Showing posts with label image of God. Show all posts
Showing posts with label image of God. Show all posts

Sunday, March 1, 2015

Raqa, Anger, and Whitewashed Tombs

Once in a while I run into the notion that emotions, particularly strong or unpleasant ones like anger, are bad — or 'beastly,' not something people should experience.

Reality check.

Emotions are part of being human. There's something seriously wrong with someone who lacks emotions. It can be a sign of hebephrenia, or other serious disorders.

We may seem less emotional as we mature: but that's because most of us learn how to manage our emotions. Or mismanage them.

Being Someone


It's hardly surprising that an angry human and an angry cat look alike in some ways. We're both animals — I'd better explain that.

I'm a Catholic, so I must believe that humanity is made in the image of the God. (Genesis 1:27)

Each of us is someone, not something; a person — able to reason, and decide how we act — and in these ways like God. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 357, 1700-1706)

Our track record for using our reason and freedom is far from perfect, and that's another topic. (Catechism, 1707-1709)

We're animals, male and female: a special sort of animal; able to reason, understand, discern, and decide how we think and act. (Genesis 1:27; Catechism, 1951, 1730)

Getting back to anger — like any other emotion, it isn't good or bad by itself. Emotions happen. What matters is how I deal with being angry: how I use my will and reason. (Catechism, 1767)

High Stakes


Our Lord raised the stakes in Matthew 5:20-26, Friday's Gospel reading.
"15 16 'You have heard that it was said to your ancestors, "You shall not kill; and whoever kills will be liable to judgment."

"17 But I say to you, whoever is angry 18 with his brother will be liable to judgment, and whoever says to his brother, 'Raqa,' will be answerable to the Sanhedrin, and whoever says, 'You fool,' will be liable to fiery Gehenna."
(Matthew 5:21-22)
Behaving ourselves, controlling our actions, is a good idea. So is controlling what happens inside, in our heart. (Matthew 15:18-19)

That's the idea behind the crack about whitewashed tombs in Matthew 23:26-27: or whited sepulchers, for folks who like antique English.

Matthew 5 isn't the only place where we're told to lay off saying "raqa," metaphorically speaking.

Ephesians 6:4 tells fathers: "...do not provoke your children to anger...," which is pretty close to Colossians 3:21. I think the same goes for teachers, which isn't quite another topic. (Catechism, 2223, 2286)

"Raqa," or "reqa," probably meant something like "imbecile," or "blockhead" in Aramaic. Either way, it's offensive: the sort of insult that could lead to murder.

I'm pretty sure that the idea in Matthew 5:22 is that verbal abuse is a bad idea, and we shouldn't do it. The other person might get angry enough to hurt me.

Worse, in a way, venting my feelings could become a bad habit: which probably involves my basal ganglia, and certainly gets harder to change as I get older.

Bottom line — How we treat others matters. So does what we keep in our minds and hearts.

Anger, Emotions, and Getting a Grip


The brain's neurocircuitry handles emotions, which is why hypothalamic disease plays hob with our feelings.

Wrenching myself back on-topic — In English, a "passion" is a strong emotion; a state of strong sexual desire, or love; or boundless enthusiasm. (thefreedictionary.com)

In Catholic writing, "passion" means something closer to "feelings." These emotions push us toward acting or not acting about something we feel or imagine is good or evil. (Catechism, 1763)
"ANGER: An emotion which is not in itself wrong, but which, when it is not controlled by reason or hardens into resentment and hate, becomes one of the seven capital sins. Christ taught that anger is an offense against the fifth commandment (1765, 1866, 2262)."
"PASSIONS, MORAL: The emotions or dispositions which incline us to good or evil actions, such as love and hate, hope and fear, joy and sadness, and anger (1763)."
(Catechism, Glossary)
I don't think that feeling angry about some injustice is wrong. Deliberately staying angry, letting that emotional impulse turn into hate or despair: that would be wrong. (Catechism, 1501, 2091)

The flip side of despair is presumption, and that's yet another topic. (Catechism, 2092)

Feeling, Thinking


Feeling angry isn't good, bad, or indifferent — not in terms of being good or bad.

Sometimes it just happens.

Hanging on to anger, letting it build into a desire to harm or kill someone else: that's where it becomes a sin. (Catechism, 1762-1775, 2302-2303)

Like it says in Romans 12:19: "...'Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.' " And that's yet again another topic. (January 11, 2015; July 13, 2014; September 11, 2010)

Then there's the notion that God has anger management issues. It's not limited to Americans. More topics. (July 13, 2014; December 1, 2013)

Doing what's right is easier when emotions are in sync with our reason: but "...conscience is a law of the mind...." We've got brains, and are expected to think. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1762-1775, 1776)

More of my take on making sense:
Posted by 5 comments:
Labels: , , ,

Sunday, January 12, 2014

Being Myself: Catholic Style

Back when I was a teenager, some folks asserted their individuality with long hair and jeans. Instead of donning the conventional nonconformist's uniform, I wore white socks and used a pocket protector.

"Be Yourself," or Not

"Be yourself" was a common bit of advice back in my 'good old days,' and still is.

A page on wikiHow tells women "How to Be Yourself:" with headings like "find yourself and define yourself on your terms;" "avoid fixating on the past;" and the familiar old "develop and express your individuality."

A dedicated apostle of angst might dredge an affront out of the advice given: but I won't.

Then there's Rob Waugh's opinion piece in Mail Online, "Why 'just be yourself' is the WORST possible advice for the workplace - people who conceal their 'real' selves are happiest."

Oscar Wilde and the Image of God

The "How to Be Yourself:" page quotes Oscar Wilde: "Be yourself, everyone else is already taken." I'm not on the same page as Oscar Wilde in most ways, but that's funny: and quite true.

