meh

Darin Erstad, the ersatz loot for the once-proposed deal for Jon Garland, signed a one year deal with the Sox last week. This is good news in the light of Podsednik out for 6-8 weeks with sports hernia surgery. Erstad is a lefthanded bat off the bench that can play above average defense in all outfield spots and first base. Basically, he takes Gload's role, with + defense and - offense. I think anyone watching Rob Mackowiak, poor soul, "play" center field last year realized that the Sox needed an upgrade. Erstad is also a Gold Lover (TM) at first base, and although he shares Podsednik's crappiness against lefties, at least he can catch the damn ball, and he should be a more than adequate fourth outfielder. An outfield of Pods, Anderson, Dye with Erstad backing up is great, and Erstad, Anderson, Dye is an excellent defensive outfield.

Please note that said "FOURTH" outfielder above. Ozzie demonstrated very often last year that he had no problem taking Anderson out because of his offensive deficiencies, which ended up hurting the team more than he seemed to realize. Now with a shiny piece that has the Proven Winner tag on him, I think Ozzie might be even more tempted to sit Anderson and keep Erstad in the lineup even after Podsednik comes back. Just in case anybody is still hung over from Erstad's breakout 2000 season, he hasn't been an above average offensive contributor (OPS+ under 100 since 2001) since then, or been particularly healthy. It's not too hard to fathom that freaking Erstad could be an obstacle to Anderson, Ryan Sweeney, AND Josh Fields.

So, basically, I'd like to see lots of this:



And not a lot of this:


This is ok, though:


Darin Erstad is the intelligence litmus test for Ozzie. Are we doomed to see the same Ozzie mistakes from the past, or has the newer, less openly homophobic Oswaldo turned a new leaf.

how i spent my friday

credo

"The Last Judgment," Michelangelo, 1541, detail

"Christianity is through-and-through an eschatological faith. It holds that the murky transactions of our sin-clouded history stand under the gaze of a divine justice that will assert itself in final confrontation at the Ultimate Moment (to Eschaton)... To have an eschatological faith is to have a 'synchronic' faith, one in which eternity is continually intersecting -- literally, cutting across -- time. We are created now, at every now. Christ comes now; the Incarnation is now. The great judgment is now. 'The accomplishment of everything impends' (1 Peter 4:7). That is the good news Jesus came to bring. Believing it is what makes me Catholic."

-- Garry Wills, Why I Am A Catholic

miami. my mammy.

I got everything I wanted on Sunday. Well. Just two things:

1. The Bears going to the Super Bowl, and
   
2. playing the Colts when they get there.

BEHRS can't pass block, but the run blocking was superb as TJones and Cedric rolled to almost two hundee on the ground. Conversely, the D was stout against the run, holding Bush/McAllister to 56 yards.

Rex didn't screw anything up.

Colts, with the legacy wobbly Manning at the helm, finally exorcised the Patriot Mystique (TM), with quarterback/philanthropist/golden boy Brady throwing the game sealing interception. I wanted the Colts to win because Sprint/MasterCard schill Peyton Manning will discover that if he thought the pressure to GET to a Super Bowl was intense, wait until he feels the pressure to WIN one if he's favored (the early line has the Colts favored by 7). I think he's going to shrivel up like a cold day at the beach.

Predictions for the Big Game later. Right now, I'm bathing in the euphoria.

If the BEHRS can actually pull this thing out (can it happen?! are we actually talking about this?!) then the onus falls more squarely on the Cubs to win something, the Chicago media being the killjoy it is.

This feels similarly magical to the White Sox postseason run in 2005, although baseball sustains a longer tenure of intensity because of the mulitple game format, whereas football is more spastic. The common denominator being my lack of employment. 2005? No job. Spring of 2007? No job. If the BEHRS get this one, it's a little bit of a weird coincidence. I will be looking to be permanently employed, mostly for the benefits of having a job, but also so it ensures that another Chicago pro team won't win something. The obvious hole in this argument is that I'd like for the Sox to win it again, but at the cost of being unemployed again... ? We'll think about that later.

sames and opposites

In Roman mythology, Janus was the god of gates, doors, doorways, beginnings, and endings, usually depicted with two faces looking in opposite directions. A perfect image for the worst 13-3 team in the history of the NFL, the 2006 Jekyll and Hyde Chicago Bears. Beating the Seahawks was far from perfect (dropped passes, Rex's predilection for panic under pressure, Hester's adventures in returning), but they were stout on 3rd-and-short situations, the offense was mistake-free, and the linebackers and corners played particularly well.

The Bears don't have any semblance of the stability that most championship teams have, but maybe the fact that they're so volatile makes it that much more fun. I have no idea whether they'll beat the Saints, but, staying true to the Janus-like nature of this team, what can be an advantage to the Bears can turn around and bite them in the collective rear. To whit:

Point 1: NO's suspect secondary

Pro: New Orleans' D is not a world beater. Bernard Berrian and Rashied Davies can get open deep on a suspect secondary, especially after Jones and Benson can gash them for big runs like Philly did in NO's opening playoff game.

Con: A suspect secondary may tempt Mssr. Grossman into trying his luck on the deep routes, which means more chances of getting intercepted, and more chances of getting sacked as he holds onto the ball longer in hopes of a receiver uncovering deep.

