Stephen Roney's Blog, page 164

Playing the Fool

 

Basil the Blessed, a celebrated Russian "fool for Christ"

Another possible objection to Christianity found in my 1982 notebook:

“Because religion is unreasoning. It is bound to appeal primarily to those whose reasoning is deficient. Therefore it is by nature anti-intellectual, and, if I subscribe to it, I am announcing to the world that I am not as intelligent or intellectual as I would like them to think. Therefore the world will mock me as a fool.”

This is based on a false premise, dealt with in a previous post: that religion is unreasoning. 

But, leaving that aside, this is a good example of the first of the three great temptations to sin, “the world, the flesh, and the devil.” It is caring about what the world thinks instead of what is true.

If you become religious, it is probably always true that the world will mock you as a fool. “For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.” The world is, by definition, of average intelligence and, as the old saying goes, “no better than it should be.” The world will value the average, and resent the exceptional. Some psychologist claims to have determined that, if you meet someone whose IQ is fifteen points higher than yours, you simply cannot understand their thinking. They will to you appear mad.

This principle of mediocrity therefore extends to the social class commonly recognized as “the intellectuals.” Who decides who is or is not of this class? They choose one another, generation after generation, in the academic faculty and “peer review” model. Which tends to extend as well to such things as literary magazines. But who selected this group, to go on to select the others? It will ultimately be the mass of common people—crowds flocking to Jordan Peterson lectures today, students flocking to Socrates in his day. The mass of common people are not qualified to recognize who is much smarter than they are, and who isn’t. A little smarter, yes. A lot smarter, no.

The recognized intelligentsia will therefore not be the highly intelligent, but people of average intelligence or a bit more who play this role, and mouth the opinions currently supposed to be the intelligent ones. The only thing certain about these opinions is that they will go against common sense—for if they were common sense, they would not set you apart as one of the intellectuals.

Not that common sense is a very reliable guide—just a better one than always having to go against common sense.

One could, perhaps, select the supposed intelligentsia by raw IQ score. But this would not work either. There is the issue of application. Just because you have tha ability to reason well does not mean you habitually use it. Not everyone who is seven feet tall is a great basketball player. In fact, people with high natural intelligence can learn to be intellectually lazy. To cope with everyday life they never need to think very hard.

We all have the moral obligation, however, not to just conform to those around us, and to think as carefully as we can, for ourselves, about what is true and right and wrong.

How narrow is the gate, and restricted is the way

that leads to life! Few are those who find it.

--Matthew 7:14

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

In Search of a Man on a White Horse

 

Dave Rubin says, “at this point, you only have to be sane to find yourself on the right.”

That seems obviously true. To be on the left, you have to believe that men can decide to be women, and women men. You have to believe that there is nothing morally troubling about abortion. You have to believe that there was an attempted coup by a crowd of people pushing into the Capitol Building. You have to believe that human equality is a racist concept. And so on and on, with a new impossibility seemingly added every day.

A lot of people are surprised to find themselves on the right. Including Dave Rubin. Or me.

Surely this means the left must implode. It falls under the category of “extraordinary popular delusions and the madness of crowds.” Such movements generally end with a crash, as everyone suddenly sobers up. 

Indeed, those on the left seem to be deliberately pushing into more and more ridiculous contradictions, as though desperate to be called out.

I fear they are implicitly calling for a dictator, some strong parent-like voice that will take over the responsibility and discipline they are having trouble with and tell them what to believe. A daddy who will set some boundaries.  A Charlie Manson or a Hitler, possibly. Or a Mark Zuckerberg, a Tony Fauci, or a Jordan Peterson.

It bears remembering that Hitler and Mussolini arose on the left, not the right.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Faith and Reason

 

Allegory of Faith, Vermeer

Another possible objection to Christianity, noted in my 1982 diary:

“Religion is unreasoning—blind faith. Truth must be worked out by reasonable discussion among reasonable people. Blind faith is fanaticism, and can only lead to conflict.”

This is a common and deadly misunderstanding. I blame Martin Luther and his doctrine of sola fides, “salvation by faith alone.”

