Computers Can Do That?

So asked Homer Simpson. I'm wondering if this doesn't prove more (and less) than the article is admitting. In other words does it only (apparently) prove the existence of a "Necessary Being" which is only the first of several logical steps on the road to finding the Father of Jesus and us all?

Scientists Use Computer to Mathematically Prove Gödel God Theorem - SPIEGEL ONLINE.

(Via Reddit Catholicism.)

What Bias?

Father Z nails it:

Child violators get a pass from liberals when they are “gay” right activists:

From NewsBusters:

Pedophiles Are Not National News — When They’re Gay Rights Pioneers

Read the whole thing.

(Via WDTPRS.)

What I Believe

The recent attempt at a dialogue with a Bible-only commenter hasn't borne fruit, yet. That's ok, not everyone is into discourse.

Perhaps what is needed is to first establish the common ground that we have. To effectively disagree with someone you must first have something you both agree on. Otherwise you have no common terms or concepts which you can both appeal to. The debate ends up being two unrelated soliloquies interrupting each other. So what, potentially, do I have in common with most Bible-only Christians?

First and foremost, we have Jesus Christ, Lord and Saviour. No one and nothing takes precedence, once you have recognized Him. As a Catholic I feel obliged to point out that this includes, logically speaking, the Bible. Not that they are opposed to each other or in tension somehow. Rather, that the Bible only stands–directly and indirectly–on Jesus Himself:

“[S]cripture cannot be broken”


(John 10:35 RSV)

And I find the ancient Roman baptismal formula (via Tertullian) to be an excellent summary of Christian beliefs about Jesus:

We,...believe that there is one only God...that this one only God has also a Son, His Word, who proceeded from Himself, by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made. Him we believe to have been sent by the Father into the Virgin, and to have been born of her-being both Man and God, the Son of Man and the Son of God, and to have been called by the name of Jesus Christ; we believe Him to have suffered, died, and been buried, according to the Scriptures, and, after He had been raised again by the Father and taken back to heaven, to be sitting at the right hand of the Father, and that He will come to judge the quick and the dead.

Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, eds., Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian (ANF III; Accordance electronic ed. 9 vols.; New York: Christian Literature Company, 1885), n.p.

This testimony [circa A.D. 213] is an early example of the ancient belief of those who eventually defined for us the canon of Scripture. Of course the remainder of the formula will refer to "the Holy Church". And examining what the First Christians meant by that may well divide us.

Second, we have the Scripture, though my Protestant brethren have a truncated version. We will both profess, I hope, verbal plenary Inspiration of Scripture. For the meaning of this the Wikipedia gives a good summary:

This view gives a greater role to the human writers of the Bible, while maintaining a belief that God preserved the integrity of the words of the Bible."[18] The effect of inspiration was to move the authors so as to produce the words God wanted.[17] In this view the human writers' "individual backgrounds, personal traits, and literary styles were authentically theirs, but had been providentially prepared by God for use as his instrument in producing Scripture."[18]

Admittedly that might actually separate me from some Catholics today but it doesn't have to. This language is generally associated with Evangelicals but is fully compatible with orthodox Catholic thought.

If my interlocutor avers the Dictation Theory of Biblical Inspiration then we must part ways and begin our conversation there.

Is that enough to begin with?

Just Sharing

a profound thought from Father Roderick:

Willpower isn't something you either have or don't have. It's something you schedule.

Stick that in you pipe and smoke it.

Farewell, WoW

WoW and I are parting ways and it's making me a little sad. I started playing a few years ago with a good friend. The whole imaginary world appealed to me. Most of the characters are ugly in some way or other but they grew on me.

But I've been playing on my own of late and it's not the same. Mind you, having your escort constantly correcting your inappropriate behaviour wasn't a good experience. I was fine with it but it was wearing on them. Now they've moved on to other games and I guess its time for me to, also.

I will remember the fantastic landscapes of the many different regions: the savannahs of the Northern Barrens; the dinosaur-filled jungles of Un'Goro Crater; the appropriately bleak Hellfire Peninsula; the exotic colouring of the swampy Zangamarsh with it's humongous mushrooms. Even the new continent, Pandaria has some beautiful places.

But the time to move on has come. Commander: Europe at War, anyone? What about Hearthstone?

Some Racists Are OK

At least that is the conclusion I and others have reached when things like the quote below are said and the political elite doesn't even deign to notice:

Two kinds of racism:

Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.

Read the whole thing.

(Via SoCon Or Bust.)

Theology Properly Taught

This is how to teach the Summa to high schoolers:

Batman v. Superman: Helping High Schoolers Understand the Summa

In the Church History Class I teach, we have finally arrived at the Scholastic period. I simply did not want to gloss over the scholastics without having my students at least try and read St. Thomas Aquinas (we were going to look at the existence of God questions, primarily Book 1, Question 2, Article 3); yet, I was wrestling for a way to try explain Thomas, the scholastic method in a way that they would understand -- I mean an argument free from most technical terms for which the average high school Senior would be familiar.

Read the whole thing.

(Via Catholic And Enjoying It.)

Evangelization and Arguments

I recently deleted a comment because it had no relationship the post it was allegedly commenting on. I’ve been thinking about the comment, the writer’s purposes, his assumptions and his method.

HIs topic was the Catholic honouring of the Saints. He argued against it by citing Bible passages that contain the words Saint or Saints and showing that none of these passages refer to a dead saint. HIs purpose, seemingly, would be to lead me from Catholic “error” into Biblical truth. There’s nothing wrong with trying to increase the amount of truth on the Internet.

