Showing posts with label religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label religion. Show all posts

Friday, September 11, 2015

Big Eyes, Bonobo Squeaks

Neanderthals apparently had bigger eyes than folks living today. One scientist says that means they didn't play well with others.

Bonobos, chimps living south of the Congo River, squeak. The squeaks are the same, whether they're happy, sad, or angry — and may tell us something about how language developed.
  1. Neanderthals: Big Eyes, Big Brains, and Being Social
  2. Squeaking Bonobos
I think accepting God's universe 'as is' makes sense, so I'll ramble on about hubris, movies, and St. Thomas Aquinas, before discussing Neanderthals and squeaking bonobos.

Hubris and the Man With the X-Ray Eyes


Hubris, self-confidence above and beyond the call of reason, makes dialog like this possible:
"Dr. James Xavier: I'm blind to all but a tenth of the universe.

"Dr. Sam Brant: My dear friend, only the gods see everything.

"Dr. James Xavier: My dear doctor, I'm closing in on the gods."
("X: The Man with the X-Ray Eyes" (1963), via IMDB.com)
Maybe hubris contributed to hoaxes like Piltdown Man and archaeoraptor; and atrocities like the Auschwitz, Dachau, Tuskegee, and Willowbrook State School experiments. (March 27, 2015; August 8, 2014)

Cautionary tales like Marlowe's Faustus, the legend of Daedalus and Icarus, and 'mad scientist' movies, can teach useful ideas: like 'trying to do the impossible is a bad idea;' or 'drinking and driving don't mix.'

But I wonder if movies like "Island of Lost Souls," "The Fly," and "The Brain That Wouldn't Die," teach that curiosity is bad: particularly when it's scientific curiosity. (August 8, 2014)

Science and technology, studying this universe and developing new tech, is part of being human. Using the brains God gave us does not offend the Almighty. Ethics apply, as they do with everything we do. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 159, 2292-2296)

This isn't a new idea. One of the Genesis creation stories has Adam, not God, naming critters:
"So the LORD God formed out of the ground various wild animals and various birds of the air, and he brought them to the man to see what he would call them; whatever the man called each of them would be its name."
(Genesis 2:19)
Putting anything — pleasure, family, power, science — anything, or anyone, above God on the priority list is a very bad idea. 'It's for science' is not an excuse for hurting folks. (Catechism, 2112-2114)

Truth and Secondary Causes


I could be a Christian and believe that we live on a plate, and that stars are on a dome between us and the cosmic ocean.

But my faith doesn't require ignorance of what we've learned in the last couple dozen centuries. (March 29, 2015)

We're told that truth is important: in relations with each other, and with God. (Psalms 15:2-3; Ephesians 4:15; Catechism, 144, 150, 153-160, 2464-2503)

We're also told that truth about creation and the universe is important. (Catechism, 287-305)

That does not mean that Catholics must believe that Earth is flat, and only a few thousand years old.

The universe is a place of order and beauty, and scientific discoveries are invitations "...to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator...." (Catechism, 32, 283, 341)

I don't have to believe that physical realities exist or that God exists. Everything we observe reflects some facet of the Creator's truth, according to its nature. (Catechism, 301-308)

All natural processes involve secondary causes: creatures changing in knowable ways, following laws woven into this creation. (Catechism, 306-308)

Believing that God creates, and knowing that a fire's light and heat involve electron transitions, doesn't threaten an informed faith.
"...methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God...."
(Catechism, 159)

Humility, Science, and Being Reasonable


Humility, Catholic style, is accepting reality:
"HUMILITY: The virtue by which a Christian acknowledges that God is the author of all good. Humility avoids inordinate ambition or pride, and provides the foundation for turning to God in prayer (2559). Voluntary humility can be described as 'poverty of spirit' (2546)."
(Catechism, Glossary, H)
Pride, in the Catholic sense, is pretty close to hubris in ancient Greek tragedies: "excessive pride toward or defiance of the gods, leading to nemesis." (Oxford Dictionaries)

Sin is being unreasonable. Getting personal preferences and eternal principles mixed up is a bad idea, and I've been over this before. (April 26, 2015; September 7, 2014)
"PRIDE: One of the seven capital sins. Pride is undue self–esteem or self–love, which seeks attention and honor and sets oneself in competition with God (1866)."
(Catechism, Glossary, P)

"SIN: An offense against God as well as a fault against reason, truth, and right conscience. Sin is a deliberate thought, word, deed, or omission contrary to the eternal law of God. In judging the gravity of sin, it is customary to distinguish between mortal and venial sins (1849, 1853, 1854)."
(Catechism, Glossary, S)
St. Thomas Aquinas explained why boasting is a bad idea. Basically, it's an offense against reason and truth: and God. It's a really bad idea.
"...The sin of boasting may be considered in two ways. First, with regard to the species of the act, and thus it is opposed to truth; as stated (in the body of the article and Question [110], Article [2]). Secondly, with regard to its cause, from which more frequently though not always it arises: and thus it proceeds from pride as its inwardly moving and impelling cause...."
("The Summa Theologica," Question 112, St. Thomas Aquinas)

