Answering a Sweeping Question with Dr.Kreeft

I recently ran across this comment on another blog:

“I’d like to learn more about this God. Are you suggesting that I read the Bible and follow the teachings of the Catholic Church in order to accomplish this? If so, why?”

It’s a sweeping question. Based on other comments from this person the question may have been posed more in sarcasm than sincerity, but whatever the case it certainly cuts to the chase. The question reminded me of a good answer from a book I read called “Jacobs ladder: 10 Steps to Truth” by Dr. Peter Kreeft.

 

Unlike aspects of this blog that tend to lead with the head in hopes that the heart will follow, Dr. Kreeft’s book seems to lead more with the heart, and the answer does not start with the Bible or the Catholic Church.  I thought I would share some notes and thoughts on this 10-step logic path in hopes that it can assist anyone with the sometimes difficult journey from the the heart to the head.

 

STEP 1: Passion

This is the first rung of the ladder. Humans get passionate about transcendent things like “the good”, “the beautiful” and “the true” and we all know the difference between true passion and just “interest”.

Many are passionate about morals or justice (the good). Others have their passion in art, literature (blogging?), music, dance, theater, athleticism or nature (the beautiful). Still others have a passion for technology, science, math, problem solving or discovery (the true). This is also how we know we are different than animals. Not even our closest animal relatives show evidence for having passion for “the good”, “the beautiful” and “the true”.

 

 

But passion alone can ignite anything it touches. It’s like blind power. This is why it is very dangerous to stop at step one. Adolf Hitler had passion. Imagine if his passion was driven by love instead of hate. Maybe we would be calling him Saint Hitler today.

STEP 2: Truth

If you are truly passionate, it’s not a big step to get to the second rung of the ladder and accept objective truth as something real. Holding truths to be self-evident, as the founders of this nation wrote, is different than a personal belief or opinion. If you are passionate in holding the truth that genocide is wrong, you will not accept relativistic terms like “it’s wrong for me” or “it’s wrong in our culture”. No, it is wrong…period. Just like a physical law, genocide being wrong is something universal and unchangeable.

STEP 3: Meaning

Once we consent to the existence of at least some objective truth, the acceptance of some meaning or purpose behind it all is not a far leap either. All people desire lasting happiness and the truths that we hold are meant to lead us to happiness. We use our heads and our hearts in the pursuit of that happiness that will ultimately lead us to the meaning of life.

 

STEP 4: Love

If we are only physical beings, then it stands to reason that only physical things are needed to keep us happy. Outward abundance and physical pleasure should satisfy us fully and bring lasting happiness, but they don’t. We seek more; we seek love and love is not the same as “good feelings”. If it were, we could say that taking drugs, which result in good feelings, is what true love is all about.

So what kind of love are we looking for? It’s unconditional, unselfish and sacrificial love. This kind of love involves more than feelings. It requires willing the good of the other, so it requires an act of the will or a choice. So love comes from an act of the will and it brings lasting happiness to everyone and is thus the meaning of life.

 

“If you find the meaning of life, you’ve found something more precious than the little time it took you to find it, because you’ve found the meaning of ALL your times.”

― Dr. Peter Kreeft
 

STEP 5: Principles (law)

Humans live in organized societies which are guided according to certain principles and those principles are reflected in the laws. If love is the meaning of life that will bring lasting happiness, then the law should be love’s servant, not love’s masters; love’s ally, not love’s enemy. Good laws would support and be consistent with the natural law of love. Bad laws would undermine love and thus be unnatural.

STEP 6: God

If there is sunlight, there must be a sun. There are always the traditional proofs for the existence of God, like how the creation proves the Creator or the design proves the Designer, but in the context of these steps God is not a far leap of faith after step 5. If one has accepted objective truth or morals that are not sourced from human opinion (step 2), then there must be a truth giver of some sort. If love is from the will and is the meaning of life (steps 3&4) there must be a first lover and a first “willer”. If there is a natural law (step 5) there must be a natural law giver.
 

