TO TINSEL OR NOT TO TINSEL, THAT IS THE QUESTION

I am all for Halloween parties, parades, getting dressed up, and going Trick or Treating.  I don’t believe in ghosts (at least the popular notion of what a ghost is) but I do believe in ghost stories.  If you looked up over the front door of the rectory on All Hallow’s Eve Night, you would have seen my (hastily) carved pumpkin glowing.

The key is, however, that these are not odd ways of behaving floating out there on their own.  They are an extension of what happens at the celebration of the Mass first.  That is what (and always has) gives meaning all of these otherwise odd behaviors we exhibit at this time of year.  The Christian community comes together to celebrate all of the saints (especially those not officially recognized) and in our joy we burst forth from the church doors to continue the celebration in our homes with candy and music and costumes.

If it were not for a grounding in faith, this season would be a sign of a slight madness that overtakes our nation.  Why go about disguised as someone (or something) else on this particular day?  If we are going to unmoor it from its religious roots, why not change it so that it is always on a Friday and make it a three day weekend?  Or better yet, move it to early October when the weather is better.  Why not make every Friday a costume day?  Why give random strangers candy only once a year?  Why take a gourd and carve a face on it?  Why not just buy a ceramic one that you can re-use every year and be done with it?  Or if it is so cool, just leave it up year round.  Without faith, scratch too deeply and all of these celebrations become inane.  Fun perhaps - but inane.  

Thanksgiving is coming up.  Without God, what exactly are we giving thanks for?  “Thank you turkey for being food and letting us eat you.”  As if the Turkey had any say.  “Thank you Mom for making this fantastic meal!”  But she makes dinner every day and why make her do it on a day when we are thanking her for making food?  “Thank you for being my friends/family” might cut it but why do it especially on this day?  Do it another day when things are not so pressing.  “Thank you cosmos for being as you are instead of another way.”  Maybe.  But if existence is pure happenstance, it means there is nothing to thank or to be thanked that matters.  

But if there is a Creator who provides and we know things do not have to be as they are, we give thanks because we are debtors.  It reminds us of The Other.  We are paupers who need to remember we are all in this boat together so don’t let your pride get too high.  And these are things to celebrate.

If there is no God (at least a Pagan god), to Hades with all of the tinsel, the Rabbit, and the shoes placed outside the door.  It is absolutely silly.  Let’s just do our own thing when it is convenient for us, with music we actually like to hear ,when we like to hear it.  I’ll shop for you when there is a sale and let’s worry about things that really matter like Flag Day.  

IMAGINE A WORLD WITHOUT GOD

Imagine a world without God.

There is no Being to help guide the actions of man.

How are we going to establish right from wrong?

One might argue for Natural Law but that is a slippery slope.  Once you argue that there is inherent right way to live and wrong way to live in nature, then you start sneaking in an intelligence to nature and that will just ruin everything.

But wouldn’t it be good to not kill?  Could we not begin there?  Possibly.  But even there is a dangerous pin upon which to stand.  If this marvelous, complicated universe just happened, like snow flakes falling from the sky accidentally forming a snowman but WAY more intricate, then life really has no meaning except to the person who happens to have it.  Why should life be better than no life? Why should your life be important to me if you have something (land?) that I really want?  There can be no inalienable rights because that implies order, intelligence and meaning, which leads us to a discussion of God, which is something we want to avoid.

There can only be one answer in this type of universe:  The one with the most power decides what is right and wrong.  It could be an individual dictator, or committee, or even a whole voting nation.  We could vote in many of the dictates of any particular religion if we want.  And we could vote them right back out again.  It will, of course, lead to even greater meaninglessness with a thin covering of legitimacy.

Take, for example, marriage.  Back to the true pagans, it had to do with fertility and child raising.  In our modern age we have removed that definition completely so our brothers and sisters, or brothers and brothers could experience a type of permanent relationship, legaly binding, that we call marriage.  This particular route seems compassionate but this idea of marriage is destined to disintegrate.  If a desire to be married is the only requirement for being married and we have removed any ties to our history, then why stop at two people?  Why worry about a brother and sister who want to marry?  Why shouldn’t all the religious brothers of a monastery be recognized as one giant marriage to give them all of the protections that others have?  

