel. Highlights include the new sign-in policy - as if it wasn't torturous enough that we have to wait in a DPS line at the end of chapel, we're now expected to show up 30 minutes early to ensure we get credit. Good thinking. I'm sure locking the doors after chapel has begun wouldn't have covered all the late students. Oh, and good job with the flyers about chapel being a "sacred space." It really helps SNU become more of a green campus when we waste reams of paper printing out bulletins of completely useless information. Leave it to our administrators to take away decades of technical advancements in order to spread news in an archaic fashion. E-mail. Use it. That way we can trash your pointless message without destroying our living space.

And a big round of applause to our new aisle monitors. It feels fantastic to be back in Kindergarten. I can't wait for nap-time and animal crackers. Maybe if I have to tinkle tomorrow someone will help me with my Osh Kosh overalls.

This space will usually be used to make enlightening and, at times, sarcastic comments on chapel sermons, especially invigorating music selections, campus events, and any other observations I happen across. However, today, as it will undoubtedly be with most of the other chapels we shall be blessed with throughout the remainder of the semester, nothing of any value was said...shocker...leaving me with nothing to comment on.

Except for the banner.

As it has been for the past two years, we have new decor. A precious gem dangling between the trusses. 2006's stained [plexi]glass was a monumental . . . . . waste of 10K. 2007 saw the rise of inane phrases and the Now and Not Yet Kingdom of theological dead ends, rambling, and general bullshit.

Now dawns the era of the one-winged man: our very own Icarus, if you will. This lovely new tapestry accomplishes two things. First, it allows the powers that be to continue to think of themselves as postmodern prophets, ushering in a new era of spiritual righteousness at our beloved institution. Second, it foretells the path of the coming semester: we will continue, as always, flying in circles.

"When is a bird a bird?" ...how about all the damn time?! Yep. Our esteemed reverend really laid an egg with that one. Excuse me if I'm missing some deep seeded meaning here, but I simply cannot find justification for turning this otherwise completely obvious query into an investigation of identity. For most Christians, the next question in this vein is, "What was I created for?" Good luck figuring that one out. How about instead of wasting a lifetime on an unanswerable question we just resolve that the question is irrelevant?

And thank you, Brad, for letting us know that we ought to make our identity that of Christ Jesus. It's a comfort to know I won't have to waste the next few years of my life figuring out my identity on my own terms. Heaven forbid I use the brain that "god gave me."

Worship was especially Maldotastic today, much to the pleasure of Brad, I'm sure. Delightfully they gained ground by singing "I love you, Daddy," a phrase that, until this morning, was saved for abused step-children and pornos. Props, worship team.

"Icarus, my son, I charge you to keep at a moderate height, for if you fly too low the damp will clog your wings, and if too high the heat will melt them. Keep near me and you will be safe."

Daedalus