"...Humility restrains the appetite from aiming at great things against right reason: while magnanimity urges the mind to great things in accord with right reason. Hence it is clear that magnanimity is not opposed to humility: indeed they concur in this, that each is according to right reason...."
"The Summa Theologica," Question 161, St. Thomas Aquinas)

"...'A man is said to be proud, because he wishes to appear above (super) what he really is'; for he who wishes to overstep beyond what he is, is proud. Now right reason requires that every man's will should tend to that which is proportionate to him. Therefore it is evident that pride denotes something opposed to right reason...."
("The Summa Theologica," Question 162, St. Thomas Aquinas)
(translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province (Benziger Bros. edition, 1947))
We're called to holiness, not delusion, so I figure pretending I'm more or less than what I am is imprudent.

So, I think, is clinging to our notions of how the universe 'should' work: instead of learning more about the wonder-filled realities around us. (March 29, 2015; November 21, 2014)


(From Thomas Hawkins; via The Online Books Page, University of Pennsylvania; used w/o permission.)

- - - and that reminds me of H. P. Lovecraft, Yeats, and fashionable melancholia; which are different topics.

1. Neanderthals: Big Eyes, Big Brains, and Being Social



(From NHM/Alamy, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("Neanderthals (r) had bigger eyes"
(BBC News))
"The Mystery of Neanderthals' Massive Eyes"
Melissa Hogenboom, BBC News (August 6, 2015)

"Our extinct cousins had eyes much larger than ours. Were these giant peepers the reason for the Neanderthals' demise, or the secret of their success?

"We won't ever come face to face with a real-life Neanderthal. They went extinct thousands of years ago. All we can do is use their remains to reconstruct what they were like.

"In many ways they were a lot like us. In fact they were so similar, our species actually interbred with theirs.

"Nevertheless there were some differences. One stands out: they had weirdly large eyes...."
I know too much about my ancestors to let the second and third paragraphs go without comment. I'll try to keep my harangue about 'species,' 'interbreeding,' and people to a minimum this time.

From some viewpoints, I'm the result of "miscegenation," another word for "interracial marriage."

Not Missing the 'Good Old Days'


The daughter of a respectable family caught the eye of an Irishman a couple generations back — to the great dismay of her parents.

As one of my ancestors said, "he doesn't have family, he's Irish." The youngsters got married anyway, which made me possible. (October 31, 2014; July 6, 2014)

The respectable family coped, most Americans eventually accepted the Irish, miscegenation hasn't been a felony here since 1967, and I am heartily glad that the 'good old days' aren't coming back.

About Neanderthals, species, and all that — scientists still say that Neanderthals, Denisovans, and Red Deer Cave people are different "species."

We don't have Red Deer Cave DNA yet, but most folks living today have Neanderthal or Denisovan ancestors. I'm guessing that Red Deer Cave people are no less "human" than the rest of us.

I'll admit to a bias here, since my ancestors are from northwestern Europe, Neanderthal country. I don't think our profuse body hair and Neanderthal DNA make us less "human" than folks from other parts of the world. But I'm one of 'them,' so like I said: I'm biased.

Ainu apparently aren't genetically similar to Europeans, although I'm not clear on which Europeans Sforza, Menozzi, and Piazza, used for comparison — and that's almost another topic.

The more we learn about life on Earth, the more scientists revise the old Linnaean taxonomy. (May 29, 2015; November 21, 2014)

A century from now, maybe sooner, looking at Neanderthals, Denisovans, and the rest of us, as separate "species" may seem as quaint as seeing the Irish and English as separate "races" does today. (May 29, 2015; October 31, 2014; July 11, 2014)

Differences and DNA



(From Elisabeth Daynes/SPL, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("What a Neanderthal may have looked like"
(BBC News)
"...Neanderthals were around before we evolved. They first appeared around 250,000 years ago and spread throughout Europe and Asia.

"Our own species, Homo sapiens, evolved in Africa about 200,000 years ago. They reached Europe around 45,000 years ago, and found it was inhabited by Neanderthals.

"We co-existed with them for 5,000 years, according to the latest estimate. But eventually they disappeared, perhaps as early as 40,000 years ago.

"In 2013, a team led by Eiluned Pearce of the University of Oxford in the UK proposed a radical explanation: their eyes were to blame...."
(Melissa Hogenboom, BBC News)
Summarizing the next 986 words in Melissa Hogenboom's article: Neanderthals almost certainly had bigger eyes than the average person living today, but that probably didn't kill them off.

Again, I don't think Homo sapiens and Neanderthals are "us" and "them."

We're learning that folks with Neanderthal traits started showing up in Eurasia some 350,000 to 600,000 years back. The anatomically modern human (AMH) model that showed up about 200,000 years ago in Africa.

Some time after that, folks whose descendants would be today's Europeans started heading into Eurasia, meeting Neanderthals and other pioneers.

