"We are travellers…not yet in our native land" – St. Augustine
As I mentioned yesterday, to mark the March For Life, this week I’m going to be posting a series of articles exclusively on the subject of abortion.
Today I’d like to outlining the two main stages I pass through when discussing the subject of abortion with those who are pro-choice.
Read more
Continuing the series of posts on the subject of abortion, I would like to discuss a strategy which you might consider adopting when talking about abortion with those who are pro-choice.
I would suggest that, when we’re talking about abortion, the discussion really needs to focus on the unborn themselves. What actually are they? In the process of having an abortion, what exactly is being killed?
You see, when pro-choice advocates object to the pro-life position, their objections fall into one of two categories:
1. On-topic Objections
These objections are fetus-focussed. For example, if someone says “It’s just a clump of cells”, their objection is on-topic and allows us to discuss the central issue: the unborn child.
2. Off-topic Objections
These objections relate to some peripheral issue and don’t concern the unborn themselves. For example, these following arguments are sometimes given in favour of abortion:
(a) “The world is overpopulated”
(b) “Raising a child is extremely expensive”
(c) “Not all children will have a stable home life”
(d) …
All of these objections are off-topic.
With regards to the off-topic objections, pro-lifers and pro-choicers will, by and large, agree that the problem being raised does need to be addressed by society. For example, both groups want to see poverty eradicated, vulnerable women protected, children born into stable, nurturing homes. However, the difference is those who are pro-life don’t think that the problem raised is sufficient justification for the killing of a defenseless, innocent life.
I haven’t done one of these in a while…
In case you haven’t seen my Quick Apology articles before, these are extremely short posts in which describe how I might respond in thirty seconds or less to objections I often encounter. These might be objections to my pro-life view, or the fact that I believe in God, that I’m a Christian or specifically to my being Catholic.
Today’s objection came from a friend:
“Catholics believe in mortal sin, but the Bible never talks about it. It never makes a distinction – sin is sin”
How might one respond to this objection?
I’ve spoken before about the objection that something is “not in the Bible”, but the above statement is one which can actually very easily be answered from Scripture alone.
When this particular issue comes up, I ask whether or not that person has read chapter five of John’s first epistle:
If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that.
– 1 John 5:16 (Revised Standard Version: Catholic Edition)
So there we go, John seems pretty clear that there is such a thing as mortal sin.
However, is this just a translation issue? After all, in the above Scripture quotation, I’ve quoted from a Catholic translation.
Well, the standard Protestant translation is the King James Version, so let’s see how that translation renders the passage:
If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
– 1 John 5:16 (King James Version)
As we can see, the KJV renders “mortal sin” as “sin which is…unto death”. Even with this translation the same central meaning remains:
1. There are two kinds of sin
2. One kind of sin leads to “death”
3. Another kind of sin does not lead to “death”
However one chooses to interpret this passage, it’s very clear that Scripture is making a distinction between different kinds of sin and saying that one is more serious than the other.
As a quick follow up, I typically point out that John is not the only person in Scripture to distinguish between different kinds of sin. Although it’s a little different, Jesus Himself speaks to this subject:
Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven – Matthew 12:31
Again, regardless of how one chooses to interpret this passage, it’s clear that not all sins are the same.
After pointing out these two passages, I would typically conclude the brief exchange by saying that, despite these distinctions, in a certain sense it is correct to say that “sin is sin”. It is true that all sin is an offense against God.
The Catholic distinction between different kinds of sin doesn’t mean that venial sin is “okay”. No, all sin is serious. We shouldn’t just try and avoid mortal sin, but all sin and strive for the holiness for which we were made!
While I was on my blogging sabbatical in December, I had a couple of blogs reference my website. The first was Veil Nation:
When I produced the graphics for “Wear The Veil” campaign, I just searched Google Images for a base graphic with which to begin my work. Well, it turns out the graphic I used was of a veil called the Colette Veil, produced by Ann Anzul. Ann found my graphic and gave me a shout-out. Thanks Ann! 🙂
The second reference to my my blog in December came from Jim who writes at Not For Itching Ears:
Jim’s post wrote about how to become a better blogger. In the section where he spoke about reading and commenting on other blogs, he had these kind words to say about this site:
One of my favorite blogs is called Restless Pilgrim. It challenges my world view! He’s Catholic, I’m a Protestant who has wandered far, far, far from home! We have great conversations about theology and early church history, which is the kind of stuff I like and write about. He does too. David comments on my blog and I on his. I am not sure who interacted with who first, but whoever did, made blogging a lot more interesting. I have lots of stories like that and you will too if you “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
Always a pleasure Jim 🙂
I’ve recently started studying the first five books of the Bible in more depth. Almost as soon as I started, I had an “Oh, I never knew that!” moment which is the subject of today’s post.
