He Who Attacks the Old Testament Attacks Judaism

jewish man dressed ritual clothing torah bar mitzvah 300x186 - He Who Attacks the Old Testament Attacks Judaism

Many criticize Christianity because of the harsh laws of the Old Testament, specifically the 613 laws of Moses found in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. For example, there’s the precept to stone adulterers to death, as well as laws about slavery.

That’s ironic, because Christians are not bound by those laws, which are part of the Old Covenant. Christians are bound by the New Covenant, ushered in by Jesus Christ. To be sure, Christians are bound by the Ten Commandments found in the Old Testament, but the Ten Commandments are derived from natural law – i.e. moral precepts that can be derived from reason. Many of the Mosaic laws of the Old Covenant are meant for the day-to-day minutia of the ancient Jews.

The issue stems from judging the Mosaic Law and the God of the Old Testament by twenty-first century standards, rather than by the standards of the ancient Near East. Compared with the abominable laws, codes, and customs of the surrounding cultures, the Mosaic Law was a vast improvement in human rights. Again, not by our standards, but certainly by theirs. This is thoroughly explained in books such as Is God a Moral Monster by Paul Copan and Hard Sayings by Trent Horn.

With Jesus Christ the harsh laws of the Old Testament (but not so harsh by ancient Near East standards) were relaxed or thrown out. Recall the story of Jesus and the adulteress. And it is because of Christianity that slavery was eventually abolished – the first abolitionists were Christians. That was based on Jesus Christ’s exaltation of the poor and downtrodden, his urging to always help them, and that they are made in the image and likeness of God. Jesus’ mission was not to immediately overthrow the political and economic order of the Roman empire, which was based on slavery. That came later.

When people criticize Christianity based on Mosaic Law, they are actually criticizing Judaism. But modern Jews do not abide by all of those precepts. That’s particularly the case with Reform Judaism, less so with Conservative Judaism, and less so with Orthodox Judaism. To my understanding, the Talmud indicates to what extent to abide by those laws.

In the past, to their enduring shame, even those who called themselves Christians attacked the Jewish faith because of the harsh Mosaic laws. Today it isn’t Christians doing so, but atheists such as Richard Dawkins – although he doesn’t attack the Jewish faith directly. Recently Lord Jonathan Sacks passed away, the former chief rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the British Commonwealth. Sacks accused Dawkins of attacking Jewish scripture without considering the context of ancient Judaism and without considering how modern Jews interpret the scripture. Dawkins, like many others, takes Old Testament scripture in too literal a manner, without depth or understanding of the historical backdrop. As reported in a recent Wall Street Journal article about the passing of Sacks, he applied to Dawkins the aphorism, “On the surface he’s profound, but deep down he’s superficial”.

Complicity in the Colossal Sin of Genocide

(A previous version of this article appeared in Crisis magazine.)

Abortion is an intrinsic moral evil. It involves carrying out or arranging to carry out the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. An intrinsic evil is an action that is always gravely sinful regardless of the circumstances. There are no exceptions, no grey areas.

The U.S. federal government is guilty of and complicit in intrinsic evil because it permits abortion. With some 62 million people killed by abortion since it was legalized, not only is the government complicit in an intrinsic evil, it is complicit in genocide – which the American Heritage dictionary defines as “the systematic killing of substantial numbers of people on the basis of ethnicity, religion, political opinion, social status, or other particularity.” In this case the particularity is the preborn.

To be sure, that does not mean federal employees and U.S. taxpayers are complicit, unless they support it and enable it.

Then who is complicit? They include the original seven Supreme Court justices who voted to legalize abortion in 1973. Presidents who appointed Supreme Court justices they knew to be in favor of keeping abortion legal were complicit in intrinsic evil, as were those newly appointed justices. Senators who voted to approve them also were complicit.

Members of the populace who vote for pro-abortion politicians are complicit in the intrinsic evil of legalized abortion, and therefore commit sin. This is particularly the case when they vote for politicians who want to enshrine abortion into federal law through an act of Congress, as well as enact taxpayer-funding of abortion. Direct funding of abortion would make the U.S. government not just the enabler of genocide as it is now, but also a principal executioner. It essentially would subcontract out the killing.

