tour

Recently Glenn Beck said on his radio shows that if their priest or pastor or preacher is using the terms economic or social justice that they should leave their local congregation. To make sure that you do not think that Father Orthoduck is misquoting Glenn Beck, please go here to read his defense on his own website. In fact, Father Orthoduck thinks that there is some interesting stuff in his own defense posting. For instance:

GLENN: No idea. “Mr. Beck said on his radio show March 2nd, I beg you look for the word social justice or economic justice on your church website. If you can find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice are code words.” Quoting me. Am I advising people to leave their church? Yes, if I’m going, if I’m going to Jeremiah Wright’s church, he said, referring to President Obama’s former pastor in Chicago. If you have a priest that is pushing social justice, go find another parish. Notice, notice, leave your parish, not your church.

What Father Orthoduck finds interesting is that Glenn Beck tries to make it appear that he was only talking about extreme congregations of the Jeremiah Wright type. And, at first he appears to have support from the transcript of the prior show. But, unfortunately, he then goes on to justify himself, and it is at this point that Father Orthoduck is unhappy:

GLENN: Yeah. Religion scholars say the term social justice now listen. This is a defense if you know history, this is their defense? Religious scholars say the term social justice was coined in the 1800s, codified by successive popes and adopted widely by protestant churches in the 1900s.

PAT: After the progressive movement had kicked in. Jeez.

GLENN: For the love of Pete. Marx started in 19 1848. All of this stuff started percolating, all of Nietzsche comes along, everything, it’s redistribution of wealth. I’ve told you this, the progressive movement started with people like Woodrow Wilson whose father was a preacher! They perverted Christianity! “The concept is that Christians should not merely give to the poor but also work to correct unjust conditions that keep people poor.” Yes! You’re exactly right. We should as Christians do that. But then there’s that added little step of having the government do it, not you.

Father Orthoduck would hope that there would be many Roman Catholics who would be incredibly insulted that there is a linkage made between their popes and Karl Marx. This would be especially true since the Second Vatican Council directly stated that social justice is part of the duty and responsibility of the Church. In particular, one should look at documents such as Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate. Mr. Beck goes on to try to defend himself by stating that he is only arguing about the use of government to accomplish social justice. But, here is the problem for Mr. Beck. He equates social justice merely with “give-away” programs, which he defines in the worst possible fashion. But, if one looks at the documents issued by both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Church, social justice has a much deeper and stronger meaning than simply “give-away” programs. Our documents consistently link the idea of social justice to the call of the prophets, the apostles, and Holy Tradition for the care of the widow and the orphan, for judges that behave appropriately, for economic transactions that are fair and just (look up both the Book of James and how many times things like unfair weights, etc., are condemned in the OT)., etc.

Father Orthoduck has noticed that the Religious Right in this country is increasingly making wilder and wilder claims. With Glenn Beck this claim now goes far beyond what is appropriate to change Church teaching into something that it is not.

Father Ernesto has been doing some postings on short-term missions to which he will return tomorrow. But, he wishes you to know that, in one area, Tony Campolo has also slipped into this same problem of increasing denial of Church teaching in the area of social justice.

store

As Father Orthoduck is writing this, he is very tired from a long Sunday of very worthwhile worship and service of the Lord. But, thanks to a fellow blogger, Father Orthoduck was introduced to the blog of a delightfully wacky fellow Orthodox blogger. And, so, Father Orthoduck recommends Steve of Pithless Thoughts. Particularly his current Lenten cartoons take a wonderful and humorous look at the reality and foibles of Lenten fasting and Lenten attitudes.

Father Orthoduck must admit the longer that Lent goes on, the more scrumptious a hot dog looks, and who cares how bad they are for your health!

What can we learn from the experiences of General MacArthur and Secretary of State Marshall on handling the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan? After all, both history and statistics show that both men were fully successful in turning former enemies into stable and reliable allies. Mind you, this does not mean that they never disagree with us, but, when all is said and done, they stand with us. What did they do that helped turned former military enemies into civilian allies? Well, there were several things that they did that might be helpful to us at this time.