The argument can’t be, “That just wouldn’t happen.”  What are you going to base a “This far and no further” law on other than right makes right?  (There are already legal attempts at similar scenarios of the above to this.)  In the end then, marriage will cease to mean anything unless the individuals want it to and have the freedom to do as they please by those in charge.

Now imagine we have formed a society that has bought into a meaningless universe.  Imagine further that you are frustrated young man who does not happen to be part of the society that makes decisions and has a voice.  You think culture is wrong and you see those you love and their ideas abused.  You have no power except to conform.

You are angry, powerless, and have no hope even in a next life.  What is to stop you from grabbing a gun or a knife and going on your college campus . . .

CATHOLIC SCHOOLS WEEK

Here is what I was able to pray with 350 children this morning:

“Set our hearts aflame, O Lord,

with the Spirit of your charity, we pray,

that we may always think thoughts

worthy and pleasing to your majesty

and love you sincerely in our brothers and sisters.”

IMHO those three seconds alone are what makes Catholic education invaluable to our nation.  That is not to say that public and secular schools cannot instill character (the public school down the street claims to do just that) but it is a lot more difficult if you don’t have a community agreed upon (and legal) moral system that you can teach.

Our public schools are not atheistic (nor are they in some sort of neutral state - that is impossible) but I think about the atheistic mindset and atheistic apostles.  An atheist can state what I said above about living charity and finding dignity and worth in his fellow man but in the end, it will only be a “good” because the speaker says so and that he was the power to enforce it.  (The school board and the Supreme Court says that I can say this!)

WARNING: This is coming out of the mind of a committed Catholic so there is a biased slant here.  But I think about what, if atheists got together every Sunday for an hour (or Friday, or Wednesday) what would they talk about as a replacement for worship of God?  If there is no God, which, by definition means there is no purpose or meaning for us or the universe, if everything is just chance and once we die there is no more life, no reward, no punishment, then every word that comes out of my mouth is completely useless unless it brings me comfort.  (Even helping someone else in the end is because it benefits or pleases me.)  If you are going to challenge this, please give the basis for your universal moral system that is employed other than in a might makes right scenario.  I would greatly appreciate it!

The only grounding for any moral system would only be the will of the majority or the powerful who have the backing to enforce the moral right.  Anyone who would get up in the “pulpit” would have one of two jobs: reminding all their duty to follow the will of the powerful or to convince everybody to change to their idea of the good to what they want.  But in the end, none of it will matter except to please the speaker.  The great consolation will be, in the last second of life as you realize that you are heading off into oblivion for all of eternity, that at least you were right in believing life is meaningless.

Champagne anyone?

SHOCKED MAYBE, BUT REALLY? ARE YOU SURPRISED?

Yesterday, my day away (somewhat,) a priest friend and I went out for brunch.  Though one of my favorite places for breakfast food, they practiced the uncivilized trend of having T.V.s playing in every corner of the restaurant.  So we were into our cup of coffee when Fr. B says, "Do you see what they are reporting on T.V.?"  It was the shocking story of the man who shot the reporter, camera man, and the interviewee on live television.  

"Can you imagine your world being so small," I opined, "that the only way this disturbance in your life can be dealt with is by killing somebody?"  

Fr. B replies, "How much you wanna bet it is a love triangle and that we find out he later ends his own life?"

Well . . . he was close.

Talk about jaded.

But really, are you surprised?  We are constantly working on becoming what some people consider a freer society, but it is leading us down some deadly paths.

1. You have a right to happiness in this world.

2. There are those who deserve life and those who don't.

3. There is no God who needs to be part of civic life therefore there are no absolutes.

4. Truth is subjective.

5. Man is the highest authority.  (At least the one with the most power.)

So, with these as your premise, where do you find meaning in your life; in what you do, accomplish, and are "good for."  That brings you happiness (or escape) is that which is labeled, "the good."  If these are the goods, anything that works against them is evil.  And if you don't have a well developed sense of God, Divine justice, hope both in this life and the after life, that you have dignity and meaning through simply through your being, which comes from this God, that there is such a thing as redemptive suffering, that every aspect of your life and the lives of those around you are a part of these paradigms, then for an increasing number of us, personal justice based on my idea of truth imposed by my will becomes a more realistic option.  

