Hannah Roorda writes:

It’s been a long week (and it’s only Tuesday)! I think perhaps it is time for something funny. Drawing on the fact that I am the only female contributor to this blog, I’d like to post some humorous quotes about the differences between men and women:

“If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant’s life, she will choose to save the infant’s life without even considering if there are men on base.” ~Dave Barry

“Women like silent men. They think they’re listening.” ~Marcel Achard, Quote, 4 November 1956

“Sure, God created man before woman. But then you always make a rough draft before the final masterpiece.” ~Author Unknown

“Whatever women do they must do twice as well as men to be thought half as good. Luckily, this is not difficult.” ~Charlotte Whitton

“The two women exchanged the kind of glance women use when no knife is handy.” ~Ellery Queen

“I have an idea that the phrase ‘weaker sex’ was coined by some woman to disarm some man she was preparing to overwhelm.” ~Ogden Nash

“If women didn’t exist, all the money in the world would have no meaning. ” ~Aristotle Onassis

“The girls that are always easy on the eyes are never easy on the heart. ” ~Author Unknown

“I should like to know what is the proper function of women, if it is not to make reasons for husbands to stay at home, and still stronger reasons for bachelors to go out. ” ~George Eliot, The Mill on the Floss

And if any of you gentlemen are ever searching for a kind word for your mother, sister, sweetheart… here’s a hint:

“To Woman: The fairest work of the Great Author; the edition is wonderful and no man should be without a copy.”

Gabriel Bertilson writes,

This is the first post of two explaining the principal parts of a Greek verb. This is a fairly Latin and Greek insider topic, but hopefully it’ll prove interesting nonetheless. This was one of the several topics I might have written on in my much-overdue post, and it might show my oddity that I picked it over the others.

The principal parts of the verb are ?????, ????????, ??????, ???????, —, — (páskh?, peísomai, épathon, pépontha, —, —). The meaning is have something happen to one (either good or bad); (in a bad sense) suffer; so the principal parts are, translated, I suffer, I will suffer, I suffered, I have suffered.

The point of the principal parts (for those of you who aren’t familiar with Latin or Greek) is to give all the stems the verb will use in its various tenses. So, removing the -? from the first principal part gives the stem for the present and imperfect forms (????-?, ????-???, ????-??, páskh-?, páskh-eis, páskh-ei, I suffer, you suffer, he suffers. . .), removing the -???? from the second principal part gives the stem for the future middle forms (????-????, ????-?, ????-????, peís-omai, peís-?i, peís-etai, I will suffer, you will suffer, he will suffer. . .), and so on.

As in this verb, one or more of the principal part slots may be empty because the forms that would be there don’t exist.

In Greek and Latin, the various tense stems are formed from a basic root in various ways: by ablaut, the addition of a suffix, a nasal infix, or reduplication (and often by two or more of those means). In some verbs some of the tenses are supplied by one verb, others by another (compare English I go, I went or French aller, tu vas, tu iras).

In this verb the aorist (??????) uses the simple root with no suffix: ???- (path-). This is the zero-grade form of the root.

Zero-grade is a term referring to Proto-Indo-European ablaut. Ablaut is the system of vowel gradation in the ancestor-language of most of the modern European languages by which the vowel of a syllable alternates between long ?, short e, long ?, short o, and no vowel, depending on what sort of a word the root is used in. Here’s an example root:

long ?: ????? (pat?r) a father, subject	long ?: ??????? (eupát?r) one noble-born, subject
short e: ?????? (patéra) a father, object	long o: ????????? (eupátoros) of one noble-born
ø (no vowel, zero-grade): ?????? (patrós) of a father

This explains one part of the formation of ?????, since there are various grades of the root represented in the principal parts of the verb: the e-grade in ???????? (peísomai) and the o-grade in ??????? (pépontha), in addition to the zero-grade in ????? (páskh?) and ?????? (épathon).

But, as you can see, there’s a bit more involved. It’s not quite clear that these forms differ in only one vowel; indeed, it appears possible that each is from an entirely separate verb. Clearly more than merely ablaut is involved. And so in my next post I’ll give you the rest of the story.

EDIT: Soundfiles added for some of the words. I decided they weren’t done well enough and was going to remove them, but John convinced me that I might as well just keep them up. So here they are. They’re meant to be an approximation of the ancient pronunciation of Greek, before the changes that gave rise to Modern Greek pronunciation, and so they’ll sound pretty different from the pronunciations given in courses on Greek.

Hannah Roorda writes:

I don’t have anything new this week, as my depth of creativity has been sucked dry by my other activities (but Han, all you did yesterday was school and laundry! That requires creativity?) but I have an old alliterative poem about feasting that I wrote for a school assignment (while studying Sir Gawain, naturally).