1.  They accepted the existing system of government and did not attempt to change it. Before World War II, Japan was a constitutional empire and Germany was a parliamentary democracy. After World War II, Japan remained a constitutional empire and Germany remained a parliamentary democracy. Neither man was interested in changing the style of government that each culture had developed over the course of time. They were only interested in ensuring that the governments were just governments in which people behaved ethically and the police forces were just. They were not interested in turning either country into an American-style representative democracy. After all, if a government is just, its particular form does not matter, and, if a government is unjust, its particular form does not matter. If one is a victorious invader, it is actually easier to maintain stability in a country if one maintains as many cultural forms as possible, provided those forms do not conflict with your ethical and security goals. One can see this in Cyrus’ treatment of the Jews in the Books of Nehemiah and Ezrah.

2.  Both men spent unstintingly in the rebuilding of the shattered economies. The rebuilding of infrastructure was actually a higher priority than the pursuit of former enemies. And, in order to rebuild and maintain the infrastructure, both men used the experienced professionals of the former regime since both Axis powers forced all middle and upper level managers to be part of the party. There is nothing that so settles a populace as having fairly full employment and a working infrastructure. If one has a full belly and a warm house, one is much less likely to rebel than if one is hungry and searching for a non-existent job. Again, look at the Books of Nehemia and Ezrah and see how much money both of those men were given in order to rebuild shattered Israel.

3.  The United States of America had a policy that allowed the immigration of many of the displaced persons from both Japan and Europe. This immigration policy not only functioned as a relief valve while the infrastructure was being rebuilt, but also built links between the USA and the former Axis countries. These were ties that went much deeper than treaties or governmental theories. Many Japanese, Germans and Austrians ended up with relatives here; relatives who reported that they had jobs and were well accepted by the populace. If you have ever seen the movie The Sound of Music, with Julie Andrews, you know that it is based on a real family who was really called the von Trapp family, and who really had to flee Austria. But, the film ends with them climbing over the mountains to the safety of Switzerland. Father Orthoduck is certain that most of you do not know that the von Trapp family ended up in Vermont. If you are interested in the story of the von Trapp family, you can go to The National Archives and see photographs as well as copies of their USA documents.

4.  The United States of America had post-war tours by people from the defeated Axis powers. One can read in newspapers from the late 1940’s and early 1950’s of touring Japanese karate experts (and teams), Austrian singers, German engineers, etc. That is, by having those people tour through the USA, it helped us see them as just normal human beings, rather than as monsters who were only fit to be killed.

Can you see how the application of policies of this type might help in turning former enemies into allies? Father Orthoduck would suggest that we need to study both General MacArthur and Secretary of State Marshall to see how many of their successful policies can be applied wholesale to Afghanistan and Iraq.

profile

Yesterday Father Orthoduck talked about the Marshall Plan and suggested that it may have some things to say to us about Iraq and Afghanistan. Father Orthoduck also suggested that some knowledge of history might be helpful in order to be able to understand why citizens of the Middle East might be less than excited about our presence in Iraq, even though they agree with our invasion of Afghanistan. Let’s start first with a look at the recent history of the Middle East.

Have you ever heard about the British Mandate of Palestine? It was, “a legal instrument for the administration of Palestine formally approved by the League of Nations in June 1922, based on a draft by the principal Allied and associated powers after the First World War. The mandate formalized British rule in Palestine from 1917-1948. The boundaries of two new states were laid down within the territory of the Mandate, Palestine and Transjordan.” Now, this may surprise you, but the United States at that time was against the mandate, in part because it seemed to simply be a legal way to disguise the spoils of war (World War I) among the European powers. More than that, the High Commissioner for the mandate refused to recognize the rights of non-Orthodox Jews and of Protestant Christians. Worse, the High Commissioner continued the millet system of the Ottoman Empire. Thus the USA Senate refused to ratify the Covenant of the League of Nations.