If we keep telling people McDonalds is a real food option, can we be surprised when people base their lives on a McDonalds diet even to the point where they get sick?  And if we keep teaching people that they are their own moral authority, can we be surprised that they take the advice seriously?

THE DEFAULT ATHEIST

As you and I both know, there are people who are Catholic/Christian for the "wrong reason."  I am thoroughly convinced that there are many people who call themselves atheists for the wrong reason.  The same goes for some who call themselves agnostic or "spiritual but not religious."  Way, way, way too often in conversations with persons who give themselves this title, the reason they give for their belief is not a deep insight or well thought out philosophy.  They do not have much of an anthropology or a system of determining that which is good or bad that holds any water (and when you take what they say to its logical conclusion they say, "well, not that of course," but offer no way to avoid it.)  It has more to do with what they are avoiding than where they are heading.

It's like swerving a car to avoid hitting a deer.  You have some idea of where you are steering but your immediate task is to avoid hitting a deer.  Dealing with where you end up after that will come with the next thought.

Imagine coming to Mass week in and week out.  You have a priest, minister, congregation, family, or group of friends who repeatedly let you know how bad you are.  Maybe you are divorced.  Maybe you have an addiction.  Maybe you have same sex attraction.  Maybe you had an abortion.  Maybe you are part of a long list of categories and this message comes down on you like a hammer on a sore thumb week after week after week.  What do you do if you are so bad at hammering that you constantly hit yourself and always feel miserable?  You give up hammering.

What do you do if your faith does not give you hope?  What do you do if you are not encouraged?  What do you do if you feel miserable all of the time because of you faith?  You stop being a church goer.  And it is often easier to tell people you are atheist, agnostic, spiritual, and even decide that you are instead of saying, "Look, I'm (insert category here) and my Church hates me."

I do the same thing with fish.  I hate fish.  I want to like it but I don't.  All the time people say, "But you haven't tried MY fish."  Yes I have.  I don't like it.  So I just tell people I am allergic.  I am an anti-fishite.  If God had intended us to eat fish he would have made them taste like steak.

I am in no way saying we need to shy away from these topics or water them down.  But there must always also be an opportunity for hope.  There must be a way for those who wish to be faithful.  There must a chance for healing and incorporating.  

Do you know who does the best pro-life work?  Women who have had an abortion and have some creds with which to speak.  Who can give the most hope to someone dealing with same-sex attraction?  The faithful Catholic who also lives with same-sex attraction.  Who are some of the best volunteers at the parish - often the back bone of the parish - doing tasks that nobody else can or wants to?  Your divorced person.  How do you get them to come to the parish?  Not beating them with a stick, but with hope that there is a place for you.  There is encouragement and support for you.  There is a community for you.  

That does not mean you get to do whatever you want as long as you are some flavor of faithful.  If you want to belong to the country club, you may not play football on the fairway.  But if you are a football player and you want to be a part of the country club, we will help you learn to play golf in a (hopefully) nourishing and safe environment.  

Somehow I don't feel like I am saying what I really want to say but I can't put my finger on it.  If something seems off, please comment and let me see if I can clarify.

ATHEISTS MAKE BETTER THEISTS THAN YOU THINK

The opposite of faith is not atheism just as the opposite of love is not hate.

 

Take this example of hate as opposed to love; In this awful scene, the character played by Glen Close is spilling vile hatred on her father.  (It is disturbing.  If you don’t want to watch it simply know this – she went to see him on his death bed to tell him she hates him and will never forgive him.)

 

Even though she obviously hates him she is still in relationship with him.  It is a sick relationship, but she is still connected to this man she despises.  She feels a need to communicate.  What happened in the past matters to her.  What he thinks and feels matters to her.  And when she leaves the room he still has control over (will still have control over her after he dies!)  It may be a sick relationship, but it is a relationship.  And though we would hardly call any aspect of this love, it is not the opposite of it yet.