I haven't had my DNA tested, but unless I'm really weird, I've got Neanderthal ancestors. As I've said before, humanity's story is complicated: and Neanderthals are arguably no more "extinct" that Gauts. (May 29, 2015; July 11, 2014)

Nifty Idea, Big Problems


We've come a long way since Marcelline Boule had an artist draw that picture of a 'primitive' Neanderthal, based on his study of an arthritic old Neanderthal's partial remains.

In fairness, your average Neanderthal would have trouble blending into most crowds today. Think someone like William "The Refrigerator" Perry on a high school's relay team.

Neanderthal adults had bigger brains than we do, on average, but they were — robust, so the brain/body ratio wasn't all that different.

The average Neanderthal brain wasn't shaped quite like the average AMH, which suggests that the wiring was a bit different.

Pearce's team says that their big eyes had to have bigger visual cortices to handle their bigger eyes: and that this meant the 'social' part of their brains was smaller.

If that was true, Folks today might mostly look like us because our ancestors were better at cooperating.

It's a nifty idea, with big problems.

For starters, as Hogenboom's article points out, the human brain is heavily interconnected. Visual processing also involves parts of the brain used for storing and processing memories and emotions.

Some of us recall and imagine images better than others, some don't, and that's yet another topic:

Eyes and Size of Social Groups


Folks at the University of Wisconsin-Madison compared 18 living primate species. They discovered that the size of their eye sockets and social groups were connected.

The big-eyed primates have larger social groups than their small-eyed counterparts — and, for the most part, bigger neocortices.

Maybe Neanderthals declined because they spent too much time playing the Pleistocene equivalent of Parcheesi. Then again, maybe not.

I'm not at all surprised that Neanderthals and folks who lived in other parts of the world didn't look exactly alike.

There isn't as much regional variation today, but folks whose ancestors have been living in Kenya, Japan, and Scandinavia don't look quite alike.

Interestingly, folks who live in upper latitudes may still have very slightly larger eyes, and marginally bigger brains, than folks who live near the equator. Since my ancestors are from the big-eyed folks, I'm not inclined to think that we're 'less evolved,' but again: I'll admit to a bias.

More:

2. Squeaking Bonobos



(From Zanna Clay/Lui Kotale Bonobo Project, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
"Bonobo squeaks hint at earlier speech evolution"
Jonathan Webb, BBC News (August 4, 2015)

"Wild bonobos use a single high-pitched call in a variety of contexts, showing a flexibility in their communication that was thought to be uniquely human.

"That is the conclusion of a study by UK and Swiss psychologists.

"Bonobos are just as closely related to humans as chimpanzees, but their wild communication is much less studied.

"Researchers say the new findings push back the development of context-free vocal calls to our shared ancestor with bonobos, 6-10 million years ago...."
Non-human primates like chimps and bonobos, communicate with calls that indicate an emotional state. For that matter, so do we: just listen to crowd sounds during the Olympics.

This research apparently shows that functional flexibility — communicating with the same sound in different contexts — isn't uniquely human.

We start squealing and growling early, sometimes as early as three to four months after birth: leaving our parents guessing whether we're happy, sad, or just squealing and growling.

Turns out, bonobos do pretty much the same thing: except they squeak. Or maybe it's more like a peep.

The bonobo squeak or peep isn't tied to one activity or emotional state: so either the bonobos figure out what the others are saying from context — or maybe they just squeak a lot.

Analysis of recorded bonobo squeaks show that they're acoustically identical, regardless of what the bonobo is doing. The squeaks could be the start of language. I wouldn't be surprised if they're the bonobo equivalent of whistling why they work/play/whatever.

Either way: this is new information.

What it means is something I'm pretty sure we'll learn, if we keep studying bonobos. Since studying this world is part of being human,1 I think it's very likely indeed that we'll keep learning more about bonobos, how language emerged, and ourselves.

More:
My take on newly-discovered pages from humanity's long story:
If you've been here before, you probably know why I don't fear knowledge.

1 Intense folks like the fictional Mr. Squibbs notwithstanding, science and technology aren't transgressions.

They're part of being human.

We're supposed to be curious, study this astounding universe, and develop new technology.

Ethics apply, but part of our job is taking care of this world: and that takes knowledge and tech. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2292-2296, 2402-2405, 2456)

I talk about that a lot:
Posted by 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Sunday, September 6, 2015

Hate People? Not an Option

I ran into a familiar sentiment on Twitter:
"Sometimes I wish I was religious so I could have an excuse for hating people."
Instead of seething with anger, I did a quick Google search.

The phrase, with exactly those words, showed up about 60 times. The earliest example I found was posted by a bot on reddit.com, December 28, 2011.

Without the quotes, I got roughly 35,200,000 matches.

That's a lot of folks talking about religion and hate. Some agreed with the "excuse for hating people" quote, some didn't, and some were talking about something completely different.

The "excuse for hating" quote hadn't been directed at me, and came from an account that Tweets a lot of platitudes and quotations. Instead of firing back a response, I started writing this post. That was on Monday of this week.