“…they told you that love is just down here, under the clouds; so when you climb up high enough, beyond the clouds, to places you can’t see from down here, you won’t find love but something else.”

― Dr. Peter Kreeft

 

STEP 7: The Jews

Why doesn’t this God revel himself publicly? Well, He did, and in a big way. God revealed himself publicly to both believers and non-believers when establishing the nation of Israel. The Hebrew people were few and weak, but broke out of bondage and survived for thousands of years even with many powerful nations wanting to destroy them. They received and passed on the greatest moral code in history (10 commandments) which the world still lives by today.

They taught us that God is one, a person, a creator, eternal, perfect, faithful and loving. This notion of god or gods did not come from the Egyptians, Romans, Greeks or anyone else in history. They taught us that God loves us and wants us to love Him and each other in return. This fits with the meaning of life we concluded in step 4.

STEP 8: Christ

The Jews were expecting a savior as can be read about in the Old Testament. Other religious figures like Buddha or Mohammad were not anticipated ahead of their birth and certainly did not make the radical claims or do the radical things that Jesus did. God went public once again in the person of Jesus through many public miracles and a public resurrection with many witnesses.

Although many Jews were expecting a political savior, a savior that can free us from sin through sacrificial love makes more sense in the logic of life we are following. Sin is what separates us from God which means we are separated from the source of love. Since we are saying love is the meaning of life (step 4), it makes sense that we need to be freed from sin to travel properly from passion (step 1) all the way up to God (step 6).

STEP 9: Catholic Church

Jesus was concrete. He was historical, visible and authoritative, so it stands to reason that His Church would also be concrete, historical, visible and authoritative. He didn’t wait for us to invent a church of our own. Jesus authorized His Apostles and they in turn authorized their own successors. The two big reasons for believing the Catholic Church is to be sure to get Jesus right and to be sure to get the Bible right. Jesus founded a Church, not a book.

STEP 10: Authority

We need the authority of the Church when reason isn’t enough. Things like the Trinity or the cannon of scripture cannot come from reason alone and certainly cannot come from the Bible alone. All Church creeds are basically answers to heresies of the past.

If you reject step 10, you must water-down or completely reject step 9 and so on with the other steps, all the way back to rejecting step1,  which leaves you nowhere, and that’s where many people are today.

It is inconsistent to have…

• Authority without a Church…or a Church without authority
• The Church without Christ…or Christ without a Church
• Christ without Jews…or Jews without a Christ
• Jews without God…or God without Jews
• God without laws…or laws without God
• Law without love…or love without law
• Love without meaning…or meaning without love
• Meaning without truth…or truth without meaning
• Truth without passion…or passion without truth

Please take the time to read and explore the 10 Steps to Truth in their totality!

 

 

Catholic Evangelization

I recently read Dr Scott Hahn's new book Evangelizing Catholics: A Mission Manual for the New Evangelization and was again swept away with his clear and accessible prose, and again by the scope of his vision.

This book describes how the Kerygmatic movement of the 1950's began a change in the Church that gained momentum in Vatican II and began to sprout through Pope St John Paul II.  The heart of this movement (as indicated by the word kerygma) is evangelization, or the proclamation of the Gospel.

Dr Hahn goes on to describe just how evangelization is carried out, both in word and in deed, emphasizing that, while a silent witness can be effective, this in no way frees Catholics from the obligation of using speech.


We are reminded that evangelization is often associated with the work of Protestant Christians, but that all Christians are expected to take part in bringing others to Christ.


This is where he brings out how Catholic evangelization differs from Protestant evangelization.  Catholic evangelization is Eucharistic.  He unpacks statements by Pope St John Paul II and Francis Cardinal George that Catholic evangelizers proclaim a "Eucharistic Christ."  In short, the simplest street corner or coffee table evangelism to bring a person to Christ is in four parts:

1. God loves us
2. We have sinned
3. Christ has died and risen to save us
4. We have to respond with faith

That may be where evangelism in practice ends.  In Protestant thought, that person is "saved" and cannot be un-saved.