 

The true opposite of love is indifference.  With indifference there is no relationship, there is no caring how the other person feels or thinks.  There is no control over the other person (positive or negative) because there is no type of connection at all.  It is the story of the rich man and Lazarus. 

 

In like manner, atheism is not the opposite of faith.  (There are many types of atheism so this is speaking rather broadly.)  There are atheists that spend their energy fighting notions of God, which puts them in relationship with Him unwittingly.  There are atheists who build their moral construct on viewing the world by observing it and seeing how it seems to operate at its best, which brings us to Natural Law, which ipso facto brings order and intelligence to the universe which brings us to God.  There are atheists who rely solely on science, which often leads him to faith.  Let us suppose that he relies on the theory of the Big Bang as the birth of the universe (put forth by a Catholic priest by the way.)  It still explains nothing.  What caused the big bang?  Why should there be energy as opposed to not?  Why should there be matter as opposed to not?  In the end (or in the beginning) the whole thing is established on faith of things that are completely un-provable.

 

The relationship with (or to) God may not be a healthy one (from a Christian perspective) and the faith in SOMETHING that gives order or was a first cause may be materialistic in nature but it is still faith. 

 

The true opposite of faith is thinking that the world and all that it is in it is a complete fluke of nature.  Life has no meaning.  The existence of the cosmos has no meaning.  This whole conversation would ultimately have no point.  Truth is non-existent.  There is nothing cognitive outside of ourselves (and even that may be an illusion) and when humanity passes away it won’t matter.  The universe will continue to go on and there will be nothing to mourn the passing of man or all of his works and thoughts.  It wouldn’t mean any more if we had just been rocks.  So eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die.

 

But let one tiny ray of order, meaning, or the holding of something that cannot be proven, then there is a relationship with something that most people call God no matter how flimsy.  Catholics may not think it a healthy relationship.  But it is one.  And therefore not the opposite of faith.

MONDAY DIARY: ALMOST EXCRUCIATINGLY TRUE STORIES: YET ANOTHER REASON TO WEAR ONE'S COLLAR IN PUBLIC

The most remarkable thing happened this past Saturday night; too remarkable to make into a cartoon.  Fr. Pfeiffer and I went to go see a play in downtown Cleveland and when the play finished, we found ourselves in one of the very scenes of the play, unstaged, out on the street.

 

To get the incident, I’ll give you a quick rundown of the pertinent parts of the play.  It was a staged production of C. S. Lewis’s book, “The Great Divorce.”  The story is a Dante-esque journey of a bus load of people from hell getting the chance to see heaven and even stay there if they chose so, but who ultimately chose to stay in hell.  One man feels that his rights were violated by the mercy of heaven, a woman cannot let go of her control of others, one wants fame more than glory, one wants her version of love rather than God’s, and the list goes on.  In the end, these people chose hell as a favored place to be.

 

When the play let out, it was apparent that at least one other play had ended at the same time and so I suggested that we go across the street and get coffee and desert while we waited for the traffic to thin out.  We debated the play and the points made and then headed out.

 

Crossing the street there was a young man, (mid-twenties?) who turned to us and said, “Are you two priests?” 

 

“Yes,” I replied, and took off my glove and extended a hand.  “Hello, my name is Father Valencheck.”

 

He recoiled as if I were handing him a snake.  “No way!” he said, turned and kept on his way to the other side of the street.

 

Things such as this happen occasionally.  It is the sometimes blessing/sometimes curse of wearing one’s collar in public.  One learns to let it roll off.

 

As we gained the sidewalk however the young man turned back toward us and said, “You guys know, of course, there is no God.”

 

“Actually, I don’t quite know that at all.” I responded.

 

“You’ve got to be kidding me.  There is no God.  I know it.”

 

“And I would respond that there is one.  And I know Him.”

 

“You know what I believe?  Science.  Facts.  Not stories in a book.  Not people walking on water.  Not having to do good works that a God tells me I have to do to get into heaven.  It’s all silly.”