For Catholics, voting for a pro-abortion candidate could rise to the level of mortal sin, provided the three conditions of mortal sin are met: grave matter, full knowledge, and deliberate consent. To be mortal, the Catholic voter has to be aware that abortion is a mortal sin, that his or her vote is helping to enable its continued legalization, and perhaps that he or she is not being misled by “seamless garment”-type ideas (see below). While voting for abortion is not on the same level of procuring an abortion, it is including oneself in a large group of voters who enable this national sin. Responsibility for the ongoing genocide ultimately rests with those U.S. voters who put the pro-aborts in power.

One may object that, though a vote for a pro-abort is a vote for the intrinsic evil of abortion, it is not sinful because it is a vote against other types of intrinsic evils.

What would constitute those other intrinsic evils? The death penalty? Allowance of the death penalty does not involve the deliberate killing of innocent human beings. The government assumes that the person being put to death is guilty of a heinous crime. He is a threat to society because of the possibility he could escape from prison or be released from prison by an unscrupulous judge. The death penalty also is a deterrent to would-be criminals. It is plausible that very occasionally, someone thought to be guilty but who is actually innocent mistakenly could be put to death. But this is not an intrinsic evil because unlike abortion, the executioners are not intending to kill an innocent person. Moreover, abortion involves the killing of some 850,000 innocent children per year. Under the death penalty, only about a two-dozen people are executed per year in the U.S.

What about when the U.S. wages war? This does not fall into the category of abortion because innocents are not deliberately targeted. Though many innocent people died as a result of U.S. actions during its many wars, the vast majority of them were not deliberately targeted – with the exception of the bombing of German and Japanese cities during World War II. The policymakers who approved the wars considered themselves to be engaging in self-defense – or the defense of other populations – against an aggressor. They may have sinned, for example through failure to think through certain consequences of their actions, but they did not sin on the scale of legalized abortion, which entails the deliberate killing of innocents.

If a presidential candidate vowed to wage an unjust war for the purposes of raw power, territorial expansion and genocide, as the National Socialists and Communists did, then it could be justifiable to vote for an opposing pro-abortion candidate. But this is not the situation in the United States. (Moreover it would be the National Socialists or Communists who would champion abortion.)

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in the document “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” states, “There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position even on policies promoting an intrinsically evil act may reasonably decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil.” This should close the door on the option of voting for a pro-abort. At no time in contemporary U.S. history has there been a public policy concern that even comes close to being as morally grave as the genocide of babies.

To be sure, the U.S. government enables other actions that the Catholic Church considers to be intrinsic evils: euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, and same-sex unions. They are all championed by the pro-abortion party.

Many subscribe to the “seamless garment” theory, promoted by certain bishops, which considers abortion to be just one of a number of issues such as poverty, unemployment, substandard health care, immigration problems, environmental degradation, and climate change. But none of these separate issues are intrinsic moral evils – they do not involve the deliberate killing of innocent human beings. Most if not all politicians and other policymakers are well-intentioned in wanting to address those issues. They may have vastly different policy prescriptions, but they do not intend to kill anyone. Voting for or against politicians based on one or more of those separate issues likely is not sinful either way. It is only sinful to vote for a politician who champions perpetuating a government-sponsored intrinsic evil such as abortion.

Voting for a pro-abortion candidate is not only sinful, but mortally sinful assuming the above-mentioned conditions are met. It is sinning against God, and against millions of babies who are denied a life.

When Churches Close, Hold Mass Outdoors, As During the Spanish Flu Pandemic

outdoor Catholic mass 300x200 - When Churches Close, Hold Mass Outdoors, As During the Spanish Flu Pandemic

Photo by Chikondi Gunde from Pexels

During the past several years, I recall reading pronouncements by Catholic mystics who said it was important to celebrate Holy Mass and receive Holy Communion as often as possible, because there would come a time when churches will be closed and we will be unable to celebrate Mass or receive Holy Communion. At the time I was skeptical, thinking something like could only occur in some sort of anti-religious police state, which was practically unthinkable in America.

But now – in March 2020 – they have closed the churches, canceling the Holy Mass and Holy Communion. Little did I realize that it would be prompted by concerns over a virus.

This is most unfortunate, because as St. Padre Pio said, “It is easier for the earth to exist without the sun than without the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.”

As far as reception of the Holy Eucharist, even a secular newspaper, The Washington Times, ran an article that stated, “It would be, as a matter of faith, impossible for the virus to spread through the bread and wine.”