A Protestant once challenged me with what I would do if I decided that some key teaching of the Catholic Church was wrong. He claimed shock at my immediate answer: that I would leave the Church. Had I no faith?

 “Faith” does not mean arbitrary belief, but trust, or having the courage of one’s convictions. As you might say, “I have faith in my wife.” That does not mean you arbitrarily decide she exists, and it is not a conviction arrived at with no evidence.

True faith or belief must be evidence- and reason-based. Catholicism is relentlessly rational.

One believes in whatever religion one believes in, follows whatever faith one follows, because after sincere examination to the best of your abilities, it is the most reasonable account of the universe. 

Anything else makes you a madman, an idiot, or a scoundrel.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

The Seventh Day

 

One objection to Christianity, appearing in my 1982 notebook, is that it takes too much time.

“Religion may be an admirable thing, but I am too busy meeting the demands of this world to give time and energy to the demands of a hypothetical next.”

This obviously had to do with ritual requirements: attending mass, not studying on Sunday, praying regularly.

Hinduism seems to acknowledge the issue. It speaks of life stages. In mid-life, as a householder, you have family responsibilities. They take precedence. After the children have grown, you become a sanyassin, a seeker, and may retreat to the forest.

Also reassuring is Jesus’s dictum that “the Sabbath is for man, not man for the Sabbath.” 

The full text of the Third Commandment reads:

Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates.

Sounds like the intent is to give everyone a holiday, not some new duty. Presumably, then, one is not obligated to take the time off if it becomes a burden rather than a respite.

It would seem to follow that, similarly, prayer is for man’s benefit, not God’s. Not an obligation, but an available grace. 

Saint Theresa, they say, was once upbraided for falling asleep during prayer time. Her response: “Surely God loves me as much asleep as awake.”

It seems perverse, then, to frame it as an obligation. The obligation, rather, is to seek truth, beauty, and the good. That is what life is for, and it might be accomplished best by studying on Sunday.

I am accordingly suspicious of the Catholic Church’s commandment that one has an obligation to attend mass. I honour it, personally, but I am not confident that it is the divine intent. It does not reflect the actual commandment, which speaks only of rest.

Many who attend do not seem to me to be Christians, but Pharisees, who merely want to be seen publicly praying. Public attendance and visible fellowship feels at times like endorsing this hypocrisy. If it feels wrong to take credit for attending mass, and it does, it equally feels wrong to condemn anyone for not attending.

“Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven….

“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.” (Matthew 6:1-6)

The Church of course needs mass attendance for its financial support. That said, it is indeed important to give the church financial support, as the vessel preserving the deposit of faith.

But the point is the leisure of the Sabbath is for contemplation and study. This is true worship: to take the time to ensure that one is on the right path. If one is not, all one does the other six days of the week is wasted or worse. One takes this time each week to seek the true, the good, and, as the third reliable indication of the presence of the divine, the beautiful.

Aside from the Eucharist, this quest may or may not, at the present day, lead you to mass at the nearest parish. It is plausible that one might find something else more valuable: reading the Bible, reading Aquinas, watching Jordan Peterson YouTube videos, going to the art gallery, or a long walk in the snow. Sadly, the music of the mass is now inane. The language of the mass is not particularly inspiring; many think Latin was better, and it certainly lacks the poetry of, say, the King James Bible. The sermon is usually pedestrian and rarely offers new insights.

This may explain why mass attendance is down. In former years, there were fewer alternatives. Getting dressed up and attending was a notable form of entertainment, of diversion. As competition for our attention has gotten fiercer, instead of making it more beautiful or entertaining, the Church has made it more mundane. Fundamental blunder.

Entering a church should feel like entering another world. It should make the next appear more than merely hypothetical. When it does not, we have some justification in seeking our Sabbath elsewhere.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

Invictus

 

The blind and the lame.

In my diary from 1982, I listed my reasons for doubt about Christianity. These may be of some interest.

First objection: “religion is a crutch.” Surely it is nobler to face life as it is, with no illusions that everything will turn out all right. 

Beyond this place of wrath and tears

Looms but the Horror of the shade,

And yet the menace of the years

Finds, and shall find, me unafraid.

