Quick Takes: Vindication, and other cool stuff.

I can't believe it! My Quick Takes are on time!

1) Is it wrong to be a tad happy for vindication? A few months back I wrote a post for Catholic Exchange called, Three Things People Don't Know About Same-Sex Marriage, the last item being:

3. Those who decry the slippery slope argument often confirm the slippery slope.

In the over 500 comments that followed, some chided me for this assertion (including our own Miss Gwen, whom I miss on this blog!); however, I recently came across an interesting couple of articles by gay "marriage" proponent Professor Kent Greenfield of Boston College Law School. Just a few months before the Supreme Court's ruling on DOMA, Mr. Greenfield mocked the many friend-of-the-Court legal briefs opposing gay "marriage", including the idea that gay "marriage" would lead to a slippery slope:

Then there’s the fixation on how a ruling in favor of gay marriage will start the nation down a slippery slope toward polygamy and incest. Adam and Steve today; tomorrow Adam, Steve, with Cain and Abel along for the ride as well. But no one seems to notice that the slippery slope worries are as great with heterosexual marriage as same-sex marriage. The slope between gay marriage and polygamous or incestuous gay marriage is no steeper and no slicker than between heterosexual marriage and polygamous or incestuous heterosexual marriage. 

So how would this “slippery slope” danger play out? Is the worry that recognizing marriage equality for gays and lesbians will drive straight men into the arms of their sisters? Well, now you’ve lost me.

The guy just can't see it, apparently! Then four months later, just after the gay "marriage" rulings, our good professor has suddenly, inexplicably reversed himself:

It’s been a few weeks since the victories in the marriage cases at the Supreme Court, and maybe it’s time for the political left to own up to something. You know those opponents of marriage equality who said government approval of same-sex marriage might erode bans on polygamous and incestuous marriages? They’re right. As a matter of constitutional rationale, there is indeed a slippery slope between recognizing same-sex marriages and allowing marriages among more than two people and between consenting adults who are related. If we don’t want to go there, we need to come up with distinctions that we have not yet articulated well.

I feel like I could have written his next paragraph, after having so many debates about this very issue (my words in blue):

In private conversations with leaders in the [gay] marriage movement [with me, the conversations have been online and public], I often hear two responses. The first is that there is no political energy behind a fight for incestuous or polygamous marriages. [Oh my gosh, we hear that all the time on the Bubble: "I don't see people clamoring for incest!" as if they forget that until recently no one was clamoring for gay "marriage" either.] The second is that they would be fine if those restrictions fell as well but, in effect, “don’t quote me on that.” [Similar to what I assert in the CE article: 'The same people who mock me for bringing up the “slippery slope” will ultimately admit that “it doesn’t matter” and they “don’t care” if polygamy is legalized or if two sisters marry or if Aunt Frannie wants to marry her dog. And it’s clear that they aren’t kidding. They really don’t care.'] The first of these responses, of course, is a political response but not a legal one. The second is to concede the point, with hopes that they won't have to come out of the closet on the concession until more same-sex victories are won in political and legal arenas.

Maybe soon the professor will admit that these guys and these guys are queueing up for some recognition as well and might just well have a legal case! Welcome to progressive Utopia.

2) I like this, as it explains the state's three options regarding any activity.

Marriage = Biology (Not Bigotry)

3) And from Fr. Barron: Why the Church sometimes has to be a fighting Church:

Clarity. Logic. Ahhhh!

4) So, I've been reading through the Pope's first encyclical, Lumen Fidei (The Light of Faith), and this paragraph struck me as reflective of the conversations we have here on this blog! Don't you think so, too? 

25. Today more than ever, we need to be reminded of this bond between faith and truth, given the crisis of truth in our age. In contemporary culture, we often tend to consider the only real truth to be that of technology: truth is what we succeed in building and measuring by our scientific know-how, truth is what works and what makes life easier and more comfortable. Nowadays this appears as the only truth that is certain, the only truth that can be shared, the only truth that can serve as a basis for discussion or for common undertakings. 