Catholic evangelism, in order to be Eucharistic, must go further.  How?  This kind of evangelism is more of an ongoing and deepening relationship with Jesus.  Dr Hahn likens this process to the three-part movement towards marriage.

1. Courtship.  In this movement, a person is introduced to the other and begins to get to know the other.  Interests are piqued and time is spent together enjoying each other's company. This is analogous to the initial evangelization where a person learns about Jesus and how Jesus wants to be part of his or her life.  The person is evangelized.
2. Engagement.  In this movement, the person takes a step forward and declares a certain conditional exclusivity to the other.  He or she is thinking about making a commitment and really focuses on whether the other is the person with whom he or she will spend the rest of their life.  This is analogous to an RCIA program where tough questions are asked and a full understanding of the obligations and perhaps quirks of the relationship are revealed.  The person is catechized.
3. Marriage.  In this movement, the person makes a commitment to non-conditional exclusivity with the other.  For better or worse, richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, until death us do part.  This commitment until death is one where each person lives self-sacrificially for the other.  Every day an effort must be made to deepen the understanding, trust, and mutual availability for the other.  A natural consequence of this mutual love and intimacy is the production of new life though children.  This is analogous to being sacramentally brought into the Church and sustained via the sacraments.  A natural consequence of this deepening relationship of trust of and intimacy with Jesus is evangelization.  The person is sacramentalized.

Note that the final movement is not a once-and-done event.  It is ongoing. This is how evangelization is Eucharistic, it is sacramental in that it culminates (but does not end) with the creation of a new family and new life.  This is what sacraments DO!

In a related way, the concept of this book that grabbed me by the lapels and got in my face was something that I am sure I knew, but heard so differently here. It is what it means to be "saved." The question "have you been saved?" is one many of us have been asked and is an entrée to street evangelization. This phrase is where it hit: "Salvation is more than about being forgiven."

If we are fallen people, guilty of sin and going to hell because of it, we need forgiveness. Forgiveness is the washing away of our guilt, giving us entrance into heaven, right?  Not quite. How would being forgiven give us entrance to heaven?

Dr Hahn uses an analogy. Suppose my car breaks down and my mechanic finds two problems and agrees to fix them.  Now when I go to pick up the car, I find that only one problem had been fixed. If I then go back and complain, the mechanic will apologize for the mistake and I will forgive him. However, I will NOT take him home and write him into my will and make him a part of my family!!

Salvation is nothing less than sacramental adoption into God's family.  This means that not ONLY am I forgiven, I am made an heir. (Rom 8:17)  All that God has is mine and I am unconditionally loved.  Heaven is a state where I am living as a child of God.  Where can this happen?  After I am dead?  Nope! God has ordained that this happens here on earth in his Church.  At Mass, in the Eucharist, we are taken to heaven, joined in worship and at a meal with the rest of our family, the saints living and dead. The marriage supper of the Lamb is OUR wedding feast, because it is sacramental, it is Eucharistic! 

Let the feast begin!  And bring your friends!

Let the Fire Fall!

As today is Pentecost, I thought it would be a good idea to recall the post on the Holy Spirit that I wrote last summer.   The Holy Spirit's character is viewed through the lens of "availability" as understood by theologian Khaled Anatolios.  

Take a look back here and may you have a blessed and fruitful Pentecost!

The Maniac

G.K. Chesterton would have been 140 years old on May 29. Although he passed on a bit short of that mark (June 14, 1936), even the most resolute atheist would admit that he lives on through all his writings. There are quite a few things lurking in this blog inspired by Chesterton. Sadly, I’ve only read one of his books from cover to cover (so far), but it’s a classic; it’s Orthodoxy.

