Safe Haven

The easiest Christian thing to say in the whole Josh Duggar mess is, "Don't we all have a little of that in us?" Well, yes. And I guess we still need to remind ourselves of that, since many professed Christians seem to join in the cultural chorus of treating certain heinous sinners like non-people. I had another thought though, as I pondered my own failings, and sought mercy: we have a sacramental system, and we make frequent use of the sacraments, not because we lack confidence in God's love, but because we want to remain ourselves. That is, the change from a holy person into a wicked one is often slow, and maybe imperceptible. Isn't one of the tragic parts of these public falls that people live a double life? You can't do that unless your friendship with the one who knows you best atrophies. Moralists aren't often wrong about what is moral, but without a shared life, they are just rules, like words on signs. Having God as your friend is like walking ...

Most people who get motivated by politics are idealists; even the people who get angry about their opponents in politics are idealists. If we don't stop these people, they're going to destroy everything. Isn't it funny how everyone says that? That shows me that we have a lot of passion, and not a lot of wisdom. There's an intellectual virtue of listening and reflecting; I know I don't have it. The biggest problem with the "left" as it were, is that they believe two huge lies: That an unborn baby is not a person, and that nobody in Heaven and earth cares--or should--about what I do with my sexuality. Actually, replace "sexuality" with "money," and you've described a pretty big chunk of the "right," also. And of course, a few of them haven't bothered to wrestle with that fundamental realization of human personhood, either. A lot of people are cynical about politics right now, and I suppose I understand that. Our poli...

It's awesome in various ways. If you are a sensualist and a sinner, you have already thought of the words "drinking" and "free love". If they were in no way related to the good, it stands to reason, they would not be pleasurable. Do we exist for pleasure, however? And our own, at that? It would seem not. The pretense that universities exist for higher things strongly suggests that they once did. And I say that, not merely to suggest a wistfulness about days gone by, as if the days passing itself has caused whatever is lacking, but that what has been lost is truth about ourselves. What is the purpose of knowledge? If I may be momentarily pedantic, the purpose of knowledge is to know. Whether what we know has any great value will depend on how well we order the various goods, and how well we share them. We become sharers of knowledge and even teachers because we want others to love, and therefore know, the highest things. The highest subject you can study is the...

It's my favorite Kenny Loggins song , and really, it's not close. Look, I get it. Hippies, socialists, eco-wackos, yadda yadda. This song is a gold mine, lyrically speaking. I don't know how to make cool videos on the internet, but if I did, I would make a montage of this song with quotes from Laudato Si. This song is Laudato Si. I was lurking around the internet yesterday, when I caught sight of Confirmation Sponsor Guy picking apart some emotivist "conservative" argument about something or other. My life goal, one of them, is to make an argument about something political that he doesn't pick apart. I wish myself luck. I wish us all luck on that one! I just think it's funny that some folks make a big fuss about being the Party of God, the same God who said, "Behold, I am making all things new!" and when the leader of the People of God says something like, "Hey, everything is connected, because Jesus became incarnate to give his life for...

MLB Network had one of their games from Toronto. Toronto is loaded, no doubt. The Bombers will have to fight. But they have That Thing. It's in the water here in St. Louis, but it's that weird chemistry that makes no sense on paper, but means October baseball. It's oozing out of their ears. The Yankees commentators pointed out that the GM Brian Cashman stood pat at the trade deadline, because these young guys had played together; he knew they had That Thing. I saw it before the year started; I called it. These so-called "experts," I tell you. Do they even watch this game?

The biggest temptation for any person is to live a lie; we all have moments where we just say, "Sod it all, I don't care." I'm the weakest person I know; my file on "sins of weakness" (as opposed to malice) is the biggest one they have, I'm sure. You might be able to say the same. But I had a firm decision yesterday; I'm not going to deny reality to make myself happy; I'm not going to deny it to make others happy. People do this all the time. Getting along is easier than speaking hard truth. You might have to say, "Mental illness is real, and you need to face it," or "Abortion is murder," or any number of things. Not wanting to rock the boat could be an exercise of prudence, or a failure of fortitude, and it's not always easy to discern. But if you let people continue in horribly unhealthy or immoral patterns for years at great cost to yourself without doing anything at all to change it, it's probably the latter. I...

Most Christians you meet are not arrogant enough to think all they need is themselves, the Holy Spirit, and the Bible; they are going to make an argument from history and the creeds at some point. This is why Mathison's attempted distinction between Sola Scriptura and "Solo Scriptura" is so popular, when faced with the Catholic challenge. It has a surface plausibility; the Reformation has persisted for almost 500 years; everyone you know would think 500 years is a long time. If you appeal to an idea or a doctrine that is at least 500 years old, give or take, most people would credit you with the rootedness and historical awareness that you desire to project. The problem is with biting the bullet, and saying that the Reformation commitments were there from the very beginning. The result of that bold commitment is to essentially consign great luminaries like Augustine and Aquinas to a purgatory (metaphorical, of course) for questionable ecclesiology and soteriology. Which...

