Skip to main content
5 Thoughts On This Tuesday



5. Are they too busy, or have Christian girls lost the ability to say, "No, thanks"?



4. I don't know if that mp3 site was just janky, or illegal, but in any case, 'A Love Story,' by Babyface is outstanding, and Arista should fire the guy who decided to shelve the album. Or is it "shelf"?



3. I eagerly await a Protestant answer to the hermeneutical/ecclesiological conundrum: 1) How do you prove a particular, well, anything from the Scripture? 2) If we disavow apostolic succession, how are we visibly, really connected to the Body of Christ? I await the Catholic answer to the same problem in 1), with an added bonus: It could appear that Catholic apologists appeal to Scripture when useful, and appeal to the revealed Tradition when the scriptural case is tenuous. I'm thinking St. Basil would freak out about that, I dunno. Let me state this in a humorous way: This is the "Everyone on 'The Journey Home' was in Fundie-Land Before This" objection. If you took one denomination or even family of theologies, any thinking person, full of love and humility, would say, "I think this about X issue, but I'd be happily wrong if Jesus tells me I had it wrong at the end..." In other words, any of us living in one culture will rebel in one way or the other. That's a long way from proving the One True Church. Take Beckwith, for example. His episode of the show sucked. It seemed like he described a caricature of Protestant evangelical faith (which I'd grant is common) both in depth of doctrine, and with respect to Catholicism, and naturally finding it wanting, he finds the most fully-orbed option, which is Catholicism. I hear him and others, when they talk about a faith that is received, not tested with a spirit of skepticism. On the other hand, none of us could test whether a person was using his own conscience as the arbiter of truth, or receiving the faith once delivered. I don't have to try that hard to translate everything he said as, "I'm exausted trying to do the hard hermeneutical work of applying the Bible, so I'll punt it to an infalliable Magisterium." Heck, I'm exausted. But if you start with the assumption your ecclesial community is infalliable, you won't see otherwise, unless you like cognitive dissonance sandwiches. It's like the lawyers and judges who believe the Supreme Court never changes its mind based on political or social pressure. Preposterous. The Catholic Church was impacted by the leaving, and their return is no different. Both sides are changed.

2. MMMMM, Coke!

1. I confess to Dan Winfield specifically that my exaggeration is out of control. Maybe I just enjoy the little things, but I worry that I bring the truth into disrepute, even if unintentionally.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

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...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...