The Common Language of Doubt

Don't you doubt me.

This is a post from June 2012 that was re-published when I was changing some things on the blog. I honestly don't know what happened; it suddenly appeared as the most recent post. Maybe someone needed to see this post today.  If not a miracle, I must have hit "publish" by mistake. Oh well....enjoy.

Here is another insight inspired by Professor Ratzinger from his book Introduction to Christianity and the scripture verse, “When they saw him, they worshiped, but they doubted.” (Matthew 28:17).


I remember having a metaphysical discussion with a secular friend about morality. The question in play was, “Does morality actually exist?” He answered, “Yes, but it’s only a concept.” I paused a moment and said, “Are you comfortable teaching your kids that?” I could see the doubt creeping into his eyes as he answered, “No.”

Doubt is something we all relate to. From the Twelve who walked with Jesus, to some of the greatest saints, to the most orthodox atheist, doubt is a part of our reality. It would be very strange if a finite being with a finite mind never experienced doubt. In fact, I’d say having absolutely no doubts at all might be a clear sign of insanity.

Here are some thoughts paraphrased a bit from Introduction to Christanity, chapter 1, Belief in the World of Today…

Just as the believer can have reservations about his faith, the nonbeliever is troubled by doubts about his unbelief; about the real totality of the world he has made-up in his mind to explain as a self-contained whole. There is no escape from the dilemma of being man. Anyone who makes up his mind to evade the uncertainty of belief will have to experience the uncertainty of UNbelief.

The rivalry between doubt and belief, temptation and certainty exists for all of us. Perhaps this way of doubt, which saves both sides from being shut up in their own worlds, could become an avenue of communication. It prevents both sides from enjoying complete satisfaction; it opens up the believer to the doubter and the doubter to the believer. For one, it is his way of sharing in the fate of the unbeliever; for the other, the form in which belief remains a challenge to him.

Belief has an adventurous “risk-leap” about it and it is helped by our own effort and will. Like John the Baptist we ask, “Are you really He, or shall we look for another?” We pose the question not only out of intellectual honesty & reason’s responsibility, but also in accordance with the interior law of love, which wants to know more and more about Him to whom it has given its “Yes”, so as to be able to love Him more.

Are you really He?

Sacrifice and the Greater Good

Today on relevant Radio, I listened for a short time and heard Fr Rocky answer a question regarding the difference between the heart, spirit and soul in relation to the body and mind.

He deftly gave the clear Thomist answers but then took it a step further.  He said that the soul (or spirit) is the differentiator that gives humans reason and free will.  Two of the faculties of the soul are the intellect (mind) and the will (often synonymous with the heart).


(Here is the archive link.)

Here's where he develops it further.  Religions usually contain some form of sacrifice.  As we look at religion with all its varied acts of sacrifice, the highest sacrifice is the Sacrifice of the Mass.

As Catholics we employ sacrifice all the time.  Fasting is the sacrifice of the body desire to eat.  Celibacy is the sacrifice of the sexual urge.  These sacrifices exercise our self-control.






How does this relate to the Will and the Intellect?

The sacrifice of the Intellect is Faith.  The Intellect is the striving to know.  To discover and to contain all it can find.  It is a temptation of the Intellect to believe ONLY what it can apprehend (through the senses).  Conversely, the logical fallacy is that if it is not sensible, then it does not exist.   Faith then, is letting go of knowing only what I can perceive.  It is the accepting of knowledge GIVEN to me rather than acquired by me.  It is other-centered and trust-based.

The sacrifice of the Will is Obedience.  The Will is the choice maker, the part of me that decides whether to do this or that.  The temptation of the Will is to be the captain of my own destiny.  To decide that MY wishes are the ends towards which the whole world ought to work.   Obedience then, is the letting go of my wants and desires.  To act as if another's wishes are actually mine.  To make their goals, my goals and their tasks, mine.  Again, it is other-centered and trust-based.

The sacrifice of the Heart is Love.  Since Love is a decision, you love from the Will.  You decide whether to love someone or not.  The temptation is to treat love as an emotion and love when you feel like it and refrain from loving when you do not.  Love then, is the letting go of whether the person is lovable, and loving them anyway.  Deciding to act loving when it's not merited, deserved or even wanted is to truly Love.


What I see from this wonderful insight is that the act of sacrificing something is an indicator of the intrinsic value of the thing sacrificed.  Food, sex, knowledge and choice, are all powerful and GOOD.  Practicing the sacrifice of them makes us better, and orients us toward the ultimate Good, God.

An Election Appraisal

Here is one more election related post that may have little to do with faith, but a lot to do with reason. There is a logic method I teach where I work called Situation Appraisal. Its purpose is to sort out priority concerns and it answers the question “What is going on?” It can help a confused Catholic voter sort out and prioritize many issues at once (at least for themselves). Here is how it works with an everyday example:

Step 1: List any concerns as vague as you want.