If they do not allow indoor Mass, bishops must permit outdoor celebration of the Mass.

During the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic, when local authorities closed church buildings and other venues, Catholic churches still celebrated mass outdoors. This is documented in a paper on the pandemic in Maine. Following are excerpts:

Saturday, October 5th

By Order of the Board of Health
Thomas Tetreau, MD, Health Officer

All the churches will be closed tomorrow, the masses at the Catholic churches will be held in the open air.  This is the first time this has happened in Maine.

On Saturday morning the Lewiston Board of Health, followed by a conference with Mayor Lemaire in his office, decided it would make no effort to prohibit outdoor masses tomorrow by parishioners of the Catholic churches.

Monday, October 14

Local Lewiston and Auburn physicians are working practically day and night, while the number of people needing their attention steadily grows larger.  Not only are the doctors overworked, but it is impossible to find help for affected homes where it is needed.  Whole families are ill with the disease, with no one to care for them. 

All of the Catholic churches of Lewiston held indoor services yesterday, disregarding the closing order of the board of health.

Out of door services were held by the Catholic church in Auburn, in compliance with a request of the Auburn Board of Health. 

Monday, October 21

In accordance with an order issued by the Board of Health and approved by Associate Supreme Court Justice Scott Wilson, all of the churches in Lewiston remained closed Sunday on account of the epidemic of influenza.  Out of door masses were held by the Catholic churches.  A week ago all Catholic churches in Lewiston held indoor services, disregarding the health board’s order.

As one priest recently declared, “Will I close this church, will I lock these doors? So long as it is in my power, we will not. They’ll have to step over my cold dead coronavirus corpse and pry the keys of the church out of my cold dead fingers before I will willingly lock these doors…And if in fact we should be forced to shut out of obedience, we’ll find a way and a place.”

The Amazon Synod and Myth of Pre-Christian Peace

(A previous version of this article appeared in Crisis.)

“These liberation theologians are promoting the idea that the Indians who still live in a primitive way are very happy, living in paradise,” said Macuxi tribal chief Jonas Marcolino Macuxí, referring to bishops at the Pan-Amazon Synod, a conference held in Rome in October of 2019. “But that’s not true.”

He’s right. The myth that pre-Christian tribes were peace-lovers was alive and well at the synod, as the assembly of bishops there discussed how best to evangelize the indigenous peoples of the Amazon rainforest, in addition to “let ourselves be evangelized by them” in the words of Pope Francis.

The pope wants the Catholic Church to listen to and learn from those peoples, who live in “harmony with oneself, with nature, with human beings and with the supreme being,” as quoted in the Instrumentum Laboris or working document of the synod.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) would be proud. He imagined people living in a state of nature untouched by Western civilization to be ensconced in an idyllic world of peace, kindness and benevolence. “Nothing could be more gentle than man in his primitive state,” he proclaimed.

That starkly contrasted with Rousseau’s intellectual arch-rival Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), who held that life in a state of nature involved endless war and “continual fear of danger and violent death”, famously writing of primeval man’s existence being “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.”

Neither philosopher had ever observed man in a state of nature. Their ideas were speculative. Who turned out to be right?

We have had hints during the synod. At a press briefing a reporter brought up the subject of infanticide among certain Amazonian tribes. Peruvian Cardinal Pedro Ricardo Barreto Jimeno, S.J. expressed skepticism that it is carried out. But fellow press briefer Victoria Lucia Tauli-Corpuz, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, acknowledged the practice.

At a counter-synod held by critics of the event, tribal chief Marcolino Macuxí confirmed infanticide among some tribes. “Those things were ending; but now, with the idea that you have to go back to primitivism, they remain,” he told the National Catholic Register. By “primitivism” he means the idealization of the pre-modern way of life of the Amazon tribes; i.e. the “noble savage” myth. “We are not living in paradise. It’s a very hard life; people have insects all over their feet, bats in their homes.”

It sounds an awful lot like Thomas Hobbes was on to something.

Napoleon Chagnon lived five years with peoples of the Yanomamö tribe in the Amazon rainforest, which previously were practically untouched by Western civilization. He and other anthropologists in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s who studied such hunter-gatherer societies exploded the myth that they were peace-loving peoples.

War, violence, and oppression of women reigned supreme among Amazonian tribespeople prior to Western contact, as was the case with most indigenous peoples worldwide – as detailed by such authors as Chagnon, Jared Diamond, Lawrence Keeley, and Sabine Kuegler.

