#traditional catholic apologetics

[stjohncapistrano67]

One more post about St. Augustine's book " The City of God, the City of Man. I'm about 100 pages in the book. And so far as I tell, it's a mix of Roman pre Catholic history, apologetics against paganism and Catholic theology. I don't think this book is for everyone, but even those who don't consider themselves, "deep" can see the parallels between his time and ours, if they read with unbiased mind. It helps to know the history of early Catholic Church, but it's not ABSOLUTELY necessary.

[tomicscomics]

01/05/2024

"If you cannot afford a lamb, one will be appointed to you."

___

JOKE-OGRAPHY: 1. Joseph continues reading about Jewish law from his brochure (continued from last week's cartoon).  In Jewish tradition, the sacrifice for a newborn boy was typically one yearling lamb (for the sin offering) and one turtledove (for the burnt offering).  As Mary and Joseph discuss this, the Holy Spirit (a dove, but not for sacrifice) shows up to give a knowing glance at Baby Jesus.  You see, Jesus is called the "Lamb of God," and His mission is to be sacrificed for our sins, so it's ironic that His parents are required to sacrifice a lamb for HIM under Jewish law. 2. A few commenters last week were concerned about Mary and Joseph sleeping too close together in their blanket fort, as it challenges the perpetual virginity of Mary (a core Catholic belief).  I argue that Mary and Joseph are a poor married couple sleeping in a barn that's open to the cold and creatures of nature, so the chaste and honorable Joseph would probably stay near his Holy Family for their protection, instead of sleeping apart and leaving them vulnerable.  No scandal here! 3. A few commenters last week argued about the perpetual virginity of Mary (the belief that she remained a virgin after Jesus's birth; a belief held by the early Church even before the Bible was canonized).  I just wanted to say that I'm thrilled and honored that my comics appeal to people of all religions, including other Christian denominations.  It moves me every time I get a comment from someone who isn't Catholic but loves my work.  That said, I AM Catholic, so please understand that my comics follow the canon of Catholicism when I can help it.  No hard feelings.  Of course, you're all welcome to continue giving me suggestions and debating in the comments (good-naturedly, of course).  I've learned so much by listening and looking into your apologetics.

[and-her-saints]

Hey sorry idk if you'd know this but I quite literally don't know where to turn about this so I'm sending this ask to every queer+catholic blog I can find

Are there *any* resources out there for queer/trans Catholics that go beyond affirmation and show how to pursue a religious life that goes beyond the laity (e.g. priesthood, joining a convent/monastery, something similar) without having to brush your queerness aside. I feel like if I don't find something soon I might go insane

years ago, i attended a Zoom event with Fr. James Alison as a keynote speaker, and something he said has been glued to my brain ever since. he said it in Spanish, so i'll try to remember, paraphrase and translate: "while they try to get us to stop being queer, what we must try to do is to be better queers."

i love what you said about "beyond affirmation" and that is precisely why i got reminded of the quote and WHY this quote resonated with me to begin with.

imho, there is a fundamental issue with a lot of queer theology and it's that it doesn't go beyond apologetics. it's not pragmatic nor does it seem to engage critically with the material conditions that work with or against queerness. and it's truly such a shame, because living "religiously" to me, as a queer catholic, it's infinitely more a matter of coherence, love, devotion and solidarity, than learning how to "reconcile" gayness/transness with the Bible.

it's a journey, of course. the apologetics were and are necessary for many of us to unlearn the hatred that might've been instilled in us through religious education and upbringing. however, here are some resources that, in my opinion, show how to pursue queer-religious-life.

💌 catholic/christian resources:

[book] The Reckless Way of Love: Notes on Following Jesus by Dorothy Day. Unlike larger collections and biographies, which cover her radical views, exceptional deeds, and amazing life story, this book focuses on a more personal dimension of her life: Where did she receive strength to stay true to her God-given calling despite her own doubts and inadequacies and the demands of an activist life? What was the unquenchable wellspring of her deep faith and her love for humanity?

[book & account] Black Liturgies: Prayers, Poems, and Meditations for Staying Human by Cole Arthur Riley. Black Liturgies is a digital project that connects spiritual practice with Black emotion, Black memory, and the Black body. In this book, she brings together hundreds of new prayers, along with letters, poems, meditation questions, breath practices, scriptures, and the writings of Black literary ancestors to offer forty-three liturgies that can be practiced individually or as a community.

[book] Cry of the Earth, Cry of the Poor by Leonardo Boff. Focusing on the threated Amazon of his native Brazil, Boff traces the economic and metaphysical ties that bind the fate of the rain forests with the fate of the indigenous peoples and the poor of the land. He shows how liberation theology must join with ecology in reclaiming the dignity of the earth and our sense of a common community, part of God's creation. To illustrate the possibilities, Boff turns to resources in Christian spirituality both ancient and modern, from the vision of St. Francis of Assisi to cosmic christology.

[book] Undoing Theology: Life Stories from Non-normative Christians by Chris Greenough. The fundamental issue with ‘queer’ research is it cannot exist in any definable form, as the purpose of queer is to disrupt and disturb. Undoing Doing generates a process of ‘undoing’ as central to queer research enquiries. Aiming to engage in a process which breaks free from traditional academic norms, the text explores three life stories

[podcast] The Magnificast. "A weekly podcast about Christianity and leftist politics. The Magnificast is hosted by Dean Dettloff and Matt Bernico. Each week's episode focuses on a unique or under-realized aspect of territory between Christianity and politics that no one taught you about in sunday school."