I sympathize, a little, with folks who assume that religion and hate are inseparable — or that faith is for the addlepated.

As a teen, I tried listening to 'Christian' radio. Rants against commies and rock music, and the steady drip feed of guilt, drove me to an all-rock station.

I haven't run into quite the same weird mix of divination, numerology, and Bible trivia, since the 1960s: but 'End Times Bible Prophecies' are still part of American culture. (April 19, 2015; January 25, 2015)

I eventually become a Catholic, and that's another topic.

I suspect that the strident 'kill a commie for Christ' crowd helped make John Lennon's "Imagine" the best-selling single of his career:
"...Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...."
John Lennon, "Imagine" (1971)
(posted oldielyrics.com) (March 12, 2011)
Some Catholics sound and act like their 'agree with me or be damned' Protestant counterparts.

I can't do that, because I know what the Church has been teaching for two millennia.

Love: NO EXCEPTIONS


I'm "religious," in the sense that I take my faith seriously.

But when I noticed myself hating radio preachers, British musicians, or anyone else: my job is rooting out that hate, not expressing it.

I can't even let myself hate folks like the 'God Hates You' bunch out in Kansas. They're not typical Christians, by the way. They're not even typical American Protestants, and I've been over that before. (October 28, 2011)

God doesn't hate me, or you.

God loves us, and wants to adopt us. All of us. (John 1:12-14, 3:17; Romans 8:14-17; Peter 1:3-4; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 27-30, 52, 1825, 1996)

Since I take God's love seriously, I try to love God, love my neighbor, see everybody as my neighbor, and treat others as I'd like to be treated.1 Our Lord said it is important:
"6 'Do to others whatever you would have them do to you. This is the law and the prophets."
(Matthew 7:12)
" 'Teacher, 21 which commandment in the law is the greatest?'

"He said to him, 22 'You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.

"This is the greatest and the first commandment.

"The second is like it: 23 You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

"24 The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments.' " (Matthew 22:36-40)
Seeing everybody as my neighbor means everybody. No exceptions.
"10 There was a scholar of the law 11 who stood up to test him and said, 'Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?'

"Jesus said to him, 'What is written in the law? How do you read it?'

"He said in reply, 'You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your being, with all your strength, and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.'

"He replied to him, 'You have answered correctly; do this and you will live.'

"But because he wished to justify himself, he said to Jesus, 'And who is my neighbor?' "
(Luke 10:25-29)
Our Lord's story about a Samaritan probably lost some shock value over the last two millennia. I've talked about that before, too. (October 26, 2014)

Faith, Works, and Bad Ideas


I'm not trying to 'work my way into Heaven:' but I'm not trying to believe my way in, either.

Taking Romans 4:5-6 plus a few more carefully-selected Bible verses, I could decide that I'm so 'saved' that nothing I do will keep me out of Heaven.

Or I could do the same with James 2:14-26, and fear that God won't let me in unless I complete some set of tasks.

I'm a Catholic, though, so it's not faith or works: It's faith and works.

My salvation depends on God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit — and God lets us help each other. (Catechism, 1987-2016)

'Works' happen because of faith.

If I take God seriously, I'll act as if loving God and my neighbors matters; which will result in my treating other folks the way I'd like to be treated. (Footnote 6, James 2 (NAB))

I've talked about presumption, despair, and Holy Willie, before. (March 22, 2015; March 15, 2015; November 9, 2014)

Our Lord came into this world: not to condemn the world, but to save it. (John 3:17)

God loves sinners: and wants us to stop sinning. The 'punishments' we experience as the result of our actions are a consequence of our ignoring ethical realities — and opportunities for us to learn charity and detachment. (Romans 5:8; Catechism, 226, 1424, 1472-1473, 2544)

Sin and Forgiveness


Mainstream news services are pretty good at reporting some things: like sports events.

I've yet to read a discussion of the quality of this year's home runs compared to number of women employed by the NFL, or speculation about why jockeys in the Super Bowl weren't wearing feed bags. (July 12, 2013)

I'm not surprised, though, that folks who rely on Time, Newsweek, or The New York Times, are sometimes shocked by Pope Francis.

Recently, for example, headlines have stirred up angst over the Pope's 'changing stand on abortion.'

The Pope says sin can be forgiven. Specifically, a woman who has had an abortion may be forgiven:2
"...The forgiveness of God cannot be denied to one who has repented, especially when that person approaches the Sacrament of Confession with a sincere heart in order to obtain reconciliation with the Father...."
(Letter of the Holy Father Francis to the President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization (September 1, 2015))
THIS IS NOT A NEW IDEA.

The example I'll use involves a woman and another way folks can hurt themselves, so I'd better explain that men have responsibilities too:
"19 'You have heard that it was said, "You shall not commit adultery."