While there no doubt were exceptions, war with neighboring villages or tribes was unceasing. Rarely could one live in peace and security. Raids, massacres, and the slaughtering of prisoners, women and children were commonplace.

The abduction of women from neighboring villages was a leading cause of wars, due in part to the effects of polygamy which resulted in many mateless men. Wife-beating was the norm for captured and non-captured women alike.

It was only thanks to Western influence and the spread of Christianity that inter- and intra-tribal aggression finally lessened. Sabine Kuegler, who spent 10 years of her childhood living with her Christian missionary family in Papua New Guinea during the 1980s, in Child of the Jungle tells a gripping account of how Christian values finally tamed the warring tribesmen.

Their pagan beliefs and practices often fostered violence. Shamanism is the predominant belief system of pre-Christian tribal societies, in which malevolent and benevolent spirits reign, and in which sicknesses and deaths are often thought to be caused by spells cast by enemies.

Retribution would be exacted upon those thought responsible for conjuring up the evil spirits. As Chagnon writes in Noble Savages: My Life Among Two Dangerous Tribes – the Yanomamö and the Anthropologists, “The Yanomamö sometimes decide that death was caused by witchcraft – an enemy in a distant village sent the snake, and therefore this enemy is now a legitimate target for a revenge killing.”

Shamanism contradicts Christianity in myriad ways. It often involves multiples gods. It involves worship of created things as opposed to the Creator. It entails persons known as shamans who claim to visit supernatural realms, as well as summon souls of the dead.

Alarmingly, what appeared to be shamanistic practices were on full display at the synod during the infamous tree-planting ceremony in the Vatican gardens, in which an indigenous woman – possibly a shaman – conducted rituals and offered prayers to what seemed to be a pagan deity. Even more alarming was that the pope was in attendance. But until we know more, let us give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he was unaware of what was to unfold. After all, he abandoned his prepared remarks and prayed an Our Father instead.

The Instrumentum trumpets that “it is desirable to deepen existing Amazonian Indian theology”. We need to “take into account the original myths, traditions, symbols, knowledge, rites and celebrations….” in order to have a “Church with an indigenous and Amazonian face.”

Not explained is exactly how the belief systems are to be taken into account. The question of religious syncretism – the merging of beliefs – came up during a synod press conference. The Vatican reported that Bishop Adriano Ciocca Vasino said “to see what coincides with the Gospel”. Let us hope that means forcefully rejecting what does not coincide.

Another bishop candidly acknowledged violent practices. Wilmar Santin, bishop of Itaituba in Pará, Brazil, at another synod press briefing spoke extensively of infanticide and the former warlike practices of the Munduruku tribe.

Moreover the Instrumentum mentions “seeing with a critical conscience a series of behaviors and realities of the indigenous peoples that go against the Gospel,” but does not elaborate apart from brief mentions of family violence and subjugation of women.

Meanwhile, it is ironic that many within the Church push the romantic vision of primitive cultures. Such a way of life actually was Hobbesian. Real progress would come from spreading the true Gospel, free of any bundling with shamanism.

The Covington Catholic Boys Should Forgive the Washington Post

490 300x300 - The Covington Catholic Boys Should Forgive the Washington PostThe Catholic Church teaches about several sins that fall under the Eighth Commandment – thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. Those since include rash judgement, calumny, and slander. They were on full display with the Covington Catholic incident, in which boys from Covington Catholic High School were falsely accused in the traditional media and on social media of racial harassment against a native American, following the March for Life in Washington, D.C. The boys were pilloried in the media and criticized even by their own bishop, based on a short video clip that did not reflect the full story. That was the sin of rash judgement. Slander and calumny against the boys also ran rampant. Upon examination of more video footage, it turns out that the native American instigated the incident by wading into the crowd of boys, and that they boys were innocent of any racial harassment.

Subsequent to that, the family of the principal Catholic boy in the story, Nick Sandmann, brought a $250 million defamation lawsuit against one of the parties who practiced rash judgement, the Washington Post.

First of all, their chance of success in winning the lawsuit is very low. Rarely do defamation lawsuits against newspaper publishers ever succeed.

But separate from that, it is easy to fall victim to the sin of rash judgement, and one hopes that the following does not constitute rash judgement:

Does it not appear that the Sandmann family is succumbing to the sin of unforgiveness?