💌 non-christian but still excellent resources:

[book] Hijab Butch Blues by Lamya H. A memoir by a butch hijabi that follows the experiences of the author through stories and figures from the Qur'an.

[book] Lean on Me: A Politics of Radical Care by Lynne Segal. Questions of care, intimacy, education, meaningful work, and social engagement lie at the core of our ability to understand the world and its possibilities for human flourishing. In Lean On Me feminist thinker Lynne Segal goes in search of hope in her own life and in the world around her. She finds it entwined in our intimate commitments to each other and our shared collective endeavours.

i don't think these are precisely what you were looking for. but i hope these resources bring you as much peace and hope as they have brought me.

[crusaderchinchilla]

as i actually get involved with going to a catholic church and initiate the process of becoming a catholic catechumen, i keep thinking about different kinds of christianity and wondering how to know which one is right? i want to seek the truth and i want to feel confident that i am following the objective truth, but i feel very concerned/worried that like. ok what if orthodoxy is correct. what if some random branch of protestantism is true. how do you know which one is right? i honestly think catholicism and orthodoxy both have very convincing arguments/apologetics/traditions; there are a lot of very smart people with very convincing arguments on both sides. i feel comfortable and at home in the catholic church but i also don't trust my own judgement and second guess myself a lot. i just want to be sure that i am following Jesus and in the "right" church, and i'm terrified Christ will reject me if i'm wrong.

[thepastisalreadywritten]

SAINT OF THE DAY (November 25)

Catholics and other Christians around the world celebrate today, November 25, the memorial of St. Catherine of Alexandria, a revered martyr of the fourth century.

St. Catherine was the subject of great interest and devotion among later medieval Christians.

Devotees relished tales of her rejection of marriage, her rebuke to an emperor, and her decision to cleave to Christ even under threat of torture.

Pope John Paul II restored the celebration of her memorial to the Roman Catholic calendar in 2002.

Catherine's popularity as a figure of devotion, during an era of imaginative hagiography, has obscured the facts of her life.

It is likely that she was of noble birth, a convert to Christianity, a virgin by choice (before the emergence of organized monasticism), and eventually a martyr for the faith.

Accounts of Catherine's life also agree on the location where she was born, educated, and bore witness to her faith.

The Egyptian city of Alexandria was a center of learning in the ancient world, and tradition represents Catherine as the highly educated daughter of a noble pagan family.

It is said that a vision of the Virgin Mary and the child Jesus spurred her conversion. The story has inspired works of art, which depict her decision to live as a virginal “spouse of Christ.”

Emperor Maxentius ruled Egypt during Catherine's brief lifetime, a period when multiple co-emperors jointly governed the Roman Empire.

During this time, just before Emperor Constantine's embrace and legalization of Christianity, the Church was growing but also attracting persecution.

Catherine, eager to defend the faith she had embraced, came before Maxentius to protest a brutal campaign against the Church.

At first, the emperor decided to try and persuade her to renounce Christ.

But in a debate that the emperor proceeded to arrange between Catherine and a number of pagan philosophers, Catherine prevailed – with her skillful apologetics converting them instead.

Maxentius' next stratagem involved an offer to make her his mistress.

She not only rebuffed the emperor but also reportedly convinced his wife to be baptized.

Enraged by Catherine's boldness and resolve, the Emperor resolved to break her will through torture on a spiked wheel. 

Tradition holds that she was miraculously freed from the wheel, either before or during torture. Finally, she was beheaded.

Maxentius later died in a historic battle against his co-Emperor Constantine in October of 312, after which he was remembered disdainfully, if at all.

St. Catherine, meanwhile, inspired generations of philosophers, consecrated women, and martyrs.

Ironically, or perhaps appropriately – given both her embrace of virginity and her “mystic marriage” to Christ – young women in many Western European countries were once known to seek her intercession in finding their husbands.

Regrettably, the torture wheel to which she herself may have been subjected was subsequently nicknamed the “Catherine wheel” and used even among Christian kingdoms.

Today, St. Catherine of Alexandria is more appropriately known as the namesake of a monastery at Mount Sinai that claims to be the oldest in the world.

[mybeautifulchristianjourney]

Today in Christian History

Today is Saturday, September 2nd, 2023. It is the 245th day of the year (246th in leap years) in the Gregorian calendar; 120 days remain until the end of the year.

459: Death of Simeon Stylites, who lived atop a sixty-foot pillar for thirty-six years.

1192: The Third Crusade ends when Richard Lionheart (pictured above) and Saladin sign an agreement which allows Christians access to the holy city.

1578: The first Anglican worship service held in Canada is led by Rev. Robert Wolfall at Frobisher Bay on Baffin Island around this date. The service is commemorated on the third of September.

1758: William Romaine preaches a sermon on justification at St. Paul’s Cathedral. He is a notable evangelical within the Anglican tradition.

1784: In Bristol, England, Wesley ordains Thomas Coke to be superintendent of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States. Wesley has tried in vain for years to get the Church of England to ordain bishops for the Methodists.

1792: A Parisian mob slaughters twenty-five Roman Catholic priests as counter-revolutionaries, beginning a week of “September Massacres” in which 225 priests and hundreds of other people will die.

1821: Death of Brindabun, an Asian Indian gospel preacher, known for his recitation of Scriptures and powerful prayers.

1842: Death of John Ireland, Dean of Westminster. As a public figure he carried the crown at the coronations of English kings George IV and William IV. He published apologetic works and a defence for the remarriage of divorced people. Well-to-do, he expended large sums on charity.

1857: Francois Coillard sails for Cape Town on the Trafalger. A man of sweet disposition, he gives up scholarly pursuits to win Africans to Christ and will perform such brave feats as risking a hail of bullets to plead for the lives of Christians.

1973: Death of J. R. R. Tolkien, a linguist, novelist, and devout Catholic. He had helped lead C. S. Lewis to Christ and was a member of the literary club The Inklings. Among his writings were the fantasy favorites The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings.

1979: Xie Songsan offers the welcome and benediction for the re-opening ceremony at Moore Memorial Church, Shanghai. It had been closed earlier by Chinese communists who interrogated, beat, and imprisoned Xie. The service is presided over by Sun Yanli, another pastor who had suffered brutal treatment from the Communists.

[saint-ambrosef]

I’ve been discerning conversion for years, but I think hanging around “pop apologetics” and social media Catholics have given me the wrong idea on how the church works. It seems to me that a lot of people think that there are just a few big official statements the church makes and everything else is up to individual discretion, despite canon law and tradition contradicting that. Am I correct in my assessment?

Could you clarify what you mean by "a few big official statements"? I want to make sure I understand you correctly.

[angeltreasure]

(whether you actually post this or not is up to you. On one hand my sad rant has some educational content, on the other hand I don’t want to scandalize Catholics or other prospective Catholics like myself)

“If you can’t find it there, ask your Catholic priests, bishops, nuns, and our Pope.“ All of whom mess up sometimes. All of whom have occasionally said things contrary to Catholic theological consensus and Tradition. The more and more I learn about Catholicism (I’ve been discerning conversion for years) and how exactly “official teachings” are promulgated, the more confused I become. The catechism and the words of priests are just the absolute bare basics. “Pop apologetics” sources are often full of garbage (secularly influenced garbage at that). Even books marked Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur only mean “this one bishop approves” not “the whole Church, Scripture and Tradition approves”, and cannot be blindly obeyed. I am very confused, your Church, as much as I admire it, is frankly horrible at catechesis (granted it’s still better than my natal Church). Apparently your Church has been “in crisis” regarding catechesis for generations now. Even those who are earnestly trying and devout still have occasionally said questionable things regarding the nature and licitness of certain things. The more I learn, the more conflicted I become.. God have mercy on all of us.

Well, you aren’t wrong. The Catholic Church does have a problem with catechizing people. That’s why a lot of people have left the Catholic faith and why a lot who do claim to be Catholic go about their lives believing in other ideals (for example, President Biden seeming to be pro abortion). So many of us just don’t understand fully our faith. Half of Catholics believe in the true presence of Jesus Christ body, blood, soul, and divinity in the Eucharist. Without understanding the basics, without respecting Jesus through Transubstantiation in the Eucharist, without seeking to constantly learn, one can easily fall away and become disconnected, to be come lazy, to be lead astray and by doing so, perhaps without our knowledge, can make others leave. With Catholicism though, you don’t have to know everything in order to become Catholic. It takes time to learn and to discover the beauty of the faith is a treasure. That is why I always encourage others to keep praying, keep learning, keep exploring, keep connected with others and reach out to those seeking. Alone, we accomplish nothing. As the body of Christ together, we can learn our faith for what it truly is.

That’s why I want to learn my faith, my goal is not knowledge itself or any earthly thing, but my goal is to get to Heaven where I become a saint. No one is perfect but God alone. Our clergy is not God and we as lay people are not God either. We can learn our teachings and traditions through texts of the saints, the Catechism, and Bible. Some resources are better than others. I find the Good Catholic website to be amazing. Word On Fire is also very powerful. I also love watching old videos of Mother Angelica Live, of Fulton J Sheen, and newer ones like Explaining the Faith. Once we learn more and more, we can be spiritual mentors to others. We don’t have to become priests or nuns, but we can certainly be spiritual mentors as lay people. I’m 29 and I’m still learning my faith. It’s ok to have questions and reach out to others who have more knowledge. It is our way we seek out God, Who has reached out to us first. You don’t have to be perfect. I pray more of us feel excited to learn our faith and have respect for the Eucharist and each other.

[drogba-prospect]

Material religion - Wikipedia

Religion Minuit-Saint Bembé Catholicism Theology 

The religious institute of the Salesians of Don Bosco (SDB), founded by John Bosco in 1859 (approved by the Holy See in 1874), is also known as the Society of Saint Francis de Sales, and is placed under his patronage

The French school of spirituality was the principal devotional influence within the Catholic Church from the mid-17th century through the mid-20th century, not only in France but throughout the Church in most of the world. A development of the Catholic Reformation like the Spanish mystics and the Society of Jesus, it focused the devotional life of the Catholic faithful on a personal experience of the person of Jesus and the quest for personal holiness. It was perhaps more concrete than the Iberian example and thus easier to teach, but it shared with the Spanish saints their focus on the divine person. This movement in Catholic spirituality had many important figures over the centuries, the first being its founder, Cardinal Pierre de Bérulle (1575–1629), along with St. Francis de Sales, who in 1877 was declared a Doctor of the Church.

The Council of Trent (Latin: Concilium Tridentinum), held between 1545 and 1563 in Trent (or Trento), now in northern Italy, was the 19th ecumenical council of the Catholic Church. Prompted by the Protestant Reformation at the time, it has been described as the embodiment of the Counter-Reformation. The Council issued key statements and clarifications of the Church's doctrine and teachings, including scripture, the biblical canon, sacred tradition, original sin, justification, salvation, the sacraments, the Mass, and the veneration of saints[4] and also issued condemnations of what it defined to be heresies committed by proponents of Protestantism. The consequences of the Council were also significant with regard to the Church's liturgy and censorship.

Initiated in part to address the challenges of the Protestant Reformations,[3] the Counter-Reformation was a comprehensive effort arising from the decrees of the Council of Trent. The effort produced apologetic and polemical documents, heresy trials, anti-corruption efforts, spiritual movements, the promotion of new religious orders, and the flourishing of new art and musical styles. 

In short, the gun-toting angel was a multifaceted metaphor. “It undoubtedly also reflected the Catholic Counter-Reformation militaristic rhetoric,” wrote Donahue-Wallace, “which promoted the church as an army and heavenly beings as its soldiers.”

BELMÔNT'S SIN: STREET IDENTITY MURAL CROWN APOTHEOSIS;  In religion, apotheosis was a feature of many religions in the ancient world, and some that are active today. It requires a belief that there is a possibility of newly-created gods, so a polytheistic belief system. The major modern religions of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism do not allow for this. In Hellenistic culture, a mural crown identified tutelary deities such as the goddess Tyche (the embodiment of the fortunes of a city, familiar to Romans as Fortuna), and Hestia (the embodiment of the protection of a city, familiar to Romans as Vesta). The high cylindrical polos of Rhea/Cybele too could be rendered as a mural crown in Hellenistic times, specifically designating the mother goddess as patron of a city. Nightlife entertainment is often more adult-oriented than daytime entertainment. Location theory has become an integral part of economic geography, regional science, and spatial economics. 

The demiurge (/ˈdɛmi.ɜːrdʒ/) (sometimes spelled as demiurg) is an artisan-like figure responsible for fashioning and maintaining the physical universe. The Gnostics adopted the term demiurge. Although a fashioner, the demiurge is not necessarily the same as the creator figure in the monotheistic sense, because the demiurge itself and the material from which the demiurge fashions the universe are both considered consequences of something else. Depending on the system, they may be considered either uncreated and eternal or the product of some other entity Gnosticism presents a distinction between the highest, unknowable God or Supreme Being and the demiurgic "creator" of the material, identified in some traditions with Yahweh, the God of the Hebrew Bible. Several systems of Gnostic thought present the Demiurge as antagonistic to the will of the Supreme Being, with his creation initially having the malevolent intention of entrapping aspects of the divine in materiality. In other systems, the Demiurge is instead portrayed as "merely" incompetent or foolish: his creation is an unconscious attempt to replicate the divine world (the pleroma) based on faint recollections, and thus ends up fundamentally flawed. Thus, in such systems, the Demiurge is a proposed solution to the problem of evil: while the divine beings are omniscient and omnibenevolent, the Demiurge who rules over our own physical world is not.[15]

An illusion is a distortion of the senses, which can reveal how the mind normally organizes and interprets sensory stimulation. Although illusions distort the human perception of reality, they are generally shared by most people.[1]

Gnostic cosmogony generally presents a distinction between a supreme, hidden God and a malevolent lesser divinity (sometimes associated with the biblical deity Yahweh)[1] who is responsible for creating the material universe. Consequently, Gnostics considered material existence flawed or evil, and held the principal element of salvation to be direct knowledge of the hidden divinity, attained via mystical or esoteric insight. Many Gnostic texts deal not in concepts of sin and repentance, but with illusion and enlightenment.[2] Gnostic writings flourished among certain Christian groups in the Mediterranean world around the second century, when the Fathers of the early Church denounced them as heresy.[3]

The Bible typically describes the Heavenly host as being made up of angels, and gives several descriptions of angels in military terms, such as their encampment (Genesis 32:1–2), command structure (Psalms 91:11–12; Matt.13:41; Rev.7:2), and participation in combat (Job 19:12; Rev.12:7). Other passages indicate other entities make up the divine army, namely stars (Judges 5:20, Isaiah 40:26).[1][full citation needed] In Christian theology, the heavenly host participate in the war in Heaven.

Mystery religions, mystery cults, sacred mysteries or simply mysteries, were religious schools of the Greco-Roman world for which participation was reserved to initiates (mystai).

In religious studies, an ethnic religion is a religion or belief associated with notions of heredity and a particular ethnic group.

The Dionysian Mysteries were a ritual of ancient Greece and Rome which sometimes used intoxicants and other trance-inducing techniques (like dance and music) to remove inhibitions and social constraints, liberating the individual to return to a natural state.