Each human being is a "me," a unique person, made in the image of God. We're finite and God isn't, so that leaves lots of room for individuality. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 202, 357)

Free to be Me

I've got a mind of my own, like everyone else. Even if I decided to 'go along with the crowd,' imitating the actions of others, the decision would be mine.

I'm supposed to conform my will to the will of God, but it's my choice. I could decide to follow my own whims, but that would be a daft idea.

My job is to work within God's guidelines, accepting the realities of this creation. (Romans 12:2; Catechism, 1730, 1992, 2085)

I don't feel 'trammeled by the shackles of an oppressive society,' though: and don't think God is trying to ruin my fun. I've long since realized that serving what is good and just is good for me, too.
"The more one does what is good, the freer one becomes. There is no true freedom except in the service of what is good and just. The choice to disobey and do evil is an abuse of freedom and leads to 'the slavery of sin.'28"
(Catechism, 1733)
This freedom comes with responsibilities, and that's another topic.

Related posts:
"...We were thought of and desired; thus, there is an idea that preceded me, a feeling that preceded me, that I must discover, that I must follow, because it will at last give meaning to my life. This seems to me to be the first point: to discover that my being is truly reasonable, it was thought of, it has meaning. And my important mission is to discover this meaning, to live it and thereby contribute a new element to the great cosmic harmony conceived of by the Creator."
(Benedict XVI (July 24, 2007); from "The Pontifical Academy of Sciences Yearbook 2008")
"Being in the image of God the human individual possesses the dignity of a person, who is not just something, but someone. He is capable of self-knowledge, of self-possession and of freely giving himself and entering into communion with other persons. And he is called by grace to a covenant with his Creator, to offer him a response of faith and love that no other creature can give in his stead."
(Catechism, 357)
"God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. 'God willed that man should be 'left in the hand of his own counsel,' so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to him.'26
"Man is rational and therefore like God; he is created with free will and is master over his acts.27 "
(Catechism, 1730)
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, March 17, 2013

Designed as Stewards

I'm not surprised that we don't have particularly good built-in senses and neural circuits to guide us. The way we travel, specialized systems might be more trouble than they're worth. (March 15, 2013)

So far, we have permanent settlements on every continent except Antarctica: and maintain year-round outposts there. (March 15, 2013)

Earth's oceans are still largely unsettled, but outfits like Freedom Ship International may change that. A few of us even walked on the Moon for a few days.

No matter where we are, humans have learned to move around without getting lost. The trick is paying attention, and using our brains.

Nature, Humans, and God

I've seen the Victorian-era assumption that science and technology will solve all our problems give way to the equally-silly notion that science and technology will kill us all.

Expecting science and technology to replace God was wrong; so is worshiping nature. Adoring anything that's not God is called idolatry, and is a bad idea. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2110-2114)

But that doesn't make science, technology, and the natural world bad. (November 19, 2012; January 27, 2013)

Studying this astounding creation, discovering how it works, and developing ways to work with it, are part of being human. (Catechism, 2293)

'And God Spake These Words: Saying the World is Ours, to Ravage and Squander' - Not

The 19th century notion that we own nature, and may pillage it without consequence, is wrong. Ethics apply to how we use this creation. (Catechism, 339, 2292-2296)

I think we'll be sorting out the Industrial Age's mess for generations. The physical damage may be the easiest to fix. Long after the last toxic waste dump is reclaimed, Some folks will probably still believe that Christianity destroys the environment.

Born-again atheists claiming that Christians think we own the natural world is, perhaps, understandable. Christians making the same claim: not so much. I'm running into less of the old-school attitude toward nature in recent years: for which I'm duly grateful.

I think part of the problem comes from folks getting the wrong idea from Genesis:
"4 Then God said: 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and the cattle, and over all the wild animals and all the creatures that crawl on the ground.'

"God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them. "
(Genesis 1:26-27)
I'm a Catholic, so I have to believe that humans are made in the image of God. But I also have to believe that we don't own the universe. Our position is more like 'shop foreman' or steward. (Catechism, 355, 337-349, 2415)

Made in the Image of God: A Scary Thought

The idea that we're images of God, put in this creation as stewards, may be scarier than assuming that God isn't involved at all.

Think about it: how would the steward of a feudal manor feel if the lord of the manor returned to find the fields untended and a party going on in the castle; or a shop foreman, if the owner showed up when the factory was a smoking ruin?

The good news is that we're equipped with everything we need to do our job, including wonderfully adaptable brains.

The disquieting news is that we can use our intelligence as we see fit. As images of God, we're both spirit and matter: animals equipped with reason and free will. Each of us is someone, not something. (Catechism, 355, 1700-1706, 1730, 1951)

We're also responsible for our decisions. (Catechism, 1020-1022)

"With Great Power ..."

"With great power there must also come -
great responsibility!"
(Stan Lee, in Amazing Fantasy #15 (August 1962) (the first Spider-Man story))
Knowing that God gives us reason and free will, and the job of running creation, is scary.

I've never been a CEO, put in charge of a company: but I imagine that getting your own parking space and keys to the executive washroom must feel good, for a few minutes.

Sooner or later, a responsible executive realizes that every decision he or she makes affects hundreds, sometimes thousands, of stockholders, receptionists, and mail room clerks. For me, that sort of pressure isn't worth a parking space and a corner office. (December 9, 2012; August 31, 2011)

Today, Minnesota: Tomorrow, the Stars

Finally, getting back to our lack of built-in navigation aids: I don't see that as a design flaw.

Specialized senses are fine for creatures that stay in one place. We're designed as stewards, able to develop skills and technology for every locale we call home: and for those we haven't reached yet.