The opening books of the Bible are known by the Greek word “Pentateuch”, which literally means “five volumes”. Unsurprisingly, there are five books which make up the Pentateuch:
1. Genesis
In Greek, “Genesis” means “Beginning”, which is an appropriate title for this book since it describes the Creation of all things. It also covers the lives of the early Patriarchs, up until the time of Jacob and the Twelve Tribes.
2. Exodus
The second book of the Bible describes the escape of the Children of Israel from Egypt and the giving of the Ten Commandments on Sinai. This is reflected in the book’s title, which literally means “Departure”.
3. Leviticus
If you’ve ever tried to read Leviticus, you’ll know that it goes into great detail concerning all the different sacrifices in the cultic worship of Israel. This worship was performed in the Temple by the priestly tribe of the Levites, which gave rise to the this volume’s title, “Book of the Levites”.
4. Numbers
This book recounts the events of Israel’s sojourn in the desert. Unlike the other volumes in the Pentateuch, its title is not very descriptive, being so named because the opening pages of the book concern a census that was taken among the people.
5. Deuteronomy
The final volume in the Pentateuch contains the Law given by Moses on the plains of Moab prior to his death and before the entry into the Promised Land.
My first “Oh, I didn’t know that!” moment was when I found out the meaning of this book’s title. The Greek word for “Law” is “nomos” and it’s the word used throughout the New Testament to refer to the Law of Moses. You can see this Greek word hidden away in the name of the book: “Deuteronomy“. The prefix, “deutero” means “second” (e.g. “deuterocanon” means “second canon”). Therefore, “Deuteronomy” means “Second Law”. It is so called because it’s the second major piece of legislative material in the Books of Moses.
I previously knew that the Jewish people often refer to the Pentateuch as “The Torah”, the Hebrew word for “Instruction”, “Teaching”, or “Law”. However, what I didn’t know was that the they have different names for each of these books. The names which I listed above (Genesis, Exodus, …) come from the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek translation of the Pentateuch sometime around 250 BC. Within Judaism, however, the following Hebrew names are used:
1. Bereshith (“In the Beginning”)
2. Shemuoth (“Names”)
3. Wayiqra (“And he said”)
4. Bamidbar (“In the desert”)
5. Debarim (“Words”)
As you might be able to guess from the translations in parentheses, the Jews follow the same naming convention used in Catholic Papal Encyclicals, naming the book after the opening words of the document.
Well, that’s enough nerding out for one day… 🙂
I have no idea whether or not Tolkien intended it to be this way (although I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he did), but have you ever noticed that all the mealtimes mentioned by the Hobbits in “Lord of the Rings” correspond with points in the Church’s Liturgy of the Hours?
Hobbit Meal #1: Breakfast (7am)
The office of “Vigils” is prayed just before sunrise.
Hobbit Meal #2: Second Breakfast (9am)
“Lauds” takes place sometime between sunrise and 8:30am.
Hobbit Meal #3: Elevenses (11am)
“Tierce” is prayed between 8:45am and 10am.
Hobbit Meal #4: Luncheon (1pm)
This corresponds to “Sexte”, which is prayed between 11:30am and 1:30pm.
Hobbit Meal #4: Afternoon Tea (4pm)
The office of “None” is between 2pm and 4pm
Hobbit Meal #5: Dinner (6pm)
Evening pray of “Vespers” is any time between 4:30pm and 8pm.
Hobbit Meal #6: Supper (8pm)
Finally, “Compline” is prayed before bed.
Does anyone know for certain if Tolkien did this on purpose?
So it’s 2015, which means my sabbatical is over and I’m back blogging! The posts over the next few days are going to be pretty light as I’m working on a few special blogging projects:
1. I am completing a series of posts concerning abortion, which I’m posting to coincide with the March For Life later this month.
2. Next, I have a series of guest posts on the subject of sex for the Goretti Group that I’m just finishing off which will be published in a few weeks.
3. Finally, I’m recording a video series on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians. You’ll be hearing more about all these projects over the next couple of weeks…
The break was good, but it’s good to be back. Happy New Year everyone 🙂