The Sandmanns should publicly and prominently forgive the Washington Post for their rash judgement.Perhaps some facts are missing that would make this lawsuit “legitimate” in the eyes of God. But from the information at hand, the Sandmanns don’t seem to be abiding by the teachings of the Catholic Faith, even though presumably they are Catholic. The lawsuit embodies vengeance; an eye-for-an-eye. Jesus explicitly rejected that, and instead urged us to turn the other cheek.

As indicated in the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant, God is merciful and forgiving – but only if we are merciful and forgiving towards others. That parable is immediately preceded by the famous dialogue in which Peter asks Jesus how many times we should forgive another person. “As many as seven times?,” Peter asks. “No, Jesus replied. “Seventy times seven times.”

So to be in accordance with the teachings of the Catholic Faith, it seems that rather than suing the Washington Post, the Sandmanns should publicly and prominently forgive the Washington Post for their rash judgement. That would convey to the world a powerful lesson about forgiveness.

Nick Sandmann in his interview with NBC said that his Catholic school does not tolerate racism. The school evidently teaches that racism is a grave sin, and rightly so. Does the school not teach that unforgiveness is a grave sin as well?

But again, in order to not fall victim to the sin of rash judgement, we’ll hold off on judging until all of the facts are in.

 

 

America Dystopia

America dystopia for pinterest 231x300 - America DystopiaImagine a relatively clean, orderly and educated society where people go about their lives working, studying, and playing, and who on the whole are generally polite to each other. But the society has a dark secret: some 2,500 murders are carried out each and every day. These aren’t gangland-style murders on the street involving guns and knives. These are systematic murders of children, taking place in mild-mannered neighborhoods, in what are called “clinics” staffed by doctors and nurses wearing green gowns and rubber gloves.

Because they take place in these nondescript “clinics” involving doctors and nurses, and because they have been legalized, people don’t think much of those murders. They’re shocked of course by the illegal murders of adults and young people on the streets, but the murders of tiny children that take place in the “clinics” don’t bother them much. It is a medical setting, after all.

The vast majority of the tiny children who are murdered were healthy. Some of them had physical defects, and therefore were eliminated. After all, the authorities don’t want lots of unhealthy babies introduced and thus negatively impact the fairly clean, orderly and prosperous society.

This society resembles the dystopian novel and movie The Giver, in which undesired or defective infants are legally and systematically put to death in clean, antiseptic medical procedure rooms by medical professionals. In The Giver a syringe is gently placed into the baby’s head, the baby dies, and the body is placed into a chute. (Disturbing scene from the movie here.) No one protests or thinks much of it – after all, everything takes place in a medical facility. And the authorities don’t want to do anything that could negatively impact the clean and orderly society depicted in The Giver.

This society resembles the dystopian novel and movie The Giver, in which undesired or defective infants are legally and systematically put to death by medical professionals.

Meanwhile, in the aforementioned society, the babies are put to death in a different manner. They don’t involve gentle syringes to the head. Instead, they are bloody and violent deaths by dismemberment. The doctor grabs the baby’s leg and tears it off, then the baby’s arm and tears it off, then its other leg and tears it off, and so on. To see a disturbing animation of this procedure, click here.

For adults, death by dismemberment would be the cruelest and most excruciating form of death. That’s why it’s outlawed for the rest of society. But for some reason, it isn’t outlawed for the babies.

In addition to death by dismemberment, the babies are often put to death through the use of chemical agents, causing the baby to be chemically burned alive from the inside out, taking more than an hour to die. For the rest of society, death by chemical agents is one of the most excruciating forms of death. That’s why chemical warfare was outlawed in World War II. But for some reason, it isn’t outlawed for the babies.

scene from The Giver 150x150 - America Dystopia

Scene from The Giver. (Walden Media, 2014)

So this society is actually much more dystopian than the dystopian society depicted in The Giver. At least in the latter, the babies died presumably almost painless deaths. Not so in the society of which we speak. They die the cruelest and most barbaric deaths. But they all take place in “clinics”, out of sight to the rest of society.

In this society roughly 20,000 murders take place on the streets each year, often via guns. People are up in arms about those murders, especially when the murders take the form of massacres. But the number of those types of murders pale in comparison to the number of murders that take place in the dystopian “clinics” using forceps or saline solutions as weapons: roughly 900,000 of them per year. That’s 2,500 per day. It’s the leading cause of death – even more than heart disease.

