Metaphysical Quote of the Day

I recently struggled through Fr. Spitzers’ book entitled “New Proofs for the Existence of God”. The new Pope should give this priest the new title of “Utmost Scary-Smart” since his book is bursting with such heavy physics and metaphysics; it often had me in a physical posture similar to this:

Glad I’m done. Walking around the house like this
was starting to scare the wife & kids.

Joe prefers pod casts from Fr. Spitzer; see his post HERE. I will post some things I can relate to from the book in the near future; things that I can connect to other things. Since I need time for my brain to recover (from the parts I could actually understand), I’ll just share this quote for now:

“An apprehension of truth entails seeing unity amongst differences, for any act of understanding involves a comparison, and comparison involves bringing together distinct images or ideas.”

OR, as G.K. Chesterton likes to put it, “Thinking means connecting things”. It is true of material things as well as spiritual things and they come together eventually if you keep digging. In the words of physicist Werner Heisenberg, “The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you.”

I’d challenge members of the new internet generation to read this book because it goes deep; it’s the exact opposite of “surfing”, so it may be quite a shock for “surface-dwellers”.

God? But the internet told me we
come from nothing for the purpose of nothing. 

 

It's Still Alive!

Continuing the notion from the last post of the Church as a living body, let us compare a person as an infant to the same person as an adult; the changes over time are staggering. In fact, no one would even recognize you as an infant unless they knew you and knew your history. Even a super intelligent extraterrestrial could think a human as an infant, and the same human as an adult, are two different people.

So let’s imagine an alien has, in fact, come to earth. It does not understand how humans grow & change over time because the members of its species, and all life on its planet, reproduce asexually. They just split in two, so they are always “born” as mature adults. No distinctions are evident between the parental unit and the resulting offspring.

 

If this E. T. is shown a human as an infant and then as an adult, it might assume that the adult and the infant are not the same person, or that the two are not even of the same species. Although the adult insists that he IS the infant from years ago, the alien could conclude that the adult human is clearly an imposter (either lying or delusional).

It’s the same with the Catholic Church if we don’t know the history; if we don’t see the Church as the mustard seed we read about in (Matt 13:31). Remember too what Jesus said to The Twelve in John 16:12-13, "I still have many things to tell you, but you can't bear them now. But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth…” Why could they not bear them now? The Holy Spirit had not come yet AND because growth takes time. The developments in doctrine such as the Trinity, Hypostatic Union, Mary as Theotokos and the Canon of Scripture ALL took centuries.
 

Transport an original Apostle, or any first century Christian, to the Vatican, or to visit other Catholic churches and institutions and they would be stunned at the size and look of it.  Show them a copy of the current Catechism of the Catholic Church and they would be stunned at the knowledge in it. In fact, some early Christians might even conclude that this modern church is an imposter.

Christians today may reason that we need to get back to how early Christians did things 20 centuries ago, or at least, how they imagine they did things. The Church is too complex now, too many things “added-on” to what should be a simple faith. All you need is Love. Let’s remove the unnecessary doctrines, disciplines, liturgy, hierarchy, traditions and sacraments. Let’s just meet in our homes, sing some hymns, read some scripture, say some prayers, enjoy some fellowship, eat some bread and drink some wine.

Not that the Church is necessarily “full grown” at this point in history, but all this reminds of an adult trying to become a baby again. Who needs complex balanced meals when we can just drink milk? Who needs intricate language to express ourselves when we can babble and scream? Who needs clothes when we can be naked? Who needs bathrooms with indoor plumbing when we can use diapers?

There is nothing wrong with being an infant when you are an infant, but there is something wrong (or undeveloped) about an adult trying to become an infant again. What comes after does not destroy what comes before. What comes after finds its reason for being in what comes before.

It's Alive!

In his Farwell address last Thursday, B16 referenced Romano Guardini and compared the Church to a living body.

Guardini says: “The Church is not an institution devised and built at table, but a living reality. She lives along the course of time by transforming Herself, like any living being, yet Her nature remains the same. At Her heart is Christ.”

B16 then said: “This was our experience yesterday, I think, in the square. We could see that the Church is a living body, animated by the Holy Spirit, and truly lives by the power of God. She is in the world but not of the world. She is of God, of Christ, of the Spirit, as we saw yesterday. This is why another eloquent expression of Guardini’s is also true: 'The Church is awakening in souls.' The Church lives, grows and awakens in those souls which, like the Virgin Mary, accept and conceive the Word of God by the power of the Holy Spirit.”

Since a lot of this blog is about the connections between spiritual realities and physical realities, here is some information on (physical) living things as they could compare to the Church:

A Living Thing: Any organism or living form that possesses or shows the characteristics of life or being alive. Living things are those that display the following characteristics:

Ø  An organized structure, being made up of a cell or cells

Since God is orderly, His Church is also orderly; not just a bunch of people that “believe”. Every baptized person is a cell grafted into “the body”. Of course, one could become a dead cell via mortal sin, but is still a cell nonetheless.