"But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart."
(Matthew 5:27-28)
John 8:3-11 ends with Jesus saying to the woman who would have been killed: "Neither do I condemn you. Go, (and) from now on do not sin any more." (John 8:11)

This may seem confusing to folks who feel that "sin" is doing something they either don't like, or can't do: and that "sinners" are disreputable folks who are thrown into Hell by a hypersensitive God. (March 15, 2015; February 1, 2015)

As a Catholic, I see sin as an offense against reason and truth: and God. (Catechism, 1849-1850)

It's deciding that I'll do something I know is bad for myself, or others: or deciding to not do something I should. (Catechism, 1849-1864)

Some things, like playing Bingo or drinking alcohol, are okay: in moderation. Getting drunk, or making Bingo more important than my family: that would be sinful. (Catechism, 1852, 2413)

Sin isn't a 'one strike and you're out' thing. As long as I'm alive, I can find forgiveness. (Catechism, 976-983, 1442-1470, 1021, 1988)

Forgiveness goes both ways, of course. It's in the Lord's prayer: "...as we forgive those who trespass against us...." (Catechism, 2840-2845)

Forgiving, and being forgiven, are important. So is cleaning up the mess sin leaves. Let's say I hold up the local bank, then realize it was wrong, and say I'm sorry. Should I be forgiven?

As far as the Church is concerned, yes. I'd also be expected to give the money back, and cooperate with secular authorities in the trial and sentencing that follows. We call that sort of thing "reparation." (Catechism, 1459-1460)

Someone who has killed an innocent person can't unkill the victim, of course. But forgiveness for murder and other serious sins has always been possible: what's changed over the last two millennia has been details in the procedure. (Catechism, 1447)

Human Life


In a perfect society, what is legal would be right. But we don't have a perfect society: and haven't, since humanity began.

I've talked about positive law, rules we make up; and natural law,3 ethical principles woven into reality; before.

Natural law hasn't changed, and won't.

Theft was wrong when Ur-Nammu and Hammurabi wrote their laws, and it will be when Ur-Nammu's Sumer, the Roman Republic, and ASEAN, seem roughly contemporary.

Positive law changes, and must change, as we adapt it to changing circumstances.

Circumstances have been changing a lot over the last few centuries. (June 12, 2015)
"Application of the natural law varies greatly; it can demand reflection that takes account of various conditions of life according to places, times, and circumstances. Nevertheless, in the diversity of cultures, the natural law remains as a rule that binds men among themselves and imposes on them, beyond the inevitable differences, common principles."
(Catechism, 1957)
When positive law wanders away from natural law, there's trouble: like the 'outmoded morality' some of my contemporaries didn't like. We can't go back to the 'good old days,' which is fine by me. (August 23, 2015; August 31, 2014; August 29, 2014)

If the United States Supreme Court had declared the law of gravity "unconstitutional," I'd be explaining why we need guardrails. (July 12, 2015)

Instead, I'll say why I think human beings are people: all human beings.

Genesis 1:27 says4 we're made "in the divine image." We are rational and therefore like God, made in the image and likeness of God; created with free will, masters over our actions. (Catechism, 1730-1825)

All humans are people, with equal dignity: no matter where we are, who we are, or how we act. (Catechism, 360, 1700-1706, 1932-1933, 1935)

Murder, deliberately killing an innocent person, is wrong because human life is sacred. No matter how young, or how sick, someone is; that person's life is precious. (Catechism, 2258, 2268-2283)

Like I said last week, killing innocent people is legal in my country: provided the victim is young and/or sick enough. That's a bad idea, and we should stop doing it. (August 30, 2015)

But what about killing not-innocent people?

Death and Decisions


The rules are simple: love God, love my neighbor, see everybody as my neighbor.

Everybody: the chap who took 'my' parking space, whoever stole the parish Gospel book, everybody. No exceptions.

"Love" isn't "approval," and I've said that before. (March 15, 2015)

For example, I don't approve — at all — of what Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did. Killing Krystle Marie Campbell, Lu Lingzi (吕令子), Martin William Richard, and Sean A. Collier; and maiming many other folks; was wrong.

I am reasonably sure that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev should have been found guilty. I think I understand why an American court decided to poison him. But I do not think killing him is right. (May 17, 2015)

Quite a few folks who believe killing babies and sick people is wrong are eager to have murderers killed.

I'm not.

The Church says that killing people who have done something very bad is allowed — if that is the only way to protect other folks. (Catechism, 2267)

I can imagine people on some remote island being forced to kill a serial murderer, because they do not have the resources to restrain and guard a killer. They would starve if everyone isn't out catching fish. I do not think the United States is that poverty-stricken and desperate.

Does Dzhokhar Tsarnaev deserve to die? Maybe. Can the United States restrain him? Yes. Some judge might reverse the verdict, and we do have the occasional escapee: but restraint is possible.

Will killing Tsarnaev restore his victims to life? No. Not even the United States Supreme Court can unkill someone.

Sometimes a murderer will, given time, decide that killing an innocent person was wrong.

St. Maria Goretti's killer, Alessandro Serenelli, deserved the death penalty. If he'd been killed, some folks might have congratulated themselves on their civic virtue: and Alessandro would not have had an opportunity to think about what he'd done.