Civil religion, also referred to as a civic religion, is the implicit religious values of a nation, as expressed through public rituals, symbols (such as the national flag), and ceremonies on sacred days and at sacred places (such as monuments, battlefields, or national cemeteries).

Material religion is a framework used by scholars of religion to examine the interaction between religion and material culture. It focuses on the place of objects, images, spaces, and buildings in religious communities. The framework has been promoted by scholars such as Birgit Meyer, Sally Promey, S. Brent Plate, David Morgan, etc.

Material culture is the aspect of culture manifested by the physical objects and architecture of a society. The term is primarily used in archaeology and anthropology, but is also of interest to sociology, geography and history.[1] The field considers artifacts in relation to their specific cultural and historic contexts, communities and belief systems. It includes the usage, consumption, creation and trade of objects as well as the behaviors, norms and rituals that the objects create or take part in.

The doctrine or theory of immanence holds that the divine encompasses or is manifested in the material world. It is held by some philosophical and metaphysical theories of divine presence. Immanence is usually applied in monotheistic, pantheistic, pandeistic, or panentheistic faiths to suggest that the spiritual world permeates the mundane.

1758 manuscript Tableau économique (Economic Table) argued that agricultural surpluses, by flowing through the economy in the form of rent, wages, and purchases were the real economic movers.

Physiocracy (French: physiocratie; from the Greek for "government of nature") is an economic theory developed by a group of 18th-century Age of Enlightenment French economists who believed that the wealth of nations derived solely from the value of "land agriculture" or "land development" and that agricultural products should be highly priced.[1] Their theories originated in France and were most popular during the second half of the 18th century. Physiocracy became one of the first well-developed theories of economics.

The tableau économique is credited as the "first precise formulation" of interdependent systems in economics and the origin of the theory of the multiplier in economics.[5] An analogous table is used in the theory of money creation under fractional-reserve banking by relending of deposits, leading to the money multiplier.

The model Quesnay created consisted of three economic movers. The "Proprietary" class consisted of only landowners. The "Productive" class consisted of all agricultural laborers. The "Sterile" class is made up of artisans and merchants. The flow of production and/or cash between the three classes started with the Proprietary class because they own the land and they buy from both of the other classes.

Pardicé Minuit Bembé (Spirit Catalyst)

Jean-Claude Mars Angel Conversation System: Jean-Claude Church Enterprises (Planetary Intelligence Church District Real Estate; Liberal Arts Immersion Schools; Gold; Athletics; Cooking); Jean-Claude Church Gatherings (School Nights Virgil, Weekend Noon Mass then Weekend Sports League) Francis de Sales and Don St. Bosco Influence 

RUSSE NOIR

[ewkrzen]

There are several different ways to evaluate the claims of any group (like Mormons/Scientologists) about other groups (Christians/Scientists) when claims of affiliation have been made.

It turns out that *whatever method we use*, there never has been any "Japanese Zen", as Japanese Mormon-Christian-Buddhists claim.

How 20th Century Scholars failed to discuss *any of this* is a combination of many factors, not the least of which is love of Japanese culture, which, like the most amazing dodo you've never seen, was in real danger of extinction in the 20th Century. We'll get back to that.

The big deal in this debate though is understanding that people who rely on claims of authority (church says, Jesus says, pope says) are not interested in history, fact, or critical thinking. They are engaged either in proselytization or explaining how an authority looks wrong, but isn't (Religious Apologetics).

Just like Catholics try to explain weird church stuff by "pope says", just like Evangelicals try to explain weird bible stuff by "church says", the ***says*** claim is always going to be BS.

All you have to do to neuter those beleifs is "why are they right without reasons?"

# Defining Terms

The 20th Century's biggest failure was an inability to define terms. I'll give some examples of how we are able to define these terms in the 21st Century, the modern internet age of searchable databases, electronic records, and instantaneous AI translators, but keep in mind NOBODY DID THIS AT ALL in the 20th Century. It became such a problem in Western religious studies programs that other disciplines just abandoned Buddhist Studies as "less than scientific". Check out this infamous quote as an example of that: https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/wiki/buddhism#wiki_academia.3A_.22buddhism.22_not_meaningful.3A

When *other disciplines* tell you that your *entire department* lacks the rigor to even define terms, that's a cultural fail. Buddhist studies is in the middle of an epic failure in the West, as Hakamaya pointed out by simply defining Buddhism.

* **Buddhism: 8FP religions, where 8FP is backed by faith in Causation, Defilement, and Conversion.**

* **Meditation: A religious practice based on faith in Defilement, Authoritative Practice, and promised Attainment.**

* **Zen: Four Statements teachings as interpreted by engagement with the historical record.**

It might seem like these are childishly simple, and that's the point. When we look at the failures of 20th Century scholars *to even attempt definitions*, it's clear that Buddhism in the 1960's, 70's, and 80's was like the 1800's of paleontology: [A total @#$#ing shartshow](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_Wars#Legacy).

# Proving the assertion: Meeting Criteria

X = Y is an assertion, and with these definitions in mind (OR ANY DEFINITIONS) we can turn toward proving assertions. Was any particular "school" of Japanese Buddhism 8FP or 4 Statements of Zen in it's fundamentals?

Easy question to answer. Japanese Buddhism is 8FP all the way.

1. Defilement is a primary element of all Japanese Buddhist groups.

2. Authority is a defining element of Japanese Buddhist traditions.

3. 8FP teachings are present throughout.

# Disproving the assertion: Debunking

But what about the other side? What evidence is there that **Zen is not found in Japan**?

1. History of fraud in Japanese Buddhism:

* Dogen's short life - a history of plaraism and pro-Tientai propaganda marketed as "Zen".

* Hakuin's Secret Manual of Koan "answers" used for political promotions

* The historical and ongoing fealty to Dogen and Hakuin as "defining authorities" of Japanese Buddhism

2. Failure to produce anything like the Zen records of China

* Japanese Buddhist parables are performed rather than arising from constant Zen Public Interview practice

* Communities based on classism rather than socialism; even Alan Watts, the poster boy for 20th Century failures, remarked on how Japanese monastic communities were fundamentally different than Chinese Zen communities.

3. Historical Aborrations in Japanese Buddhist history

* Banning of books, particular *Wumenguan*.

* Dogen's church becoming a funerary business *before* the 20th century

* Public reaction to the leaking of Hakuin's secret manual

# Failure of Representation

We can drill into the incredibly difficult to dispute evidence supporting all of these definitions, assertions, and denials, and indeed any competent academic would... but why *nobody wants to discuss these questions* let alone the evidence in the 20th Century also has to be examined, and it comes down to at least these three:

1. Love of Japan, desperation to see Japan survive WW2.

* Send food or bullets - few people realize Japan almost didn't survive WW2.

* Just as Chinese culture was complete lost after WW2, Japan could have faced a similar fate.

* Anyone who has been to Japan will understand; or just read Lafcadio Hearn

2. Buddhist religious bigotry

* Majority of Western 20th Century Buddhist scholars were affiliated with Japanese religious schools: www.reddit.com/r/zen/wiki/fraudulent_texts

* Buddhism's traditional feud with Zen was ignored/suppressed, like Buddhists never lynched the 2nd Zen Patriarch

* Evangelical Buddhism pushed by Western Academics, which is why we see no basic definitions in the 20th Century Western Academia

3. Anti-Chinese devaluation of Chinese history

* Communist party actively destroyed records and dismantled academia

* Japanese history is full of misappropriation of Chinese history

* Without the Chinese to advocate for Zen records, there was nobody to do it. Until D.T. Suzuki.

The two champions of 20th Century Zen scholarship, D.T. Suzuki and R.H. Blyth, struggled with all three of these problems, along with the lack of Western education in philosophy, history, or comparative religion necessary to be truely scientific.

# No Discussion? No Disagreement

The fact that we don't find ANY evidence of these questions being discussed ANYWHERE in the 20th Century is enough to certify the 20th Century as **a failure to meet any academic standard**. It's important to acknowledge that when religious people refuse to engage in debate at all that their positions are no longer academic. The 20th century Western Buddhist scholarship is less credible than 1800's Paleontology... there weren't any Bone Wars, no competition, and thus no need for critical thinking and argument.

[mathsandcomedydotcom]

Here, we see John 7:8-10 in the 1894 Textus Receptus compiled by Frederick Henry Ambrose Scrivener (1813-1891). This text represents the textual choices made by the Translators of the King James Version of the Bible. We see where a later scribe added the word, ‘oúpō’—Greek for ‘not yet’—in a vain attempt to rescue Jesus Christ from a lie.

The Textus Receptus represents a very late stage of the Greek New Testament. It is an oversimplification to say that the Textus Receptus is, more or less, the Medieval New Testament as used by the Greek Orthodox Church of the Middle Ages. However, the preceding oversimplification suffices for our purposes.

In the Critical Text, which represents a much much earlier form of the Greek New Testament, the highlighted ‘oúpō’ is not to be found. One can check this for himself/herself at the below link, which takes one to the Nestle Alland 28th edition of the Greek New Testament.

In traditional Catholic theology, lying is always sinful. Lying about grave matters is a mortal sin, whereas lying about trivial matters is a venial sin.

Jesus, in the below passage, is telling a lie about a trivial matter and is thus committing a venial sin. To me, this disproves the traditional Catholic assertion that Jesus was sinless.

The Jesus of traditional Catholicism, let me remind you, condemns the vast majority of sentient human beings to an eternal Hell, in which there is contained real fire. The Eternal Conscious Torment version of Hell cannot be denied in traditional Catholicism. Thus, in my mind, it is excellent News—a true Gospel!—that this Jesus, so far from His being a sinless God with the ability to cast people into Hell, is, instead, a common liar.

I add the qualifier, ‘traditional’, as John Paul 2 speculated that perhaps Hell is empty, and Francis believes that even atheists go to Heaven. Probably, most lay Catholics don't even believe in Hell. However, there are still many Catholics who adhere to the former teaching.

So as to aid our memory, I include John 7:8-10 as it is rendered by the NRSV UE, the translation employed by professional Bible Scholars.

‘"Go to the festival yourselves. I am not going to this festival, for my time has not yet fully come.” After saying this, he remained in Galilee. But after his brothers had gone to the festival, then he also went, not publicly but as it were in secret.’