But, more than that, France held Syria, Lebanon, Algeria, and French Morocco as colonies. Spain held Spanish Morocco. Italy held Ethiopia. Britain further held Egypt. In other words, the Middle East was divided among the (white) European powers. Algeria only became fully independent in 1962. Father Orthoduck was already 10 1/2 years old then. Morocco became independent in 1956, and so on. As Americans, we fail to realize that the Middle East is full of people who can remember being occupied by the European powers. For these people, it is NOT old history, it is part of their personal memories.

Can you understand why they might have a knee-jerk reaction to the invasion of a Middle Eastern country by a “white” country? By and large the Middle East understood our invasion of Afghanistan because it was a clear case of retaliation against your enemy. But, there was no clear aggression by Saddam against the United States. We might not have liked him, and he certainly was violating human rights. But, you need to place yourself in their shoes. Many of the Middle Eastern states are run by autocratic and authoritarian regimes. While Saddam was extreme by Middle Eastern standards, he was not completely outside the way their various governments run themselves. But worse, almost all Middle Easterners of the age of babyboomers (or older) have personal memories of being controlled by an European power.

But, we might have yet pulled it off had we found weapons of mass destruction or proof that Saddam was planning to directly engage in terrorist acts in the USA. But, he was not. There were no weapons of mass destruction found and to this day there is no evidence that he was involved in any direct attacks on the USA. So, to the typical Middle East citizen, it looks merely like another instance of the historical interference of the European/First World powers into the Middle East. Can you now understand why the typical Middle East citizen might then look at anyone who violently opposes the USA as a freedom fighter rather than a terrorist? In fact, as Father Orthoduck pointed out Al Qaeda had an incredible opportunity to become heroes. Thank God that they made the same type of mistakes as C.S. Lewis points out in his book That Hideous Strength. Evil always overstretches itself.

Had it not been for the stupidity of Al Qaeda, we might be facing a more difficult situation than the one we are facing. That is not to say that we have taken the smartest steps that we could have, particularly given the history of the post-WWII period. But, the prior history of the region gives a quite plausible reason why Middle Eastern Muslims were slow to speak out against the jihadists. It was not always because they were evil Muslims who had it in for Christians. Put yourself in their shoes. Would you have nice thoughts about people who resembled the people whom you remembered as being your occupiers when you were a child, or that your parents or grandparents had told you about?

And, so, on the one hand, it took longer than it should have for a fatwa to be proclaimed against the jihadists. But, that can be explained in part, but only in part, by the prior history. Nevertheless, we have yet to look at ourselves and some possible approaches to the Middle East.

===MORE TO COME===

Yesterday Father Orthoduck posted on the fatwa that was announced against the jihadists by a prominent Islamic scholar. Sometimes we ask ourselves why did this not happen sooner. But, since Americans have very little tendency to listen, despite all the Oprah-like shows that emphasize learning to listen, and since Americans know very little history or geography, they then have a tendency to be somewhat clueless when dealing with world affairs. Even our Psych-Ops people inside and outside the Armed Forces tend to be oriented only towards neutralizing a perceived immediate threat rather than preparing the ground for a lasting change among those whom you have defeated in battle.

On top of this general cluelessness, Americans have a tendency to judge everything as black or white and to make that as a snap judgment. The trouble is that it is in the shades of gray that one begins to understand the dimensions of a problem. We actually got that right in World War II. Notice that both General Douglas MacArthur in the Pacific and Secretary of State George Marshall in Europe understood that. Both men resisted outcries from the populace and the Congress to punish the conquered enemy. They also resisted outcries that everyone who had held any position of any authority in the former regimes had to be banned from being used by the Allies. Both men knew their history and their human psychology and knew that to produce lasting change in the two main Axis countries, they had to be cognizant of the two factors of history and psychology.

On the history side, they were well aware that the reparations that were levied on Germany after World War I impoverished and humiliated the country and led directly to the rise of the anti-European reaction that was the National Socialist Party. In fact, just this past week, one of the Ripley’s Believe It or Not cartoons pointed out that Germany is still paying off the reparations from World War I. Can you imagine that?! On the psychology side, they were well aware that outside the top leadership, many people simply serve the current regime because they have to eat and not necessarily because they agree with the current regime. More than that, the longer a regime is in power, the more of the infrastructure is managed by people who are supposedly tainted with some affiliation to the party in power.