You hear evangelicals say sometimes, "The culture wars have really hurt our Christian witness." Nonsense. Hypocrisy has hurt the Christian witness. When someone speaks derisively of the "culture wars," they mean the politics of sexual "liberation." They think somehow that there is some formulation of the good news that doesn't include sex, and if we talk about that other stuff, well, maybe that other stuff will go away. Isn't it obvious that politics at its core is the imposition of public morality by force? The libertines know this; their opponents shouldn't be so naive. The very people you want to reach, Christian, nod their heads in tragic approval of your surrender, because that's exactly what it is. The people who say, "We shouldn't legislate morality" are actually saying, "I don't like the one you want to legislate." It's either deception, or stupidity, and we shouldn't find it compelling. Law...

I was talking politics with an older, more liberal friend last night, and he said he thought Sen. Rubio not believing in abortion exceptions for rape and incest would hurt him. I remember thinking I didn't care, because he's right on the issue, if indeed he believes this. Indeed, as I have said, it's the most principled position to take, if a pre-born child is a person. Sen. Goldwater had said that extremism in pursuit of liberty is no vice, and if we say "virtue" in place of "liberty," he's right. The game of politics is about persuasion as much as anything, though, and that's why winning is about not seeming to be extreme, even if you are. More interesting still, when discussions about principles and policy degenerate, the game of politics becomes about convincing the people one's opponent is "extreme," an outlier in relation to some mythical middle that you and your travelers occupy. "Extreme" is the postmodern secula...

It's not just an abortion stance. Not to me. It is the deepest, most fundamental conviction I own: that the fundamental dignity of the human person is the beginning and the end of my political philosophy. I think the gravest indictment of the Democratic Party I could articulate is this: If every Republican became an anti-abortion George McGovern or Paul Simon in exchange for the end of the evil of abortion, and its advocate, Planned Parenthood, no Democrats of any consequence would take the deal. You want to lecture the GOP on its anti-child, anti-family, anti-mother policies after birth? Fine; I'd probably join you. It wouldn't allow any of us to affirm corruption, inefficiency, mismanagement, and policies that don't work. Liberals can shout, "Seamless garment!" until the final resurrection; if we don't oppose abortion in all its forms, we're close to useless. There is no garment, if the emperor has no clothes. If it sounds at once like a politica...

I may spout any number of political ideological heresies from this space, as is my right and duty. Yet I think it is important to say that I like Republicans; I think like them, and talk like them. I am them. As Catholics wishing to adhere to all that the Church teaches, we may find ourselves at odds with deeply-held ideological commitments; if we do it well, we can articulate a bold, truly humanist conservative vision that will be compelling to the body politic; if we do it poorly, we alienate the very people we want to reach, and we unwittingly reinforce the piecemeal approach to ethics and political engagement that we abhor. The very first rule of effective communication is to connect with the audience; dispose them to hear what you are saying. If a faithful Catholic is indeed compelled to question the philosophical basis for the broad economic vision of his political party, for example, he can do this more easily by frankly acknowledging the things the listening or reading audi...

Abortion. Hey, good morning! Time for serious things! OK, here's your syllogism for the morning: Murder is the unjust taking of an innocent human person's life; Abortion is the unjust taking of an innocent human person's life in the womb; Therefore, abortion is a species of murder. Given this, there can be no exceptions, if indeed murder represents an intrinsic evil. So, on this issue, there are actually two real principled positions, all turning on the second premise of the above argument: A fetus is an innocent person, in which case, no exceptions to abortion can be allowed; or, A fetus is not a person, in which case, no restrictions to abortion are necessary. The fact that politics on this issue are mired in arguments over qualifications and exceptions tells me that most people aren't accustomed to thinking clearly, and in fact, nearly all of us know we have been wrong to permit abortion all this time.

I'm thankful for Sean Hutton today; he teaches theology in New York state. He's younger than me, smarter, and better-looking. [Does that need to be hyphenated?--ed.] I don't know; it just looked wrong before. Anyway, we're part of a rumble on Tim Dukeman's wall. There was a nice post affirming his Catholic and Orthodox "brothers" for standing for life amidst the Culture of Death. At that, the fundie hordes descended, and this lovely unity was shattered by theological disputation. This is Tim Dukeman, so the only natural thing was to make another thread where we could argue about our differences. I was named as the other main Catholic combatant, which was dumb, because I can't hold a candle to Mr. Hutton; pointing out the holes in Protestant thought isn't the same as making an affirmative case. Sean had this great little syllogism for Mary as the Mother of God: Mary is the mother of Jesus; Jesus is God; Therefore, Mary is the Mother of God...