 

 

Ø  Requires energy to survive or sustain existence

I would call the power of the Holy Spirit and the spiritual food of the Eucharist a kind of energy; wouldn’t you?

 

 

Ø  Ability to reproduce

Although it remains as one and only one body, quite a few dioceses and parishes have popped-up over the centuries.

Ø  Ability to grow

Could relate to reproduction in this context, but the Church has not only grown in size & number, but also in the knowledge of God.

Ø  Ability to metabolize

Metabolism is a set of life-sustaining chemical transformations within the cells of living organisms. This compares to the set of life-sustaining sacraments that provide Sanctifying Grace resulting in transformations inside of us.

 

Ø  Ability to respond to stimuli

This made me think of the many counsels held over the centuries in order to properly and definitively “respond” to problems and heresies.

Ø  Ability to adapt to the environment

Simply stated, “The Church in the Modern World”. The Church's on going teachings about humanity's relationship to society, especially in reference to economics, poverty, social justice, culture, science, technology and ecumenism. We might add, however, that the Church adapts more IN the world than TO the world.

Ø  Ability to move

Animated by the Holy Spirit, the Church has gone and continues to go forth and make disciples of all nations, even to the farthest reaches of the newest continent…the internet.

Ø  Ability to respire

Respiration is sometimes just another way to say “breathing”. The breath of God is often related to the Holy Spirit or God giving life. In Genesis, God breathed into Adam to make him a living being (see Gen 2:7); in the New Testament Jesus breathed on the apostles so they could receive the Holy Spirit (see John 20:22). The Church continues to breathe God’s life into the world today.

 

 

If Church is a living organism as described in 1 Corinthians 12,  it makes sense that it would change, mature, grow and gain knowledge over the centuries; if it did not it could be described as something “dead”.

It is common fallacy to say things like the Immaculate Conception, Papal Infallibility or the Assumption of Mary are just man-made doctrines, made-up as time went on. The reality is that they were finally and properly understood with the guidance of the Holy Spirit as the Body grew; a natural consequence of a living thing. Although “Non Habemus Papam” for now, we can still enthusiastically say, “It’s Alive!"

 

 

That's Not in the Bible: Contemporary Dilemmas with Sola Scriptura

Some time ago, I had a religious discussion with a co-worker that took on an unexpected twist. We were out at a local pub after the last day of a logic class I teach to our company’s support staff about problem-solving and decision-making. One of the members asked me, “So what else do you teach?” I responded, “Some technical product training and some religious education, specifically, confirmation class…I’m Catholic.” He said inquisitively, “Really?” I said, “Really.” He went on to tell me about how he gave his life to God a few years back and how it has completely changed his life; he described himself as a born again Christian.

As the discussion continued, he began to express his frustration with other Christians that do or teach things that are not found in the bible. I set down my beer, sat-up straight, took a breath and began to brace myself for what you know would be next. I was expecting him to barrage me with a litany of things Catholics do or teach that are not (explicitly) found in the Bible, but it never came up. Instead he began to complain to me about other “born again” Christians.

He is a member of what Catholics would call a parish council over at his church. He complained that his pastor taught that ANY consumption of alcohol was sinful. One drink leads to two; two will lead to three, and so on. Therefore, starting this process with even one drink would be sinful even if you stopped at one. A Catholic might call this kind of reasoning inviting the “occasion of sin”. There is some logic there, but my coworker had a big problem with this. The problem was not that he likes alcoholic drinks. His objection was, “that’s not in the Bible”.

Were you just applauding?
Really?

On another occasion he was invite to a piano performance by his niece during a worship service at his brothers’ non-denominational church. He began to applaud after the performance, but immediately noticed that no one else was applauding. Additionally, he received some icy stares as he began to applaud. Afterward, it was explained to him that during a worship service they only applaud for God. Applauding for others in church is taking away praise from God and is wrong. My colleague had a big problem with this also. Once again, the objection was “that’s not in the Bible”.

I thought to myself, "All Christian churches will do or teach things not specifically found in the Bible. What clear, real-world examples of how the teaching of Sola Scriptura (Bible alone) relentlessly affronts reason". Bible Christians do not actually use the bible alone; they use the bible along with whatever interpretations their leaders may have, and different interpretations results in different denominations as a natural consequence. I was going to tell him that using ONLY the Bible is also something that’s not in the Bible, but I was afraid he might self-destruct right there in front of me.