So both men executed the same basic simple plan. Part one of the plan was to avoid reparations that would lead to hopelessness and resurgent anger. So, they set about rebuilding the infrastructure and making sure that a functional economy was in place that could provide decent employment for almost everyone. They were so successful that, “By 1952 as the funding ended, the economy of every participant state had surpassed pre-war levels; for all Marshall plan recipients, output in 1951 was 35% higher than in 1938.” Folks, they actually improved the economy of Europe so well that the economy was 1/3 better than under the pre-World War II governments! Who would even want to rebel against the occupying forces under such a scenario? The populace remained calm after World War II out of sheer amazement at what their conquerors were doing.

But, they also understood human psychology. Most people are followers of one type or another. They may rise into supervisory positions, but they tend to implement policy rather than to originate policy. And, as long as that policy does not have them personally involved in something evil, as long as the evil things happen somewhere else, they can convince themselves that they bear no personal moral responsibility for the other actions. Add a healthy dose of fear (the Gestapo, Saddam’s secret police, etc.), and one can keep large portions of the populace quiet, even if they do not agree with you. If, in addition, you make some type of party affiliation necessary for any post beyond a very low level supervisor, then you can morally taint a large number of people who will know that the party with which they are affiliated is doing evil things, but are too afraid to critique or to not join. Uhm, Saddam knew that lesson, too.

Both MacArthur and Marshall knew this psychology. And so, they did not punish those with party affiliation. Rather, they told them to stay in their supervisory jobs and to run the country, under the new rules. In one fell swoop, they turned a large portion of the management people into supporters of the Allies. Those people were not followers of either the Emperor or the Führer, they were simply scared out of their wits and caught in a system they thought they could not change. You can read the horrendous arguments that broke out in the USA at those policies! Yes, just like today, we wanted to judge black and white. We wanted to create an underclass of permanently unemployable (or incarcerated) people because justice had to be done. But, both those men knew that the long-term stability of those countries was more important for our security than the punishment and impoverishment of them. And, they also knew that gratefulness is a better teacher of repentance than punishment. Uhm, Jesus knew that too; just look at the Samaritan woman or the woman caught in adultery. The end results were both a Germany and a Japan that were psychologically changed and freely chose to become our allies. In fact,  major European wars have stopped. There has been no major European war since then. Sadly, the same has not been true in Asia outside of Japan, but notice how stable Japan is.

So, what does this have to do with the Middle East?

===MORE TO COME===

terms

Islamabad, Pakistan (CNN) — A fatwa, or religious ruling, issued this week is roiling theological waters after it took aim at those notorious for targeting others: terrorists.

The anti-terrorism fatwa by renowned Muslim scholar Muhammad Tahir ul-Qadri pulled no punches, declaring that terrorism was “haraam,” or forbidden by the Quran, and that suicide bombers would be rewarded not by 72 virgins in heaven, as many terrorist recruiters promise, but with a suite in hell.

Qadri, the founder of the Minhaj-ul-Quran International, an Islamic movement with centers in 90 countries, told a news conference in London, England, on Tuesday that his decree categorically condemns terrorism and suicide bombings in the name of Islam.

“Until now, scholars who were condemning terrorism were conditional and qualified what they said,” Qadri said in a phone interview, noting that his 600-page ruling left no room for interpretation. “I didn’t leave a single, minor aspect that, in the mind of radicals or extremists, can take them to the direction of martyrdom.” . . .

Father Orthoduck was glad to see the action above. It should have a good effect among the non-jihadists, and make recruiting significantly harder for the terrorists. Please notice that this was issued by a leading scholar from Pakistan, a country full of jihadists. And, please do go and read the rest of the article on CNN. Father Orthoduck would like to echo another poster and say to the Iman:

To Muslim scholar Muhammad Tahir ul-Qadri: Assalamu Alilkum Wa Rahmatulah Wa Barakatuh (meaning peace, mercy, and blessings be upon from Allah) And thank you!