Yet at the other end of the scale we are willing to allow for subjective truths of the individual, which consist in fidelity to his or her deepest convictions, yet these are truths valid only for that individual and not capable of being proposed to others in an effort to serve the common good. But Truth itself, the truth which would comprehensively explain our life as individuals and in society, is regarded with suspicion. Surely this kind of truth — we hear it said — is what was claimed by the great totalitarian movements of the last century, a truth that imposed its own world view in order to crush the actual lives of individuals. 

In the end, what we are left with is relativism, in which the question of universal truth — and ultimately this means the question of God — is no longer relevant. It would be logical, from this point of view, to attempt to sever the bond between religion and truth, because it seems to lie at the root of fanaticism, which proves oppressive for anyone who does not share the same beliefs. In this regard, though, we can speak of a massive amnesia in our contemporary world. The question of truth is really a question of memory, deep memory, for it deals with something prior to ourselves and can succeed in uniting us in a way that transcends our petty and limited individual consciousness. It is a question about the origin of all that is, in whose light we can glimpse the goal and thus the meaning of our common path.

Isn't that beautiful? Identify the problem, and ultimately give hope (which in turn reminds me of this great post from Dr. Stacy). 


5) So excited to report on the Nigerian pro-life conference that we have promoted and supported here in the Bubble! Uju's summary of those amazing days is on the COLAfrica blog, and if you watch the following video, you will see Uju and Nicole (at the 0:27 mark) on the day they attended a five-hour, joy-filled, life-filled mass, which included Confirmations for the children in white!

From the article:

As we got the privilege of spending time with the amazing people of Enugu and Owerri, we found them to be warm, kind, resilient and yes, pro-life to the core. It was as if every single encounter we had was a balm to the soul and a shot in the arm at the same time.  

But one of the highest points of our journey happened on a bright Sunday morning when our gracious Host, Archbishop Anthony Obinna, of Owerri Archdiocese, took us to Mass (worship) with him to a rural Catholic parish in a small village called Orodo. 

To get to Orodo, we journeyed an hour on the dirt-road, passing by small scenic villages, catching a glimpse of rural Africa and seeing the glorious beauty of nature in the African landscape. But the summit of our experience was in meeting the people of Orodo and experiencing first-hand their vibrant faith and their inexplicable joy.  

The men, women and children we met at this local Catholic parish did not have much in terms of material wealth but they had more zest and grace than anyone you'll ever know. And they welcomed us with the warmth and cheer of real family. 

Their faith and fervour were palpable. Their zeal and passion for God was abundantly obvious. Their music was as melodious as any grand choir in any part of the world. The Mass, which lasted for all of 5 hours, was a profound faith experience that will remain emblazoned in our hearts for years and years to come.  

And as the Catholic way of worship is universal, we prayed, we sang, we danced and we listened to the Liturgy along side everyone else. Yes, we sat, stood and knelt with everyone else! So we got to see what we already knew in our hearts - that the Church is a family with one worship and one love for God. In America, Africa, Europe or anywhere else, the worship is the same, from Orodo to Ottawa the Liturgy is the same - pristine and life-giving.  

And we counted it a real blessing for us to experience this in the midst of pure joy and in the embrace of true catholic family that transcends race and nation! 

I cannot say it enough: Uju and Nicole are warrior heroes in this battle for life and love around the globe, and I feel privileged to occupy the same planet as they do. To think it's only been one year since the Blessed Mother inspired Uju to write her open letter to Melinda Gates. Thank you again to all of you who helped with financial assistance and so many prayers. I cannot wait to see what the future holds for this apostolate!