Alessandro Serenelli eventually realized that he had done something very wrong. Later, after he was released from prison, he met Maria Goretti's mother: who forgave him. Her daughter had also done so before dying of her injuries. Allesandro later entered a monastery. (July 6, 2009)

State and Federal authorities want to kill Dylan Roof, the young man who killed nine folks at a Bible study in June.

His execution will, I think, be done legally: after a trial, and probably after appeals.

I think Dylan deserves the death penalty, but I also think that the state of North Carolina and the United States could protect citizens without killing this prisoner.

I hope that he gets time to think, as Alessandro Serenelli did.

What Dylan Roof did was very bad. Hanging on to anger, letting it build into a desire to harm or kill someone else, is a sin. So is murder. (Catechism, 1762-1775, 2302-2303, 2261)

I'm angry about what Dylan Roof did.

But if I cherish that anger, letting it build into hate and a desire to see him killed — that would be very wrong. Maintaining justice is a responsibility. So is loving our enemies. (Matthew 5:21-22, 44; Catechism, 2302-2306)

Recap


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

I must love God, and my neighbor: and see everyone as my neighbor. (Luke 10:25-27, 29-37; Catechism, 1789)

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. (Catechism, 1707-1709)

And that's yet another topic.

Living in a world of neighbors:
1 Love God, love my neighbor, see everybody as my neighbor: it's simple, but not easy. (Matthew 5:43-44, 7:12, 22:36-40; Mark 12:28-31; Luke 6:31 10:25-27, 29-37; Catechism, 1789)

The principle of reciprocity we call the Golden Rule isn't, quite, unique to Christianity. I've written about that before:
2 Letter from Pope Francis to the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization (September 1, 2015):
3 About natural law:
"...This ordination of reason is called law. In man's free will, therefore, or in the moral necessity of our voluntary acts being in accordance with reason, lies the very root of the necessity of law. Nothing more foolish can be uttered or conceived than the notion that, because man is free by nature, he is therefore exempt from law. Were this the case, it would follow that to become free we must be deprived of reason; whereas the truth is that we are bound to submit to law precisely because we are free by our very nature. For, law is the guide of man's actions; it turns him toward good by its rewards, and deters him from evil by its punishments.

"Foremost in this office comes the natural law, which is written and engraved in the mind of every man; and this is nothing but our reason, commanding us to do right and forbidding sin. Nevertheless, all prescriptions of human reason can have force of law only inasmuch as they are the voice and the interpreters of some higher power on which our reason and liberty necessarily depend...."
("Libertas," Pope Leo XIII (June 20, 1888))
And see:
4 I have to take the Bible, Sacred Scripture, seriously. (Catechism, 101-133)

That's nowhere near the same as picking a few verses I like and warping them around my personal preferences, and that's — another topic. (October 12, 2014; July 13, 2014)
Posted by 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, August 9, 2015

Killing Bloggers in Bangladesh

I was getting ready to talk about 1 Kings 4-8 and John 6:41-51, two of today's Bible readings, when I read about Niloy Neel:


(From Facebook, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("Niloy Neel was an atheist from a Hindu background"
(BBC News))
"Bangladesh blogger Niloy Neel hacked to death in Dhaka"
(August 7, 2015)

"A Bangladeshi blogger known for his atheist views has been hacked to death by a gang armed with machetes in the capital Dhaka, police say.

"Niloy Neel was attacked at his home in the city's Goran area.

"He is the fourth secularist blogger to have been killed this year by suspected Islamist militants in Bangladesh.

"Imran H Sarkar, head of the Bangladesh Blogger and Activist Network, told the BBC that Mr Neel had been an anti-extremist voice of reason.

" 'He was the voice against fundamentalism and extremism and was even a voice for minority rights - especially women's rights and the rights of indigenous people,' he said.

"BBC World Service South Asia editor Charles Haviland says that, like previous victims, Mr Neel was not only secular but atheist and, like two of the others, he was from a Hindu, not a Muslim, background...."
What I had to say about the Bread of life, depression, and Ezekiel's run-in with Jezebel, will wait.

Niloy Neel's killers probably thought they were committing an execution, not a murder. Either way, Niloy Neel is dead: and quite a few other folks in Bangladesh are in serious danger.1

At first glance, this looks like something that doesn't matter to me. I'm not an atheist; my life hasn't been threatened; and I live in central North America: a long way from Bangladesh.

But "atheist" bloggers in Bangladesh are human, I'm Catholic: so I must care about them, and everyone else.

I'll get back to that after another excerpt from BBC News:
"...Analysis: Mukul Devichand, editor, BBC Trending

"All four men killed were on a list of 84 'atheist bloggers' drawn up by Islamic groups in 2013 and widely circulated.

"It was originally submitted to the government with the aim of having the bloggers arrested and tried for blasphemy. The groups which wanted bloggers arrested told us they have no knowledge of who is behind the killings.