Orthodoxy means “right teaching”, which is the opposite of what we have today where we act as if there is no “right” and no “teaching”, but we do find plenty of heresy or heterodoxy, which means “other teaching”. Chapter II of Orthodoxy is entitled The Maniac and it begins with a popular other teaching we often hear today. It’s the individualistic philosophy that a person will get along fine in life if he just believes in himself. There is nothing wrong with self-confidence, but could we not write “He Believed in Himself” over the grave of every famous tyrant in history? Could we not find criminals, oppressors and terrorists today who believe in themselves? Could we not find people in insane asylums who believe in themselves?

Anyone can believe in himself, and in a culture that denies objective truth all opinions become equally valid, even the opinion of a maniac. In this environment basic terms cannot be defined because the definitions are relative, and having well defined terms is a first step in logic. So reasoning with a maniac about what “believe in yourself” really means can be the catalyst for an endless game of “point-counterpoint”.

“A madman is not someone who has lost his reason but someone who has lost everything but his reason”

 – G.K. Chesterton

 

Examples:

• If you have children you may be familiar with “point-counterpoint”. Once, my son was bothering my oldest daughter by touching her. I said, “Stop touching her.” He said, “I did not touch her.” I replied, “I just saw you!” He said, “I touched her shirt, not her.” Of course, my daughter just happened to be wearing the shirt he was touching. From here we could have gotten into an insane discussion (or demonstration) about what would constitute touching someone, but I wasn’t in the mood for games.
• This need not be only a game for children. I’m reminded of the trouble former President Bill Clinton got into in the late 90’s with a certain female intern which caused him to say, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is."
• One might think it easy to be clear about such simple words as “touching” and “is”, but maniacs can be great reasoners. Imagine someone suffering from paranoia says to you, “Everyone wants to kill me.” You respond, “I don’t want to kill you." The person answers, “Of course you would say that to keep your evil plan a secret.” There is logic there. The explanation covers the facts.

“If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment.”

– G.K. Chesterton

 

The above examples may seem humorous, but the consequences are no laughing matter when the maniac engages the very basics of life, family and what it means to be human. When does human life begin? Both science and faith point to the moment of conception, but the maniac will look elsewhere. What is marriage? Whatever we want it to be? If it can mean anything, then it means nothing, so we demand some kind of definition via laws and definitions always require limits. How do we know if the limits are right or wrong? Cultural consensus becomes the infallible guarantee that all is well with whatever opinion the majority has. The underlying problem is that we demand laws, limits and morals without God. It’s like demanding electricity and then denying the existence of a generator.
 

A clever analogy between the sun and the moon was given at the end of the chapter to compare reason grounded in God (orthodoxy) vs. reason grounded in man (heterodoxy). God is our ultimate source of reason just like the sun is our ultimate source of energy. The sun provides both light and heat, but it is impossible to look at it directly. We call its shape round, but as we wince at it and try to trace out its exact shape with our eyes, we can’t do it. It’s too much for us. It’s both shining and shapeless. Like a mystery, we can’t define it perfectly.
 

Whatever light we receive from the moon is secondary light that ultimately comes from the sun, although one might think at first glance that moonlight has nothing to do with sunlight. The moon reflects light off of a dead world and gives no warmth, but at the same time the moon is quite reasonable. Its circular shape is clear and unmistakable.
 

“The moon is the mother of lunatics and has given to them all her name.”

– G.K. Chesterton
 

So how can one finally reason with the maniac? Other than presenting orthodoxy and insisting upon well-defined terms and premises (both stated & assumed), I really don’t know. At times it seems to be more about casting out demons than debating philosophies and facts. As far as a final solution, I’ll need to think about it and get back to you.

I’ll just sit here until I figure all this out.

 

What's in 100,000 Digital Touches?

We finally reached 100,000 hits or “digital touches” as we like to say. Of course, some blogs may do this in one day for all we know, and some hits are spam or just the two of us clicking around the blog. So what’s the big deal?

Well, I would think 100,000 hits represent at least a few hundred different people reading about Catholic Faith & Reason and that’s no small thing. Regardless of the real numbers, this blog has always been a place where two or more are gathered, so thanks for caring and thanks for sharing.