 

Instead, I went on to talk about how scripture is subject to different interpretations and how the Catholic Church teaches that Jesus actually founded one, and only one, universal Church for everybody; a visible & authoritative Church that uses imperfect men, together with the Holy Spirit, to guide us in faith & morals. If there really is a God and He really cares about people, He would provide a way for us to know what is true or what to believe (faith), and how to behave (morals). A good Father would not just leave a book behind and for us to “figure out”; a good Father would not leave His children as orphans.

This got his attention on Catholicism, but he suddenly changed the subject to the 2nd coming of Christ. He said, “I believed Jesus is coming back very soon. What’s the Catholic take on that?” I mentioned Mat 24:36 “But of that day and hour, no one knows…”, but also added a twist of my own for him to think about.

I told him that some Catholic thinkers speculate that since the 1st coming of Jesus came through Mary, it is conceivable that His 2nd coming will also come through Mary, except this time He would not come as a helpless baby. This could explain some of the increased Marian activity and apparitions around the world in the last couple of centuries as a kind of “spiritual pregnancy” for the 2nd coming (I also made it clear that is only speculation, not formal Catholic teaching). He said, “You know, that makes a lot of sense. I’ve never thought of that before”. Since he did not do very well in the class, I thought to myself, "I bet there are many things you’ve never thought of before".


On the surface, bible alone Christianity might make more sense than Catholicism to a believer that just wants to praise God and “be saved”, but as one asks probing questions about both faith & reason that go deeper and deeper, a reversal takes place. Catholicism stands-up to battering questions like that house built on rock we read about in Matthew 7:24-27. Bible alone Christianity crumbles like a biblical house built on sand.

Final Tribute to Professor Ratzinger

The origins of this blog came from a gripping desire to share what we have learned over the years about the seamless compatibility between faith & reason, and how this is realized in the Catholic faith as an accurate model of our world; our cup ranneth-over and spilled into this blog, so to speak.

For me, the cup’s tipping point came after I had read “Introduction to Christianity” by (then) Father Ratzinger. A series of posts based on insights from that book can be easily found by clicking “Professor Ratzinger” in the left column blog tags or HERE. Between you, me and the blogosphere, my personal favorite is “Professor Ratzingeron Modern Physics” (blew me away).

And now the Pope is resigning and we’ll need to say goodbye. I did not imagine that the first post, which was a tribute to B16 seven years on would not lead to a completed eighth year, but it is comforting to know that “seven” is a number that represents completeness or perfection in scripture. As one last post, here are a few quotes from that book that I double starred and highlighted, but never incorporated into a full post. Maybe I will someday, but for now I’ll just share them as a tribute to this amazing man.

Ø  On Christian Sacrifice:

“Christian sacrifice does not consist in a giving of what God would not have without us, but in our becoming totally receptive and letting ourselves be completely taken over by him. Letting God act on us – that is Christian sacrifice.”

Ø  On the Historical Method:

“It is quite often forgotten that the full truth of history eludes documentary verification just as much as the truth of being escapes the experimental approach. So it must be said that historical science in the narrowest sense of the term not only reveals, but also conceals history.”

Ø  On Reason:

“Reason can speak about God; it must speak about God, or else it cuts itself short.”

Ø  On Being a Christian:

“Let us be blunt, even at the risk of being misunderstood: The true Christian is not the denominational party member, but he who through being a Christian has become truly human; not he who slavishly observes a system of norms, thinking as he does so only of himself, but he who has become freed to simple human goodness.”

 

Thank you good & faithful teacher!

 

Fatigue Makes Cowards of us All

What could Jimmy Johnson, former coach of the Dallas Cowboys, and St. John of the Cross possibly have in common? Both speak of “fatigue”.

One evening I caught part of a motivational talk given by Jimmy Johnson on the NFL Network. He was sharing a football philosophy he learned from another coach about how football rewards great conditioning. When we think of a great football player, with think of a tough guy with great strength, speed and natural ability, but it means nothing without conditioning. Regardless of your ability, fatigue will cause you to lose focus and make mistakes; you will lose the will to fight and you will lose the will to win. Nearing the end of a game, a player should be smiling. The player who is hunched over and sucking-wind in the 4th quarter becomes a coward. Even if your opponent is more talented, you can still win by exhausting your rival.

When I was younger I played some soccer. Now my eleven year old son plays on the local travel team. At the end of the last spring season we had a “kids vs. the parents” game just for fun. I do some jogging to try and keep fit, but it is nothing like the conditioning needed for the frequent, fast sprints required in soccer.

Although the Dads were bigger, stronger and in some cases more talented than the boys, by the end of the game fatigue made a coward out of me. I lost the will to play and I lost the will to win. I started to make mistakes. I began to hope the ball would not come my way in fear of being embarrassed by some speedy kid. I knew what to do, but I could not do it; my body could not react to my will because of fatigue. It was like Romans 7:19 was coming to life right there on the field, “For I do not do the good I want, but I do the evil I do not want”. The Dads did win in the end, but no thanks to me.