In this society, most of the legalized murders of the babies take place while they’re still in the mother’s womb. Now there’s a push to legalize the murder of babies up to the point of delivery, and even after delivery – i.e. straight-up infanticide, as takes place in The Giver. Several states in this society already permit the murder up to the point of delivery.

The governor of one of the states of this society even discussed permitting murder after delivery. A professor at one of this society’s prestigious universities, who in true dystopian form describes himself as a bioethicist, champions the killing of born babies up to a month old. So do researchers who published a paper on this subject in a prestigious academic journal. And numerous college students support the killing of born babies. This society is moving closer and closer toward the systematic slaughter depicted in The Giver – but it all would take place in “clinics”, which seem so kind and gentle.

Brave New World, 1984, Animal Farm, The Giver … they all depict dystopian societies. With the systematic but out-of-sight killing of thousands of babies going on every day in the nondescript “clinics” probably not far from where you live, America has become a real-life dystopian society – playing out right before your very eyes.

Euthanasia: Out of the Frying Pan, Into the Fire

fryingpan fire 300x234 - Euthanasia: Out of the Frying Pan, Into the Fire

(Illustrations credit: Clipart-Library.com)

What’s wrong with euthanasia? A lot.

The rise of euthanasia – a.k.a. physician-assisted suicide, mercy killing, or so-called “death with dignity” – is a reflection of our increasingly secular society. It used to be that the taking of a life – whether it be one’s own or someone else’s, even if assisted by a doctor – was considered to be a violation of the Fifth Commandment that Thou Shalt Not Kill. People took the Ten Commandments seriously, especially the fifth one. This not only was because of moral reasons but also because violating it could result in the loss of Heaven.

But as people have turn away from religion, they have turned away from the Ten Commandments. Apparently they don’t think the Ten Commandments are valid because they don’t believe the Bible is inspired by God – and often they don’t even believe in God. So they think ending their life or ending someone else’s life in order to relieve suffering is okay, provided the person consents to being put to death. Most atheists surely would consider that to be the case, and even many believers in God would go along with that, because they think God would rather have a person die than suffer, especially in old age.

But not so fast. First, atheists may be surprised to learn that there is a God. Evidence for the existence of God abounds. Second, the Ten Commandments are still quite valid; there is much evidence that the Bible is indeed inspired by God. So the Fifth Commandment holds. But what does “Thou Shalt Not Kill” mean? Does it mean we can’t kill a mosquito when it lands on our arm? Someone accustomed to private interpretation of scripture may think so. But God does not want us to interpret scripture ourselves. A hundred different people would have a hundred different interpretations of a given passage. That’s why God gave us a supreme teaching authority that we can look to in order to get the proper interpretation of the Fifth Commandment and other scripture passages. That teaching authority is the 2,000-year-old Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church interprets the Fifth Commandment to mean (among other things) that thou shalt not kill oneself, even if one is suffering; even if one is elderly and suffering.

Not only that, but the Catholic Church teaches that we should offer up our sufferings to atone for past sins; because if we don’t atone for them in this life, we’ll atone for them in the next – in purgatory (assuming we merit that place). Since God is perfect, no one can enter heaven who is not perfect. So we must be purged of our imperfections. Purgatory is where that purification takes place.

The Catholic Church teaches that you can carry out much of your purification here on earth, through involuntary suffering (such as cancer) or voluntary suffering (such as fasting) – and offering it up as a sacrifice to God. In fact, as bad as the pain is here on earth, according to many saints and mystics it is nowhere near as severe as the pain of purgatory. So it is much better to go through your purification on earth than in purgatory.

Not only does physician-assisted suicide curtail that purification, but it also could cause the loss of heaven – both for the sufferer and for the physician. It’s a case of: out of the frying pan, into the fire. It’s possible that the soul could wind up in purgatory – and therefore heaven someday – but the suffering in purgatory would be far, far worse than anything the sufferer endured on earth.

So anyone undergoing or enabling physician-assisted suicide, including those who legislate its legality, are taking a great, great risk. Apart from the worldly evils that can derive from it – such as putting to death the merely depressed, children, and those who don’t consent to it – it could bring on other-worldly evils in the hereafter.

Out of the frying pan, into the fire.