Ø  Every day example: I hate my car

Step 2: Separate & Clarify:
We ask questions to restate unclear concerns into specific elements to help minimize/alleviate over-generalizations and rationality overloaded by feelings. Whether questioning another or yourself, remember that the goal is NOT to solve a problem; the goal is to bring clarity. Any concern should be questioned until it is difficult or even impossible to give it more than one meaning. This is done with probing, open questions like “why”, “what do you mean by”, “what concerns you about”, “what else”.

Ø  I hate my car (this can mean many things)

- Why?

            - It doesn’t work well.

- What’s wrong?

            - It vibrates at highway speeds

- What else?

            - It’s bad on gas mileage

- What else?

            - That’s it.

“I hate my car” was separated & clarified in to two specific concerns; a vibration that happens at highway speed & poor gas mileage.

Step 3: Consider Current Impact, Future Impact and Time Frame
For each clarified concern we ask, what is the current impact or seriousness? What is the future impact or growth (or what is likely to happen if nothing is done)? What is the time frame or urgency (when does it become too late)?

Concern	Current Impact	Future Impact	Time Frame
Car has vibration at high speed	It’s annoying	Vibration will destroy my new tries	A few weeks until the tires are destroyed
Car has poor gas mileage	Spending $40/mo too much on gas	Going into debt $40/mo	6 months until out of extra money

Step 4: Make a Comparative Evaluation.
Compare & prioritize each column one at a time, and then look at all three columns at once for the big picture.

Concern	Current Impact	Future Impact	Time Frame	Result
Car has vibration at high speed	Annoying LOWER	New tires destroyed HIGHER	A few weeks HIGHER	2 Higher 1 Lower
Car has poor gas mileage	Spending $40/mo too much on gas HIGHER	Going into debt LOWER	6 months LOWER	1 Higher 2 Low

The car vibration issue becomes the top priority concern since it was given 2 highs and 1 low, so we address this concern first.

This same kind of logic can be applied to a Catholic considering election issues:

PLEASE NOTE: This is only an example of hypothetical voter opinion.

Step 1: List any concerns:

Ø  Life Issues

Ø  Religious Liberty

Ø  Social Justice

Step 2: Separate & Clarify:

Ø  Life Issues

- What specific life issues concern you?

            - Abortion & Death Penalty

- What else?

            - That’s it

- What’s concerns you about abortion?

            - That it is legal. Abortion should be illegal.

- What concerns you about the death penalty?

            - God is the author of life, so the death penalty should be outlawed.

Ø  Religious Liberty

- What is your religious liberty concern?

            - HHS Mandate will cause Catholics to violate their conscience or be fined.

- What else?

            - That’s it.

Ø  Social Justice

- What concerns you about this?

            - Healthcare

- What about healthcare?

            - Many Americans can’t afford insurance.

- What else concerns you about Social Justice?

            - Nothing else.

 

“Life Issues” was separated & clarified into two specific concerns; legalized abortion & the death penalty. “Religious Liberty” was clarified to the HHS mandate. “Social Justice” was clarified to healthcare coverage for those who cannot afford it.

Step 3: Consider Current Impact, Future Impact and Time Frame

Concern	Current Impact	Future Impact	Time Frame
Legalized Abortion	Over 1 million babies killed per year (U.S.)	Over 1 million more killed per year, every year	No specific time limit
Death penalty	<50 executions per year in recent years	About 50 more per year, every year	No specific time limit
HHS Mandate	Law suits taking time & money	Many Catholic Institutions forced to close. Higher cost to government to fill the gap	A few years for the full impact
Healthcare for the poor	Tens of millions do not get basic care	Preventable sicknesses left unchecked cause suffering & higher healthcare cost	No specific time limit

Step 4: Make a Comparative Evaluation

Concern	Current Impact	Future Impact	Time Frame	Result
Legalized Abortion	Over 1 million babies killed per year (U.S.) HIGH	Over 1 million more per year, every year HIGH	No specific time limit LOW (none)	2-High 0-Med 1-Low
Death penalty	<50 executions per year MEDUIM	About 50 more per year, every year LOW	No specific time limit LOW (none)	0-High 1-Med 2-Low
HHS Mandate	Law suits taking time & money LOW	Many Catholic Institutions forced to close. Higher cost to government to fill the gap MEDIUM	A few years to feel the full impact HIGH	1-High 1-Med 1-Low
Healthcare for the poor	Tens of millions do not have health insurance MEDUIM	Preventable sicknesses left unchecked cause more suffering & higher healthcare cost HIGH	No specific time limit LOW (none)	1-High 1-Med 1-Low

So for this hypothetical voter, abortion becomes the top priority concern, followed by the HHS mandate & healthcare coverage with the death penalty coming in last. The voter can then compare a candidate’s position to these priorities.