After seeing coach Johnson’s talk the night before, I happened across a reflection from St. John of the Cross the very next morning which spoke of fatigue. We may be familiar with the analogies that compare spiritual conditioning to physical conditioning. An athlete prepares for an event through training and practice; it’s a lot of hard work and discipline. It may even be described as suffering and sacrifice. The same is true in the spiritual life if we want to defeat our adversary. But St. John touches on something a little different; something that is dangerous even for those who are spiritually well disciplined. It’s what happens when we are fatigued by divided desires.

He says:

“Weakness and tepidity are another kind of harm the appetites produce in a man. For the appetites sap the strength needed for perseverance in the practice of a virtue…. A man whose will is divided among trifles is like water which, because of some leakage, will not rise higher and consequently becomes useless.”

St. John of the Cross

If we pour out too much of our time, talent and treasure like a libation to the gods of power, possessions and pleasure, we leave ourselves open to spiritual attack, even if we have routine spiritual practices. Too much work, too many hobbies/activities, too much on the social calendar; the devil loves worldly busyness and helps to keep us pulled in many directions in order to exhaust us. This can happen even with ministry work and other “good deeds”. Once fatigued, his temptations have greater effect. He knows we will lose focus in our spiritual life and make mistakes, we will lose the will to fight and we will lose the will to win. If not careful, we too will become useless, living life as described in Romans 7:19 because fatigue makes cowards of us all.

God as Father

Monday is the feast day of St. Thomas Aquinas. This reminds me to share something from his compendium of Summa Theologica that helps to explain God as Father.

God is pure spirit and the Catechism of the Catholic Church is clear that He has no gender in paragraph 239, “We ought therefore to recall that God transcends the human distinction between the sexes. He is neither man nor woman: he is God.” One might conclude that there is no particular reason to call God Father other than our own sexist bias. Why not say “Mother”, “Divine Parent”, “Great Spirit” or “The Big Man Upstairs”?



INTERESTING SIDE NOTE:

Whenever I hear some refer to God as “The Big Man Upstairs” there seems to be a strong correlation between that title and a deficient (or non-existent) relationship with God.

I’ve heard it said that the reason we should call God Father is simply because Jesus called Him Father and we should follow suit. I suppose this is a reason, but it leaves me uninspired. Inspiration (for me) comes from reading St. Thomas Aquinas, and of course, other theologians who help explain Aquinas.

Before getting to Aquinas we can first step into some High Christology from John’s Gospel where we read, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). We also read, “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us…” (John 1:14). From here we can make some distinction between a word and an idea or a thought. Physical words are meant to express some other “thing”, idea or thought. The Word of God as described in John’s gospel is not a physical vibration from vocal cords formed by the mouth, tongue and lips; a thing of the air. We might say the Word of God is more like the “thought” of God.

We also should make a distinction between the thought and the thinker. If you were to think of yourself, you would have some imperfect image of yourself in your mind. If God were to contemplate Himself, there would be no deficiency in it; this would be a perfect thought or perfect image, or God himself. Going back to the beginning of John’s gospel, it can be helpful to use “thought” in place of “word”, so we would have, “In the beginning was the Thought, and the Thought was with God, and the Thought was God.”, “And the Thought became flesh (God incarnate), and dwelt among us,…”

What do these seemingly useless mental gymnastics have to do with St. Thomas? Chapter thirty-nine of his compendium of theology is entitled Relation of the Word to the Father. Aquinas relates a thought in the mind as a kind of offspring of the intellect when he says, “What is conceived in the intellect is a likeness of the thing understood and represents its species; and so it seems to be a sort of offspring of the intellect”. The intellect itself can resemble a mother, whose function is such that conception takes place in her. The thing thought about resembles a father since it acts on the intellect to make an offspring, which is the idea or thought.

Example:

Ø  An object, let’s say a bird, acts on the human intellect through sensory input from the sight, sound, smell, (taste?), and touch of a bird.

Ø  The bird flies away, but the idea of the bird conceived in the intellect remains as an imperfect image of the bird.

Ø  The image of the bird is a product (offspring if you will) of both the intellect and the bird itself.

Therefore, if the thing being thought of is God, it is God acting on the intellect resembling a father, so to speak. Now if God’s intellect were to contemplate and understand Himself, the thought conceived would be a perfect image of God better known to us as the second person of the trinity (the Word was God). Therefore, the thought, or the Word, or Jesus relates to God as a Son relates to a Father.

Although God has no gender, Father is the most reasonable term for us to use considering the logic above along with the kind of close family relationship God wants with us. The nature of God, the wisdom of the Church and St. Thomas Aquinas all come together to give us a whole new perspective on that modern-day phrase…“Who’s Your Daddy?”