A friend of mine recently told me about a conversation she had with her friend who considered himself a follower of Jesus, but who also held to the popular Dan Brown myth that one also often hears from Jehovah Witnesses and Muslims, that the divinity of Christ was something invented by the Emperor Constantine at the Council of Nicaea.
Don’t trust murdering albino monks when it comes to theology…
I promised my friend that I would put together a post to demonstrate the Divinity of Christ from both Sacred Scripture and Early Church history, so here it is…
A couple of months ago I found myself back around my old stomping ground of Washington DC. It was great to return to one of my favourite US cities, catching up with friends and re-visiting all my favourite places.
Since writing that earlier blog post, I visited Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary in Nebraska and did a double-take when I saw an office with his name on it! Clearly this guy gets around! his brother’s name on it!
Anyway, during this “Year of Faith”, the CIC has been hosting a series of lectures on the documents of the Second Vatican Council and I just so happened to be in town for Deacon Carnazzo’s lecture on Orientalium Ecclesiarum, the Decree concerning the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches, a subject close to my heart.
No, I’m not a Roman Catholic…
Deacon Carnazzo is himself an Eastern-Rite Catholic and during his talk he explained the origin of the Eastern Churches and gave a brief introduction to life as an Eastern Catholic. In his talk he encouraged all Western Catholics to become familiar with the Eastern Church. How is this to be done? Well, if you want to get to know someone, you share a meal with them. For Catholics, this means sharing in the Eucharistic feast.
So, in the spirit of this, I have set up a Facebook event and invited my friends to come with me to celebrate the Feast of St. Peter and St. Paul at the end of the month at my local Byzantine parish. If you’re in town and you’d like to come, feel free to shoot me an email.
The meaning of BC and AD recently came up in conversation. It’s come up a few times in fact….and you know what that means…it’s time to do a blog entry about it! 🙂
And, in case you think that knowledge like this has no practical application, you’re wrong. Understanding these terms allowed me to win points on the quiz game at Dave & Busters! That’s some real-world usage, right there!
This Sunday, as well being the Second Sunday of Easter, it is also Divine Mercy Sunday (declared by Pope John-Paul II in April 30, 2000). The Readings in the Lectionary therefore accordingly celebrate and proclaim the great mercy of God.
Three times in our psalm we sing “His mercy endures forever”. In our Gospel, when the fearful Apostles encounter the Lord whom they abandoned, they are greeted not with anger and condemnation but with invitations of “peace”. Our First Reading describes the early Christian community’s response to this Divine Mercy. Because of their experience of God’s great love for them, they in turn loved one another. They cared deeply for the brethren and put themselves and their possessions at the service of the community. This great love for God and neighbour is further explored by St. John in this week’s Second Reading.
Eternal God, in whom mercy is endless and the treasury of compassion inexhaustible, look kindly upon us and increase Your mercy in us, that in difficult moments we might not despair nor become despondent, but with great confidence submit ourselves to Your holy will, which is Love and Mercy itself – Divine Mercy Chaplet
I recently had a conversation in which a friend said that he was quite liked relativism. Relativism has all kinds of problems, not least of which is that there exists a logical contradiction at the most basic level, since it makes an absolute statement in saying that everything is relative.
Despite this logical error, relativism is extremely popular. After all, it seems a rather nice, live-and-let-live outlook on life. However, the very practical problem with relativism is that it’s not how we really live our lives, since we all hold many things to be absolute truths. This means that, in order to be a consistent relativist, one ends up having to say some pretty crazy things. For proof of this, please see the video below…
Update – Here’s a follow-up conversation on Facebook which I think is worth sharing so as to really spell out the ridiculousness of some of the things said:
Friend: Well besides the fact that Todd Friel is clearly a douche-bag, I am supremely in agreement with the relativist! Sorry!
Me: Oh yes, Todd is extremely obnoxious, that’s a given. But how can you agree with the relativist? Aside from the fact that he can’t see the inherent logical contradiction in the very definition of relativism, he says things which he can’t possibly believe to be true.
He couldn’t even affirm that 2+2=4! I can *guarantee* that he doesn’t live his life as though that could be false. Consider the question of his race. If that man had been asked in ANY other context, he’d have had no problem answering the simple question. He just knew that his paradigm was at stake, so he was forced to deny the obvious. This is the primary problem with relativism – it’s not how people really live their lives…
* If this guy bought some gum at a store with a $20 note, do you think he would complain if I tried to just give him a dime change? Are there objective arithmetic truths when his own money is at stake?! 🙂
* When this chap was filling in the enrollment form at college, do you really think he was unable to commit to saying that his ethnicity was African-American?
* When taking his Math final, do you think he seriously entertained the idea that 2+2=5?
* In his history class, do you think he would have disputed with someone who claimed that the Holocaust was evil? When studying about African Slavery in the deep south, do you think he would have suggested that, from a certain point of view, the brutal treatment of the slaves was, in fact, a morally praiseworthy thing?
This is the weakness with relativism – it’s not how anyone lives their life and, if applied consistently, renders someone completely unable to confront moral evil since even something as horrific as rape could technically be morally good from another person’s point of view.
Continuing my notes for The Four Loves, this is the second of two posts which continue my summary of Chapter 2 (“Likings and Loves for the subhuman”) of The Four Loves. In this post we will be looking at the final section of the chapter which Lewis devotes to the love of country, patriotism.
1. Everyone knows that patriotism can turn turn bad
…we all know now that this love [of country] becomes a demon when it becomes a god. Some begin to suspect that it is never anything but a demon.
2. But if we say it is always bad, we have to reject much
But then they have to reject half the high poetry and half the heroic action our race has achieved. We cannot keep even Christ’s lament over Jerusalem. He too exhibits love for His country.
3. In this chapter we will attempt to distinguish authentic patriotism from its demonic form
Let us limit our field…. We are only considering the sentiment itself in the shape of being able to distinguish its innocent from its demoniac condition.
4. We will be focussing on patriotism in subjects rather than rulers
Neither…[innocent nor demonic patriotism] is the efficient cause* of national behaviour. For strictly speaking it is rulers, not nations, who behave internationally. Demoniac patriotism in their subjects…will make it easier for them to act wickedly; healthy patriotism may make it harder: when they are wicked they may by propaganda encourage a demoniac condition of our sentiments in order to secure our acquiescence in their wickedness. If they are good, they could do the opposite. That is one reason why we private persons should keep a wary eye on the health or disease of our own love for our country.
* Jack is referring to one of the four causes described by Aristotle.
Nessa is back and we’re picking back up our discussion “Is there life before marriage?”. In today’s episode we talk about discernment, virtue and service.
Episode 6: Is there life before marriage? (Download)
— Show Notes —
* If you would like to listen to my original talk I gave on this subject to the Goretti Group, it is available here. The YouTube video is also available here.
* During our discussion, Nessa shared a quotation from Catholic Teen Posts on Instagram:
Purity is not the elimination of sexual attraction, but the ordering of sexual attraction demanded by love.
– Catholic Teen Posts
* …and the the quotation I offered from Ravi Zacharias was as follows:
“Chivalry in love has nothing to do with the sweetness of the appearance. It has everything to do with the tenderness of a heart determined to serve”
The meaning of BC and AD recently came up in conversation. It’s come up a few times in fact….and you know what that means…it’s time to do a blog entry about it! 🙂
2nd Sunday of Easter: 15th April, 2012
I recently had a conversation in which a friend said that he was quite liked relativism. Relativism has all kinds of problems, not least of which is that there exists a logical contradiction at the most basic level, since it makes an absolute statement in saying that everything is relative.