I think it's easy to forget how far we've come, and how much we've done since we started.

Scientists have been piecing together what happened before we developed the sort of external memory we call writing. What they're finding makes me pretty sure that my ancestors left Africa somewhere between 60,000 and 125,000 years ago.

My branch of humanity's appearance changed during our travels, but we're still optimized for an environment that's 'room temperature' all year: ranging from about 66° to 83° Fahrenheit in cold months, 73° to 92° in warm seasons. (19° to 28°, 23° to 33° C)

I live in a part of the world where water is a mineral for several months each year. Living here is easier than it is in places like Antarctica or Earth orbit, but we need technology to survive Minnesota winters: whether it's the latest WHRU, or old technologies like fire and clothing.

That doesn't mean that God never intended humans to live in central North America: only that developing the necessary technology, and getting here, took time and effort.

More:
Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, May 13, 2012

Individuals, the Common Good, and All That

One thing I really like about the Easter season is renewing our baptismal promises at mass.

Actually, "we" don't renew "our" promises: it's more 'I renew my baptismal promises,' together with other folks in this parish. There's a difference.

This is what I promised:
  • Do you reject Satan?
    • I do.
  • And all his works?
    • I do.
  • And all his empty promises?
    • I do.
  • Do you believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth?
    • I do.
  • Do you believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was born of the Virgin Mary, was crucified, died, and was buried, rose from the dead, and is now seated at the right hand of the Father?
    • I do.
  • Do you believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting?
    • I do.
  • This is our faith. This is the faith of the Church. We are proud to profess it, in Christ Jesus our Lord.
    • Amen.
    (source: "Pastoral Visit of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI to Sydney on the Occasion of the XXIII World Youth Day," p. 139)
    (April 8, 2012)
The last part, starting with "This is our faith," isn't what we say in this parish: and that's another topic.

Getting Lost - or Hiding in - a Crowd

I spent my teens in the '60s, when quite a few folks, adolescents included, were concerned about getting lost in the crowd: 'losing their individuality.'

Standing out in a crowd was never an issue for me: it just happened. There was the time when I'd been assigned the role of announcer for some high school event. I'd been told to not clown around, to be serious. Understandably, given the reputation I'd earned by then.

I had no problem with being serious, and fully intended to 'play it straight.' Then, when someone handed me the cut-open envelope with the name inside, I held it by its edges. It wouldn't open, so I blew a puff of air to widen the opening: and sailed the envelope almost two dozen feet.

Like I said, standing out as an individual was never an issue for me. Blending in? That I wasn't so good at.

Getting lost in a crowd, becoming just one more piece of humanity jostling along a sidewalk, may not be a goal for many folks.

On the other hand, hiding in a crowd can be quite convenient. It's a way of distributing individual responsibility: or maybe shifting the whole load onto the group. "Convenient," maybe, but not necessarily "good." And that's yet another topic.

Lockstep Conformity

Like I've said before, I can be nostalgic: but I don't want the 'good old days' to come back. I've got a pretty good memory. Among other things, I really don't want to see any of the 'my way or the highway' attitudes again. I've posted about various flavors of lockstep conformity and the Gray Flannel Suit before. (December 7, 2010)

A Nonconformist: (not) Like Everybody Else

Back in my youth, I was a bit of a non-conformist, but not in the conventional way. Some of my peers were expressing their individuality by not cutting their hair and wearing jeans. Just like everybody else who was defying convention.

("All together now: Say 'I - am - an - individual.' ")

I let my sideburns grow; wore pants that were a little too short, with white socks; and was seldom seen without a pocket protector and an array of writing instruments. I've been over this before. (August 26, 2010, September 19, 2009) I've mentioned nerdiness, too, on occasion. (November 30, 2010)

Individuality: Catholic Style

I converted to Catholicism because it made sense, and because I found out who currently holds the authority my Lord gave Peter. (Matthew 16:13-19)

I like being Catholic in part because there's room for someone like me. Although individual Catholics can be as narrow-minded as anyone else, the Church says that we're not all alike: and that this is a good thing. (August 26, 2010)

"Not Just Something, But Someone"

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is pretty definite about whether or not individual human beings are important:
"Being in the image of God the human individual possesses the dignity of a person, who is not just something, but someone...."
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 357)
Like I've said before, Catholic teachings and science get along just fine. But the Church's insistence that all human beings are people with intrinsic worth, not commodities, means that something can be 'scientific,' but not right:
"...'Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity'85 which are unique and unrepeatable."
(Catechism, 2275)

Individuals and the Common Good

As far as I can tell, the Catholic Church says that since I'm a human being: I'm an individual. I'm not just like everybody else, and I'm not supposed to be.

That's not the same as saying that what I want and what I need is all that matters. Here's where it starts getting complicated. Or interesting, depending on your - what else? - individual point of view:
"In keeping with the social nature of man, the good of each individual is necessarily related to the common good, which in turn can be defined only in reference to the human person:
"Do not live entirely isolated, having retreated into yourselves, as if you were already justified, but gather instead to seek the common good together.25"
(Catechism, 1905)
"Common good" is the name of a political party in the United Kingdom; a "non-partisan" advocacy group from Los Angeles; and, according to Princton's WordNet, "the good of a community."

Here's what "common good," Catholic style, means:
"By common good is to be understood 'the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more easily.'26 The common good concerns the life of all. It calls for prudence from each, and even more from those who exercise the office of authority. It consists of three essential elements:

"First, the common good presupposes respect for the person as such. In the name of the common good, public authorities are bound to respect the fundamental and inalienable rights of the human person. Society should permit each of its members to fulfill his vocation. In particular, the common good resides in the conditions for the exercise of the natural freedoms indispensable for the development of the human vocation, such as 'the right to act according to a sound norm of conscience and to safeguard . . . privacy, and rightful freedom also in matters of religion.'27"
(Catechism, 1906-1907)
Working for "the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more easily?" Sounds reasonable to me.