Frankly, the terrorists have done it to themselves and helped us to redeem a mistaken act. We had and have significant world support for the invasion of Afghanistan. At the time of that invasion, there was no general Islamic support for the Taliban or the Al Qaeda. But, when President Bush (son) decided to invade Iraq, we lost some significant support from the Arab world. And we did not just lose support from outside the USA. I have cited in other posts the strong opposition of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops to the invasion of Iraq. Both they and the Pope went on record saying that Iraq did not qualify as a just war. But that is not my point.

After the invasion of Iraq, Arab support was on the side of Al Qaeda. From terrorist in 2001, they quickly went to being almost heroes. Their opposition to what was unanimously seen in the Arab world as an illegal American invasion started looking like the underdog fighting an evil bully. Suicide bombing directed against USA troops was seen as a heroic self-sacrifice to permit the self-determination of an occupied people. IED’s were seen as the only way to fight an empire with overwhelming firepower. If you read the stories from back then, there were even places were Al Qaeda was providing food and infrastructure to villages in outer parts of Iraq. Had they kept on this course, the current situation in Iraq would be much more difficult.

But Al Qaeda made a major mistake. C.S. Lewis has pointed out that evil often makes the mistake of over-reaching itself, of getting greedy for more and more gain and power, thereby ruining their plans. Al Qaeda began to treat everyone who was not actively helping them as though they were enemies. They thoroughly applied the idea of, “he who is not with us is against us.” They began to suicide bomb fellow Muslims. It did not matter whether or not the persons killed had any involvement with the Americans. The idea was to sow such terror that the populace itself would rise up against the invader just to get relief from the bombers. But, it did not work that way. Instead, the people began to turn against Al Qaeda.

The fatwa above is a sign of what is slowly becoming a general rejection of Al Qaeda among your average Muslim. This is not to say that Muslims are now in agreement that the USA invasion was correct. You would be quite mistaken if you thought that was true. Rather, we are being seen more and more as the lesser of two evils. If we are fortunate, we may someday make it all the way to no longer being perceived as evil, but rather being perceived as good. Insha’Allah.

api

Father Orthoduck wishes to urge a little caution before watching this ABC News Video. Some visible nudity is present. Nevertheless, this, uhm, ah, group of people–Father Orthoduck is wary of calling them a church–claim that it is perfectly within the Gospel to worship au naturale. Please listen to their Biblical reasons for being able to do this and not contradict any Scripture. Father Orthoduck suspects a bit of rationalization is involved in this case.

Why did Father Orthoduck say, “in this case?” Well, as many of you know, Father Orthoduck lived in South America for about a decade. While there, Father Orthoduck visited the Mbya-Yuki tribe in the Bolivian jungle courtesy of New Tribes Mission. The Mbya-Yuki do not wear much of any clothes. The missionaries commented to Father Orthoduck that as they reached the Mbya-Yuki, they deliberately did not teach them to wear clothes. Now, partial clothes wearing was indeed adopted by many of them, but that was in part because they saw the protection that clothes could provide them, and, in part, because of a little imitation of the “outside” people they met. Nevertheless, to this day, the Mbya-Yuki in their territory will still worship in a mixture of clothing to very little clothing to no clothing. Here is a small entry on the Mbya-Yuki:

Around a hundred and fifty Mbya-Yuki (Hunters-Yuki) people still live in northern Santa Cruz; they are hunters and gatherers within the Amazonian Basin rain forest. The name Yuki was given by the white man; they refer to themselves as Mbya. They belong to the Tupi-Guarani group of people and are related to the Mbya-Siriono. They terminated their isolation in 1960 when some of them made contact with the New Tribes Mission; however, nobody knows for sure how many of them still live isolated within the forests. The ones out, live in Mbia Recuate, next to the Chimore River.

