Skip to main content


Showing posts from August 24, 2014

The Social Doctrine And Me

I've been political my entire life. The truth is, I love politics because I love people. It's a noble profession, especially here in America. Yes, I said "especially" and I meant it. America is still a great place, and no one could say otherwise. We have a lot to do, but our history and heritage gives us all we need to do it, whether intellectual or spiritual. The great gift of America to the world is the recognition of the dignity of the human person, uniquely in regard to people and their government. That the citizen is a participant and co-ruler is the logical conclusion of the belief that legitimate authority is not limitless; every authority and everyone bound by it owes a first duty to the One who sanctions it in the first place. I mean no disrespect to avowed atheists; though this is a Christian space, this is not an attempt to explicate religious doctrine. Rather, I ask every person to recognize that even the most expansive view of personal license must gr

Do What Father Says

When he teaches the Truth, and when you know his spiritual advice comes from a close relationship with the Holy Spirit. Let's just say that a priest with a heavy physical cross has a certain credibility when he says to forsake selfishness, and turn to the Lord. I'm not one for a certain patronizing pity, but if there is something heroic about a life like mine, (and his) it is that the temptations to the idol of Control are deeper for those who seem to have none. It seems counter-intuitive, but it's not. I could see in his eyes and in his voice that he understood me. And a man like that can push me to something higher without being irrelevant and theoretical. May Christ be praised for His glorious grace!

Her Name Is Jennifer (Or, Why I'm Not Happy For Brad Pitt Today)

Because he's (most likely) still married to Jennifer Aniston, in the eyes of God. If a marriage tribunal ruled that it never took place, fine. But let's get it straight: there is no re-marriage. Lord, have mercy on us! Look, I get it, man. Angelina Jolie is totally hot. Can I say "hot" on a Christian blog? I'm not blind. And even if I were, I'd probably still think so. There's a reason people burst out in applause when they hear of old people who've been married 60 years, however. It's praiseworthy; it's noble; it's sacrificial and heroic. Here's the point, though: That's how it's supposed to be. I know they're just celebrities, and it's easy to mock them. But celebrities are just people. A well-regarded performance in A River Runs Through It won't get you into Heaven. When it's all over, we're all just people. I hope we all have wedding garments, (let the reader understand) because there are no do-over

Still Got It

I was looking at some apartments closer to downtown St. Louis, and talking to this manager-lady, and she turns to my mom and says, "Must be tough, etc." (Keeping in mind that my mom and I were going to live together, anyway) My mom says, "Nah. I've been through this before." She asked me the same question, and I said, "Well, I'm 34..." "What?! I thought you were in your early 20s!" JASON WINS!!!

5 Thoughts For Tonight

5. That was so fun, I want all my friends to move away so we can celebrate it. 4. How did I get invited to this party? 3. I'm like, "No, how YOU doin'?" 2. My friend Alex and his wife (and baby August) are going to Franciscan University in Steubenville so Alex can teach philosophy. Converts taking jazz over, yo. 1. I think it'd be cool if we called it "The Steub." Seriously, let's make this happen. "You going to Ohio State?" "No, man. My lame-o parents are all about the Catholic education, so I'm going to The Steub." [This is not a John Hughes movie; no one says "lame-o" anymore.--ed.] You just did. [Arrrgh!--ed.]

That Awkward Moment

When I read something on the occasionally interesting The Gospel Coalition website, realize it's Kevin DeYoung, and stop reading. Not only is he comically anti-Catholic, but he is the epitome of tribalism, theological truncation, and oversimplification. Seriously. I would read Karl Barth backwards in French before I even thought about reading a book by DeYoung. I'd read Tillich. I'd read almost anything else. I had a hard time leaving Reformed theology. I truly did. But he would have inspired me to leave faster. The fact that he's a leader in this New Calvinism is tragic. I'm sorry. But not.

Is It Echoing In Here?

Haven't I said this 12,000 times? No matter. Seminarian Joe is way smarter and cooler than me, so let's hope something sticks. Paging Fred Noltie! I find in recent days as I mull the thing over in my head that the presupposition of discontinuity that gets one off the hook for schism is, in the end, a radical juxtaposition between the divine and the human. I'll wait while you recover from the realization that this indirectly denies the Incarnation. Yes, it freaked me out as well. The Tiber is warm this time of year.

5 Thoughts For Today

5. Oh, come on! That's funny! More proof that we are ruled by humorless scolds. 4. Humorless, gay-vangelizing scolds. [Did you just approvingly link Matt Walsh?--ed.] Yes, I did. I'm Catholic. We don't wring our hands about "tone." It's an act of charity to tell someone to stop being such a fascist. 3. And someone should be mad about Gosnell. They buried that story, on purpose, to avoid damaging public support for abortion. 2. C'mon Padres. Pitching a dude who's 6-13 (now 6-14) against the Brewers was just Stults. 1. Bases loaded, one out, down by a run. A hit would be nice, but whatever you do, HIT IT IN THE AIR! Situational hitting. You're lucky we won.

You Can't Have An Ecumenical Council Without The Pope

Even if he's not there, it doesn't go down without his say-so. It's always been that way, and it always will. So it just strikes me as mind-games to speculate whether the bishops wanted to be "distant" from the Holy Father or not in any one case. We have the same 3 choices: 1. Accept all the ecumenical councils as the most solemn invocation of the Church's authority; 2. Reject all of them as an unlawful imposition of human authority; or 3. accept some and reject others. If you choose (3), then you cause 2 problems: You violate JK's Axiom #1: "One cannot be both the arbiter of divine revelation, and a humble receiver of it at the same time," and 2. You lose the ability to distinguish human opinion from divine revelation. At some point, the convenience of the "true gospel" conforming precisely to what you already believe will test your intellectual honesty, just like it did mine. You may hold up the Westminster divines or their docu

If Nicea Is Correct, Then Christ Founded The Catholic Church

At the end of the day, it's that simple. Because the Council Fathers did not and could not use an hermeneutical method that did not exist (Sola Scriptura). They also knew that arguing with heretics and schismatics concerning the literal sense of Scripture theoretically and in fact has no end-point. So when you see a patristic quote about testing everything by Scripture, they are speaking of it in its mystical sense. A mystical sense that they understood from their own ecclesial self-awareness. If you will pardon the simplification, there is no "them" if there is no "us." Schism is always a schism from; it can't be a sin if it's just an unfortunate separation. It's always unfortunate, but tragic, culpable, and provoked by the sins of others are not mutually exclusive. The only good reason to accept an ecumenical council is that it is the most solemn invocation of the authority of the Church Christ founded. I was unwilling to accept one or two, and