Computer Code in Nature Points to an Ultimate Programmer

computer code 300x212 - Computer Code in Nature Points to an Ultimate ProgrammerWhat if scientists found computer code embedded in our natural world? Not only that, but what if that computer code was identical to code found in, of all places, Internet browsers? Surely you would have to conclude that an intelligent mind had a hand in designing our natural world, and that it did not arise by chance. Because after all, there’s no way computer code – whether it be in Internet browsers or anywhere else – could “evolve” into existence on its own; someone must have put it there.

Well it turns out that a scientist has found computer code embedded in the fabric of reality – which points to strong evidence of a Creator. (The coding we’re talking about here is not that of DNA, which is another topic altogether.) His name is S. James Gates, a theoretical physicist at the University of Maryland at College Park. He studies string theory and supersymmetry, which seek to explain how the most elementary parts of the cosmos work.

Some time ago, when he was developing diagrams to represent equations in string theory, he noticed that these equations are indistinguishable from error-correcting coding found in browsers. In fact, the browser coding is a special kind of coding developed by a brilliant mathematician named Claude Shannon, a pioneer in information theory. 

Dr. James Gates 300x263 - Computer Code in Nature Points to an Ultimate Programmer

Dr. S. James Gates

Huh? That’s huge! Just as browser coding obviously had to have been written by an intelligent mind, the same is true for coding found in nature. It is stark evidence of an ultimate, ethereal Programmer.  

Dr. Gates’ findings are solid. University of Maryland physicist Tristan Hubsch assures that the discovery of coding in supersymmetry is a rigorously proven theorem

To be sure, one commentator points out that we’re not talking about literal computer coding such as found in C++ or Visual Basic; instead, it’s a type of math that’s indistinguishable from Shannon coding – which is a mathematical way to represent information.

The more that science uncovers, the more evidence of The Creator. Dr. Gates told Smithsonian magazine, “I have never found a schism in my life between doing science and having religious beliefs….I believe that both faith and science are essential for the survival of our species.”

 

 

Catholic Church Pioneered Hospitals and Large-Scale Charity

Saint Elizabeth of Hungary bringing food for the inmates of Wellcome V0017200 219x300 - Catholic Church Pioneered Hospitals and Large-Scale Charity

Saint Elizabeth of Hungary. 
Credit: Wellcome Library, London.

Many people blame Christianity for wars and other calamities in human history. Little do they realize how much more common wars and barbarity were in the pagan world, before Christianity came along.

Evil wasn’t eliminated under Christianity – there always are going to be villains, even among those who call themselves Christians. But Christianity and more specifically the Catholic Church (which for the most part was the only kind of Christianity for about first first thousand years after Christ) certainly did much to mitigate the barbarity of the world – and introduce the large-scale practice of caring for the poor and sick.

Concern for human welfare is readily apparent in the teachings of Jesus Christ in the Gospels, and in the Acts of the Apostles when the St. Paul appointed the seven deacons to care for widows and orphans.

W.E.H. Lecky, a 19th century historian highly critical of the Catholic Church, admitted that the Church’s commitment to the poor constituted something new in the Western world, according to Tomas E. Woods’ book, How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization. Before Christianity during the time of the Roman Empire, the poor all too often were treated with contempt, and the very idea of helping the destitute without any thought to reciprocity or personal gain was something foreign to most people – although to be sure, care of widows and orphans was an important part of Jewish life.

In the early 4th century, famine and disease struck the Roman army of Constantine. Tacomius, a pagan soldier in that army, watched in amazement as certain people brought food and other provisions to the starving. Curious, he found out that these people were Christians. What kind of religion, he wondered, could inspire such acts of generosity and humanity? He was so moved that he became a Christian himself.

More than a thousand years later, even the anti-Catholic French philosopher and satirist Voltaire wrote of being am

How Catholic Church Built Wester Civ 201x300 - Catholic Church Pioneered Hospitals and Large-Scale Charity

azed that Catholic women would sacrifice their position in society to work in hospitals for the relief of the sick.

Charitable work went hand in hand with the development of hospitals, which the Catholic Church also appears to have pioneered. According to Woods, Christian facilities originally provided hospitality to strangers, but eventually cared for widows and orphans and the poor in general. Those evolved into institutions staffed by physicians. By the fourth century the Church began to open hospitals on a large scale, to the extent that nearly every major city in Europe eventually had one.