More-or-less-related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

"Not Just Something, but Someone"

My weekly schedule includes a post about studying the Bible and Catechism each Wednesday. That's a good way for me to keep learning about what I believe.

"Following Catholic beliefs and practices in America: One man's experience" is this blog's descriptions, and my experience includes studying my faith.

That's partly because of the sort of person I am. One of my daughters told me that I'm a scholar and philosopher by nature, and I see her point. No bragging involved: it's just the kit I was issued.

Besides, as an adult convert to Catholicism, I feel like I've got a lot of catching up to do.

Next: Man; "In the Image of God;" "Body and Soul but Truly One;" and More

I'm skipping over a section summary after the Catechism's discussion of Heaven and Earth, the angels, and the visible world. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 325-349, summarized in 350-354) The next part of the Catechism is about the sort of creature I am, and starts with a quote from Genesis.

In the Image of God

" 'God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them.'218 Man occupies a unique place in creation: (I) he is 'in the image of God'; (II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds; (III) he is created 'male and female'; (IV) God established him in his friendship. "
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 355)
If that's not exactly the way you remember that verse, I'm not surprised. Here's how it goes in the New American Bible:
"God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them."
(Genesis 1:27)
There's a pretty good introduction to the Pentateuch in that translation, and that's another topic.

"Man," Language, and Me

I posted about this yesterday:
Partly because I like big words, partly for the sake of communication without crisis, I generally write things like "humanity" or "human beings" when I mean "man" or "all creatures of my variety."

As I've said before, I've got the full authority of "some guy with a blog." I don't speak for the Church. Which is why I've got those links. The Catechism, and the Bible, are free online resources. Just a thought.

I'm a Man: I'm Also part of "Man"

I'm a male human being. In my language, my sort of individual human being is called a "man."

I'm also part of "man," all human beings. About half of us are male, the other half female. We're a package deal. Again:
"God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them."
(Genesis 1:27)
On a related topic, I've run into men who read Ephesians 5:22, and decided that God wants wives to conform to the old 'fetch my beer' mores. Astonishingly, quite a few women seem to have bought into that idea.

My mother had the iron will of the vikings packed in her five-feet-nothing, black-haired frame; I married a woman who's named after a doctor of the Church; and I've opined about Ephesians 5:21-30 before. (September 24, 2009)

Top of the Visible World

After that introduction to this part of "I believe in God the Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth," the Catechism discusses "in the image of God." (Catechism, 356-361)
"Of all visible creatures only man is 'able to know and love his creator.'219 He is 'the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake,'220 and he alone is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God's own life. It was for this end that he was created, and this is the fundamental reason for his dignity...."
(Catechism, 356)
"Of all visible creatures?" I've posted about angels before. (March 7, 2012) I like the way this next paragraph starts out:
"Being in the image of God the human individual possesses the dignity of a person, who is not just something, but someone...."
(Catechism, 357) [emphasis mine]
We've been given "dominion" over the visible world. (Genesis 1:26) Some folks seem to have assumed that what God meant was that we could pillage creation. Sort of like a shopping-crazed adolescent with his parents' credit card: and no appreciation of consequences.

"Dominion" doesn't work that way:
"God created everything for man,222 but man in turn was created to serve and love God and to offer all creation back to him...."
(Catechism, 358)
And that's - what else? - another topic.

Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Genesis, Optimus Prime, and Victorian America

I'm getting a post ready for tomorrow. Or, rather, that's what I was doing until "in the image of God" caught my attention:
" 'God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them.'218.... "
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 355)

Information Age Entertainment

A recent Transformers movies used that line from Genesis to show the uneasiness of someone, dealing with a truck-size alien:
[after seeing Optimus Prime transform]
USAF Tech Sergeant Epps: "You gotta wonder: if God made us in His image, who made him? "
("Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" (2009) via imdb.com)
Besides uneasiness, that "who made him?" line suggested a rather narrow world view. That may be reading too much into that bit of dialog. I don't think philosophical insight is a top priority for folks when they're creating Transformers movies.

Victorian Age Reflections

Samuel Clemens, the 19th century American riverboat pilot who used "Mark Twain" as a pen name, was in a more "reflective mood" when he wrote about being made in the image of God:
"... The Deity that did frighten him [Samuel Clemens] 'is the caricature of him which finds in the Bible . . . I have met his superior a hundred times - in fact I amount to that myself' 33 In a similarly reflective mood, he wrote to his sister,
"I love you, & am sorry for every time I have ever hurt you; but God Almighty knows I should keep on hurting you just the same, if I were around; for I am built so, being made merely in the image of God, but not otherwise resembling him enough to be mistaken for him by anybody but a very near-sighted person.34"
(Page 258, "Mark Twain: A Life," Ron Powers (2005) via Google Books)
Despite writing "a very near-sighted person," I suspect that Twain realized that "image of God" wasn't meant to be taken literally. At least not in terms of physical appearance.

As for cracks he made about the American religious quirks of his day? Given what I've read about the era, I'm impressed that Mark Twain was as conventionally devout as he was.

Poetry, Metaphor, and a Nation of Literalists

The idea of humanity being made in the image of God is is probably familiar to most Americans. I think it helps that it shows up fairly close to the start of Genesis: and that authors seem to like using it.

I suspect that Western culture's tendency to take metaphor and imagery literally accounts for some of what I've heard and read.1 Putting a simple, literal, one-dimensional idea in the middle of a situation that's filled with evocative imagery can be funny.