 

I will give this much to the young man.  He may have been willing to throw out comments such as this, but he was also willing to engage and have a conversation.  Many, if not most people like to throw a comment-bomb and run it seems.  I admire him that he would be willing to have a debate in the middle of the sidewalk in downtown Cleveland, late on a cold, cold night.

 

Everything in the objections-to-faith-including-the-kitchen-sink arsenal was hauled out and thrown at us.  It was like a game of dodge ball but instead of the two of us playing against one person, he was like a team against two!  Question from left field, point from the right, beaming ball right between the eyes.

 

The most interesting part of the conversation for me was toward the end.  “How do you determine the good?”

 

“We, each of us, get to decide for ourselves.” 

 

Fr. Pfeiffer, “And what if I thought it was right to take your life?”

 

Young man: “That would be wrong.”

 

Me:  “Good.  Then how is it determined that your good is better than mine?”

 

Young man:  “Look, if a guy killed five people robbing a bank, how could you say that that was right?”

 

“The crook would think it just fine.  He would have money he never had before and if not caught might have a lot more stuff than he did before.”

 

Eventually we got to this point: there is no ultimate good, no truth (unsubstantiated by facts) and no real purpose or point to life.  It is simply what you make of it and decide that it is.  And when death comes, its game over – end of existence.

 

“That being said,” added the young man, “You have to admit that religion is what causes all the wars and violence in the world.  Religion is what is wrong.”

 

“I would have to strongly disagree with you.  As a matter of fact, I would say quite the opposite in most cases.”

 

“It is religion that breads hatred,” he countered, “and violence.”

 

“And yet,” I replied, “when we were crossing the street, which of us took off his glove, extended a hand, said good evening and introduced himself, and who refused?”

 

At that, he broke out with a great smile, he shoulders relaxed, and he extended his hand.  “Sorry about that.  I think I needed to vent and you were here.” 

 

We learned then that his name was Mike and he turned out to be quite a likable fellow.  We parted on friendly terms and Fr. Pfeiffer could not resist turning back to him and saying, “Good night and God bless!” to which he threw up his hands and with a big smile shot back, “No, no no!”

THIS EITHER MEANS SOMETHING OR IT MEANS NOTHING AT ALL

I know I get stuck on one topic every now and then.  For those whom that annoys I apologize.  Currently I am on this whole atheist compared to Catholic kick.  It simply fascinates me. 

 

If you watched the video on Tuesday you witness one of the world’s most famous atheists and one of the princes of the Church . . . compare and contrast I suppose.  I understand why the cardinal wants to use any opportunity to express his beliefs – he has what believes is a divine mandate to do so.  What motivates the atheist?  Why would it be important to him that everyone understand him?  I suppose there are two main reasons – one, that he wants to be understood, and two, he must to some extent enjoy it.

 

The most interesting part of the interview for me is the “why” of the universe.  I interpret his question as to why there is anything as opposed to nothing.  Why should there be matter and space and such a thing as life?  The whole universe and everything in it would be equally as mysterious if it were the size and composition of a tiny pebble.  Why should there be something that can form structure, have energy – no – why should there be anything at all?  Why should there be existence?

 

Of course, for the Christian, the universe is full of meaning and purpose and direction and everything means something.  Where we came from, where we are, and where we are going are all very significant.  “Why” is based on a benevolent God who created all there is out of love and Who desires to share that love with those who freely choose to accept it.  All of creation is aiming toward that love.  So bringing others on board is very important. 

 

Unfortunately most of the self proclaimed atheists with whom I get the opportunity to speak are either not really atheists at all or have a very shallow understanding of the underpinnings of their atheism.  (I am sure they can be matched man for man with similar Catholics – probably outnumbered and in vast numbers – but such is my current experience.)  As one of my favorite Catholic speakers once said, “There are many good reasons to be an atheist, but most people don’t know enough to be one.”

 

So we turn to Dawkins.  Firstly I was disappointed that a lot of his argument was based in ridicule.  There was the dismissives, “Surly you don’t believe . . .” and his misleading presentation of the Christian position that then made it easy for him to ridicule.  But such is life.

 

What was truly interesting to me was his turn on the “why” of the universe.  He believes there is a scientific why to the universe.  Something caused it to form.  It can be explained.  It can’t be explained yet, but science will eventually tell us.  (Here he we see a basis of atheistic “belief” the same as the Christian “belief.”)  But as to the deeper why of the universe – the meaning behind it, he calls an absurd question.  There is no meaning to the universe.  It is not achieving any perfection.  It simply is.  So what does this debate matter unless you do it out of personal joy? 

 

So then he rejects social Darwinism and declares it wrong.  But how can he declare it absolutely wrong if there is no meaning to the universe?  The only way I can see is to say, “I have declared it wrong, I have the power (or the majority or what have you) and have decreed it so.”  Is that not, in effect, a form of Social Darwinism?  It can’t be both ways.  The universe cannot be meaningless and full of inherent good and evil at the same time.

 

So we both look at a pebble.  For both of us it is an amazing thing.  Scientifically it might reveal tons of information.  It might bring joy or be useful.  We could instill meaning into it such as, “This is the rock I picked up on my 25^th birthday and I keep it as a happy remembrance of that day.”  But after that, if I read things correctly, for the atheist, all else is meaninglessness.  For the Christian, there is further meaning in that pebble with the power of a nuclear explosion.  There is a Who, what, where, when, and why of its coming into being and just as much to where it is going. 

THE MONTH OF RESTING IN PEACE

What is the most basic difference between a Catholic funeral and most of the Protestant world’s funerals?  You might point to having the body taken to church (which to some people just seems odd at best) or any other number of things.  But these are mostly symptoms of what is different, not what, at heart, is dissimilar.

 

It is most evident during this month when Catholics celebrate All Souls Day and place a special emphasis on praying for the poor souls; those in Purgatory awaiting their entrance into heaven, all month long.

 

For most of the Protestant world (and it is the same for atheists,) we have no real connection (prayer wise) with those who have died.  For Protestants this is true because at death you have gone to your reward (one way or the other) and are no longer in need of prayer even if it were possible.  For the Atheist this is true because after death there is simply nothing.

 

For Catholics, there is a more unified understanding of what it is to be the Body of Christ.  There is only one Body of Christ.  Christ is its head.  That singular body cannot be divided up even by death.  Somehow we are still mysteriously united and our prayers may still benefit each other.  There is also the idea of being purified prior to entering before the face of God, which requires being purged of one’s sins.  Whatever this is, we call Purgatory.  The Protestant world does not have a teaching about this.  So for them, even if prayer could flow back and forth, it is unnecessary because once you are in heaven for what do you need prayer?  You’ve made it to the top.

 

So basically, (painting with a very broad paintbrush) at a non-Catholic funeral the idea is to encourage each other (either with the Word of God and/or the support of the community etc.,) and to remember the one who passed away.  There is an additional element understood among Catholics for over two thousand years: that we can also pray from the deceased.  We ask God that they be sped to heaven (which is the tragedy when someone says, “I’m sure they are already in heaven.  You may be denying them some prayers they could use!)  And if we can pray for them, we may also ask them to pray for us, that we remain close to Christ, follow in His ways, and be better prepared for entrance into heaven when we leave this life. 

 

So get on it Catholic!  Remember to pray for you deceased loved ones and for the poor souls this month inparticular.  And hopefully in doing so, we will lead by example and others will pray for us when we need it!

EVERYONE "BELEIVES" IN SOMETHING

I was set to write something completely different and then someone sent me a link to a website that had this statement on it:

 

“Proud, vocal, unapologetic atheist, freethinker and secular humanist. Science teacher. President of northeast Ohio branch of Center for Inquiry. Member of Freedom From Religion Foundation, Cleveland Freethinkers and Cleveland Skeptics.”

 

He is calling for like minded people to get together and talk.  The sessions would be pretty open to, “Anything that is intellectually stimulating and interesting.”  Would that Christians would be so bold. 