A full list of clarified election issues would be much longer than in our example, but it is hard to imagine any concern that has a greater current & future impact than the slaughter of over one million innocent lives this year and every year. Even if we added in the concern of over 20 million unemployed people, at least they are alive and have the legal right to remain so. Of course, the spiritual impact of a nation that allows this kind of killing is difficult to measure even in a detailed appraisal like this.

Remember that the purpose of Situation Appraisal is NOT to actually solve the concerns; it is meant for clarity. Clarity of thought and prioritization brings focus to any state of affairs, no matter how complex. Using an appraisal like this in the context of our faith can give us true clarity to act by the reality of things, and there is a word that describes acting by the reality of things very well; that word is…“sanity”.

Thoughts on Third Party Voting

There is no such thing as throwing a vote away in the literal sense. The value of one vote is the value of one vote, no matter how one would like to spin the logic. Catholics should not have blind loyalties to any political party. If we derive our identity this way, we will give that group unquestioned loyalty because the sense of belonging will give us feelings of security, pleasure and power. Our cultural and emotional conditioning to a political party can become like a mask covering our true face.

Many Catholics reject the Democratic Party and understandably so. Abortion-on-demand and same-sex marriage are now part of the platform. Additionally, new developments like the HHS mandate clearly show us the intolerance of relativism. If you have your truth and I have mine, there is no point in trying to use reason to argue. Relativism creates a stale-mate. All that is left is “might-makes-right” if there is going to be any movement. Agree to violate your beliefs or be fined by the government. Hard to believe it has come to this.

Many Catholics see the Republican Party as better, but still unacceptable. They are not exactly a collection of saints either. Abortion is commonly accepted by many Republicans to one degree or another. Catholics may feel that Republicans are much less likely to be concerned about the poor & disadvantaged, and perhaps more likely to start unjust wars.

Given all this, a fair question comes to mind. Is supporting a third party candidate the best way to go? We all want to be good stewards of our citizenship, but what can we compare third party voting to in this current presidential election?

What about a food analogy? We are starving and must vote on what food we can receive. Food A is mostly rotten (say 75%), food B is about half rotten (50%), and food C is pure. Food A and B can be quickly & easily delivered by local suppliers. Food C has no supplier. Although food C is real and can be obtained if enough people can be persuaded to help, there is no way to build a consensus & a supply-chain in time. We need food now. Where will your vote go? Should you vote at all? The best choice may be to take what is best about food B for now, and continue to push for food C or an equivalent afterwards.

How about a runaway train headed toward a fork in the track? Taking the left track will kill two children playing on the tracks; taking the right track will kill one child also playing on the tracks. There is a third track that you can see that is perfectly safe for everyone, but it is not connected to the track you are currently on. The third track is real and is a perfect solution if there was only enough time to convince enough people to help construct a connection, but you need to decide what to do right now.



Boycott?
Jiminy Cricket!

I also remember hearing about the Baptist Disney boycott on Catholic radio years ago.They argued against the boycott for the following reason. The point of boycotting is to non-violently persuade an organization to do things your way, but it can back fire. If Christians reject Disney entirely, the company may focus more on the secular portion of their market to make up for lost business. For example, how about a new animated movie about two princes or two princesses falling in love and getting “married” and living happily ever after. Instead of boycotting, the case made was that Christians should support Disney entrainment that is consistent with Christian values and reject anything that is not.

The same kind of logic can apply if Catholics or Christians completely reject the Republican Party. Republicans would still want to win, so they could try to appeal to the more secular portion of society as a “business decision”. Perhaps adopt a pro-choice and same-sex marriage platform similar to the Democrats. After all, one rule of success is to emulate the winners. They could still differentiate themselves from Democrats by focusing on smaller government, fiscal responsibility, strong military, etc. Any help protecting conscience rights/religious freedom would obviously be forgotten about. Instead of “boycotting” the Republican Party, perhaps the wisest choice is to take what is better, but continue to lobby for what is best.

There is also the logic that says one single vote doesn’t matter anyway, but what if every Catholic reasoned liked this? The reality is we can affect many votes if we include our sphere of influence among family, friends, co-works, church, blogosphere, etc. A voting block is made from individual votes, just like a building is made of individual bricks. Just consider the voting power in following Q&A*…..

Q: How many Catholics are in the U.S.?
A: About 77.7 million (I like how it’s #7 three times; very symbolic).

Q: How many people does it take to elect an American President?
A: Less than 70 million.
*source: Wikipedia


All in all, a vote is another brick in the wall.

In the end, debates about candidates and political parties are endless. Beyond any discussion about voting, it should be made clear that if we can evangelize the culture around us, the rest will take care of itself. The election will soon be over, and regardless of who wins, our work is still cut out for us because too many will still not see the reality of our faith or how to act in accordance with it.