Astrobiology and the 'Vatican Science Academy'

I don't know if there are other worlds in this creation that support life. If there are, and there are people there, I'd be very surprised if they look like Hollywood's Transformers.

But I'm a practicing Catholic, so I can't say that we're living on the only patch of inhabitable real estate in the universe. That rule has been on the books for more than seven centuries.2

As a Catholic, I figure that part of my job is to learn about God. Studying God's creation seems like one reasonable way to do that. (March 14, 2012)

But that's just me. As I've said before, I've got the authority of "some guy with a blog." Let's see what's being published about the possibility of life on other worlds, back in Rome:
"Astrobiology is the study of life's relationship to the rest of the cosmos: its major themes include the origin of life and its precursor materials, the evolution of life on Earth, its future prospects on and off the Earth, and the occurrence of life elsewhere....

"...The study of Astrobiology is a quite appropriate subject for the Pontifical Academy of Sciences which has a multi-disciplinary membership...."
(Introduction, "Study Week on Astrobiology," Pontifical Academy of Sciences (November 6-10, 2009))
Looks like studying the increasing catalog of planets circling other stars is okay.

Related posts:
Background:
1 Western civilization's literalist streak produces some odd notions: but I also think my native culture has its good points:
2 Proposition 27 (1277), issued by the bishop of Paris, Etienne Tempier, made it clear that practicing Catholics must not claim that God could make only one world. I've been over this before. (April 19, 2010)
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Angels, Theology, and Gilligan's Island

I'm pretty sure that nobody's going to watch "Gilligan's Island," and think they've learned how to survive a shipwreck.

I'm not sure how many folks take television theology seriously.

On the other hand, real-life analogues to my imaginary 'Bombastic Bob, Preacher of the First Hallelulia Church of Snort-and-Stomp' attract followers, so maybe some folks accept the good-enough-for-a-story assumptions behind these shows:
  1. "Teen Angel"
    (TV Series 1997–1998)
    • "After eating a six month old hamburger, Marty DePolo dies and God's Cousin Rod appoints him as his best friend's guardian angel."
      (imdb.com)
  2. "Touched by an Angel"
    (TV Series 1994–2003)
    • "Monica, Tess, and Andrew are a trio of angels sent to earth to tell depressed and troubled people that God loves them and God hasn't forgotten them."
      (imdb.com)
  3. "Highway to Heaven"
    (TV Series 1984–1989)
    • "A probationary angel sent back to earth teams with an ex-cop to help people."
      (imdb.com)
  4. "Charlie's Angels"
    (TV Series 1976–1981)
    • "The adventures of three sexy female private eyes."
      (imdb.com)
One of those series got it seriously wrong, when it comes to what angels are. And it's not number four.

"CHARLIE'S ANGELS?!"

The '70s television series was, in a way, more accurate than some more earnestly 'uplifting' and 'spiritual' programming. The decidedly flesh-and-blood trio in "Charlie's Angels" were, in a way, angels. They served as agents for the unseen Charlie.

Angels, like Gabriel, Michael, and Raphael, are servants and messengers of God. "Angel" is a sort of job title:
"St. Augustine says: ' "Angel" is the name of their office, not of their nature. If you seek the name of their nature, it is "spirit"; if you seek the name of their office, it is "angel": from what they are, "spirit," from what they do, "angel." '188 With their whole beings the angels are servants and messengers of God. Because they 'always behold the face of my Father who is in heaven' they are the 'mighty ones who do his word, hearkening to the voice of his word.'189"
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 329)

I'm No Angel

Although I try to let God work through me, I'm no angel. Not like the guardian angels, or the rest of the host of Heaven.

I'm a human being: created with a physical body and a soul.

Angels are created along different lines:
"The existence of the spiritual, non-corporeal beings that Sacred Scripture usually calls 'angels' is a truth of faith. The witness of Scripture is as clear as the unanimity of Tradition."

"As purely spiritual creatures angels have intelligence and will: they are personal and immortal creatures, surpassing in perfection all visible creatures, as the splendor of their glory bears witness.190"
(Catechism, 328, 330)
I don't hear the word "corporeal" used all that much. Maybe a definition is in order. If not, skip to the next heading.

Corporeal:
  • Having material or physical form or substance
  • Affecting or characteristic of the body as opposed to the mind or spirit
    (Princeton's WordNet)

I'm Human: Soul and Body

I can't be an angel because I'm another sort of creature. Angels are people created as pure spirit: no body. I'm a person created as a living being who is spiritual and corporeal/physical:
" The human person, created in the image of God, is a being at once corporeal and spiritual. The biblical account expresses this reality in symbolic LANGUAGE when it affirms that 'then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.'229 Man, whole and entire, is therefore willed by God.

"In Sacred Scripture the term 'soul' often refers to human life or the entire human person.230 But 'soul' also refers to the innermost aspect of man, that which is of greatest value in him,231 that by which he is most especially in God's image: 'soul' signifies the spiritual principle in man."
(Catechism, 362-363)
A human being is designed and created as a spiritual/physical person. We don't 'become angels' when we die. We become dead. Our bodies stop living; we experience our particular judgment; and will later be raised from the dead. And that's another topic. Topics.

Related posts:
More:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

"In a State of Journeying"

I'm a practicing Catholic, so I believe that God created - and is creating - everything. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 279, 301, 302-305)

That's not necessarily the same as believing that God the Almighty looks like Charleton Heston's Moses.

It's certainly not the same as believing that God created the world, exactly as it is today, about 6,000 years ago.1 Or even believing that the world hadn't changed a bit up until about 1850, when science and technology started killing everybody.

Which reminds me of providence, secondary causes, and free will. And that's another topic. Topics. (Catechism, 306-308, 1730-1742, 1853)

Thinking About God

I suspect that quite a few folks - myself included - find it hard to think about God, because God is so, well, God-like. Almighty. A "mystery beyond words." (Catechism, 198-227, 230)

It's a lot easier to think of God as someone who looks pretty much like me, only a little taller, a little older, and with better hair.

"Easier," not "more reasonable."

"In the Beginning - - -"

Here's what got me started with today's post:
" 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.'116 Holy Scripture begins with these solemn words. The profession of faith takes them up when it confesses that God the Father almighty is 'Creator of heaven and earth' (Apostles' Creed), 'of all that is, seen and unseen' (Nicene Creed). We shall speak first of the Creator, then of creation, and finally of the fall into sin from which Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came to raise us up again.

"Creation is the foundation of 'all God's saving plans,' the 'beginning of the history of salvation'117 that culminates in Christ. Conversely, the mystery of Christ casts conclusive light on the mystery of creation and reveals the end for which 'in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth': from the beginning, God envisaged the glory of the new creation in Christ.118"
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 279-280)
As I've said before, I take the Bible seriously. Including Genesis 1:1. That doesn't mean that I look for answers about fixing software in the Bible. Holy Scriptures aren't a technical manual. The Bible wasn't written by Americans, either: and that's almost another topic.

Science, Poetry, and Truth

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has a pretty good resource online. Several, actually, including this:
  • "Understanding the Bible"
    Mary Elizabeth Sperry, Associate Director for Utilization of the New American Bible
    1. Bible reading is for Catholics
    2. Prayer is the beginning and the end
    3. Get the whole story!
    4. The Bible isn't a book
      • It's a library
    5. Know what the Bible is
      • And what it isn't
    6. The sum is greater than the parts
    7. The Old relates to the New
    8. You do not read alone
    9. What is God saying to me?
    10. Reading isn't enough
There's more under each of those 10 points. Like number 5:
"Know what the Bible is - and what it isn't. The Bible is the story of God's relationship with the people he has called to himself. It is not intended to be read as history text, a science book, or a political manifesto. In the Bible, God teaches us the truths that we need for the sake of our salvation."
("Understanding the Bible")
Thinking that the Bible isn't "a science book" isn't the same as thinking it isn't true. There can be truth in poetry, but that doesn't make poetry "scientific." Or "unscientific," for that matter.

And I am not going to get side-tracked by Virgil, Parmenides, and metaphysics.

Stuff Changes: Deal With It

There may have been times when one year was much like the last. When generation succeeded generation with little to mark the passage of time, apart from the familiar turning of the seasons.

Today isn't one of those times. My father spent part of his childhood in a pre-industrial pocket of America, I remember when Apollo 11 landed on the Moon, and my son plans to run a computer repair service.

Technology isn't all that's changed. I remember when "she's as smart as a man" was supposed to be a compliment, and someone with African ancestry wasn't allowed to use the same drinking fountain as someone with a genetic melanin deficiency. Not all changes in American culture and society have been for the better, but I remember the 'Good Old Days,' and am glad they're not coming back.

Nostalgia, Nature, and Notions

I think it's easy to mistake nostalgia with virtue: and feel that if only things had stayed just like they were, everything would be okay. Or at least better.

The secular version of that attitude shows up, I think, in 'back to nature' beliefs: the notion that science and technology are icky, and that we should all live 'as nature intended.' I'm not fond of smog, but I don't think trying to climb back into the trees is a viable option, either. (January 16, 2012)

A religious take on the 'change is bad' notion doesn't necessarily reject technology. It's been a while since I heard a variation on "if God had meant man to fly, He'd have given us wings." On the other hand, I think it's interesting that folks who are gung-ho for "old fashioned values" also tend to think science is bad. In my experience, anyway.

Evolution: Getting Past the One-Liners

The science that seems to get the 'good old fashioned family values' folks upset most is 'evolution.' I've gone over the Victorian-era snit that I think is behind much of 'Bible science' before. (July 5, 2011)

Nifty one-liners notwithstanding, what scientists are learning about human beings isn't that 'we used to be monkeys.' Here's a pretty good summary of what we've learned so far:
"...Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution. While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage...."
("Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God," International Theological Commission, via Internet Office of the Holy See (July 23, 2004))
Interestingly, the president of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences is a microbiologist who has been studying how DNA is involved in evolution.

Change is Okay

I think it's a mistake to assume that God doesn't exist because things change: or because we've learned some of the rules that this creation follows. That's as silly as assuming that God wouldn't take 13,750,000,000 or so years to get the universe to where it is today because I wouldn't have done it that way.

I suppose God could have made a physical world that was finished from the start. But that's not the way things are:
"Creation has its own goodness and proper perfection, but it did not spring forth complete from the hands of the Creator. The universe was created 'in a state of journeying' (in statu viae) toward an ultimate perfection yet to be attained, to which God has destined it. We call 'divine providence' the dispositions by which God guides his creation toward this perfection:
"By his providence God protects and governs all things which he has made, 'reaching mightily from one end of the earth to the other, and ordering all things well.' For 'all are open and laid bare to his eyes,' even those things which are yet to come into existence through the free action of creatures.161"
(Catechism, 302)
Related posts, getting a grip about:
1 Ussher didn't approve of 'Papists,' and worked out a detailed chronology of the world: including the particular date in 4004 B.C. when Eden was opened for business. I've been over this before:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Saturday, September 17, 2011

I'm Human: No Excuse, Just a Fact

Update (September 18, 2011)
My #1 daughter told me it was hard to figure out what this post's topic was, until near the end. She's right. I've added introductory paragraphs that may fix that. Or, not.
I like living here, but I think America could be better; and that the same is true for every other country.

As a Catholic, I'm supposed to help make my homeland a better place to live.

Dreaming of Utopia

The notion that there's gotta be a better way of getting things done isn't new. Plato wrote his Republic about 23 centuries ago. Since then, we've had quite a few 'looks good on paper' efforts: Tao Yuanming's 桃花源记/Tao Hua Yuan; Thomas More's Utopia; and B. F. Skinner's Walden Two.

By the last half of the 20th century, while surviving large-scale efforts to make people live in a perfect society, we got not-so-utopian stories like Logan's Run. And that's another topic.1

Ideal Society, Real People

The biggest obstacle that I see for someone trying to establish an ideal society is that human beings will be involved. Unless the founder of Erewhon II, or whatever, is satisfied with a virtual world - and that's yet another topic.

There's nothing basically wrong with humanity. Like I've said before, God doesn't make junk. But at this point, we're flawed.2

The next visionary idealist, full of enthusiasm for the latest 'perfect' society, will have the same problem everybody else has: people. A society that works needs to face at least one unpleasant reality. Human beings will act like human beings, no matter what.

High Ideals, Sensible Expectations

For two millennia, the Catholic Church has been saying we should 'love God and love our neighbor.' (Matthew 22:36-40)

It gets worse. The Catholic Church says that everybody is our neighbor:
If the Holy See left it at that - saying we should sort of love people, most of whom aren't close enough to bother us - I think the Catholic Church wouldn't have quite so much of an image problem.

Vague, Hateful, or Satanic: Some Choice

As it is, the Church tells me that I have to act as if I love God - and my neighbor. Even the one who stole the parish church's Gospel Book. And that I must love God, and my neighbors - all of them - for real. Inside.3

Well! No wonder what the Church says gets called:Considering where some of those labels come from, I think they're a sort of compliment: along the lines of 'you're known by the enemies you keep.' And that's almost another topic.

Religious Beliefs: Good for a Laugh, and Otherwise

I can see how folks, at least here in America, get the idea that people with religious beliefs are at least a bit nuts. If not sociopathic. We keep seeing what 'those religious people' are like:


(Oakland Blog, via SFGate, used w/o permission)


(Non Sequitur, Wiley Miller, used w/o permission)


(Reuters photo, via FoxNews.com, used w/o permission)

I'm not complaining about the news focusing on religion's weird and wacky side. As I said earlier today, it's the man bites dog stories that make the news.

I wouldn't mind if more reporters and editors started looking up what 'those religious people' really believe, and that's yet again another topic.

About that "God Hates You" photo: in my considered opinion, which I've shared before, those folks aren't typical Christians. They're not even typical American Protestants.

Moving on.

'The Good Old Days' - Weren't

Back in my 'good old days' which I'm sincerely glad won't come back - America's establishment was rather keen on going to church. I suspect part of that was because all the 'right' people would be there - and the grounds fees were a whole lot lower than at the country club.

Oh, dear: That was rather uncharitable of me. Still, I remember how hard it was to sort out secular motives from conventional piety. Like I've said, the '60s happened for a reason.

Over the last half-century the establishment's changed. And it hasn't. I've been over that before.4 The current lot aren't quite so eager to claim that America is a "Christian" nation. And I'm getting off-topic again.

Death Cookies

An American sub-culture that's held on to its' values like bubble gum to your shoe are the sort who love to pass out this sort of thing:


(Chick Publications, via FoxNews.com, used w/o permission)

The Eucharist is a central part of my faith - and I am not going to get off-topic.

Loving My Neighbor - Realistically

What I think helps get the Catholic Church in trouble with the 'right' people is that our faith is intensely practical.

That's right: practical.

I'm not allowed to 'love' my neighbor is a sort of warm, fuzzy way: that doesn't make me pay attention to what the person is really like. I have to love my neighbor in a way that makes me give a rip whether he lives or dies.

Right now, this is a fairly theoretical point for me. My close neighbors, the ones I know something about, aren't doing anything crazy. I don't have to wonder how to encourage someone to lay off the booze, stop having cheating on a spouse, or plan suicide.

In a way, it's a dull sort of life - which I don't mind a bit.

Poking Noses into Other People's Affairs

There's an idea that religious people try to tell others how to live their lives. Like I've said before, there's something to that.

I've had fairly well-defined religious beliefs ever since I can remember. Even before I became a Catholic, I figured that suicide was a bad idea. That belief led me to try telling someone very dear to me how to live her life. Specifically, I urged her to keep living.

She killed herself, anyway.

So much for my trying to meddle with someone else's life.

After I became a Catholic, I made a point of learning what the Church had to say about suicide. Bottom line? It's wrong. We're not allowed to kill ourselves.

So, do suicides get a guaranteed eternity in Hell? Oddly, we're told to hope.5

I still think killing yourself is a really bad idea, if only on practical grounds. Alive, there are options. Dead, your options are pretty limited.

I'm Human - And That's Okay

My opinion, based on what I've read about Catholic teachings, is that the Church thinks I'm a human being. Not just me, of course. The Church, again in my opinion, acts as if Catholics - and everybody else - are human beings. Finite creatures. Not able to see the future, lacking omniscience, and generally not all that much like God Almighty. Not in terms of abilities.

Which means that when I run into instructions, try to follow them, and fail - I try not to feel that all is lost.

God designed me, and knows my limitations. The Church has been dealing with human beings for two millennia: and gives ample-enough-for-me evidence of having learned what we're like.

Which doesn't mean I think I can use 'I'm only human' as an excuse - and that's still one more topic.

Almost-related posts:
1 I find 'post-apocalyptic' films and stories involving crazed computers or mutant frogs mildly entertaining. Particularly if there are lots of explosions. I don't necessarily take these more (serious?) views of humanity's future seriously, though:2We don't live in a perfect world: which shouldn't be a great surprise, if you've been paying attention.