 

As a side note, I do find it interesting how similar what they want to do is to Church.  They want community and a gathering.  They will have a set of beliefs with its own set of presuppositions that are as utterly improvable as the faiths they disdain.  There will also be dogma.  Consider the acceptable areas of inquiry being, “intellectually stimulating and interesting.”  Who gets to decide this?  The president?  (a pope – every Church has its version of a pope) or a committee (a curia)?  I am pretty sure that things that I find stimulating and interesting would probably off limits.  But I could be wrong on that.

 

But what are the main differences between this gathering and Church?  Well, yes, of course whether there is a God (or gods) or not.  Though both are seeking community, both are seeking truth, but one is seeking the “how” of the universe, and the other is seeking the “Who.”  One hopes to understand causality (this happened because this happened because this happened), the other on relationship between persons of this world and the Persons of another place.

 

Abraham Joshua Heschel writes about this in his book, “A Philosophy of Judaism” (h/t Adam).  He is describing what each of these groups are looking for when they look at something such as the book of Genesis:

 

“There is, for example, a basic difference in meaning, intention, and them between a scientific theory of the origin of the universe and what the first chapters of the Book of Genesis are trying to convey.  The Book of Genesis does not intend to explain anything; the mystery of the world’s coming into being is in no way made more intelligible by a statement such as, ‘At the beginning God created heaven and earth.’  The Bible and science do not deal with the same problem.  Scientific theory inquires: What is the cause of the universe?  It thinks in the category of causality, and causality conceives of the relationship between a cause and effect. . .  The Bible, on the other hand, conceives of the relationship of the Creator and the universe as a relationship between two essentially different and incomparable entities, and regards creation itself as an event rather than as a process.  Creation, then, is an idea that transcends causality; it tell us how it comes that there is causality at all.  Rather than explaining the world in categories borrowed from nature, it alludes to what made nature possible, namely, an act of the freedom of God.”

 

(There’s a lot there.  Spend some time with that if you have the time.)

 

It takes just as much faith to say that creation just always was than to say that it was created.  But to say that there is an infinite Creator (or at least a Creator Who is outside of time) begins to give an answer.  It also allows for a bigger universe both in terms of the size of existence and the realm of knowing for belief (at least Catholicism) allows for (and developed much of) scientific “belief,” but the discussion group proposed at the beginning of this post does not allow for the opposite.  (I can talk to him, but he cannot countenance me.)  And that creates an incredibly limited universe. 

 

It is also sad.  For taken to its logical conclusion, the type of belief system proposed by the gentleman above leads to the belief that human beings are utterly pointless.  The group, in turn, becomes pointless.  Even the pursuit of knowledge is a chase after the wind.  We are an accident of the universe.  We only exist for ourselves, and when we are dead we cease to exist, when we are extinct there will be no one even to know it, or care, or remember . . . we are entirely without purpose or meaning.  And this leads to a horrible form of morality.  A culture of death.  It becomes about what is best for me because that is all that really matters.

 

And that, to me, sounds neither honest, hopeful, complete, intellectually stimulating, or interesting.

THE JOY OF THE ETERNAL REMEMBERER

This too shall pass.

Though used by medieval Persian poets before her, in Jewish folklore, and Abraham Lincoln before her, this is one of the pearls of wisdom my mother instilled in me.  Although the same holds true for good times, she usually drug out this handy phase when things were not going so well.  Feeling down in the dumps about a girl?  This too shall pass.  Experiencing troubles?  This too shall pass.  Acne?  This too shall pass.

 

The fact is, we exist in this world for a flash of time as absurdly as a May Fly that lives for a day and dies.  Our trials will pass; our joys will pass; and ultimately we will pass.  Are you depressed about this?  That, too, shall pass one way or the other.

 

But right there is the joy of being a Christian.  It doesn’t matter.  We weren’t made for this world.  And when things are going well we have someone to thank and be joyful with.  When things are bad, we have someone to cry out to for help (or be angry at.)  When we need hope we have someone to Whom to look, when we are a lone we have someone to call upon, when things seem to be meaningless, we have Him to look to give even the most mundane aspects of our lives incredible and significant meaning.