Point 2: The weather

Pro: The Saints' high-powered offense, which plays in the cozy confines of the Superdome, will bog down in the mucky winter weather of Soldier Field.

Con: The Bears have given very little evidence that they're any more acclimated to the cold, dropping lots of catchable passes against the Seahawks (including some crucial third down conversions) and Hester on punt returns and Grossman on sacks both having problems securing the ball. It's only going to get colder, so it's only going to be more difficult to catch a slick, rock hard pigskin. Gloves, kids.

And if they can get past the Saints, who are the kings of good-feelings mojo this season...? I don't even want to say Super ----. All I know is, I hope Indy somehow beats New England, cuz I'd rather face a crap-the-bed Peyton Manning feeling the weight of legacy on his shoulders instead of 3 time SB MVP Tom Brady, making it look so easy that it's boring.

Also, the first half of the 24 premiere was fricking awesome. Come on. You were all thinking it. Kumar? Oh, and that guy from The Matrix Reloaded? And the guy that always plays any prominent Arab speaking role?

Then it was followed up by the Demetri Martin special on Comedy Central, which you can still catch clips on their website. And more 24 for tomorrow. Great day to stay home.

a word from Father Edward

Feast of the Epiphany (1/6/07)

Dear Friends in Christ,

I recently saw the first of the Lord of the Rings trilogy for the first time since it came out in theatres. This time around I was able to pick up on some of the more obvious Christian symbolism in Tolkien's storytelling. The focal point of the story is the Ring of power, the universal representation of the sin that is within every person. To the righteous (Aragorn, Gandalf), it is evident that the ring is treacherous and must be destroyed at all costs. To those whose consciences have been cooled and have "lost the sense of sin" (Boromir), the ring is more ambiguous, perhaps even a good thing which shouldn't necessarily be destroyed. I drew parallels to the Christian journey distinguishing two types of persons, the humble and the arrogant. Since the ring represents sin the presupposition here is that every person is susceptible to being tempted by it without exception. At least in this story no one is immaculate or above sin. The humble person is the one who recognizes this reality, that he is weak and susceptible to sin, that he will inevitably fall but shouldn't be surprised by his fall. Just as Aragorn and Gandalf distrust themselves and are vigilant in the presence of the ring, the humble person is vigilant and on guard against temptation. The arrogant person is the one whose pride blinds him from acknowledging his own frailty, choosing to rely on himself and thereby rejecting God. Likewise, Boromir is seemingly convinced that he is immune to the ill-effects of the Ring, rejecting the proposed solution by Way of the Cross (the journey to Mt. Doom) insisting rather on bringing it to Gondor. Boromir commits the Pelagian heresy by relying on the strength of his own arm and failing to see that salvation can only come from God for "there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).

The only proper response to sin is that of humility, which prompts us to get up immediately after every fall, and by patiently bearing the Cross which serves to mortify concupiscence and destroy the sin within us. I likened Frodo to the exemplary models we have in the Saints. Frodo is ordinary, not one who is perfect and without sin. Throughout the film, he noticeably feels the effects and burden of the Ring, even bearing a shoulder wound which "he will bear the rest of his life" resembling humanity's woundedness in original sin. Like Frodo we too feel the effects and burden of our own sins. At times the going may seem too difficult and we may be left wondering if we will ever be liberated from the sins that ensnare us. But just like Frodo we too can count on the Fellowship of the Ring, that is, our siblings in Christ that God has gifted us. The Way of the Cross is difficult, but we have the aid of others like ourselves who are making the same journey in the collective effort toward Salvation. During our times of weakness and difficulty we can be assured of the company and support of friends like Samwise. Just as Aragorn and Gandalf realized that the only way of defeating Sauron definitively and achieving Final Victory was by journeying to Mt. Doom in order to cast the Ring into the fire, so too must the Christian disciple journey his entire life by taking up the Cross whereupon reaching the foot of that Cross, he will already have been assured of Victory over death and sin.

Christ repeatedly tells us in the gospels, "Whoever does not take up his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me". And what is this cross of which He speaks? The Way of the Cross signifies the self-denial that is necessary as a means of self-donation. It is the lifelong combat against the poison of sin countered through the antidote of practicing virtue. It is graciously accepting the difficulties that come your way by generously offering the suffering that has been invested with redemptive value through Christ. It is patient endurance with confident faith, unfailing hope, and merciful love while keeping your eyes fixed on the King who has tread the journey before you.

Your brother in the Fellowship of the Christ through Mary,
Edward

treasure

This sucks, I thought. Got to the theater late from dinner, so there weren't very many seats available except for front and right-under-the-screen center. I was staring down the barrel of creaky neck and movie motion sickness right off the bat. Plus, in the trailer, director Alfonso Cuaron is heralded for being the director of Y Tu Mama Tambien and, ahem, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. Say what you want, but that's not something I put on my resume when trying to sell a movie about a Macchiavellian future.

For all of the relentless bleak outlook on the future, Children of Men still celebrates and values that which is most precious: life. It does it in a way that isn't necessarily predictable or overly sentimental, but still, without a doubt, shows what is most important, and I don't have to traverse some iffy moral territory to agree with that. And I didn't puke from all the handheld shots.