Below is the link to a 10 minute video on the Yuki, in part made by themselves and in part by New Tribes Mission missionaries. Caution! Remember what Father Orthoduck said about their clothing styles. There are clear unclothed views. No worship is shown, but rather the lifestyle of the Yuki. Let Father Orthoduck give you an additional warning. The Yuki hunt and eat small monkeys, etc. One of the scenes shows the hunt and the field dressing of a small monkey. Finally, Father Orthoduck wishes to emphasize that the site is NOT an official New Tribes site in any way nor is the video labeled as an official New Tribes Mission video, and the views of the pastor of that site should not be taken to reflect the views of the New Tribes Mission.

Yuki video

So, here is Father Orthoduck’s question for you. Would you forbid both groups from worshipping au naturale? Would you permit one group to do so and another group not to do so? OK, what is your reasoning? Yes, Father Orthoduck has a clear opinion, but he wants you to do some thinking through your Scriptures, etc. Here is another question. Is it sinful for either or both groups to worship au naturale? Why or why not? And a final question for you, if you gave either group permission to worship au naturale and you forbade that permission to another group, have you fallen into relativism? Why or why not?

And, here is a final question from Father Orthoduck. Let’s say that you went as a tourist to St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome or to an Orthodox parish in small town Romania. Because of your clothing you were refused entrance to the church. If you are a woman, perhaps you wore a sleeveless dress and had uncovered hair. If you are a man, perhaps you are wearing a tank top because it is hot, or you are wearing holey blue jeans with scruffy flip flops. Would you be in sin if you then insisted on setting up a church in their town that emphasized the ability of people to come and worship in clothing styles that are considered sinful by the locals? Would there, in fact, be any difference between you and the nudist church? Why or why not?

news

From the news on February 10:

RIO DE JANEIRO (AFP) – The worst heatwave to hit Rio de Janeiro in 50 years turned the city into a pre-Carnival furnace Wednesday, and killed 32 elderly people further south, officials said.

According to the Inmet national weather service, recorded temperatures in Rio were well above 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees) — and felt more like above 50 degrees.

“The heatwave in Rio is seen as historic. February right now is the hottest month for the past 50 years,” meteorologist Giovanni Dolif told the O Globo daily.

On Monday and Tuesday, the scalding conditions proved deadly for 32 elderly residents in Santos, a city close to Sao Paulo and 350 kilometers (220 miles) south of Rio.

Half of them succumbed in their homes and the other half died as they sought help in clinics, a spokeswoman for the city’s health service told AFP.

The heatwave made Rio the hottest place on the planet on Tuesday, save for Ada, a town in eastern Ghana, according to data from the World Meteorological Organization.

Opponents of any measures to try to control increased pollution of the environment have been gleefully pointing to both the incredible scandals out of the environmental research facilities in Scotland and to the “snowmaggedon” that is still going on over the East Coast of the United States of America. They point to this as evidence that any talk of future global warming is junk science and should not be taken seriously until we have increased evidence. The only problem is that this type of viewpoint ignores quite a bit of other evidence that is also present but conveniently not quoted. For instance, I followed the AFP link and found the news story quoted above on the main page of several newspaper websites in other parts of the world, right along the massive snow stories from the United States.

Of course, it is only as you put those two stories together that you have some nice evidence for the changes that are taking place in the global climate situation. Side by side, one can see the evidence for a system that is starting to “wobble” and become less stable. This is precisely what the scientists have been warning about, a less stable system that will tend to eventually stabilize, but at a temperature higher than that which we have had for quite a while.

The problem with all too many of those who claim that no changes are taking place is that all too often their claims are based on limited instances of events that supposedly do not match global warming. All too often the skeptics do not do the additional research necessary to see whether the facts they are quoting are the full facts. For instance, you may have read quite a few stories listing a number of glaciers that are growing at an increased pace instead of shrinking. That is absolutely true. However, what most of those stories fail to tell you is reflected in the chart in this story. That chart is a graph of a massive number of worldwide glaciers. The glaciers with lines pointing to the right are growing; the glaciers with lines pointing to the left have been shrinking. As you can see from the chart, it is absolutely true that, on the whole, glaciers around the world are shrinking. What about those who are growing? As Father Orthoduck said above, the system is wobbling, it is not warming up uniformly in all places. Again, the data is consistent with a wobbling environment that is trending hotter.