Original sin explains this quote:
"For mischief comes not out of the earth, nor does trouble spring out of the ground; 2But man himself begets mischief, as sparks fly upward."
(Job 5:6,7)
Original sin, as taught by the Catholic Church, does not mean that humanity is basically bad - an egregious mistake made by a bungling God. We're flawed, not inherently evil:I've posted about original sin a few times:3 Lip-service, just going through the motions, won't cut it. The Church is firm about deciding to love - right down to the core of our being:Firm: or stubborn; or close-minded; or obstinate. It depends on your point of view.

4 I explained what I mean by "the establishment" recently. Also how it's changed - and not changed - over the last half-century:5 The Catholic Church says that suicide is a bad idea. I agree:
Posted by 4 comments:
Labels: , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Like it? Pin it, Plus it, - - -

Pinterest: My Stuff, and More

Visit Brian H.'s profile on Pinterest.

Advertisement

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light Candle  • Find a Retailer
• Spiral Light Candle Store

Popular Posts

  • A 'Saint Brian,' Sort of
    My name is Brian Gill. In keeping with the customs of my culture, the first name is one which my parents chose for me, the last is the name ...
  • Blind Mice; Heroism During the 'Batman' Killings
    The London 2012 Olympics start today: but instead of analyzing the significance of a South Korean flag being displayed with a North Korean...
  • A Catholic Citizen in America: New Location
    The good news is still that Blogger's changes haven't made images in my posts here unviewable. ( May 6-16, 2016 ) Instead of jumpi...
  • Mass Murder in Orlando
    I'd be writing a longer, more detailed, post about this; but still haven't resolved some technical issues. ( May 6, 2016 ; updated M...
  • Elijah and Pushing a Rock
    10th Sunday in Ordinary Time, 2016: 1 Kings 17:17 - 24 Galatians 1:11 - 19 Luke 7:11 - 17 Third Sunday of Easter, 2016 by Deacon L...

Label Cloud

1277 abortion ADD ADHD-Inattentive Adoration Chapel Advent Afghanistan Africa America Amoris Laetitia angels animals annulment Annunciation anti-catholicism Antichrist apocalyptic ideas apparitions archaeology architecture Arianism art Asperger syndrome assumptions asteroid astronomy Australia authority balance and moderation baptism being Catholic beliefs bias Bible Bible and Catechism bioethics biology blogs brain Brazil business Canada capital punishment Caritas in Veritate Catechism Catholic Church Catholic counter-culture Catholicism change happens charisms charity Chile China Christianity Christmas citizenship climate change climatology cloning comets common good common sense Communion community compassion confirmation conscience conversion Corpus Christi cosmology creation credibility crime crucifix Crucifixion Cuba culture dance dark night of the soul death depression designer babies despair detachment devotion discipline disease diversity divination Divine Mercy divorce Docetism domestic church dualism duty Easter economics education elections emotions England entertainment environmental issues Epiphany Establishment Clause ethics ethnicity Eucharist eugenics Europe evangelizing evolution exobiology exoplanets exorcism extremophiles faith faith and works family Father's Day Faust Faustus fear of the Lord fiction Final Judgment First Amendment forgiveness Fortnight For Freedom free will freedom fun genetics genocide geoengineering geology getting a grip global Gnosticism God God's will good judgment government gratitude great commission guest post guilt Haiti Halloween happiness hate health Heaven Hell HHS hierarchy history holidays Holy Family Holy See Holy Spirit holy water home schooling hope humility humor hypocrisy idolatry image of God images Immaculate Conception immigrants in the news Incarnation Independence Day India information technology Internet Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Japan Jesus John Paul II joy just war justice Kansas Kenya Knights of Columbus knowledge Korea language Last Judgment last things law learning Lent Lenten Chaplet life issues love magi magic Magisterium Manichaeism marriage martyrs Mary Mass materialism media medicine meditation Memorial Day mercy meteor meteorology Mexico Minnesota miracles Missouri moderation modesty Monophysitism Mother Teresa of Calcutta Mother's Day movies music Muslims myth natural law neighbor Nestorianism New Year's Eve New Zealand news Nietzsche obedience Oceania organization original sin paleontology parish Parousia penance penitence Pentecost Philippines physical disability physics pilgrimage politics Pope Pope in Germany 2011 population growth positive law poverty prayer predestination presumption pride priests prophets prostitution Providence Purgatory purpose quantum entanglement quotes reason redemption reflections relics religion religious freedom repentance Resurrection robots Roman Missal Third Edition rosaries rules sacramentals Sacraments Saints salvation schools science secondary causes SETI sex shrines sin slavery social justice solar planets soul South Sudan space aliens space exploration Spain spirituality stem cell research stereotypes stewardship stories storm Sudan suicide Sunday obligation superstition symbols technology temptation terraforming the establishment the human condition tolerance Tradition traffic Transfiguration Transubstantiation travel Trinity trust truth uncertainty United Kingdom universal destination of goods vacation Vatican Vatican II veneration vengeance Veterans Day videos virtue vlog vocations voting war warp drive theory wealth weather wisdom within reason work worship writing

Marian Apparition: Champion, Wisconsin

Background:Posts in this blog: In the news:

What's That Doing in a Nice Catholic Blog?

From time to time, a service that I use will display links to - odd - services and retailers.

I block a few of the more obvious dubious advertisers.

For example: psychic anything, numerology, mediums, and related practices are on the no-no list for Catholics. It has to do with the Church's stand on divination. I try to block those ads.

Sometime regrettable advertisements get through, anyway.

Bottom line? What that service displays reflects the local culture's norms, - not Catholic teaching.