6) Rejoicing with all our readers in the UK on the birth of the new little prince, George Alexander Louis! What joy to celebrate new life on a global scale and to remember that every human life, whether king or peasant, is unrepeatable and of infinite value. I particularly love this picture, as I am old enough to remember when George's father was born:

And readers in the UK should consider attending the following conference on September 27 & 28, hosted by the Anscombe Bioethics Centre:

The Moral Philosophy of Elizabeth Anscombe

If you can't attend, please get the word out, and pray for its success!

7) Speaking of unrepeatable, invaluable lives, meet Grant! This little guy was doing well in his baby house when this photo was taken, but since then he has been transferred to an adult mental institution where things are very bad. No child should be in a place like that.

Click my photo for more details!

Please, someone, go get him out. He is eight years old and may not have much time left to be saved. Pray for Grant and all those children with him in that very horrible place. Where there is life, there is hope! 

+++++++

Have a great weekend everyone, and thanks to Jen for hosting!

Quick Takes (which will cover all your weekend reading needs)

1) Wow, I have not posted in a while, but that doesn't mean the Bubble hasn't been hopping! As of today, there is still a conversation going on at the last post, and if you haven't read through the almost 500 comments, you should fix yourself a cup of tea and get started. Remember to hit "load more" after the first 200 comments (ugh, Blogger!!), and then again and again and again, until there is no more option to "load more".

The sad part is that after all that, it seems that most gay "marriage" supporters still really do want these kids to sit down and shut up.


2) A powerful companion piece to the last post is this piece by Robert Oscar Lopez. It's hard to read, heartbreaking really, but in this day when gay "marriage" is seen as such a beautiful, just, and ordered thing, we have to open our eyes and see, and open our brains and think:

Same-Sex Parenting: Child Abuse?

And as Catholics, we are required to speak, and not remain silent. Speaking can be in the form of facebook links, discussions with family and friends, letters to the editor, blog posts, tweets, whatever. When the issue comes up, don't be silent. Say something, even if it's simply: "I disagree with same-sex marriage. It's just not right."

Remember, Jesus is not interested in whether or not you get along with the world.

To that end, this short piece at First Things, by Robert P. George, is worth a full reprint here (emphases mine):

A little Sunday sermon from a guy with no license to preach: For those of us who are Christian—and I suspect the same is true of our friends of other religious traditions—it is tempting to embrace those doctrines and teachings of our faith that are acceptable to the “beautiful people,” to the trend setters and opinion shapers, to the powerful and influential, while going silent on, or even denying, those teachings that will mark us as standing in opposition to the values that are dominant in elite sectors of the culture. We’re all-too-willing to be “tame” Christians. We want the comforts and consolation of religion, but we’d like to have them without risks or costs. We don’t want to jeopardize friendships, family relationships, professional and economic opportunities, prestige, social status, and the like. We don’t want people to think of us as retrograde or “out of touch with the times,” much less as intolerant or prejudiced. So we are tempted to pick and choose—to be “cafeteria Christians.” 

But if we are serious about our faith, we will understand that a true Christian is never a “tame” Christian. A true Christian will stand up and speak out for what is good and true, what is right and just, both in season and out of season. He or she will not go silent, even when bearing witness is unpopular—even when it is personally or professionally risky. He or she will know that there truly is a “cost of discipleship,” and will be prepared, with God’s help and by His grace, to pay that cost—whatever it turns out to be. A faithful Christian will be ever mindful of the words of Christ himself, “If anyone would be my disciple, then let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.”

One man who did just that is a courageous mayor in France who refuses to transgress the Natural Law and is willing to face five years in prison for not going along with what he calls the "farce" of gay "marriage" in his town. Jean-Michel Colo says he "will not perform an illegal act", reflecting perfectly the words of Martin Luther King, Jr., in his 1963 Letter from a Birmingham Jail:

[I]t may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may well ask: "How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all." 

Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. 

Amen.

Okay, and since we are on the subject (don't you long for the recent days when we didn't have to talk and hear about homosexuality all the time and when it didn't permeate every aspect of our culture?), here are two more worthy links about gay "marriage":

Four Ways that Same-Sex Marriage Will Affect You

(Because we hear, reflexively and repeatedly, that it most certainly won't.)