Certain saints were instrumental in this endeavor. In the 300s St. Fabiola established the first large public hospital in Rome. In Caesarea (in modern-day Israel), St. Basil the Great established a hospital. Known as the apostle of almsgiving, he was particularly known for caring for lepers.

Monasteries were prominent in caring for the sick; they were practically the only organized providers of medical care during the dark ages – after the fall of the Roman Empire in the late 400s. W.E.H. Lecky ackowledged that monasteries became centers of charity: “By the monks the poor were protected, the sick tended, travelers sheltered, prisoners ransomed, the remotest spheres of suffering explored.”

Monasteries not only served as hospitals, but also ran schools, aided the poor, reared orphans, and provided models for agriculture, industry, and forestry. For centuries they were the centers of religious, charitable and cultural activities, writes Woods.

In future posts we will explore other ways in which the Catholic Church established venerable human institutions. Stay tuned.

Origin of Life Reveals a Transcendent Creator

dna 1903318 1280 300x169 - Origin of Life Reveals a Transcendent Creator

The probability of an RNA spontaneously forming from simple organic compounds in the primordial soup is essentially zero.

There’s so much evidence for fine-tuning in the origin of the universe, pointing to a transcendent Creator, that scientists had to come up with the far-fetched multiverse theory to try to get around a Creator (even though a multiverse would need a Creator, too).

Now, they’re doing a similar thing vis-a-vis the origin of life. There’s so much evidence that life could not have originated through random chance, implying that it had to have been designed by a transcendent Creator, that (some) scientists are resorting to quantum physics as a possible explanation.

In their book Life on the Edge, Johnjoe McFadden and Jim Al-Khalili (the latter a science popularizer frequently seen on science television shows) discuss the impossibility of life ever originating on its own in the “primordial soup”. When in 1952 Stanley Miller and Harold Urey tried to replicate that primordial soup in the famous Miller-Urey experiment, all they came up with were some amino acids. Such acids are what proteins are made of.

Proteins are the components of cells. (They’re not just nutrients found in meat. They’re so much more than that.) They are molecular structures that take multitudes of shapes, which carry out multitudes of functions within the cell. They are akin to the components of your car engine – i.e. mostly made of metal, but in a variety of shapes and forms (e.g. piston, fan, spark plug, etc.)

Proteins are needed for life to form. Also needed are nucleotides – which form DNA and RNA, the blueprints which instruct amino acids to form the millions of varieties of proteins. The authors cite the Scottish chemist Graham Cairns-Smith, who estimated that just to form an RNA from simple organic compounds in the primordial soup, there are some 140 steps involved. For each step there are about six reactions that have to be avoided. “So the odds of any starting molecule eventually being converted into RNA is equivalent to throwing a six 140 times in a row.” The chances of this happening are roughly one in six to the power of 140.

But six to the power of 140 is far more than there are particles in the universe! McFadden and Al-Khalili write that the earth simply did not have enough molecules or enough time to enable anything like that to happen. And that’s just the first step – random chance also needs to make ribozymes (a certain type of RNA) capable of self-replication. Random chance additionally needs to make proteins. “Clearly, we cannot rely on pure chance alone,” declare the authors.

That points to obvious evidence of a transcendent Creator.

Life On The Edge 195x300 - Origin of Life Reveals a Transcendent Creator

But McFadden and Al-Khalili are scientists, and the job of scientists is to find natural explanations to things, not supernatural explanations to things – even when the evidence screams supernatural.

So McFadden and Al-Khalili resort to quantum physics to try to come up with an explanation – and quantum physics is very supernatural-like. They suggest that quantum tunnelling (akin to going through solid walls) and quantum superposition (where a proto-enzyme can exist in all of its possible configurations simultaneously) played a role.

Scientists often use the terms “weird” and “strange” to describe quantum physics, because things happen therein that from a classical physics perspective are like little miracles. In quantum physics, subatomic particles can be move through solid walls. They can be invisible. They can communicate instantaneously with a twin particle a billion light years away. And a single particle can be in many different, distinct places and configurations simultaneously.

Scientists have no idea how these phenomena happen. They just know that they happen.

They are stumped enough trying to explain how the natural physical world arose on its own. They certainly have no idea whatsoever how the quantum physical world arose, or how it works.

It’s yet more evidence of a transcendent Creator.

%d bloggers like this: