The Boston Red Sox open their 2007 schedule on Monday, and hope are high in Beantown. What do Red Sox fans have to look forward to, team-wise and blog-wise this year? Plenty!

1. Pitching. There is no question the Sox have a formidable starting five. While early on the idea of staring the season with a front-end of Curt Schilling, Josh Beckett, Daisuke Matsuzaka, Jonathan Papelbon, and Tim Wakefield was tantalizing, the idea of having no closer scared the bejeezus out of everyone. So, while putting Paps back into the closer role where he dominated last season improves the team’s chances overall, moving Wakefield into the 4th slot and replacing Paps with Julian Tavarez isn’t quite as impressive. But no worries: if Tavarez (or Wakefield, for that matter) falter, there’s Kyle Snyder from the bullpen and plenty of help down in AAA Pawtucket with the likes of Jon Lester, Kason Gabbard, and Devon Hansack - three young ‘uns any team in baseball would love to have on their rosters.

In the bullpen, as mentioned, there’s plenty of talent to get from the starters to Papelbon, with Snyder, Brendan Donnelly, Joel Pineiro (if he doesn’t get traded), and Mike Timlin from the right side, and Javier Lopez, J.C. Romero, and Hideki Okajima from the left. This is a deep staff, with an equally-deep pool of reinforcements down in Pawtucket. Arguably, the best pitching staff in the American League, and an oasis in the Baseball Desert when it comes to your typical pitching staff.

2. Catcher. Same as last year - all-around catching dude Jason Varitek back doing the 1, 2, 3, and 5 starting shift, with erstwhile backup Doug Mirabelli handling the knuckleballer Wakefield. There are concerns over Varitek’s age and his offense this spring after hitting a paltry, career-low .238 last season, but there’s few better when it comes to his preparation, handling of pitchers, and understanding the Keys To The Game. Were he ever to get hurt, the Sox like up-and-comer George Katteras, who will be playing at AAA Pawtucket this year.

3. First Base. This will probably be Kevin Youkilis’ last season playing closest to The Dugout on the first-base side, as it is expected Youk will move to third after third baseman Mike Lowell opts for free agency once this season is over. Until then, however, while Youk may not end up amongst the league-leaders in power numbers for first basemen, he is steady and rock-solid both offensively and defensively.

4. Second Base. OK, I’ll admit, this is a spot I don’t think the Sox are strong in. From all appearances, Dustin Pedroia does not appear ready for the bigs. His defense is OK, but watching him at the plate, all I can say is, “Great El Guapo’s Ghost!”. If the Red Sox offense starts off slow and Pedroia ain’t helping, don’t be surprised to see him back in Pawtucket and the steady Alex Cora in his place.

5. Third Base. A strength on the team, both offensively and defensively. Besides his quiet, steady and stabilizing influence at third, Mike Lowell has pop in his bat and should do a very nice job in the 6- or 7-hole in the Sox lineup. You don’t have to be a Soxaholic to appreciate what Lowell brings to the park both day in and day out.

6. Shortstop. I’ve never really understood why the Sox have always been so enamored of Lugo, but, now that we have him, I guess we’ll just have to see. There’s no question that shortstop is now as much an offensive as it is a defensive position on a baseball roster, and, while Alex Gonzalez played a great defensive shortstop last year, you need a player who can hit one Over The Monster more often than A-Gon did. Will Lugo’s offensive capabilities make up for the defense the Sox have given up as a result? We’ll just have to see.

7. Left Field. Manny Ramirez returns for another year of who knows what. The one thing you know you’ll always get from Manny is offensive prowess that few others in baseball possess. Does he do dumb things, like disappear during a pitching switch if he hears the Call of the Green Monster? Well, sure. Will he take a few days off around the All-Star Break? Most likely. But if the Sox are in it and Manny’s interested, there’s few more dangerous hitters in baseball. Not to mention that no other team in baseball has as feared a 3-4 combination as the Sox do with Manuel and David “Big Papi” Ortiz.

8. Center Field. Another position I think is potentially weak offensively (and, perhaps, due to his throwing arm, defensively as well). What’s up with Coco Crisp this spring? The happy-go-lucky and plucky center fielder of 2006 seems to have lost The Joy of Sox. His defense this spring has been just so-so and his bat kinda abysmal, and one wonders whether it’s because he’s been injured, or simply doesn’t relish the prospect of hitting eighth in the Sox lineup. Something defintely to keep an eye out for.

9. Right Field. J.D. Drew looks like everything advertised this spring, and I’m gonna predict the guy has a monster year. This year the Sox are going to add some new seats in the right field stands and call it “Conigliaro’s Corner”, but, as much as I respect the memory of Tony C. and what that memory means to Sox fans, we all know that right field is really The House That Dewey Built, as there may never be another patrolling that part of Fenway like Dwight (Dewey) Evans.

10. DH. “Big Papi”. Need I say more? A fave of all Fenway Fanatics, and, in my mind, the greatest clutch hitter in Red Sox history.

11. Bench. Eric Hinske can play first, third, and outfield. Wily Mo Pena will be getting his swings backing backing up Coco if he gets injured again, Cora backs up second and short. You need to have a solid bench if you want to be the Firebrand of the A.L., and I think the Sox are pretty solid here.

12. Manager. Terry Francona has done a fine of making sure the Red Sox keep Surviving Grady. BTW, we may see Mr. Little’s Dodgers in the World Series this year. Now wouldn’t an October matchup between Terry’s and Grady’s nine be interesting?

Bottom line: if the Sox stay healthy, there’s no reason why they shouldn’t be a solid pick to win the A.L. pennant and get to the World Series, but it’s a long way to October. This team appears built for the long haul and ought to make it interesting.

Let the games begin!

Earlier tonight, for no reason whatsoever, I was looking at some of the posts I had put up in this space last year at this time, and was amazed to see how absolutely lost, and how imprisoned spiritually, I felt back then.

Forward then, two hours. Tracey and I were watching on DVD The Beatles Anthology (of all things!), and I was struck by an overwhelming sense, so powerful and (how can I describe it?) so personal - how important it is that devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, is a course I should be pursuing in my life, to what extent I know not. What was it that triggered such an incredible response? Believe it or not, it was hearing these lyrics to John Lennon’s song, “Real Love” (my boldings):

All my little plans and schemes
Lost like some forgotten dream
Seems like all I really was doing
Was waiting for you

Just like little girls and boys
Playing with their little toys
Seems like all they really were doing
Was waiting for you

Don’t need to be alone
No need to be alone

It’s real love
It’s real, yes it’s real love
It’s real

From this moment on I know
Exactly where my life will go
Seems that all I really was doing
Was waiting for love

Don’t need to be afraid
No need to be afraid

It’s real love
It’s real, yes it’s real love
It’s real

Thought I’d been in love before,
But in my heart I wanted more
Seems like all I really was doing
Was waiting for you

Don’t need to be alone
No need to be alone

It’s real love
Yes it’s real, yes it’s real love
It’s real, yes it’s real love…

Listening to the lyrics and music wash over me, I realized that “real” and “love” are not words to be taken lightly. Is my alter-ego “The Great White Shank”, and my roles as husband, lover, Goodboy, and project manager nothing but a cheap facade? Is the life I find myself living so different from some existence I should be, but haven’t the guts to pursue? Or is it just over-reaction. Who knows? Whichever it might be, after my experience of two weeks ago, I sure feel as if I’ve appeared out of some crazy fog bank to find myself thousands of miles (literally and figuratively) from somewhere I was. Like Lennon’s lyrics say, maybe I don’t need to be afraid of having some time alone to understand everything that’s happened to me recently. I’m clearly wrestling with impulses far and beyond anything I could have imagined when I wrote that post a year ago February.

At any rate, it is real love, and it is a joy to feel free.

Hope I didn’t wig everyone out, but it is what it is. I promise - a post on boat drinks or the Red Sox tomorrow!

Still thinking about presidential candidate John Edwards’ comments in that recent interview that “Jesus would be appalled at how the United States has ignored the plight of the suffering”.

I’ve heard some point to the story of Jesus telling the rich man to give away everything he had and come follow him (Matthew 19:21-23) as an example of the Jesus’ disdain for wealth and greed in general. Well, it was not - rather, it was an indictment on the rich man’s allegiance to the master he viewed as more important to serve. Being “rich” (whatever that term means) is not, by its very nature, either sinful or a bad thing: I’ve always believed God has given some people the gift of being able to make money hand over fist. (Looking at my credit card bills tonight, that wouldn’t be a bad gift to have!) Rather, it’s what you do with your so-called “riches” (i.e., the gifts God has given you, in whatever manner, shape, or form that takes) that counts, and something we will all be judged on and held accountable for somewhere down the line.

And so, just days away from the start of Holy Week, a few questions for us all to ponder: What are the gifts God has given you? To what purpose are they being used? Who is the master you yourself swear allegiance to?

(Part 1 of an occasional 3 - or is it 4? - part series)

Last month, a group of Anglican Communion leaders gathered in Tanzania to discuss issues that various churches within the Communion found themselves at odds over in an attempt to avoid schism. On one side you had the churches of the Global South - Africa, Asia, and South America, churches virtually exploding in growth and teaching an orthodox, or traditional (no, I’m not going to call it “conservative”), form of Christianity. On the other side, you had the churches of the “West” - The Episcopal Church (TEC), the Anglican Church of Canada, and the Church of England (the founding church of the Communion), churches wracked by discord (primarily over the issue of homosexuality), hemmorrhaging membership, and - perhaps more importantly - losing power and influence within the Communion.

The primary reason for this gathering was to discuss TEC and various actions it had taken which the Global South churches saw as contrary to the traditional teachings of the Church, particularly in the area of homosexuality. Specifically, the leaders of these churches took issue with: a) TEC’s consecration of a non-celibate gay man, the Rt. Reverend Gene Robinson, as Bishop of New Hampshire back in 2003, b) certain dioceses quietly sanctioning its clergy performing same-sex unions, and c) overt, hostile actions taken by TEC bishops against clergy and church congregations who disagreed both philosophically and theologically with the these actions and, as a result, sought alternative Episcopal (bishop) oversight, or to leave TEC altogether and affiliate themselves with churches of the Global South.

As a result of the meeting in Tanzania, TEC was given what amounted to an ultimatum: either conform with the rest of the Communion and the historic teachings and traditions of the Church, and allow alternative Episcopal oversight for U.S. dioceses who have refused to recognize the leadership of newly-elected Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, or face a reduced status within the Communion, or perhaps even expulsion. TEC was given until September 30 to provide the Anglican leaders with a response.

It didn’t take that long.

Last week, following a meeting of TEC’s House of Bishops at Camp Allen, Texas, TEC bishops released a three-pronged statement that rejected the Anglican primates’ ultimatum in its entirety. As the AP’s Rachel Zoll writes:

Episcopal bishops risked losing their place in the global Anglican family Wednesday by affirming their support for gays and rejecting a key demand that they give up some authority to theological conservatives outside the U.S. church.

In strong and direct language, the Episcopal House of Bishops said it views the Gospel as teaching that “all God’s children, including gay and lesbian persons, are full and equal participants” in the church. The bishops also said they would not agree to an Anglican plan for leaders outside the U.S. denomination to oversee the small number of conservative American dioceses that disagree.

“We cannot accept what would be injurious to the church and could well lead to its permanent division,” the bishops said in a resolution from a private meeting in Texas.

“If that means that others reject us and communion with us, as some have already done, we must with great regret and sorrow accept their decision.”

While this news may come as a surprise to many, it certainly doesn’t to me, as it is something I have been predicting would happen for a long time. Call it, “irreconcilable differences”, if you will. The fact is, whether you place yourself on the side of the Global South leaders or with the TEC bishops, what you have here are two sides that have finally come to the realization that there is no real way to reconcile the significant philosophical, theological, and pastoral differences that exist between them. While it is true these differences seem to have coalesced around the issue of homosexuality more than anything else, at the core is the tension that has always seemed to exist historically and fundamentally between the supposed “three legs” of traditional Anglicanism - Holy Scripture, Church tradition, and