Here’s a little more about us:

The Two Catholic Men are fellow parishioners, neighbors and good friends like this…

 

 

We are studious like this…

 

Loyal to the Church like this…

 

We “assist” misguided blog commenters like this…

Joe & Ben vs. random "wrong-person"

 

Sometimes stubborn like this…

 

Anti-Catholics find us curiously disturbing like this…

 

That’s OK; we find them curiously disturbing like this…

 

…yet we maintain a joyful worldview like this...

 

 

Last, but certainly not least, we’re grateful to God like this…

Thanks for visiting!!!

 

What do you mean by...?

One of the first steps of a problem solving process is to be clear on meaning. If one were to say X is not working right or Y is acting funny, the specific meaning of “not working right” or “acting funny” must be separated and clarified. We separate to see if there is actually more than one issue being lumped together as if it were one, and we clarify to get the most specific meaning possible.

This requires a dynamic back and forth communication between the information source (the person with the problem) and the information gatherer (problem solver). A one-time static communication almost never works out well. This kind of thing was demonstrated very well by apologist Patrick Madrid in a Lighthouse Catholic Media CD using what appears to be a very straight forward and simple sentence. Consider the statement, “I didn’t say you stole the money.” It seems clear enough. What could possibly be misinterpreted about it?

• Suppose we put the emphasis on the word “I” so we have “I didn’t say you stole the money”. This could mean that I am not accusing you, but someone else is.

• Now put the emphasis on the word “you” and we have “I didn’t say YOU stole the money”. This could mean that I am not saying you did it, but I am saying someone else did.

• Put the emphasis on the word “stole” and we have “I didn’t say you STOLE the money”. This could mean that I am not saying you stole it, but I am saying you did something else with it, like wasted it.

• Put the emphasis on the word “money” and we have “I didn’t say you stole the MONEY”. This could mean that I am not saying you stole money, but I am saying you stole something else.

If you were not present to hear the emphasis on any particular word or to ask some clarifying questions, the true meaning of the statement would be lost. The same can be true of the statements found in the Bible. How do we know we have it right when we can’t go back in time and ask the author, “What do you mean by…?”

Consider a simple word like “believe” in the famous verse… “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life” (John 3:16). It goes on in verse 18… “Whoever believes in him will not be condemned, but whoever does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.” A verse from today's gospel is not as famous, but just as relevant. “Jesus answered and said to them, ‘This is the work of God, that you believe in the one he sent.’” (John 6:29).

 

So what does it mean to believe? It would seem that we need to be very clear about the precise meaning of this word. Is it just an intellectual or factual belief, like believing the earth is round or believing that two and two make four? James 2:19 says “You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble.” So if the demons can believe, should we believe the same way they do?
 

Other verses seem to clearly link our belief to what we do, like in James 2:20-26. These verses link what Abraham did, in offering up his son, to his belief in God (see also Romans 4:3 & Gal 3:6)

Sometimes it is helpful to think of opposites when trying to understand something. If we need to better understand the color white, it helps to study the color black. If we find out that black is the absence of visible light, it helps us to understand how white contains all the wavelengths of visible light at equal intensity. What would be the opposite of belief? Disbelief? John 3:36 suggests that disobedience is the opposite of belief, “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever disobeys the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon him.” Again, our belief seems to be linked to what we do, or don’t do, as opposed to merely agreeing to some concept intellectually.

This is not meant to be a biblical study on the concept of Christian Justification, but just an illustration of how static words on a page are subject to human interpretation. When our nation’s founding fathers wrote the Constitution, why did they bother to form a Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution? Did they not understand what they were writing? Did they not know how to express themselves? Could not future generations just read the words and understand what to believe and what to do in terms of governing a nation?