The assumptions he makes about the Bible are interesting. He seems to assume that the Protestant canon of Scripture is correct and so ignores the clear testimony of 2 Macc 15:11-17. But that book is one of those which isn’t in his canon so he ignored it. And I’m wondering if he’s assuming the Perspicuity of Scripture based on his doing an English word search and basing his conclusions on that. That is not at all unusual amongst "Bible Only” Christians.

I assume that he didn’t do this study especially for me since it wasn’t related to the post. So how to rate his effectiveness? In the end my intellectual curiosity was aroused by his comment, even if I deleted it. But what chance did he have of persuading me when we’re so far apart in some key beliefs?

 The kinds of issues he would need to deal with would include: 

• The process and authority of the closing of the canon of Scripture;
• The clear Scriptural reference to the difficulty of interpreting Scripture (2 Pet 3:15-16);
• The failure of Scripture to claim for itself the authority that “Sola Scriptura” claims for it;
• The fact that both written and oral Tradition are honoured in Scripture.
• The ultimate circularity of the Bible-Only position.

That’s a lot of ground to cover. Perhaps you would like to comment on this post.

Test # 2

Testing again this time with an updated Marsedit.

As Long As We're Talking about Modern Shibboleths

Let's talk about men and women being equal in every way:

The Problems of Women in Combat – From a Female Combat Vet
:

Because most women wouldn’t even qualify to be in the military if they didn’t have separate standards. Men and women are different, but those pushing women into combat don’t want to admit that truth. They huff and puff about how women can do whatever men can do, but it just ain’t so. We’re built differently, and it doesn’t matter that one particular woman could best one particular man. The best woman is still no match for the best man, and most of the men she’d be fireman-carrying off the battlefield will be at least 100 lbs heavier than her with their gear on.

Read the whole thing.

(Via SoCon Or Bust.)

Gay Parents Are Just Like Other Parents?

Is there some room to express doubt about that?

Life on GLAAD’s Blacklist | LifeSiteNews.com:

America doesn't know that this is part of same-sex parenting, because Americans have been blocked from hearing from me, Dawn Stefanowicz, Jean-Dominique Bunel, "Janna," Manuel Half, Rivka Edelman, and the blogger known as "the Bigot" -- just some of the many people I've come to know over the last year and a half, who have the human stories to dispel the myth that all is well with "gay families." This scares the crap out of people at GLAAD. It scares the crap out of them that I'm a professor and fluent enough in the way research works to know that the "consensus" on same-sex parenting is a fraud. It scares the crap out of them that I have a scholarly record in African-American Studies and queer readings of Thoreau and Whitman, so they can't write me off as a wacko, unwashed homophobe.

Read the whole thing.

(Via LifeSiteNews.)

Has the Sexual Revolution Been Good for Women?

This is an interesting overview of some of the gender issues in culture and politics:

Of all the political gambits that ought to be torn from the playbook once and for all, the idea that a national “war on women” is afoot has got to top the list. It’s an ideological whopper that demands more scrutiny than it has so far gotten — because underneath it are solid rocks of myth, especially myths about the sexual revolution and its real fallout. Let’s turn over a few of these to see what facts they hide.

(Via SoCon Or Bust.)

Thank You Father Z

for this:

Much needed funny cartoon:

From HERE:

Share/Bookmark

(Via WDTPRS.)

Thank You Father Z

for this:

Much needed funny cartoon:

From HERE:

Share/Bookmark

(Via WDTPRS.)

I Agree with Mark Shea

and Simcha Fisher:

Simcha Fisher Talks Sense…:

…to bedwetting panicmongers.

If some stranger came to me and said, “I thought I overheard your wife say that she is a Zoroastrian who spits on Jesus Christ” my first thought would not be, “Could this possibly be true? Is everything I know of her a lie? What do I do? O what do I do!!!!!”

Read the whole thing.

(Via Catholic and Enjoying It!.)

Sagrada Familia

will be finished in 2026. Since I most likely won't be around to enjoy the sight here is someone's imagining of it:

Here's how Barcelona's Sagrada Familia will look when it's finally done in 2026...:

When Spanish architect Antoni Gaudí was tragically killed by a train in 1926, he was in the middle of building of his masterpiece—the Barcelona basilica, Sagrada Familia. Eighty-six years later, the church still isn't complete. But according to Jordi Faulí, the current architect on the magnificent life-sized sand castle, it'll be done by 2026. This is what it's going to look like.

Read the whole thing.

(Via New Advent.)

William Lane Craig Does Nifty Work

Your lesson in Natural Theology today:

William Lane Craig Does Nifty Work:

(Via Mark Shea.)

Want to Come to Rome?

How's that for a timely invitation?

Want to Come to Rome?:

Come to Rome withMark “Catholic and Enjoying It!” SheaandFr. Shane “Catholic Ragemonkey” Tharp!Click on the pic for more information! 

(Via Mark Shea.)

My Favorite City

It's true you shouldn't have favourite offspring so it might also be true that you shouldn't have a favourite city. As if that was gong to stop me. I've visited Rome four times, only once on a day trip. The others lasted from five to nine days. And still I can't get enough.

Life will probably not permit me to see her again but this article sure gave me great pleasure. You have to be a history and art buff to get the full flavour of it. Read it anyway even if you're not.

Rome’s past shows not only in her monuments and ruins, but in the very layout of the streets themselves...:

The new Mayor of the city of Rome, Ignazio Marino, just announced his intention to destroy one of the city’s central roads, the Via dei Fori Imperiali, and turn the area around the old Roman Forum into the world’s largest archaeological park. Reactions have ranged from commuters’ groans to declarations from classicists that this single act proves the nobility of the human species.

Read the whole thing.

(Via .)

So How Do They Pick a Pope Anyway?

This is quite nice:

So How Do They Pick a Pope Anyway?:

An explanation in nifty graphic form.

(Via Catholic and Enjoying It!.)