A Joy to Behold

In long lines we laughed,
Waiting to wonder awhile:
A full feast of food lying before us.
Our desires were satisfied deliciously
As we were challenged by many choices,
Each dish shining and showy.
The girls, eyes aglow and glimmering, smiling,
The boys brashly boasting–
For we most loved our mother’s meal and dishes,
And knew no one’s could be better.
Finally, food overflowing off plates,
We wended our way to the table,
And carefully claimed each chair we could find.
Smiles and stories were shared unselfishly,
And I delighted to see friends edifying one another.
Lizzy and Lauren were lovingly talking,
Whilst both the Bens recalled their battles.
Many memories were made at this feast.

Yes, it does need a bit of tweaking! Let’s see what can be done.

In long lines we laughed

That’s not a bad start. It captures the reader’s interest and has a very nice sound, a benefit of alliterative poetry.

Waiting to wonder awhile:

What on earth does that mean? Waiting to wonder? This one needs help. Let’s replace it with, “While waiting for wonderful things”. There’s no need to put the repeated sound in every word!

A full feast of food lying before us.

That works, but it’s a little drawn out. How about “A full feast of food spread before us”? A little more to the point with fewer unnecessary syllables.

Our desires were satisfied deliciously

That just sounds silly! “Hunger extinguished by humble hands” sounds a little confusing at first, but hopefully it can be figured out.

As we were challenged by many choices,

It sounds too forced. “As we piled our plates with plenty” falls much more naturally on the ears.

Each dish shining and showy.

Showy potluck dishes? Excuse me, Han? Even at our church you can’t call potluck dishes ’showy’. “Each dish delighting dangerous appetites”. (You question the use of ‘dangerous’? You should meet some of the young men around here.)

The girls, eyes aglow and glimmering, smiling,

I’ve never actually seen anyone glimmering. I should be hung up by my toes for using that word in this context! Let’s try “The girls giggling gladly”, which is much simpler and matches the next line,

The boys brashly boasting–

Hmm, not quite right. Boys, check. Boasting, check. Brashly? No check. “The boys bragging and boasting” doesn’t cheat to get the sound.

For we most loved our mother’s meal and dishes,

I have a firm rule: Using ‘for’ when ‘because’ is what you mean is lazy. And this line is just because I felt I had to explain the boasting of the boys. Bad! Everyone knows when you get guys together they will brag and boast. So out it goes, and the next line, And knew no one’s could be better. Let’s replace it with “Excited for edification in eating” It’s a little quirky, but after taking out two unnecessary lines, it’s okay.

Finally, food overflowing off plates,

That works, even if it does paint us as the gluttons we tend to be…

We wended our way to the table,

‘Wended’? Ew. Cheater. Amateur. Write words you use. “We wandered, walking, waiting” is not incredibly clear, but it draws you to the next line.

And carefully claimed each chair we could find.

There is nothing careful about the way we claim chairs. “Chasing down chairs for each friend as they came” gives a much more accurate picture of what went on.

At this point I’ve noticed that I’ve been creating some natural divisions, stanzas of three lines. So I need another line to fill out this stanza. “And praying the table would hold our platters’ plenitude!”

Smiles and stories were shared unselfishly,

True in history and sound.

And I delighted to see friends edifying one another.

It’s a little contrived, and I’ve already used the edifying idea. “Conversation cheering comrades in Christ”.
Lizzy and Lauren were lovingly talking Whilst both the Bens recalled their battles.

I really liked these lines at the time I originally wrote this poem. But it depends too much on the names and not too much on the truth. Cut.

Many memories were made at this feast.

Yeah, well, thank you Captain Obvious! In case you didn’t read the poem, here is a neat little summary, and if you did WHACK! that’s what it was about! Sorry, let’s clean that up. “More than mouths, our faith was fed”.

All that’s left is an approved title. I wrote the title as an observer but I wrote the poem as a participant. This needs correction. Let’s make it funny. “Potluck? Potprovidence!”

So now, the final product:

Potluck? Potprovidence!

In long lines we laughed,
While waiting for wonderful things:
A full feast of food spread before us.

Hunger extinguished by humble hands,
As we piled our plates with plenty,
Each dish delighting dangerous appetites.

The girls giggling gladly,
The boys bragging and boasting,
Excited for edification in eating.

We wandered, walking, waiting,
Chasing down chairs for each friend as they came,
And praying the table would hold our platters’ plenitude!

Smiles and stories were shared unselfishly,
Conversations cheering comrades in Christ
More than mouths, our faith was fed.

John Ahern writes,

I’m not going to be needlessly apologetic about this, but do understand that I neither claim this to be original nor do I claim this to be the prior idea of anyone else. I’m communicating ideas I happen to think are important, and they may be either too crazy to be the work of anyone else or too profound to be mine.

Yes, yet again, my attention is focused on that petty issue of ecclesiology. You’ll notice Christians often assume that Protestantism began as a completely new doctrinal strand of the 16^th century, and was vaguely connected to the early Church. Somewhere along the way, however, at a vague point, Christians started doing papist stuff.

Or, to put it anecdotally, I was watching a lecture series by Anthony Rizzi, who is really quite excellent at presenting Thomism in a modern day application. One of the conclusions he came to gave me convulsions – he said that the Catholic Church was really the founder of modern science.

