Skip to main content
Anybody who knows me knows that I'm a bit girl-crazy. [What are you, 12?--ed.] Yes. After a fashion. No one of the fairer sex has seen fit to snag me off the market, so yes. Anyway, one meets with a certain lack of success (or limited success) and the natural reaction, albeit perhaps not the most productive one, is to question one's desirability and so forth. I'm not breaking any news here, surely. Lonely dudes, can I get a witness? I know you feel me. [You're a jobless, penniless bum in graduate school who's apparently about to torpedo your most viable career option. Would you date you?--ed.] No. But kats get lucky all the time like that. I had a friend who introduced me to the film version of "Phantom of the Opera" directed by Joel Schumacher. Yes, I know, it's not faithful to the story/play, blah blah, shut up. Anyway, I personally really identified with the Phantom. And yes, it begins on creepy terms, given the fact that Christine Daae is just a girl when the Phantom takes a shine to her, a la "The Thorn Birds" [You just lost all the papists, bringing that up.--ed.] Well, sorry. It happens. No, the funny part is, I've never actually seen "The Thorn Birds." But a story about a priest who falls in love with a woman is always going to some kind of cultural marker, so long as priestly celibacy is a norm in the Catholic West. I digress. The Phantom. I like him. I understand him. That is, I suppose, until he started killing people. But deformity and being on the fringes, this I understand well, whether I choose to admit this as my reality or not. I know tons of good-looking women who went for other dudes, too. In any case, Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber and his minions decided to add a song to this film called "Learn To Be Lonely" that I really love. The words ring true, in some sense, in a nice, accessible, singable form. [Is 'singable' an actual word?--ed.] It is now! The song is an odd, bittersweet encouragement to me, as I consider all the possible permutations of my estate. Still, I hope this line isn't true: "You've always known/Your heart was on its own." I didn't come here to tell you that, as the great Cosby would say.
I'm doing That One Thing At That Secret Place (let astute readers understand) whose outcome, whose mission, if I choose to accept it, would entail a great many changes. I don't want to put some girl who loves her Lord the way she knows how through that kind of change. Just a bomb I drop in the middle of the relationship: "Oh, by the way..." "Uncle Bryan" was already married. If he hadn't been, that would have been a fun reality show to watch. (But not for Bryan.) It's certainly not over, but I actually expect matters to conclude in that fashion. Should I wait until the crisis is over? Seriously, what should I do? [That's what you get, chasing theologically committed girls, dummy.--ed.] At least they're holding to a dogmatic principle! How comforting. (Not) I wish God would give me the faith one way or the other. No, I pray he does.

Comments

All leaving of my senses aside, we need to focus on hammering out more theology for you. There is still hope this side of the river!

Popular posts from this blog

A Friend I Once Had, And The Dogmatic Principle

 I once had a friend, a dear friend, who helped me with personal care needs in college. Reformed Presbyterian to the core. When I was a Reformed Presbyterian, I visited their church many times. We were close. I still consider his siblings my friends. (And siblings in the Lord.) Nevertheless, when I began to consider the claims of the Catholic Church to be the Church Christ founded, he took me out to breakfast. He implied--but never quite stated--that we would not be brothers, if I sought full communion with the Catholic Church. That came true; a couple years later, I called him on his birthday, as I'd done every year for close to ten of them. He didn't recognize my number, and it was the most strained, awkward phone call I have ever had. We haven't spoken since. We were close enough that I attended the rehearsal dinner for his wedding. His wife's uncle is a Catholic priest. I remember reading a blog post of theirs, that early in their relationship, she told him of the p
Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con

Just Sayin.' Again.

One interesting objection to this chart has been to say that one gets stuck in a "loop" that doesn't resolve. This is a thinly-veiled way of putting forward the argument that we don't need absolute certainty in religious dogma. But Fred Noltie already dealt with this in the comments on another post. And to the specific objector, no less. I'll be blunt: The only principled thing to do is put down your Bible, resign your pulpit, and lead tours in Europe. Because a man must be able to distinguish dogma from human opinion, and this epistemology doesn't allow us to do that. One of dogma's distinguishing characteristics is infallibility; another is certainty. Without this, essential characteristics of God Himself are put into question. If we say that the most important Person any person could know is God, and the content of that knowledge (doctrine) is the means by which we know Him, it must be certain. This Reformed argument that certainty is a dangerous or un