It matters not how strait the gate,

How charged with punishments the scroll,

I am the master of my fate

I am the captain of my soul.

I answer that, if you are lame, is it smart or brave to refuse a crutch? Isn’t it smarter and braver to face your own infirmity, and to improve?

If you are not lame, do you have any right to congratulate yourself for it?

Was it thanks to your own efforts if you were not struck lame with childhood polio? Was it thanks to your own efforts if you were not born mentally retarded? That you were born, say, into a middle-class family in a prosperous part of the world?

God—or “luck”—has been good to you if you can mouth such swaggering lines. You are not in command, and you are simply being ungrateful. You have no right to take the credit, any more than to look down on those less fortunate.

So you reckoned, my bright young mastodon,

That God was a crutch for the lame.

And you’d call the lame man a loser,

As if loss were a reason for shame.

Go, walk down the darkening morning

As one not accustomed to beg

And hold your head high as a street lamp

Till you feel a sharp pain in your leg.

And, hey, look over your shoulder;

An old man is dressing to grieve.

And he’s hiding an ace in his pocket watch

And he’s hiding a laugh up his sleeve.

 

-- Stephen Kent Roney
'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

A Vision of Fifty Years Ago

 

I discovered recently a notebook I kept back in 1982 or so. I was reflecting, in turn, on an event that took place ten years earlier, an important moment in my own spiritual journey.

It was the first winter of Elrond College, a student-owned high-rise co-op designed by and for Queen’s University students who considered themselves of the left or of the cultural avant garde.

It was towards evening, and towards Christmas. Snow was falling on the abandoned gas station across Princess Street. A Salvation Army band gathered in a circle of lamplight, and began to serenade. Not well, as I recall, but with some spirit. I opened the window to listen. It seemed to me a grace note just before exams.

What I soon heard instead were hoots and jeers from heads at other windows. 

The band persisted. The enraged spectators started to throw wads of paper. 

I felt suddenly, utterly alienated from my generational and intellectual peers. 

I can understand the annoyance of the other students. It was exam time. They had to study.

But I felt Mary had chosen the better part. What was it all for, anyway?

At around the same time, I had either a dream or a waking vision that society had descended into trench warfare. And I found myself, to my shock, fighting alongside evangelical Christians, against the left of which I thought I was a part, for basic human liberty.

The dream or vision seems to have been prophetic. Fifty years later, that is almost where we are.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

A Vision Fifty Years Ago

 

I discovered recently a notebook I kept back in 1982 or so. I was reflecting, I turn, on an event that took place ten years earlier, an important moment in my own spiritual journey.

It was the first winter of Elrond College, a student-owned high-rise co-op designed by and for Queen’s University students who considered themselves of the left or of the cultural avant garde.

It was towards evening, and towards Christmas. Snow was falling on the abandoned gas station across Princess Street. A Salvation Army band gathered in a circle of lamplight, and began to serenade. Not well, as I recall, but with some spirit. I opened the window to listen. It seemed to me a grace note just before exams.

What I soon heard instead were hoots and jeers from heads at other windows. 

The band persisted. The enraged spectators started to throw wads of paper. 

I felt suddenly, utterly alienated from my generational and intellectual peers. 

I can understand the annoyance of the other students. It was exam time. They had to study.

But I felt Mary had chosen the better part. What was it all for, anyway?

At around the same time, I had either a dream or a waking vision that society had descended into trench warfare. And I found myself, to my shock, fighting alongside evangelical Christians, against the left of which I thought I was a part, for basic human liberty.

The dream or vision seems to have been prophetic. Fifty years later, that is almost where we are.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

I Ain't Afraid of No Ghosts

 

There is a common misconception that Christians do not believe in ghosts. See the video clip.

No religion that denied the existence of ghosts would be worthy of attention. My own misunderstanding that Christianity did not believe in ghosts held me back from full-hearted commitment to Christianity at one point. Of course there are ghosts. People all over the world report encounters. This denial made Christianity look less like a conduit to the next world than a charade in defense of philistinism. It looked like trying not to think about the next life. It looked like whistling past the graveyard.