The final supposed winner argument is the Scotland argument. Supposedly, this proves that all scientists are deliberately changing information. Frankly, for those of you who read this and are Christians, this argument is on the same exact level of logic as arguing that a few pedophile priests prove that all priests are hidden pedophiles or arguing that the televangelist and megachurch scandals prove that all successful pastors are hypocrites. It also ignores the masses of data that have been collected by meteorological facilities around the world since the 1800’s. This data has been collected by people from different countries, of different political backgrounds, from long before any thought of global changes existed. Moreover, the data has been part of the public record since the 1800’s in many countries. It would be very easy to tell whether worldwide data had been altered. In fact, at least one of the scandals was caught precisely because reviewing staff was able to compare a statement in a report to the previous original statement on the record and realize that it had been altered.

Because science is not exact, many of the opponents have been having a field day pointing to unknown areas. But, one need not have every detail figured out in order to be able to spot massive trends, and that is what has been happening in the environmental studies. Can mistakes be made? Of course, but eventually one has to go with the evidence. The problem is that the opponents want us to wait to take any action until it is a sure thing, by which time there will be no action to be taken. The final proof of global warming will be global warming and we should not wait until then to take action. And this is the connundrum. Science is, indeed, imperfect. Perfect proof is usually only present by hindsight.

For those of you who are Christian and use apologetics by Josh McDowell (a fine writer), you know how little the evidence you present matters to the one listening. It is the rare person who decides to commit to the Lord based on the evidence Mr. McDowell presents, despite the fine documentation he provides. Let Father Orthoduck ask you a question. Are you behaving in the area of science the same way as that person to whom you present the McDowell apologetic evidence? Would you consider the possibility that a closed mind is a closed mind regardless of whether it is the mind listening to “Evidence that Demands a Verdict” or the mind listening to compilations of data (yes, that are imperfectly interpreted)? Remember that the saying about exceptions not disproving a rule is there because there is such a thing as anomalous findings. Look at events such as the East Coast “snowmageddon” and then read some more to find out that it is balanced by a killing heat wave on the east coast of Brazil. Consider the possibility that this is actually evidence for a planet whose controls are beginning to wobble. Too many opponents of global warming theory look at the trees and forget to also look at the forest.

language

By and large Father Orthoduck is not in favor of the Tea Party. Nevertheless, Father Orthoduck posts the cartoon above. Given the extremely low rating that Congress has, regardless of whether one is a Democrat or a Republican, the cartoon above points to a uniting point between Democrats, Republican, Independents, Libertarians, Anarchists, etc. Sadly, that uniting point is an utter revulsion about the ethics that are demonstrated by the members of Congress.

For all the talk about ethics, both the Democrats and the Republicans have and continue to engage in pork barrel politics. Some of the latest cases are every bit as bad as anything that the banker’s have done with their bonuses. So, part of Father Orthoduck’s wish is that the snowstorms continue unabated and strong over only the city of Washington, DC. Please note that Father Orthoduck wishes no snow over non-governmental parts of Virginia and Maryland, but will make an exception for sections of the Pentagon, the CIA, and some other governmental entities.

Nevertheless, may Arlington Cemetery stay snow-free, mildly warm, and full of flowers. May the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier remain free of dirt or dust. May the Vietnam Wall, the WWII memorial, the Iwo Jima memorial and others remain accessible at all times. May the Peace Corps always be accessible.

information

terms

So, you do not know why the book, Never Ceese, fits the worldview of Roman Catholic Christianity? Well, let Father Orthoduck tell you. But, let Father Orthoduck warn you that there is some heavy theology ahead.

