Category: Theology & Philosophy

After spending pretty much all day at Church yesterday, starting about 0745 and getting home about 0200 this morning, this is not going to be as long or as detailed as originally planned. That is probably the latest I have stayed up in more than a decade, much less after all the fun of the lightning strike and other health delights. I will say I had fun, and it was interesting to take part in various liturgical forms for the same service, and I learned a good bit as well. It also served to highlight how different apostles presented the same event in very different ways. That’s a discussion for another day.

I am also glad to report that today’s post has nothing to do with Yale or Buckley (1). That said, however, I need to make a note to myself that in later discussions of the Bible that I remember to give thanks that neither engineers or academics were involved with the original New Testament. Just ignore and roll with that one for now.

If there is a greater contrast between two parties in the universe, than between God and Man, I have yet to find it. Polar opposites is a good descriptor, and highlights the challenges of God explaining things to Man, and Man understanding (more often not understanding) what God is saying and intends.

While a number of theologians concentrate on the 12-15 characteristics of God, it is in my opinion best to focus on and understand the 3 prime attributes of God. Those attributes are the basis of trying to understand God and of the characteristics we have come to associate with God. They are also why we do not have a chance of truly understanding God without assistance. And, no, that assistance does not come from pharmaceuticals as there is no amount of mind expanding or mind altering drugs we can take that will let us truly grasp even a fraction of the mind of God. Trying such is a great way to burn out your brain and waste the gifts God has given you, at least in my opinion.

God exists out of time, as in before and after time as we understand it. Let’s look at the three key areas.

First, God is omnipotent. While that does indeed mean all powerful, it also means that God has the wisdom, judgement, and other characteristics that make him infallible. God does not, therefore, make mistakes. Which leads to God being almighty, because of this and because of what comes next.

Second, God is omniscient. God knows everything since he existed before time and will exist even after time (as we understand it) is gone. God sees all of time (and the before and after) as a single instant. Scripture tells us that God knew that a third of the Heavenly Host would revolt before they did so. God knows we are going to screw up, how we are going to screw up, and loves us anyway. Which is getting a little ahead of myself, but…

Finally, God is omnipresent. “No sparrow shall fall” is because God is present in everyone and everything in the known (and unknown to us) universe(s). There is nothing that happens anywhere (or any time) of which God is unaware.

Where we see probabilities for actions, God not only saw the probabilities but knew which would become reality (in this and even in other potential dimensions) before we even started to take actions. Keep in mind that while we deal (awkwardly and often unwisely) with this reality, God deals with this reality and quite probably more. Keep in mind that whole ‘known and unknown’ thing that pops up in scripture and life from time to time. Which, when you add in free will, makes for a complex situation that puts 3-D chess right out the airlock when it comes to complexity.

So, you have God who likely knows all and sees all across what we would consider multiple dimensions (though God may not see it as such, again a rather advanced discussion for another day). Then, you have us, mankind.

We are why most aliens lock their doors and speed up when passing by our cosmic neighborhood. God is a wondrous trinity of attributes (cough, cough, pay attention) while we know little and seem determined to get as many things wrong as possible. While the latter is a bit cynical of me, the former truly isn’t our fault. To explain why, I need to borrow from the late Kurt Vonnegut.

In one of his stories, I remember him describing humans as a figure who experiences life essentially bound on some sort of open rail car, the car only able to move in one direction while we can only look in one direction (off to the side?), and do so through a long tube that limits our field of view. Let’s face it, that’s not a bad descriptor of how we experience time (and space in a relative sense).

Our viewpoint is extremely limited, we have no real ability (other than some possibly limited bits of pre-cognition and related, again, a discussion for another day) to look ahead. As for looking behind, my own take is that we far too often fail to do so even when it would do us good. Those who fail to understand history are doomed to repeat it; and, those who seek to prevent the teaching of history are working as hard as they can to repeat it and not to the benefit of mankind.

Humanity also has an unmatched (as far as we know) ability to screw up. Much of that comes from taking the easy way on most everything. It reflects strongly in certain politics and political movements, where free and easy is the promise, along with the idea that no payment or work will ever be required to enjoy the largess. This despite rather clear evidence the world really doesn’t work that way…

While jumping ahead a bit, it is worth noting that the Old Testament can be condensed as follows. God: Do these things as I command and life will be good. Mankind: Yes, we will do that. Ooops. We didn’t, we got what we deserved. Please give us another chance. God: Okay, here’s a new covenant, do these things as I command, and life will be good. Mankind: Yes, we will do that. Ooops. We didn’t, we got what we deserved. Please give us another chance. God, possibly tempted to sigh: Okay, here’s a new covenant, do these things as I command, and life will be good. Mankind… For the record, that’s also an accurate summation of me and sin. There is the best of intentions, but the flesh (esp. my brain) is weak.

So, back on track (pun intended). We, mankind, really haven’t got a shot at understanding more than a very limited fraction of the mind of God. We simply are not wired to understand such in this form. Outside this form is an interesting discussion, but again one for another day. The fact is, however, we really don’t need to fully understand the mind of God in order to understand what God wants us to do.

Whether it is from the Burning Bush, the words of the prophets, or the parables of Jesus, the basics are there. Now, particularly in the latter, there is room for growth as it were. Keep in mind the ‘spoke and thought as a child’ bit as it applies to our understanding of God and his word.

For example, I’ve read some ‘learned’ (cough) discussion that God evolved in the Old Testament. After all, God went from a vengeful and emotional creature to the God we know today. This skips a couple of important points in my opinion.

First, in the earliest forms, Judaic belief held that God in Genesis was a first among equals (a concept that comes up again in scripture I believe, and most assuredly in Church politics). Judaism, however, went from from somewhat polytheistic to monotheistic far more rapidly and far earlier than almost any other belief system in the world.

Second, as it did so it was not God that evolved, but our understanding of God. Where we had tried to place a human face and understanding on something that is far from Human, as Mankind evolved our understanding grew as well. This mirrors our understanding of the parables of Jesus, where what we get out of some of them has indeed involved over the years (‘So that’s what it really meant!). That’s one of the beautiful things about parables, is that it is possible to see and understand more (look at this from over here!) as we learn and grow. Not only do I think God has a sense of humor, but I also think he’s efficient in such things, yet another point we may get into later.

What we do need to consider is that our understanding is limited. There are far too many out there who seek to place limits on God, which is something we have been told flat out not to do. For all that such can be amusing, it is also incredibly sad to see people proclaim that God has to do what they want because he has to operate on the basis of how they think God should operate. Such is often linked to extremely legalistic thinking on theology. My personal take is that the more legalistic you get on theology, the greater the chance you are, er, messing up by the numbers.

Indeed, today’s post brings up one of the greatest hopes for the individuals of mankind. I think I’ve been told this before, but a wise priest shared with myself and others that no good, reputable priest (or preacher) will tell you definitively where the soul of a recently departed has gone. They may have strong suspicions (I got the impression that this was particularly true to those who were not so good in life, and likely to go down as it were) but even if likely to go up one didn’t make that declaration. One reason is that for the former is that God is a being who transcends time, and we have no clue if in the final nano-seconds of a person’s life that God did not intervene to give that person a chance. After all, what is a nano-second to us can be an eternity to God. God’s love and mercy are infinite, so we do not know what God might do, especially given that our understanding is both limited and to some extent likely flawed. Just look at the number of times God has given mankind another chance in the Old Testament. Who is to say that such might not extend to an individual level? As for those going up, we may think that but we don’t know all and the only people known for sure (as far as we know) in heaven are the Saints and Martyrs.

Some food for thought as we explore the holes in my memories and I try to work some things out for decisions and more to come.

1. One of the unexpected (and IMO unearned in some ways) honors in my life was to be an invited guest to WeaponsCon I many years back. WeaponsCon was the response by the late (and missed) Irv Koch to a number of science fiction conventions to banning weapons. At WeaponsCon one had to be armed at all times. It was the safest and most polite convention I think I’ve ever attended. The Guest of Honor was the late (and much, very much, missed) L. Neil Smith. My being put on a similar level to him is what I considered unearned. That said, we got along great and it was a true pleasure to meet him and get to spend some time talking on any number of subjects. To this day I love his description of William Buckley (as character Buckley Williams I think in The Probability Broach) rolling his eyes like a dying horse as both accurate and a bit of sheer comic genius. His entire take was so spot on…

The Series Of Posts:

Exploring Faith, Christianity, and Theology

Some Thoughts On God, And Man

Some Additional Background Memories

In no way do I fancy myself to be a Lewis, Sheen, or Tolkien, and I start what I hope will be a series of posts not as an apologist (a term that still bothers me a bit). Rather, I start this to try to explore some of the holes in my memory and make sure I’m not missing any important points. Also, I will be making some decisions over the next few months and want to explore thoughts and theology to help ensure I make reasoned and informed decisions.

If, in the process, my explorations prove helpful to others in exploring and articulating their own faith, all the better. If it helps bring someone to Faith, even better. By sharing, I hope that my words may do good beyond the mundane.

To start this series of explorations, I need to establish who I am and how I came to be where I am today. This provides you (and me) with the background to evaluate and understand where I come from, where I hope to go, the points I make, and to spot the gaps as it were. It also strikes me as a better forum than the cesspit that is social media.

My father was raised Southern Baptist, though he later joined the Southern Methodist Church after marrying my mother. I remember attending “Homecoming” at Mt. Zion church each year, mostly quite fondly. This was a time where those who grew up in that church, families, and friends all came back together to to socialize and share. Everyone brought food, and that food was quite good.

I recall at least a couple of the preachers there at that country church. I recall, not clearly, one who was of the hellfire and damnation cadre who preached a sermon telling those present that if they did not return to the church they would burn, burn, burn. I have the feeling that he heard, possibly strongly, that such wasn’t a good idea for Homecoming and that the next year if he was still there he was on better behavior. I remember one who reminded me very much of “Shaking Sammy” in the book MASH. Seem to recall being admonished for mentioning such to my parents, though I also seem to recall my Dad agreeing with me after he read my copy of the book. The last preacher I recall was an older gentleman who was quite good at his job and cared deeply not just for his congregation but others in that community as well.

I also very much believe my Dad when he remarked that they lost as many people as they gained, courtesy of the baptism. They did a full immersion baptism, and the pool (cement pond) was spring fed. Ice cold spring fed. Seems that when let back up from under the cold, cold water some people uttered less than respectful phrases, resulting in them being brought into the church and kicked out immediately. Yeah, it might be hyperbole, but having felt the water I can believe it.

My mother was raised in the Southern Methodist church, and was quite proud that our direct ancestor (my x-great grandfather) was Bishop Pierce who was credited with truly putting the Southern Methodist church on the map as it were. Indeed, the portraits of the good Bishop and his wife (who preferred to be called Miss Nancy instead of her real name), hung on the wall of our living room for many, many years.

Those portraits were eerie to me as a child, and I got a strong feeling of disapproval whenever I snuck into the living room as a small child. The room was off limits to me as a toddler and even when older. Miss Nancy seemed very disapproving. When I was older, I found it to be a matter of amusement and vindication when our beagle would sneak in (it was off limits to him too) and end up in apparent argument with Miss Nancy. No joke, he would be in rolling on the rug, look up at her portrait, and bark at it. Often, he would get up on the sofa, put his front paws on the bottom of the portrait frame, and appear to go back and forth with Miss Nancy. I’m actually rather glad that those portraits, along with the reproductions that replaced them until my mother’s death, were donated to the Methodist museum at Epworth By The Sea. Yes, there is a point to sharing that. Another day.

In many ways, my mom pushed religion hard, while Dad preferred a more refined approach. Laid back is NOT the right word for how he did things, but subtle gets into it. Dad was the type who would let you fall, bang yourself up a bit, and then pick you up and set you going again so that you learned from your mistakes. To be quite fair, he would usually warn you that you were about to bust yourself, and if you persisted… Good life lessons and I am the richer for that as wrapping people of any age in cotton and not letting them do is not doing them (or anyone else) any favors.

The church I grew up in has been around for more than 175 years now. It has long sponsored the Boy Scout troop in which I earned my Eagle and the God and Country award. As an aside, I am not happy with what Scouting has become, to the point that I promote another organization. As for me, I’m glad I came along so I could be an old-way Eagle, and the God and Country award was both an exploration of Faith as well as of comparative religion.

Looking back, I begin to suspect I may have been a trial to some of my pastors. I remember Rev. Fredrick Wilson, a nice man though not a theological powerhouse. I ended up confounding him by asking if dogs and other pets went to heaven (possibly related to the loss of a pet rabbit, memories are jumbled) when still quite young. It hit him cold, and I still find it interesting he didn’t have a position on such worked out, as surely I was not the first to ask such a question? I’m not sure if I hit him or Reverend Key with a thought on the Miracle of Transubstantiation. The Methodist Church, at least at that time, did not believe in the Miracle, instead believing that it only became the body and blood of Christ on a spiritual level. I think I was six or so when I innocently asked that if it did become the body and blood, why not have everyone partake, then spit out the literal flesh and blood, assemble them, and bring about Christ’s return on the spot? I have some very jumbled and fuzzy memories of what may have been a couple more doozies.

Years ago, someone put together an Art Linkletter-style book on mishearings by children in church. Yes, I think I did hear ‘parakeet’ when the term “Paraclete” first came up, like many others. I did think one of the choral responses used the phrase ‘and or-e-o’ at one point. One I didn’t do, but still appreciate, is the child in the book who heard “Father, Son, and Holy Goat.” BTW, if you are old enough to remember Art Linkletter and his show, good on you. If you are not, you should check it out.

I think I was in the seventh grade when the “Born Again” craze/movement hit. My parents were patient, mostly, with me and pointed out they had already been baptized and given themselves to Christ, and did not need to do so again. No direct reference to one baptism for the forgiveness of sins, but a strong implication. The youth ministers of the day pushed it, and a couple of years later I found myself visiting the historic house taken over by the youth movement (sorta hippie freaks from what I remember). It was there that I got introduced to C.S. Lewis, the Chronicles of Narnia, and The Screwtape Letters. I don’t think my mom (who tried to keep me from listening to Rock and a number of other things) was thrilled, and she found ways to keep me from ever going back to that ministry.

For me, I was taken by the writing, and use of language, by C.S. Lewis. I know I read the Perilandra trilogy, though I have no memories of the books. I just remember fragments of The Screwtape Letters. Strangely enough, I don’t think I got into Tolkien until around my junior year. Again, the language and use of same caught my attention, and I truly came to appreciate the power of language (and linguistics and the etymology of words and language). The corruption of language is also a pathway to the corruption of populations and the world, and as such I recommend reading this article that cites Lewis and more even as it gives warning.

I was still quite naive and callow at the time, and I recall bristling at the title “Mere Christianity” as I regarded Christianity as anything but mere. I also still cringe a bit at the term apologist, as given modern usage the original meaning is not well known. Again, my take was that Christianity needed no apology. Thankfully, both led to an increase in knowledge and an awareness of how words were changing — for good or ill.

Around my junior year, I left the Methodist church. We had gotten a pastor that while I loathe the term in many respects, sky pilot seems an apt designation even unto this day. He wanted to turn my church into a mega-church and himself into a noted tele-evangelist. A number of people quit leadership roles in the church over what he was doing and how, including my Dad. For me, the break came when he told my mom that he would not visit her mother, my grandmother, who was dying in a nursing home as she had no money to leave the church. I’m not joking when I say I am still amazed she did not literally kill him on the spot. When I asked her about that, she said she was so stunned she could not move or speak at first. Mom and Dad seriously considered leaving the church over this. Then the stubborn in both came out, it was their church not his, and they dug in until he was finally gone.

For me, I was going to school with the children of an Episcopal priest and had already been spending time at that church as they did midnight Christmas services and other such things I enjoyed. I had a talk with him, had him actually somewhat agree with a point of theology I lifted from Heinlein (true sin is harming another; harming yourself isn’t a sin, just stupid — no don’t agree with this today though it can be a good basis for detecting/determining sin), and joined the Episcopal church. Sadly, the priest ended up leaving the church several years later, but that is a tale for another day. Once in college and beyond, I came to find less satisfaction from the church and what seemed to be a changing doctrine as woke came into play.

So, I wandered for a bit. Work had me traveling, so as I did I attended a number of different services. Mary Stewart’s book The Crystal Cave had a profound impact on me when I was in the sixth or seventh grade (think sixth), as she had her young Merlin do much the same as he traveled. As the series progressed, I will note it did a good job of putting Christianity into a good light.

While in Japan, while not truly interested in it, I was invited to attend a Shinto Buddhist ceremony while staying at a monastery. Quick aside: if you go to Japan, forget Western-style hotels and stay at ryokans, which are traditional Japanese-style inns. Some of the best of them are the Buddhist monasteries. When checking in, I was told that if I happened to hear the bell the next morning, I was welcome to attend and observe. The next morning, I awoke vibrating about a foot off the mat. Seems the bell was about ten feet in diameter and rung with a tree trunk that would make a passing fair battering ram. Collecting myself, I went down and quickly determined a couple of things.

First, the ceremony sounded as if they were chanting ‘and I said and he said and she said and they said and you said and they said…’ along with the occasional spinning of a cylinder in a wall of cylinders apparently with prayers on them. I watched, listened, and never did pick up a real pattern to it. Second, I will note that Japan can be a very friendly country, but it also is incredibly bigoted (Japanese language, physiology, etc. is superior to all other on Earth). Apparently, there is a competition between the males attending as to who can sit seiza the longest. Turns out I have a bit more competitive streak than I realized, esp. when one of the other males present has made it clear that the gajin should not be there. Having learned to sit seiza for martial arts, I stayed in it for about five minutes longer than he did, and may have smiled at him… No surprise, I mouthed off to a Yakuza bouncer while in Japan. Thankfully, he didn’t understand American and thought I was saying thank you very much as I bowed. If I get killed, good odds it will be because I was a smartass at the wrong time to the wrong person. Keep in mind, I really did walk through the gates of the Kremlin whistling the theme from Patton. If I die of natural causes, it will be an amazing surprise.

I also attended the Hindu wedding of a friend, and found it fascinating. There was a lot of things done to emphasize two becoming one, with a strong implication that the one was stronger than the sum of the parts. While I don’t think it would be a good addition to traditional vows, I do think it could and should be used in pre-marriage counseling. I did have to turn down offers of an arranged marriage for me, but appreciated the thought. I also got a good laugh as the brother of the groom took me around the temple and explained all the different deities. When we got to Krishna, he very dryly pointed out that despite what Americans seemed to think, Krishna wasn’t that big a deal. (Oh now Krishna he must laugh on, to see me in my saffron!)

I’ll skip some of the wanderings and investigations (already confessed), and note that as I traveled in Europe, I began to more and more visit Catholic churches, from cathedrals to small churches. I am so glad I got to attend (though not participate) in a service at Notre Dame, and wish I could have attended more of services at both Mont-Saint-Michel and Sacre Coeur. I took it as a good sign that I did not burst into flames as I walked beneath the lintels, and that Holy Water did not sizzle when it hit my skin. Long story short, I ended up joining the Catholic Church in a traditional parish that did the Latin Mass every Sunday. They actually did three different masses on Sunday, and the one I attended most often was the sung mass.

I did attempt to start the process of discernment for becoming a priest. It did not get too far, as I was told I was too old to become one in this diocese, but was free to move to another diocese that might have different rules. Truth be told, I am now very glad that cup passed from me in the Catholic church. I am not sure I could be the priest I would want to be, nor that under current leadership I would be allowed to be the priest I would need to be. As for the future, what comes will come. I should also note that over the years various things have happened that have caused me to brush up against that which divides life and death. Those brushes and certain glimpses have had an impact on me and reaffirmed my faith. I may or may not ever discuss them, but they are a factor I need to keep in mind.

Since moving several years ago, I’ve been looking for a new church home. For all that I keep my Faith in my heart, I am a lapsed Catholic but not a lapsed Christian. Even in the years of wandering, I never lost my faith in Christ though I came close to losing my way a time or two. Again and again, God guided me so I did not lose my way. I see God’s hand, and a miracle, in that I am alive after being struck by lightning. I believe there is something I am supposed to do, but remain clueless as to exactly what that may be. Yes, I have actually suggested in prayer that given how dense I can be, it might be helpful to drop a sign in front of me telling me exactly what I am to do… As with almost every human, I am a sinner, but by Grace and Mercy keep trying to do and be better.

Next week, my plan is to either start discussing the nature of God and our understanding of him, or what is Christianity. I’m leaning towards the nature of God as that truly sets the foundation for all other discussions. That said, I will go where guided on this.

I wish I could remember Reverend Key’s full name, as he was a good pastor and theologian of the Methodist church. I can’t remember the name of the pastor who caused me to leave the Methodist church, which is a shame as I really do need to pray for him. I remember flashes of people, but for all that is missing there I seem to remember the truly important things, with the most important part being my Faith.

The Series Of Posts:

Exploring Faith, Christianity, and Theology

Some Thoughts On God, And Man

Some Additional Background Memories

Over on Twitter, someone reposted the anti-Catholic rantings of a special type of evangelical. One who is convinced they know the full and real truth, are not hesitating to share it, and fully into judging others and the faith of others. Any disagreement gets the old “read the Bible” (you pagan bleep that is going to burn, burn, burn). It generally is useless to engage such ignorant bigotry, and just mute them. Why it is pointless is a bit long and complex for Twitter, so you get to suffer through it.

I hope that I am remembering all correctly, as some of the information goes back decades and the lightning strike sort of scrambled things a bit. For anyone new, I was hit by lightning, they think all my memories are still in there but the root directory is corrupted, and some things are jumbled up. I also need to note that I am not a theologian, just someone who has been interested in the origins and more of the Bible and scripture since a child. I would also note that I was born and raised a Methodist, left said church in high school after a preacher refused to visit my dying grandmother as she had no money to leave the church; joined the Episcopal Church; then wandered a bit spiritually; and am currently a lapsed Catholic for all that I try my best to maintain the faith. Part of the reason for the lapse is personal and none of anyone’s business (other than a priest), and part has to do with the current Pope. I’m actually working towards not being lapsed, but it is an ongoing process. I’ve done comparative religion studies in high school, when I earned the God and Country award, and in college. I’m a sinner who struggles every day to do right and live up to my faith.

Let’s start with the Bible. In fact, let’s go back quite a ways and look at the language of the Bible. Different parts were written at different times, but at the time of Christ everything had been put into Aramaic as it was the language of the learned in that region and time, and the New Testament was again written in Aramaic. From there, scripture was translated into Greek, which was the language of the learned in the larger world. Only later was it translated into Latin.

Now, based on conversations with someone who’s goal as a priest was to study those ancient writings and was learning both Greek and Aramaic, the fun part was translating the Greek. The Greek language, at least of that time, was contextual which means the words around the word you were translating determined what it meant. For example, one word could mean brother, step-brother, brother from another mother, band-of-brothers type brother, or I think one other type of relation. Get the context wrong, and you get a technically correct translation that isn’t accurate.

So, you have chances for error when translating from the original source into Aramaic. You have chances for error when translating from Aramaic into Greek. You have a boatload more chances translating from Greek into everything else, and even today you can get debate that devolves towards fist fight by those trying to do so today. Don’t laugh, read the real accounts of some of the early councils and the fact that several of the fathers of the Church did indeed get into fist fights over theological points. This was long before the schism between Catholicism and Orthodox, and well before Martin Luther came onto the scene.

Translating into English, no matter the source but Greek made for the most fun, was yet another chance for error. I seem to recall a tale of a deliberate error of translation to curry favor with King James when he had scholars produce what is now known as the King James bible. Hate to say it, but things like that can happen. Even updating the English text to current usage is potentially problematic. I still remember when a new modern version of the Bible came out (Living Bible?) that had some rather interesting updates. Think that’s the best way to put it. My personal take is the more modern and hip you go, the less likely it is to be accurate or even theologically sound.

Now, which version and in which language are your reading the Bible? I mean the Catholic Bible has the books still in it that Martin Luther threw out. Some sects of Christianity still include the Apocrypha that all mainstream Christianity leaves out. I will note that to better understand Catholic theology, you really need to read the books of the Bible that Martin Luther threw out. Within that, you still have a heap of different versions (NAB, New Standard, King James, etc.) and each has a slightly different take on things for all that the key point remains the same.

I should make clear that there are a number of new translations into various languages that are quite good. The key is, they all are translating from the Aramaic, and the scholars are cross-checking each other as they go. It’s a way to cut down on the mistakes, because we are human and mistakes are sort of what we do best.

So, when someone screams “Read the Bible” I know up front they are not a serious person and are not making a serious effort at discourse or conversion. Frankly, it’s a Christian version of virtue signalling. They are also missing several key points to Christianity in my opinion. Clearly they jumped over the whole place not limits on the Lord thy God, judge not, motes in eyes, and such. They seem to have missed that they are not God, and that God is not bound by their rules on what he can or can’t do, and how he can or can’t do things. They are being extremely legalistic, and are also denying Grace exists. Just as there is no Grace, no forgiveness in the SJW clique, there is no forgiveness or Grace in the this type of argument. There is no love in this approach either. It is not my place to judge others; however, it is a duty to help those struggling with love and compassion. It may seem that I am judging this person and those like them, but I see this more as a bit of tough love.

Because, the real key point they are missing is that we are all Christians, no matter what “flavor” of Christianity we choose. We disagree with each other on different points, but we all accept that Christ was born to die for our sins, and that his death on the cross purchased for us eternal life. I think it may have been Reverend Key, an outstanding Methodist preacher and theologian, who first pointed this out to myself and others. Then again, he was also (I think) the person who taught me about the Miracle of Transubstantiation, and how Catholics and others believe in it.

This argument also misses that God is Love, and that God is both omniscient and omnipotent. Which is a state we really can’t grasp all that well. So, we use scripture and the parables taught by Jesus, we use direct revelation (the Commandments), and the guidance God offers us everyday to get a very imperfect and limited grasp of both God and the rules by which we should live. It’s also why we have miracles, as God can and does take a very direct hand in our lives on occasion. I’m living proof of that as I should have died more than once in this life, including when I was hit by lightning a couple of years ago. There were several aspects of that which add up to a miracle, an every day miracle if you will, but still a miracle. So, no, God who sees all of time and space at once is not sitting on a throne watching and waiting to see any imperfection as a reason to cackle and smite — it’s people who do that.

For God is Grace and forgiveness, not picky legalistic gotchas. So much so, that he gave his only begotten son to die on the Cross for us.

I’m also reminded of something a priest said to my RCIA class. A wise or good priest will never tell you where they think the recently deceased is going, even if they have suspicions. For with even the worst sinner, we can’t know if God did reach out with a miracle to let them change their minds and accept Christ in that last second of life. Again, we are not God and he is not bound by our rules and understandings. Nor do I think that since I now have problems with remembering and saying a number of common prayers (stupid lightning) that such will send me to Sheol, aka Hell. Part of Love is Compassion, and not only do I think that God is far more compassionate than we realize, I think he is not going to hold our worldly infirmities against us.

I view the legalistic clique in much the way I regard prosperity gospel. Not highly. And, all of the above is why I think it is usually useless to engage those doing this type of virtue signal. Because it is about the virtue signal, and not conversion or theology.

As for some of the specific points that troubled the person on Twitter, I’d like to take a moment to address some of them. Especially as some of them were things that may have bothered me when I started the process to join the Church. Never mind that some of the ornate and such still can offend parts of my Methodist soul…

A lot of ignorance and bigotry focuses around Mary, the mother of Jesus. Those that hate her, or hate that she is highly regarded within the Catholic Church, appear to subscribe to what I call the Empty Vessel concept. In short, they see Mary as an empty vessel, a rent-a-womb if you will, who had no further role in Christianity than that. They deny her agency if you will. Instead of a 13-year-old girl who bravely agreed to carry the Son of God (think stoning and other things that could have happened to a pregnant female not yet married), and made a conscious informed choice to do so, they see her as an empty-headed piece of meat. As for future role, you might want to go back and re-read the Wedding. When she asks Jesus to perform the miracle of the wine, there is an exchange where he asks is she sure as she knows where it will lead. To the Cross. Depending on translation, her reply is along the lines of ‘it is time.’ She was there at the foot of the Cross as he suffered and died. Far from an empty vessel.

Bit of an aside, but relevant: The book of Luke is the only book that talks about the childhood of Jesus. There is reason to believe that the author interviewed Mary before her death. Reread that book, and think about the tales only a mother would tell. Puts a little different light on it.

Despite what many think, Catholics don’t worship Mary as God. One of the better explanations came from a priest who pointed out that a lot of it is like a child picking out the “good” parent when they’ve done something wrong. Keep in mind that for all his life, Jesus was a good Jewish boy who loved his mother and would do almost anything for her. As such, we turn to her for intercession, a form of ‘Mom, I screwed up and did something bad, would you help me with your Son’ type thing. We pray to God, but we also will ask Mary to help us do it right and get our request through. The theological points can get complex, but Mary, being born free of original sin and being the mother of Jesus, serves as an intermediary to humanity. Someone pointing the way to her Son. The Way, the Truth, and the Light.

It is much the same for the saints. Short form: all saints are in heaven, and we ask them to help us get our prayers right and to remind us of what they did so we can do the same. They provide an extra voice for our prayers if you will, and can act as an advocate for us before the Throne.

As for Jesus having brothers, you might want to go back up near the top and the discussion of Greek. You might also want to consider that Jesus may have had stepbrothers as Mary might not have been the first wife of Joseph, who was much older than her. Catholic theology holds that she was chaste throughout her life. There’s not a lot in scripture about Joseph, including his history or even when he died. Food for thought.

As a final note, if you are so inclined, please say a prayer for that person on Twitter and all like her. In fact, say it for all of us, that we all open our eyes to God and his love, and that we hear, see, and feel his guidance and love for us. That we have love and patience with one another, and lead others to Faith by our actions.

Final aside: I rarely pray for specific outcomes on anything, especially myself. I’ve found over the years that I’m far better off leaving outcomes to God, as those tend to be far better than what I would have prayed for. Things are always better if we leave them in God’s hands.

Getting hit by lightning is not fun! If you would like to help me in my recovery efforts, which include moving once we have medical issues cleared up, feel free to hit the fundraiser at A New Life on GiveSendGo, use the options in the Tip Jar in the upper right, or drop me a line to discuss other methods. It is thanks to your gifts and prayers that I am still going. Thank you.

He is Risen! May you and yours enjoy a Happy and Blessed Easter.

May your day be Blessed, and filled with light, love, and laughter. May the warmth of the light and love that surround us all fill you, those around you, and your day.

To my friends, acquaintances, and readers who follow an older faith: Chag urim sameach!

To those who struggle this time of year, particularly this day: you are not alone. Please reach out at need, and know that there are others who share and understand. It can be the roughest time of year, but you are not alone.

May peace and love be upon you all, and if you have family cherish that time for it is not given to all.

Merry Christmas!

Over on Twitter, Bree A Dail, a journalist who among other duties is the Vatican Correspondent for The Epoch Times, posed an interesting question as part of a discussion:

If a journalist (or media outlet) identifying as Catholic Media publishes or supports publications rejecting/denying the Bishop of Rome, or Church Teachings, should they be exposed, publicly reprimanded and censured by Bishops and/or the Holy See?

Within the context provided, I would (and did) answer yes to her poll. My explanation of why I voted as I did led to a nice discussion with her, and among other things she pointed out to me this story from a Catholic media outlet saying that Francis is not the Pope. In fact, they refuse to call him Pope or Francis.

Some quick background before we dive in on this. I was raised Methodist and joined the Episcopal Church in late high school. Eventually I found my way to the Catholic Church. When I joined, I did so in one of those conservative churches so beloved of Pope Francis (/sarc), one which until brought to heel performed the Latin Mass every Sunday. In fact, when I joined the early Mass was Anglican, the reasonable Mass was the Sung Mass, and the later/mid-day Mass was the Latin Mass. The difference between the Sung and Latin Mass? About an hour.

One benefit of joining in a more conservative Church was that the RCIA program, which educates on Catholic theology and practices, was rigorous (and fun). We had some theological debates and discussions, and more importantly got into some of the historical debates and discussions that resulted in current Catholic doctrine. The course I took was such that other Churches sometimes sent their students, or even those who were of the Faith, to participate and learn. Some of it was warts and all, as there have been Saints fist fighting and Popes who were “rotters.” Thing is, at the end, you had no doubt about where the Church stood, why they did so, and what the options and expectations for you involved.

In fact, we spent pretty much an entire session one evening discussing things like the denial of the Sacrament to those who supported abortion or other issues that run counter to the laws outlined in the Catechism of the Church. On any number of issues like that, if you did not agree with the Church’s position, you should not join. If you did join, and found yourself in disagreement with the Church on doctrine decided later, you should not accept the Sacrament.

Technically, I am a lapsed Catholic. For personal reasons and because I find myself in disagreement with a number of things decreed by Pope Francis, I chose to not take the Sacrament and to even step away from the Church. It is the right, moral, and honorable thing to do IMO and is in keeping with the Catechism. My Faith remains, and remains strong. My faith in Man and the Institutions of Man remains about the same, just short of non-existent.

Until Bree pointed out that article and some other things, I was unaware that any Catholic media was denying that Francis is the Pope, much less questioning the authority of the Bishop of Rome and the Magisterium. Been focused on a few other things the last year or two, and while I knew I was far from alone in my thoughts in regards Pope Francis I did not realize that things had gotten this far.

For good or ill, Francis sits on the Throne of St. Peter and is the Pope and Bishop of Rome. Period. Full Stop.

The thing that struck me in some things I’ve been reading since this came up, the argument being made is that Francis has abandoned doctrine, process, and more and therefore isn’t Pope. It is a novel approach, though not terribly grounded in Church law IMO. I’m rather surprised that none of those denying his authority have done it (at least that I’ve read) on the basis of his being an anti-Pope.

For those of you who’ve never played Pope-A-Day Bingo, there have been times when there were two (in once case I think possibly three) Popes. This happened when politics ruled the day and there were competing factions French, Italian, and otherwise. The verdict of history (written by those who lived much later most often) was that one was the “real” Pope and the other was an “anti-Pope” or false Pope. An intellectual case can be made that Benedict was either forced out or that his being allowed to renounce the Crown of St. Peter was improper/illegal (under Church law), and that therefore the elevation of Bergoglio was improper/illegal. Whatever the verdict of any future history, the fact remains that Bergoglio was elevated and is serving as Pope Francis.

Now, back to Bree’s query above. Based on the laws of the Church as outlined in the Catechism, the process should be for the appropriate Bishop to remonstrate with them in private, and if that is not satisfactory, remonstrate in public and take further steps as needed. Those steps could be to deny the Sacrament or even up to excommunication.

I am uncomfortable with forcing resignations or removals from the publications. Again, while it has been done in the past, even the recent past, it is far too easy to weaponize against simple, even if profound, disagreement. It is also in many respects a secular response to a spiritual matter.

However, given the manifest unwillingness of the vast majority of Church leadership to do so with a number of people on several subjects (Pelosi and Biden are not the only ones just on abortion, and let’s not even get into matters sexual), I do not see this being addressed anytime soon. Which also tends to push things towards what might be a rather draconian response when and if it comes. It doesn’t help that far too many in leadership see disagreement not only as an assault upon them as an individual, but also as an attack on the office which they hold, and that therefore to disagree with them in any way, shape, or form as an attack on the Faith as a whole as well. Simple disagreement is not being Satanic.

Which leads to another poll Bree conducted as part of the thread:

Should journalists who identify as Catholic Media be held to a standard of ethics, to include Oaths of Fidelity to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church?

This is where things get interesting for me. Oaths are powerful and sacred things, even when they deal with the purely secular. I’ve sworn a couple in my life that have no expiration that include the cost of my life. I tend to approach them a bit differently from some for very good reasons.

While the idea of Catholic Media taking an oath similar to what some Catholic academics do seems like a good idea, I have some strong reservations about it. Much depends on what is sworn, and how. Given how so much of the leadership of the Church is thin-skinned on criticism (to be polite) my concern is that any oath to obey, support, or other the Magisterium or the authority of the Bishop of Rome could (and sadly I suspect would) be twisted such that any disagreement, or any report they don’t like, is a violation of the oath.

I do think that media claiming to be Catholic media needs to be held to a higher standard on matters of the Faith and the doctrines of the Church. Then again, I think all media needs to be held to some minimum standards on honesty, accuracy, and other matters. I agree with Bree that we need to hold journalists to at least the standards we would hold a child doing a book report. Preferably more. When I left journalism many moons ago, I was delighted to discover that public relations not only had a much stronger code of ethics, but that unlike journalism they actually enforced it. At least they did at that time, no idea about today. Modern journalism talks (a lot), but does not walk the walk.

Catholic Media needs to walk the walk. If they are to claim that they are a Catholic organization/publication/whatever, then they need to be held at least to the standards expected of any member of the Faith. Disagreement and discussion are allowed in the Faith within certain constraints. It is how the Church grows and expands the understanding of God’s Word. To that end, those that stray need to be dealt with by the spiritual methods as outlined in the Catechism, not by secular means.

*****

If you would like to help me in my recovery efforts, which include moving to the SW, feel free to hit the fundraiser at A New Life on GiveSendGo. Getting hit by lightning is not fun, and it is thanks to your gifts and prayers that I am still going. Thank you.