 

If there is no God, I can only thank fate or luck, which is to say, there is consciousness to thank.  (Even if there is a person to thank, what luck they were there.)  When things are bad, there is nobody to blame but myself and no help to cry out to.  There is a gamble that things might get better, but there is no hope beyond luck, gumption, and surviving.  When life seems meaningless, it is because it is; we live, we die, and so will, ultimately, the world with nobody to remember it.  The only good in life is the pursuit of happiness which when pursued directly is not ultimately satisfactory.  (This is why you cannot joke with an atheist about death on his death bed.  There is nothing hopeful about it.)

 

I look at this gravestone from a local grave yard.  It is very interesting from a historical point of view.  The deceased did a lot of good and accomplished some amazing things.  If there is no God, I find this gravestone exceedingly sad.  Considering how old the universe is, in a flash this stone will disintegrate and not even the casual passerby with a camera walking his dog in the cemetery will ever even know he existed.  The only joy the man it describes experienced was the feeling of doing good with the thought that in the future someone might be happy because of his works.  He’s not even sure anybody will remember him.

 

But if there is a God, what incredible significance the information on the stone is!  Our efforts are not gas in the wind, but everlasting monuments even if this stone is not.  That our joy will echo in eternity.  That there is a consciousness, a Person, with Whom and in Whom we will know and celebrate after our time here is over and that these actions may lead others to share in this joy for which we were made.  Therefore picking up a used gum wrapper in the park is not a good deed that may or may not be noticed by anybody, but may stretch through eternity if it is done in love.

 

There are those that point to God as a crutch and a fantasy to get through the rough points of life.  I believe evidence points otherwise.  But even if it turns out to be false, having dealt with the dying who believe and of those who don’t, I would rather believe and be wrong than not believe and be right – to die in some amount of hope and joy rather than the heavy burden of passing into non-existence and meaninglessness. 

A-THEISTS POINT OF VIEW

There are those who believe (and I use the word “believe” very deliberately since it comes with its own set of un-provable presuppositions) that there is no God.  The theory of “no god” is also associated with the idea that there we are an accident of the universe with no meaning and when we die we cease to exist.  Period.  If this is so, then there really is no basis for a universal morality because there is no basis for absolute truth.

 

Some will argue that a basis for morality might be found in nature (natural law.)  There is small grounds here.  We might, for example, figure out through natural law that without clean water it we cannot survive and therefore it is good to have clean water and bad not to.  But what about people living in a desert?  Should we give them some of our clean water?  What if it places our access to clean water at risk?  If there is no real meaning to life why not let the people in the desert die?  If you give them water they will only increase in number and then we will need to send more of our limited supply of water.  But if they died, that would be the end of a problem.  There is no heaven or hell so there are no consequences and for the people who live, life on this meaningless planet just became more tolerable.

 

If, on the other hand, one would say that there is in natural law a basis for morality that says life has meaning and that we should take care of the people in the desert; that means that life and the universe have meaning and purpose.  If it has meaning and purpose that means there is an intelligence behind it and we get right back to some form of god.  But even if one argues otherwise, how do you enforce this concept of natural law other than to say, “This is my idea!” followed by a meaningful lump on the head with a club to the one who disagrees?

 

“But wait!” one might argue, “I know plenty of moral and good atheists!”  I agree.  So do I.  They are some of my favorite people.  They are also some of my favorite people in history.  People of towering (what Christians even would call) virtue.  But in the end it can only be fashion.  There is no absolute by which it can be enforced save for “Might Makes Right,” whether that be army, popular vote, control of resources, or other such means.  When the benevolent believer in a god free universe is no longer in control, to what can we appeal to continue his ideals against a contradictory force other than to raise our own force for our preferences?

 

It is often brought up that religion has caused so much war in the world.  From the Catholic perspective, it is exactly when we were NOT living up to the call of our faith that the worst in the world has been committed; when God is used as a false rallying cry and not to move people more deeply into the Gospel message. 

 

For the radical separation of Church and state (which I would argue does not state nor mean that the faith of many of the very people that they government is supposed to represent may have no sway in political activity) opens the door to those with power abusing those without power.  The worst in ourselves will come out over the (not so) long haul.