That’s true. There’s nothing wrong with that statement, as far as my own research and his oratory go. But the context he put it in makes us think of the Roman Catholic church, and this is really what makes me peeved. I’ve come across somewhat the same attitude in Philip Schaff.

Delve with me, if you would, into the meaning of the word Catholic. It means universal?—?something most people may be familiar with. I do wonder when Peter Kreeft, who does always have helpful insights into the issue, says we’re all small “c” Catholics. Does that help? Does it do anything aside from forming, blissfully and naively, some sort of ecumenical connection between Protestants and Roman Catholics?

Let’s look at the proper name of those under the headship of Rome. We call them Roman Catholics. That is to say, the Roman Catholic church is the Catholic church under the headship of Rome. I must beg all the Roman Catholics reading this to correct me if I’m wrong. This name, Roman Catholic, is an assertion (and one that I have no intention of trying to deny here) that the Catholic church is defined by Rome. Not sure if that’s a good way of putting it, but there it is.

Now, a Classical Protestant would acknowledge this – would further the point by saying that, actually, Protestants are Catholics too. Not small “c”. Capital “C”. We should consider ourselves within the visible bounds of the Catholic Church. It’s because we refuse to define the Church by Rome?—?indeed, by an institutionalized or infallible entity, other than the Word. If we really believe in sola Scriptura, this is premise with which to be begin. We are Protestant Catholics. (All thanks, Douglas Wilson.)

Post Israeli-split of 1^st Kings 12, the story of Ruth did not exclude itself from being told to the children of the tribe of Reuben, just because it happened in Judah, and that wasn’t Israel. To put it in a mundane way, I, the Protestant, want in on the fun too.

The idea that Protestants of the Reformation were trying to suppress and confine the proper roll of the Church is really quite off the mark, I think. (Funny thing is it’s an idea probably originating with Protestants.) If what we say is true, and obviously, no good Roman Catholic could say it was, then the Protestant ecclesiology is much, much bigger and broader than anything defined by an infallible institution. I’m not trying to do Protestant apologetics here, either, but that’s something to understand about the nature of Protestantism.

Hannah Roorda writes:

(So you know, I expect to continue with Weddings and Celebrations for a while. :)

It is customary in many cultures to offer toasts when celebrating. At weddings you toast the couple, at parties you toast the guest of honor, and at the end of an old year you toast the new.

While toasts are not mentioned specifically in the Bible, the principle is certainly Christian. A toast is an opportunity to thank, encourage, and bless others. Toasts are customarily given with an alcoholic beverage– wine that makes glad the heart. They are a reminder of the gifts that God has given us and the hope of good things to come. And they are a simple but extraordinary way for each of us to give of ourselves to others and build each other up– publicly. It is not easy to stand up in front of everyone at a wedding and say to your brother and his new bride, “May your children possess the gates of The Enemy” but it is a gesture that is a memorable witness and a blessing for years to come.

I have collected many toasts that are appropriate for many different occasions (excellent resource: Toasts Book) and would like to share some of them with you. Well, all right, quite a bounty of them, and I hope it makes up for the lack of posts last December:

As we start the New Year,
Let’s get down on our knees
to thank God we’re on our feet.

May you have warm words on a cold evening, A full moon on a dark night, And the road downhill all the way to your door.

Be at war with your voices, at peace with your neighbors, and let every new year find you a better man.
-Benjamin Franklin

May the roof above us never fall in. And may the friends gathered below it never fall out.

May all single men be married, and all married men be happy!

As you slide down the banister of life, may the splinters never face the wrong way.

May the most you wish for be the least you get.

Here’s to the year that has gone
With its share of joy and sadness
And here’s to the year to come
May it have a full measure of gladness

May the saddest day of your future be no worse than the happiest day of your past.

Here’s to the love we give away for it’s the only love we keep.

May for better or worse be far better than worse.

When I said I should die a bachelor,
I did not think I should live ’till I were married.
—Shakespeare: Much Ado About Nothing

Frame your mind to mirth and merriment,
Which bars a thousand harms and lengthens life. –Shakespeare: The Taming of the Shrew”

God, the best maker of all marriages,
Combine your hearts in one.
– Shakespeare: Henry V

Congratulations on the termination of your isolation and may I express an appreciation of your determination to end the desperation and frustration which has caused you so much consternation in giving you the inspiration to make a combination to bring an accumulation to the population.

May you be buried in a casket made from the wood of a 100 year old oak
That I shall plant tomorrow.

May the road rise to meet you.
May the wind be always at your back.
May the sun shine warm upon your face.
And rains fall soft upon your fields.
And until we meet again,
May God hold you in the hollow of His hand.

Long Life to our Friends: May the chicken never be hatched that will scratch on their graves.

And finally, to my co-bloggers John, Gabriel, Mark, Nick, Samuel, and Philip, and to our readers:

Another year is dawning! Let it be
For better or for worse, another year with thee.