And the great piece by the brilliant Mary Rice Hasson:

Breaking Silence: Catholics, Contraception, and Same-Sex Marriage

As one commenter stated of Hasson's analysis, this is "undoubtedly the most concise, cogent, coherent explanation for how the contraception pandemic has given rise to the fallacy of same-sex marriage."

3) Oh my gosh, have you seen Pope Francis' first encyclical, written largely by his predecessor, Pope Benedict?

Ahhhh, I wish it could be required reading for all. It's called Lumen Fidei  (The Light of Faith).

And the popes quoting Dostoevsky (and Nietzsche) in the first few paragraphs is just too good to miss! I love that as Catholics, we never stop learning, we never plumb the depths of our Faith. Thank you, Jesus.


4) Speaking of the new encyclical, my friend Brandon Vogt got into a little bit of a pickle when he tried, in good faith, to spread Lumen Fidei far and wide. You can read about it on his blog, and then you can take steps to help us "Free the Word", as Brandon proposes a solution to a very unfortunate problem that is hindering evangelization in this digital world:

Free the Word: Why the Church Needs to Release Her Teachings to the World

This is perhaps the only time you'll ever hear me say, the Church needs to get with the times (at least with regard to copyright rules)!


5) Okay, I know this is a few weeks old, but I can't get past it. I have said often on this blog that certain things have left me speechless, or that I just could not believe what I was hearing/reading/seeing. But this. This. This! This is really it. It's got to be a bad parody, a Saturday Night Live skit, bizarre dark humor, a joke of some kind.

Except that it's true!!!

This really happened!! 

We have arrived at the point where the head of a Christian denomination, female Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori of the Episcopal Church, is openly siding with the demons (yes, yes, I said that!) against a saint! A possessed and exploited girl is delivered from the demons by St. Paul, and Ms. Jefferts Schori slams St. Paul! As being intolerant!

Like Fr. Barron, I want to laugh out loud! I mean, it's come to this? Oh, wow, it can't get much crazier. The Episcopal Church is already dying out, but when its leadership literally sides with the devil, you've just gotta chuckle and shake your head!

And not to get back to the gay stuff (although how can we avoid it?), but this really is happening, too, in California!

All Same-Sex Couples are Infertile
(The gist? Insurers should be required to provide
"infertility" treatment to gay couples!!)

Another head-scratcher that makes me wonder if we haven't slipped right down the rabbit hole with Alice. Or arrived in the Twilight Zone. Jesus can't come soon enough!


6) As have many of you, I have learned so much from the saintly Karen Pullano in the aftermath of the loss of her oldest daughter in a car crash -- just a few years after she lost her small son to cancer. Her most recent post has really hit me at the level of my soul. She has lived through an earthly hell, and yet she is not angry at God. Listen to her tell it:

Last weekend we attended our oldest daughter’s high school graduation.  It was a lovely celebration honoring the class of 2013. Except for us, there was no graduate. I didn’t have a camera at the ready or flowers to give or anyone to meet for photo ops afterward. The classmate who was tragically killed in a car accident several months ago; that would have been, should have been, our girl walking across the stage. She was remembered and honored and greatly missed by her entire class and it was all very moving as I tried desperately to keep the tears in check. 

It was suggested to me, not for the first time in the last 5 years, that I could and should be angry. I’m told that it would be okay to yell and scream and rail at the Universe and at God. He’s a big God after all and can take it and will still love me despite it. 5 years ago we sat helplessly by our 4-year-old son as a brain tumor and chemotherapy ravaged his little body. For 9 months we watched him suffer and then die. 

I had no anger then and I have no anger now ….

Read the rest here.

I want to be like Karen. (Who is expecting her newest little girl any day now!)


7) Here is a sweet little princess to capture your heart! Meet Rebecca:

Click my photo for more info!