John 7:8-10 NRSV UE

____

#christianity #catholicism #greek #bible #TextualCriticism #apologetics #counterapologetics #classics

[nicklloydnow]

“February 27, 1989

Dear Ken,

As CSP would say: It's a sweet thing, my dear Ken, for you to want to dedicate your book to me. But it may be misleading to dedicate to me CSP's Reasoning and the Logic of Things, your edition of the Cambridge Conferences Lectures. I'm not sure CSP would approve. Let me explain.

As you well know, I am not a student of Peirce. I am a thief of Peirce. I take from him what I want and let the rest go, most of it. I am only interested in CSP insofar as I understand his attack on nominalism and his rehabilitation of Scholastic realism. I am only interested in his "logic" insofar as it can be read as an ontology, or, as CSP said, insofar as he "takes the Kantian step of transferring the conceptions of logic to metaphysics."

Which is to say, I have not the slightest interest in his formal logic, existential graphs and such like. I use his "logic of relatives" for my own purposes, that is, as a foundation for my own categories. That means that I expropriate his two categories, Secondness and Thirdness, as the ground of an ontology, setting aside "Firstness" since it, Firstness, is an idealized notion and is not to be found exemplified in "reality." As CSP put it, "it is the mode in which anything would exist for itself, irrespective of anything else. . . ." But, of course, nothing exists like that but only in relation to something else.

Accordingly, if CSP defines himself as a logician, as he does in these Cambridge lectures, I am rather massively uninterested, same only when he strays from formal logic and allows his "logic" to stray into ontology.

But this is not the worst if it. What would set CSP spinning in his grave is the use I intend to put him to. As you probably already know, and if you don't, let us keep the secret between us, I intend to use SP as one of the pillars of a Christian apologetic. CSP, of course, made himself clear about religion in general, "a barbaric superstition" - and Christianity in particular - especially "the miracle mongers of the synoptic gospels." To be specific, I think that CSP's notion that Christianity was a development out of earlier Asian traditions, especially Buddhism (to quote you), is the silliest kind of nonsense. I have seen it, ever since reading Kierkegaard, as quite the contrary. Kierkegaard (and I) would see Buddhism, and most of the great contemplative religions as "scientific" in a broad sense, that is, as professing general truths which can be arrived at by anyone, anywhere and at any time. Christianity (and Judaism) would fall into what Kierkegaard land I) would call the "religious" stage, that is, the being open to "news," of the singular (scandalous) event, the Jewish covenant, the Christian incarnation and news of same.

As you may know, I have been at some pains to sketch out an "anthropology," a theory of man by virtue of which he is understood to be by his very nature open to the kerygma and "news." You can see why I not only diverge radically from CSP here, but find him in the enemy camp when he says things like: "The clergymen who do any good don't pay much attention to religion. They teach people the conduct of life, and on the whole in a high and noble way." So did "Booda," Socrates, Gandhi, and yes, Jesus. But Jesus taught something else far more subversive.

So if you want to dedicate this book to me, please do so with the understanding that I admire at the most one percent of it (two pages) and with the understanding to that it would spin CSP in his grave. Naturally I love the idea - using CSP as the foundation of a Catholic apologetic, which I have tentatively entitled (after Aquinas) Contra Gentiles.

As I was saying, what I hope to do is to use CSP's "ontology" of Secondness and Thirdness (not Firstness) as the ground for a more or less scientific introduction to a philosophical anthropology. Such an ontology, I think, would debouche directly into the phenomenology of the "existentialists," like Marcel, Heidegger, Buber, et al.

Anyhow I'm afraid you can't enlist me in your attempt to publish CSP's book and I think you see why. But good luck.

This is a pleasant way to spend a Sunday afternoon, sounding off at you.

Best,

Walker”

[self-deprogrammed]

Today’s reminder that the Scriptural Jesus of the first four Centuries was considered much more forgiving than the Jesus of the ensuing 16 Centuries.

Most of the several hundred separate Christian Sects of the first four Centuries believed in a doctrine of Universal Reconciliation.

Because the first four Centuries had the Gospels in Greek…without the subsequent mistranslation of ETERNAL DAMNATION.

Matthew 25:46 in Greek describes is a pit of fire punishment for ‘correction for an indefinite time period’ of those who failed to provide food, water, clothing to those in need, failed to welcome strangers, failed to attend to the sick and prisoners.

A Latin translation of the Greek language Scripture was commissioned for the newly formed single state church of the Roman Empire. This translation changed Matthew punishment 25:46 to ‘Eternal Supplication’.

Believers will find a plethora of Christian Apologetics on line to reassure them that the above is a fabrication by Satan or Cthulhu or the FSM.

However, most of the the Eastern Orthodox Christian denominations retain the Greek text and a doctrine of Universal Reconciliation.

The question remains as to why hasn’t the Catholic Church and it’s Protestant offspring bothered to address and resolve the issue?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Disclosure: Raised in the Tradition. I spent 25 years in lay ministry. Not a believer today.

The first 800 years” were Resurrection only. “Soul” and “Hell” are Nordic terms applying to Viking theology. As is “going to Heaven”. These Nordic concepts are not found in the Christian scriptures. Don’t appear as concepts until after the eight century. Fuller analysis at another time

Of course, there are apologetics that explain swain the above postscript.