Gerald, the resident Christian voice in the clip, explains that there is a prohibition in the Old Testament against trying to consult with the dead.

If so, Jesus is guilty of this sin.

Matthew 17: 1-3: 

After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light. Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah, talking with Jesus.

The event is in three gospels, and referred to in the fourth.

What is prohibited is necromancy. That is, divination: calling upon the spirits to tell you the future. This implies a lack of trust in God, and in divine free will.

This has been cooked into a prohibition on contact with the dead by Protestant theologians who want to discourage prayer to the saints and a belief in purgatory, ultimately because this allows for indulgences, which Martin Luther saw as corrupt. So some protestant groups do not believe I ghosts. But most Christians are Catholic or Orthodox, and do.

Gerald then explains that communication with the dead is not possible: “there is no coming back.” Apart from the Transfiguration, already cited, the prophet Simon is successfully summoned from the afterlife in the Old Testament (1 Samuel 28). Not to mention Lazarus. Or, er, Jesus Christ.

Gerald cites the story of the rich man and (the other) Lazarus, as his evidence. There, he submits, it is not possible for Lazarus to return to earth to warn the rich man’s relatives. 

But this is not what the story says. 

He said, ‘Then, father, I beg you to send him to my father’s house—for I have five brothers—that he may warn them, so that they will not also come into this place of torment.’ Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; they should listen to them.’ He said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

Abraham’s refusal makes it clear that Lazarus could go. But it would be futile. If there were capable of ignoring the Mosaic law, they will ignore a ghost. As many do in the modern world. God gives us what we need to know; he does not pressure or bully us. Nor should we do right merely from fear of punishment.

This passage endorses Judaism as a perfectly sufficient religion. The “someone rising from the dead” is surely a reference to Jesus.

Why doesn’t the rich man go himself to war his brothers?  Asking Lazarus to go implies that he understands Lazarus is in a different position. Souls in hell cannot appear to those on earth, it seems. But souls in heaven can.

Stephen Crowder then chimes in to deny that one’s dead relatives look down on you from heaven. “Angels are not human.”

They can be. As St. Augustine points out, “angel” is not a class of being, but an office, that of messenger between heaven and earth. There are various classes of spiritual beings: seraphim, cherubim, and so forth. But there are also the spirits of the dead, and there is no reason they cannot perform this function. 

Indeed, this is the function of the saints, and to deny it happens is to deny the saints.

And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. – Revelations.

Even if they are not emissaries between earth and heaven, why wouldn’t the sainted dead continue to be interested in those they love on earth?

If heaven is the fulfilment of our desires, how could heaven be heaven for a good, unselfish man or woman if they could no longer see or know what is happening with their loved ones still in the world below, and, indeed, could not help them in some way?

Crowder avoids the problem by suggesting that everyone enters heaven at the same moment, because this is the nature of eternity. 

This is not the teaching of the Catholic Church; otherwise there would be no distinction between the particular judgement at death and the general judgement at the end of time. Nor does it work conceptually. Time is something of value: without time, there is no music, no prayer, no deeds, no games, no stories, no poetry, no art, no thought. All require duration. Therefore, heaven would be a profoundly inadequate place, not heaven at all, if there were no time. Rather, time is to heaven as space is as seen from a mountaintop—one reason why heaven is pictured as above us. You can observe any moment, past or future. Just as you can the three dimensions of space.

So a good Catholic believes in ghosts. The beings we encounter as ghosts might in any instance be angels or demons. But they might also be what they appear to be, or claim to be: the spirits of the departed, speaking to us from heaven or from purgatory.

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

We Three Kings

 

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.

The Magi

 

 Now as at all times I can see in the mind's eye,

In their stiff, painted clothes, the pale unsatisfied ones

Appear and disappear in the blue depths of the sky

With all their ancient faces like rain-beaten stones,

And all their helms of silver hovering side by side,

And all their eyes still fixed, hoping to find once more,

Being by Calvary's turbulence unsatisfied,

The uncontrollable mystery on the bestial floor.

-- W.B. Yeats 

'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.