From her profile:

Rebecca has Down syndrome, and a heart condition; ASD, enlarged RA, mild insufficiency of TV, and mild pulmonary hypertension…the left side of her heart has normal function. A brain CT and EEG were both normal.

Rebecca is a precious little one who is just 2 years old. She was found abandoned at a bus stop when she was about 5 months old.  This sweet little girl has delays; to be expected, of course, but she does not seem to be receiving the therapy she needs to help her progress more quickly. Her heart condition is slowing her down, too. Imagine the great progress she will make when her heart is fixed, and she has someone to help her learn and develop! Rebecca is crawling now, and her fine motor skills are behind. She badly needs a loving family and the continued stimulation that will help her develop and improve her future. It is certainly not too late to begin working with her…at all! Rebecca is sweet, quiet, and loves to watch other children play. A family for Rebecca will help her join other kids at play!

Please consider Rebecca for your own family, or pray and share her with others!

+++++++

Now, in the last few posts I think I have exhausted what I want to say about all the gay "marriage" fallout, and it's time to get back into what we should be doing spiritually. There is no new sin, and there is no new antidote to sin. We simply must get to the heart of what really matters. So, get ready for some of that.


Have a great weekend, and thanks to the wonderful Jen for hosting!

Comparing the old and new atheists: My interview with Dr. Kevin Vost, Part II

Hooray! Back to more with Dr. Kevin Vost, as he explains some of the differences between the old atheists and the new atheists. Catch up with Dr. Vost's first question and answer, here, at Part I.

"Superman" (Nietzsche) and "The Angelic Doctor" (Aquinas)
Art by Theodore Schluenderfritz

My second question:


Q.  So, did you understand those philosophical principles back when you were a practicing atheist, or are you classifying your beliefs in retrospect, looking back as a Catholic? I ask because one of the things that struck me in your book (which squares with something I've heard Fr. Barron say) is that although the older atheists, i.e., the existentialists, had some real intellectual depth, the new atheists don't have knowledge of the great philosophers, have no real understanding of the depth of wisdom and thought throughout the ages. It's like the new atheists are not connected to anything, or somehow do not work in reason and logic in the same way the old atheists did. Do I have that right?


A. I believe you (and Fr. Barron) hit the nail on the head. I sometimes tell people I couldn't have been pulled away from the faith by the "new atheists" because 1.), I'm too old, and 2.), I knew a little philosophy. It was the older atheists who had some sense of intellectual history who lured me away from the faith. Bertrand Russell was an eminent philosopher himself. Ayn Rand, who rarely gave credit to predecessors, wrote that her philosophy was the natural development and fulfillment of Aristotle's. (Because of that influence, unlike almost all other prominent atheists who are relativists, Rand believed in objective truth. Hence, she called her system "Objectivism.")  Psychologist Albert Ellis acknowledged that his vastly successful system of Rational-Emotive Behavior Therapy found its origins, not in modern psychological theory and research, but in the philosophy of the ancient Greek and Roman Stoics. So, the folks who pulled me toward atheism saw their connection with the great ideas of the past, but saw their role as developing them further. They also led me to read the great ancient thinkers themselves. It did not hit me fully until decades later that those great foundational pagan thinkers (e.g., Socrates, Aristotle, Cicero, Epictetus, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius) were not  atheists. Though they did not know Christ, their reasoning led them toward belief in God.

So, when I left the Church, I did come to believe those four key ideas I laid out and I thought I grasped their principles. Still, it did not occur to me until the last year or so, to lay them out that way in how they relate to four key areas of philosophy.

As for the "new atheists" who are popular today, when I've read their books I've been stunned by their lack of awareness or acknowledgement of the wisdom of the past. They seem to think reason came into the world when they attained their own reasoning capacity in their own teenage years. I remember in 2010 when an atheistic group put up an anti- Christmas billboard in New York, their message included a phrase about their group being "reasonable since 1963." I thought I'd like to see a billboard from the Catholic Church stating "reasonable since 33."