"There is also a more complex backdrop to the killings. Islamic groups label all these bloggers 'atheists' - and many did indeed use the internet to criticise those who believe in God.

"But in fact, not all the bloggers were atheists. What they did have in common was they were part of a wider, secular movement that took to the streets in protest in 2013...."
(BBC News)

Life and Love


Human life is sacred. All human life: mine, yours, Mukul Devichand's, Niloy Neel's, his killers'; everyone's. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2258-2262)

I must love God, love my neighbors, see everyone as my neighbor, and treat others as I'd like to be treated. No exceptions. (Matthew 5:43-44, 7:12, 22:36-40, Mark 12:28-31; Luke 6:31 10:25-27, 29-37; Catechism, 1789)

I also must respect folks who don't believe as I do: including atheists. We're all rational creatures, able to talk with each other.2 How we use our reason — or don't use it — is up to us, and that gets me into free will and other topics. (Catechism, 39, 1730, 2104)

If you've met a Catholic whose loathing of 'foreigners' is exceeded only by his or her seething hatred of immigrants: I'm not surprised.

Loving God and neighbors isn't easy. I'm describing what we should believe and how we should act: not how the billion-plus living Catholics actually live up to those standards.

Our failure to live up to the standards set by Sts. Thomas More and John Fisher, St. Francis of Assisi, and Pope St. Fabian, reflects our shortcomings. It doesn't mean that loving our neighbors, and treating others as we'd like to be treated, is a bad idea.

Change, Then - - -



(From "The Public Schools Historical Atlas" by Charles Colbeck, via Hel-hama, Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
(Europe in 814, the year Charlemagne died.)

About a dozen centuries back, a warlord brought order and a measure of stability to lands from Vasdomia to Chrobatia, and from the Kingdom of the Lombards to Jutland. For the first time since Rome's empire had dissolved, folks from the Mediterranean to the North sea had some hope of peace and stability.

We call him Charles the Great. Charlemagne is also known as Karl der Große, Carolus, and Karolus Magnus. Charlemagne has been mythologized as a shining light of civilization, and a demonic slayer of 'true' Europeans. There's a little truth in both images.

Scholarship, arts, architecture, and literature, flourished during his reign. On the other hand, he gave those he conquered a choice: say that they were Christian, or die.

My wife probably lost relatives when Charlemagne's enforcers gave folks in Verden a choice: become Christian, or die. We're still cleaning up the mess that left.

Eventually, her ancestors and mine became Christians: keeping parts of our native cultures, but abandoning customs like human sacrifice.

Europe has changed quite a bit since Charlemagne's day.

The Avar Khaganate was conquered, partly by Charlemagne's empire, partly by the First Bulgarian Empire. Ystrad Clud is currently part of southern Scotland and northern England. Frisia eventually joined the Upstalsboom League, and you hardly ever read about either these days.

Europe settled down for a bit — until the Lindisfarne incident, when Vikings started stirring things up. I probably had kinsmen on both sides of that.

- - - and Now


A little later, the Great Famine of 1315–17, Black Death, and assorted other crises set off a series of economic and social upheavals.

I think Western civilization lost track of some important values over the next few centuries, but we've made some progress, too. About a half-century back we finally decided that killing each other in wholesale lots was a bad idea.

The United Nations and European Union aren't perfect, and I'd be astounded if either last more than a a few centuries: but they're a start.

We haven't had anything quite like the Black Death lately, and I hope we're within a few generations of putting famine on humanity's 'problem almost solved' list. (January 23, 2015; October 17, 2014)

I'm not sure what overturned so many American applecarts in the mid-1960s. I strongly suspect that we're looking at an anything-but-simple situation.

Many folks with African ancestry had moved from the Old South to the Rust belt during the first half of the 20th century. Folks had been moving off the farm and into cities, and the mean center of population shifted from Indiana to Illinois as American families moved west: many to California.

I strongly suspect that many baby boomers were raised by comparatively affluent couples — who had unintentionally isolated themselves from their extended families.

Pulling up roots and moving is nothing new. We've been doing it for a very long time. (May 3, 2015; July 11, 2014)

In 'Happy Days' America, inexperienced young couples left their elders behind.

Age doesn't necessarily bring wisdom, but I'm not convinced that self-appointed 'child psychology experts' were an improvement on an extended family's grandmothers, aunts, uncles, and grandfathers.

I'm a 'boomer,' by some definitions: and remember the 'good old days' when "she's smart as a man" was supposed to be a compliment.

I was one of 'those crazy kids' who thought buying stuff you don't need with money you don't have to impress people you don't like — made no sense. I still don't, and that's almost another topic.

The point of this trip down memory lane is that America and the world have changed, a lot, in the last century.

Some of the changes haven't turned out as I had hoped, but I most sincerely do not yearn for the 'good old days.'

Dealing With Difference


Folks in Bangladesh who wanted their country's government to punish 'blasphemers' may be as sincere as Americans who want to protect their country from people like me.