[thepastisalreadywritten]

SAINT OF THE DAY (November 12)

Today, on the day of his martyrdom, November 12, Roman Catholics and some Eastern Catholics remember St. Josaphat Kuntsevych, a bishop and monk whose example of faith inspired many Eastern Orthodox Christians to return to full communion with the Holy See.

Other Eastern Catholics, including the Ukrainian Catholic Church, celebrate St. Josaphat's feast day on November 25.

Born in 1580 in the western Ukrainian region of Volhynia, John Kuntsevych did not become “Josaphat” until his later life as a monk.

He was not initially a full member of the Catholic Church, born to Orthodox Christian parents whose church had fallen out of communion with the Pope.

Although the Eastern churches began to separate from the Holy See in 1054, a union had existed for a period of time after the 15th-century Ecumenical Council of Florence.

However, social, political and theological disputes caused the union to begin dissolving even before the Turkish conquest of Byzantium in 1453.

By John’s time, many Slavic Orthodox Christians had become strongly anti-Catholic.

During this time, Latin missionaries attempted to achieve reunion with the individual eastern patriarchs.

The approach was risky, sometimes politicizing the faith and leading to further divisions.

But it did yield some notable successes, including the reunion of John’s own Ruthenian Church in the 1596 Union of Brest.

John was trained as a merchant’s apprentice and could have opted for marriage. But he felt drawn to the rigors and spiritual depth of traditional Byzantine monasticism.

Taking the monastic name of Josaphat, he entered a Ukrainian monastery in 1604.

The young monk was taking on an ambitious task, striving to re-incorporate the Eastern Orthodox tradition with the authority of the Catholic Church in the era of its “Counter-reformation.”

Soon, as a priest, subsequently an archbishop, and ultimately a martyr, he would live and die for the union of the churches.

While rejecting the anti-Western sentiments of many of his countrymen, Josaphat also resisted any attempt to compromise the Eastern Catholic churches’ own traditions.

Recognizing the urgent pastoral needs of the people, he produced catechisms and works of apologetics, while implementing long overdue reforms of the clergy and attending to the needs of the poor.

Josaphat’s exemplary life and zeal for the care of souls won the trust of many Orthodox Christians, who saw the value of the churches’ union reflected in the archbishop‘s life and works.

Nevertheless, his mission was essentially controversial, and others were led to believe lurid stories and malicious suggestions made about him.

In 1620, opponents arranged for the consecration of a rival archbishop.

As tensions between supporters and opponents began to escalate, Josaphat lamented the onset of attacks that would lead to his death.

“You people of Vitebsk want to put me to death,” he protested.

“You make ambushes for me everywhere, in the streets, on the bridges, on the highways, and in the marketplace. I am here among you as a shepherd, and you ought to know that I would be happy to give my life for you.”

He finally did so, on a fall day, on 12 November 1623.

An Orthodox priest had been shouting insults outside the archbishop’s residence and trying to force his way inside.

Josaphat had him removed, but the man assembled a mob in the town.

They arrived and demanded the archbishop’s life, threatening his companions and servants.

Unable to escape, Josaphat died praying for the men who shot and then beheaded him before dumping his body in a river.

Josaphat’s body was discovered incorrupt, five years later.

Remarkably, the saint’s onetime rival — the Orthodox Archbishop Meletius — was reconciled with the Catholic Church in later years.

Josaphat was beatified by Pope Urban VIII on 16 May 1643. He was canonized by Pope Pius IX on 29 June 1867.

He was the first saint of the Eastern Church to be canonized by Rome. He is the patron saint of Ukraine.

After the partition of Poland, the Russians forced most Ruthenians to join the Russian Orthodox Church.

[paula-of-christ]

I kept quiet at the time as I didn't want to sow discord or start a debate, but my Protestant friend pointed out to the other friend we were with that "Catholics aren't allowed to choose how many kids they have," and I just don't know how to gently respond to that. We welcome all children as a gift from God, and marriage is sacramental... idk what else to say?? It's not about God "not allowing" us freedom lol. And that God's design for marriage says to be fruitful and multiply. Sigh. Sorry for the rant, I'm just tired and exhausted and feel like I missed an opportunity to step up and share our beliefs accurately and struggled with how to gently correct them and stayed silent as I anticipated it would start a fight. God bless.

I am going to be honest, I had a hard time answering this one, because there are so many different direction with which one can go. I think the first thing to do when someone brings something like that up, whether it's this specific thing or about all the "rules" that Catholics have to follow, is to point out of course that marriage is sacramental, it is a vow before God, but that also God is our ultimate moral authority, not ourselves.

God, in our belief being omniscient and omnipotent, means that it isn't that our choice doesn't matter, but that there is something better out there than our narrow time-centered view of the world. It is in getting married that one gives consent to have children, whether that's one or five or twenty or even none. I think it's often overlooked that the faithful Catholics that are entering marriage, still have "ideal" number of children, and can more or less stick to that. If you feel you aren't ready to have another child, abstain from sex during ovulation. You are still open to children, because conception is still a shallow possibility, but you are not actively trying to have children. I think the idea that "you have to be open to children always" turns into, in the secular world, that you have to be always trying to get pregnant, which is just blatantly false.

While I love apologetics, I am not married nor called to that sacrament, and so I think some insight from someone who is a married Catholic would be appreciated on this post!