I find a huge intellectual hubris or overweening arrogance among some of the new atheists.  They dismiss religion despite the slimmest acquaintance with religious history and its philosophical and theological underpinnings that have the deepest roots in human intellectual history. Ironically, at the same time, they promote the idea that truly smart and well-educated people do not believe in God. Forgive me for quoting myself, but I summed it up this way in From Atheism to Catholicism: "How grand it must be to so confidently declare that the profound questions which so taxed the greatest minds in human history are mere child's play for one's own."

This is not to say that there are not some philosophers among the new atheists, or that their ideas are not influenced by philosophy (whether or not they are aware of it.) Their ideas, however, are influenced by modern philosophy, the philosophy of the last several hundred years that neglected or misunderstood the perennial truths of Aristotle and St. Thomas. These ideas led to materialistic, mechanistic views of the universe with so many inconsistencies and problems that modern-day philosophers are rarely heard in the public square. They embrace what Blessed Pope John Paul II described as a scientism -- an impoverished view of reason that seeks truths in the material realm, ignoring the spiritual and ethical dimensions of reality. (For those who would care to look any deeper into the problems of modern philosophy, I recommend Mortimer Adler's Ten Philosophical Mistakes, and Edward Feser's Aquinas, as well as JPII's Fides et Ratio - Faith and Reason.)

Interestingly, as for as this intellectual pride or hubris among the new atheists, the greatest thinkers in the history of humanity took an opposite approach and arrived at the opposite conclusion. Pick up the writings of Aristotle or St. Thomas Aquinas, and without fail, you will see that whenever they address an important issue, they begin with a careful and accurate survey of what others before them believed, before they apply their reason (and Scripture for St. Thomas), weigh the pros and cons, and arrive at their conclusions. Neither believed that reason entered the world the day that he was born!


Dr. Vost's words remind me of a post that I have had in draft form for months, from an exchange I had with some "new atheists" on another blog. I think I might finally dust it off and publish it next, as it really is an illustration of what he just said.

Stay tuned!

Not quite a Quick Takes

+++++++

1) First, I can't thank you all enough for the kind words, support, and especially prayers for my sister and our whole family. Currently, she has a team of doctors working to find out exactly what we are dealing with. I can't say much more because so much is still unknown, but the word "bizarre" doesn't begin to cover the last eight days. Please keep praying.


2) So glad to see that Catholics have been responding to the popular but deeply flawed video, "Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus". My personal favorite response, by a rapping priest:

And if you want to go further, check out Fr. Barron's response:

The funny thing in all of this is that the "hate religion" guy subscribes to sola scriptura (the idea that the Bible is a Christian's only authority), but yet he does not grasp the fact that the very New Testament he quotes is a product of the Catholic religion! He would not have the Bible in his hands if the Church had not written, preserved, copied, canonized, protected and preached that Bible for 20 centuries. Ah, the irony.


3) I just saw this, and now I'm fuming:

Obama Admin Decides to Require Religious Institutions to Cover Free Contraception

Seriously, my head is going to explode. Does the Obama Administration think us Catholics fools? Maybe we are if we don't bombard him with emails and phone calls and lawsuits. I want to fight. Here is part of the response from Archbishop Dolan and the U.S. Bishops:

In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences. To force American citizens to choose between violating their consciences and forgoing their healthcare is literally unconscionable.It is as much an attack on access to health care as on religious freedom. Historically this represents a challenge and a compromise of our religious liberty.

What kind of man did we elect to the presidency of the United States?! Obama must be defeated in November.


4) Turns out I am a homeschooling mom again (schooling only one this time around). So many myths about homeschooling, and this hilarious young man's video about those myths deserves a wide audience! Too funny! I want to shake his mama's hand:

(Gosh, maybe I shouldn't have said I was homeschooling. The Obama administration might soon declare it illegal and come after me. I'm only half joking.)


Have a great weekend!