One can argue that the Bible is the living Word of God, not dead words on paper, and the true believer is guided by the Holy Spirit to the correct interpretation. In this case, all the disagreements among Christians and all the different denominations can be explained by people not listening to or misinterpreting the Holy Spirit. Of course this begs the question, who should I listen to if I cannot question the Holy Spirit directly? I’m afraid the answer in many cases becomes “Whoever agrees with me” and thus we make ourselves God. This is why Jesus founded a Church, not a book. We could all take a lesson in humility from an Ethiopian eunuch who lived long ago. He got it!

“Philip ran up and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and said, ‘Do you understand what you are reading?’ He replied, ‘How can I, unless someone instructs me?’” (Acts 8:30-31)

 

 

Got Just 3 Words for You

There is much talk about Jesus during Holy week and the Easter season that follows, even from secular sources. All the homilies & sermons, all the writings & scripture and even all the movies & television shows about Jesus can be distilled down into three basic elements expressed by these words – Way, Truth and Life, and these three words describe what mankind has lost just as precisely as a key fits a lock.

A most curious point is how Jesus describes himself as the way, the truth and the life using the curious phrase “I am”. If someone were to say I have or I know the way, the truth and the life, we must study what they have or what they know if we want to obtain it. Who that person actually is would be of secondary importance if any importance at all. Consider an ordinary teacher; the knowledge he or she is trying to covey in class is our primary concern. The person teaching is not the focus and a substitute teacher is possible to find. If someone were to say, however, I am the way, the truth and the life, then we must study who that person IS. “I am” relates to “who” as knowing or having relates to “what”. Christ does not simply give us the way, the truth and the life and then leave us to follow as best we can. He gives us Himself, for He is all three and there is no substitute.

WAY:

There is a problem. The way is closed. There is a chasm. We live in a fallen world. We cannot see God face to face as we are. Jesus is the bridge that reaches across the chasm between God and man. Think of the way as a road to salvation that was closed, but is now open for everyone to travel on. Of course, if one holds that there is no way or the way it is not relevant, then for them, it is as if the way were still closed.

TRUTH:

Once the way is open, how do we navigate it? Once a road is open we don’t just wander around it like lost sheep hoping to get somewhere eventually. A road always has a direction and a way of traveling upon it. There are lines and boundaries; there are signs and lights to obey. There are other travelers to consider. We cannot understand the road if we do not understand the rules of the road. We need truth to guide us on the journey. So how can we know the truth as we travel? How about the Bible? That’s a good start, but not a good end. The Bible will ultimately point to something else. “…the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” (1 Tim 3:15) Of course this begs the question “Which church?”, since there are so many and they all have different road rules, but this is a question for other posts. See HERE and HERE.

LIFE:

If Jesus is the life, and we wish to live, then He must live in us. The strength of man alone is not enough to walk the way. Imagine you were to travel to Mars just as you are. Not only would you never be able to live on Mars, but you would not even survive the journey. The long journey to Mars would require many special systems, equipment & supplies to sustain your physical life. In the same way our souls cannot travel back to God unaided. We need a supernatural life.

 

• Baptism is the birth or beginning point of the supernatural life.
• We can receive daily nourishment for the journey via the Eucharist, which is none other than the Lord himself as our food.
• Just like the body needs healing from sickness & injury on a long and difficult journey, our souls need healing from sin on our supernatural journey, so the Lord gives us the sacrament of Reconciliation.
• The Journey is long. We need to grow and mature while we travel, so we are equipped with the Grace given at Confirmation.
• As we grow and mature in our supernatural life, we are responsible to help others along on this challenging voyage. Our vocation helps us to advance the entire Kingdom of God forward.
• There is even a special Grace near the end of our journey to help us finish well. The anointing of the Sick.

 “In three words Way, Truth, Life, Our Lord sums up what He is. In the same three words we may summarize what He did. He opened to men the way of salvation, gave them the truth by which that might know the way, and the life by which they might travel it.”

- Frank Sheed from Theology and Sanity.

Much in this post was inspired by lay apologist Frank Sheed. We all need some Sheed!!

Frank Sheed 1897 - 1982