OK, here is the theology. All Christians agree that the Fall has damaged humanity, but they do not agree on what it all means.  Both the East and the West agree that Free Will has been damaged, as versus the Pelagians who insisted that Free Will was undamaged. The West, by and large, has gone with Saint Augustine of Hippo’s version of what the Fall has meant. The West has a conception of Original Sin which the East has nicknamed Original Guilt. Now, the details are not important for the purposes of this post. Suffice it to say that the transmission of Original Sin, or hereditary guilt, was physical transmission. The transmission of this hereditary guilt is a form of traducianism:

In Christian theology, traducianism is a doctrine about the origin of the soul (or synonymously, “spirit”), in one of the biblical uses of word to mean the immaterial aspect of man (Genesis 35:18, Matthew 10:28). Traducianism means that this immaterial aspect is transmitted through natural generation along with the body, the material aspect of man. That is, an individual’s soul is derived from the souls of the individual’s parents. This implies that only the soul of Adam was created directly by God (with Eve’s substance, material and immaterial, being taken from out of Adam), in contrast with creationism (not to be confused with creationism as a belief about the origin of the material universe), which holds that all souls are created directly by God (with Eve’s substance, material and immaterial, being taken from out of Adam).

Thus, in traducianism, the act of begetting a child transmits a body that is composed of both the father and the mother (and this was pre-genetics, too). It also transmits a soul, “derived from the souls of the individual’s parents,” but, in the West, it also transmits sin. Let Father Orthoduck be clear, in the West, it is not simply a damaged human nature that is transmitted, sin and guilt are transmitted. (This is not the way in which either Eastern or Oriental Orthodoxy explain it.) This means that, for the West, the child is a sinner from the day of its conception, while it is still in the womb, before it has done anything right or wrong, and is deserving of hell. This is why the Roman Catholic doctrine of limbo developed. The thought of a baby who is stillborn or dies within a few days of birth being condemned to hell was repugnant to many theologians, and so limbo was a place where a baby (and others, but that is another discussion) could live out eternity in happiness but never be able to experience the joy of God’s presence. (All Protestants have a different explanation for babies. Some Calvinists are willing to say that babies of non-believers may indeed go to hell. Eastern and Oriental Orthodox do not have that problem since they do not believe in Original Guilt.)

SPOILER ALERT DO NOT READ IF YOU PLAN TO READ NEVER CEESE

OK, with that background, let’s look at the transmission of either vampirism or lycanthropy on the book Never Ceese. In the book, both vampirism and lycanthropy are the result of a two fold process. On the physical side, part one of the process appears to be the transmission of pluripotent cells which become or are stem cells of different types and do the physical job of transforming the genetics of the affected person into either werewolf or vampire. A vampire has more pluripotent cells than a werewolf. But, the transmission is not merely that of physical characteristics. Rather, as in traducianism, there is a transmission of an immaterial aspect, and that is what is labeled the “curse” in the book. And, just like in the Western conception of Original Sin, the person who has been attacked is automatically guilty of sin and worthy of hell despite the fact that they have personally done nothing to deserve this punishment. (Neither Eastern nor Oriental Orthodoxy would agree with this conception.) This is a very Augustinian conception.

Father Orthoduck will say that there is a twist to the book Never Ceese that is neither Orthodox nor Roman Catholic nor Protestant. And that is the idea that the curse becomes permanent if you pass on the curse. This means that passing on the curse is the equivalent of the unforgivable sin. Matthew 3 says, “But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin.” This is the only twist in the book that slightly disappoints Father Orthoduck. He would have preferred that the book would have been written in such a way that passing on the curse would have required a much stronger act of abnegation rather than being unforgivable. On the other hand, Father Orthoduck must admit that it certainly adds some significant dynamic tension to the book to realize that once one curses someone else one is going to hell with no hope of reprieve. But . . . but . . . but, uhm, that is not a very Christian conception of sin and forgiveness.

There are other touches in the book that put it in the realm of an Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic conception of how the world works. These are touches that would not be present in Protestantism. Nevertheless, Father Orthoduck will not cover those in this post.

api