Some sins actually are worse than others. If someone tells you otherwise, they are wrong. Can it be covered by the blood of Christ, no matter how serious? Of course it can. Let me say that again. Yes. There is nothing you can do to put yourself beyond the reach of His love. Can you choose not to be friends with God? Can you put yourself in danger of being excluded from God forever in Hell? Also yes. Most avowed Christians I know and talk to worry too much about the second, and meditate too little on the first. Before you stone me for that, I also recognize that many baptized and confirmed Catholics have never undergone initial conversions! They've never met Jesus personally! No wonder the American church is terrible! If you're not living a spiritual life, you're not going to understand spiritual things. You might be able to go through the motions; you might even understand that if you receive these sacraments, you can be rescued from damnation, at least for a time. You ...

Happy and sad, all at once.

Look here, children: Horror movies aren't good for us; I don't watch them. But if I need a clickbait post title, well, my hands are tied. After I thought of it, though, I realized that I know tons of people who irritate me, even make me angry. What better "revenge" than the Rosary? That former TA of my Covenant Theology class, who loves his generalizations about the poor motives of Reformed converts to Catholicism? He's got no chance, ultimately, when the saints get involved. If you think about these little irritations in relation to eternal life as a blessed child of God, they don't measure up. If I really understand the last things, my evil neighbor--who's made life pretty hard for us these 20-plus years--really isn't meant to live in the bitterness he apparently harbors. He isn't meant to suffer the damnation that evil rightly deserves. Nobody is. The reality that Hell is and will not be empty is of no concern to me, as long as I have co-redem...

I was up early again today. It's Sunday, of course. I had the distinct feeling that God is rescuing me from myself. Those of you who have the ability and the time to go to Mass more frequently should do it. There is no good reason to stay away, in that case. So the Rosary this morning was energized with the thankfulness of the Eucharist to come. There are moments when the whole thing feels commonplace, comfortable, and suburban; there are other moments when it seems we will all die here before the altar. I can remember times when my soul grabbed a hold of, "for they offer it for themselves, and all who are dear to them, in hope of health and well-being..." and really offered something. It seems we get little moments of eternity like this, where we realize the truth of it all, not only in our minds, but in the core of ourselves. Maybe the saints are the saints because they sensed this all the time, and kept living, instead of just being blown away. For the greatest a...

In my last post, I wanted to lightly touch on the Catholic and Reformed doctrines of justification, so we might be aware that the difference is not a trifling one. In general, the educated Catholic--of which there are too few, sadly--knows that he or she must give unyielding, unqualified assent to much more than that which appears in the ecumenical creeds--the Apostles' and the Nicene--in order to suppose that he might possess the virtue of faith. Therefore, even if we supposed incorrectly that the Catholic and Reformed mean the same things in giving their affirmation to those creeds, we would still be divided. We are divided over charity ; that is, the fundamental theological significance of it. In crude terms, the Reformed person locates the goodness of God's sovereign mercy in the divine electing will; the Catholic locates the same in the sacraments of the New Covenant. They are efficacious signs , for the Catholic. There are 2 ways to be denied salvation, for the Catholic...

We were asked about this in our Reformed and Catholic dialogue group; one PCA elder mistakenly believes that yours truly does not understand his position. Well, when I was in fact Reformed, the words from Chapter XI of the Westminster Confession of Faith were my own:   Those whom God effectually calls, He also freely justifies; not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ's sake alone; nor by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to them, as their righteousness; but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them,   they receiving and resting on Him and His righteousness by faith; which faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of God. II. Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification: yet is it no...

Certain self-appointed lecturers of conservatives and the pro-life movement have charged that by switching the discussion back to Planned Parenthood in the midst of the outrage over Cecil the Lion, we are deflecting. You get this charge a lot with other things, if you point out the selective outrage of the Left. I admit that the gaping hole in their moral vision angers me, not least because moral superiority is the means by which they shift the discussion in their favor in other contexts. Here's my personal key: Do I actually care about the other things, or do I just want the shaming to stop? No; I actually care about innocent, dead babies, dead lions killed by trophy hunters, sub-standard wages, criminal justice reform, and dozens of other things. If we're talking about structural racism and violence in policing, it is deflection to yell out, "All lives matter!" just to make yourself less uncomfortable. I actually agree with that. But   I don't grant to a cer...