I 'look Anglo,' but I'm not. One of my ancestors, asked about a young man who had shown interest in her daughter, replied "he doesn't have family, he's Irish." The two got married anyway, which made me possible.

Most Americans have probably gotten over the shock of having Irish neighbors by now, and it's been decades since Father James Coyle was killed for marrying a Puerto Rican to the daughter of a 'regular American.' (September 11, 2014)

But like I've said before, being sincere doesn't justify acting badly.

Bangladesh is a new country, less than a half-century old, but folks have been living there since traders near the Ravi river were importing lapis lazuli. Longer, actually.

That part of the world has changed since the Pala Empire's day. For example, almost half the folks there can read and write these days: 61.3% (men) and 52.2% (women) in 2010. (Wikipedia)

Depending on your viewpoint, that's a low literacy rate: or evidence of a shocking disregard for traditional values.

I don't see a problem with "letting" women read, write, drive cars, or think. But that's no great virtue on my part. My mother's Norwegian, my father's mostly Irish, and I married a German-American whose father told the local school to let one of his daughters take shop class if she wanted to.

I've talked about Ephesians 5:22, cultural quirks, and getting a grip, before. (October 12, 2014)

So, what can I do to make Bangladesh safe for folks who don't live up the standards of some Islamic soreheads? Very little, actually.

There's prayer, of course. I don't write about that aspect of my faith much, but it's important. (August 26, 2014)

I can also share what I think about living in a big world.

Looking Ahead


I am part of an outfit that's literally καθολικός, universal: a united and diverse people, embracing all cultures and all times. It's about as close to living in Tennyson's "Federation of the world" as I can hope for in my remaining years:
"...Till the war-drum throbbed no longer, and the battle-flags were furl'd
In the Parliament of man, the Federation of the world....

"...And the kindly earth shall slumber, lapt in universal law...."
("Locksley Hall," Tennyson (1842, rev. 1865) via gutenberg.org)
The Catholic Church has "universal law:" rules that apply to everybody.

They boil down to what I wrote earlier: 'love God, love my neighbor, see everybody as my neighbor.' (Matthew 22:36-40, Mark 12:28-31; Matthew 5:43-44; Mark 12:28-31; Luke 10:25-30; Catechism, 1825)

How we apply this universal law depends on how, where, and when, we live.

This isn't the 1st, 11th, or 20th, century any more. My job isn't trying to live in some bygone era. It's applying principles that haven't changed since before Hammurabi's Code was written to living in today's world.

Change happens, some things don't change, and that's another topic. Topics. (Catechism, 302, 1954-1960)

Even if I could, I wouldn't force you to believe what I do. Again: I must respect everyone who seeks truth. (Catechism, 2104)

As I've said before, often, part of our mandate is building a better world — one with a greater degree of justice and charity: and respect for "the transcendent dignity of man." (Catechism, 1928-1942, 2419-2442)

That includes freedom to worship: for everyone.

I can hardly expect others to respect my right to worship if I heap abuse on those who are not just like me. Or, worse, try forcing them to agree with me. (Catechism, 1738, 2104-2109, 2357-2359)

I think we can make a difference — If we help others keep what is good and just in our cultures, change what is not, and act as if loving our neighbors makes sense.

We must be patient, though. Folks can't be forced to embrace truth: particularly when it means giving up some cherished injustice, or long-established privileges.

But truth wins — eventually. Slavery, for example, had been a way of life for millennia. Laws regarding slaves show up in the law codes of Ur-Nammu and Hammurabi, and Roman law.

Then, a century or so back, quite a few folks in some nations started acting as if owning people was wrong. I've been over that before. (August 31, 2014; July 13, 2014)

That's just one social ill, of course. Humanity has an enormous backlog of unresolved issues: including a regrettably-common hatred of folks who are different.

A few more thoughts, and I'm done.

There's nothing most of us can do to keep wannabe leaders from using fear and hate to attract attention or suppress opposing opinions. But we can avoid following their example.

I remember the trailing edge of McCarthyism, endured political correctness, and think both were very bad ideas. (July 19, 2015; November 11, 2011)

I think, and hope, that Bangladesh will recover from colonial rule, and that most folks there will get used to the idea that having different opinions isn't a crime.

Maybe — if we keep working with all people of good will — some time around the 42nd century we'll even have an "international authority with the necessary competence and power" to resolve conflicts without war. (Catechism, 2307-2317; "Gaudium et Spes," 79 § 4)

And that's yet another topic.

More of my take on cautious optimism and the long view:
1 More:
2 Truth and respect are important:
" 'All men are bound to seek the truth, especially in what concerns God and his Church, and to embrace it and hold on to it as they come to know it.'26 This duty derives from 'the very dignity of the human person.'27 It does not contradict a 'sincere respect' for different religions which frequently 'reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men,'28 nor the requirement of charity, which urges Christians 'to treat with love, prudence and patience those who are in error or ignorance with regard to the faith.'29"
(Catechism, 2104)
I've been over that sort of thing before. Quite a bit:
Posted by 2 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.